View Full Version : Started as Proportional bills for a variable service?
We advertise our service as an 'up to' service and never state you will always achieve the maximum speed available on any particular tier.
So there is a capacity issue?
No, there is an issue with bandwidth availability caused by lots of users
downloading an unusually large amount of data per day.
That really doesn't make much sense. Do VM buy their bandwidth per unit,
and cant afford the costs, or that theirs plenty of seats on the bus, as
long as people don't sit in them.
I dont believe there is an ISP network that could cope with all of the users
downloading all of the time.
That's interesting because when VM were trying to convince me not to go
to adsl they said that all adsl services were 'up to' and I'd never
achieve the stated speed......
STM was introduced to try and give a fairer service to all by stopping users using all of the bandwidth 24 hours a day.
Even though retentions claim that adsl doesn't give you the stated
speed, and cable does?
xspeedyx
21-10-2008, 14:59
With Cable your more than likely to achieve the speeds you are quoted and your speed doesnt degrade the further you are from the exchange, however there can be other factor that can make your speed lower i.e congestion.
I am not saying I agree with this as NTL and Telewest never used upto which was there great selling point.
Seriously Gary how many thread in a day you going for lol (just kidding around) but seriously?
With Cable your more than likely to achieve the speeds you are quoted and your speed doesnt degrade the further you are from the exchange, however there can be other factor that can make your speed lower i.e congestion.
It doesn't have to degrade the further you are away. it'll degrade with them putting more people than there should be onto them. i.e congestion.
I am not saying I agree with this as NTL and Telewest never used upto which was there great selling point.
they say upto when it's public facing, but will like you believe that it's guaranteed if you're thinking of buying.
Seriously Gary how many thread in a day you going for lol (just kidding around) but seriously?
Just the 2 I think. I'm too knackered to do another one :)
how many people that 'should be' on a pipe varies dramatically. How many 20mb people would you put, for example, on a 100mb pipe? 5? 10? 20?
as for the adsl not reaching the advertised speed, that is true for the majority of people, i can barely get 2mb on any adsl service so why pay for something that is 4x that speed?
so why pay for something that is 4x that speed?
:confused:
With Virgin you get an apology and a reference number :D
whydoIneedatech
21-10-2008, 15:37
Never have any real problems with my Broadband connection, it has always been pretty well Rock solid with virtually no STM.
You appear to dislike Virgin intensely especially with all your polls, are you a customer and if so why are you? the are plenty of other ISP's out there.
You appear to dislike Virgin intensely especially with all your polls, are you a customer and if so why are you? the are plenty of other ISP's out there.
No, you just say that because you can't think of anything else to say. you think that saying that you get full speed and no problems cancels out what someone else has said otherwise.
you haven't even said that yes some don't get the speed they should get, but the priority of getting as much money as possible by taking more users on than they should, is more important. not that I'd expect you to say that anyway ;)
now im trying to figure out whether this is adsl or cable related because you cannot compare the two, adsl has always been an upto service based on the technology it uses
yes not everyone gets the speeds they pay for and i do think that most of your posts do seem to be negative towards VM, if you are a customer why? and please dont say there is no alternative
whydoIneedatech
21-10-2008, 15:47
No, you just say that because you can't think of anything else to say. you think that saying that you get full speed and no problems cancels out what someone else has said otherwise.
you haven't even said that yes some don't get the speed they should get, but the priority of getting as much money as possible by taking more users on than they should, is more important. not that I'd expect you to say that anyway ;)
I have never had any major issues with Virgin or Telewest or its previous guise of Cable Northwest.
I know people have issues but I appear to have a very good connection, which is pure chance as other parts of Liverpool have a poor connection, if I had problems I would post them as other do.;)
yes not everyone gets the speeds they pay for and i do think that most of your posts do seem to be negative towards VM, if you are a customer why? and please dont say there is no alternative
I've said before why. I truly am a masochist.
MovedGoalPosts
21-10-2008, 15:54
I've said before why. I truly am a masochist.
Interesting since your IP shows you are not currently using Virgin Media :angel:
Interesting since your IP shows you are not currently using Virgin Media :angel:
Are you covered by the DPA? ;)
chickendippers
21-10-2008, 16:08
Any webmaster can see your IP address and resolve it to find your ISP.
Any webmaster can see your IP address and resolve it to find your ISP.
Well duh! and please don't call me a troll in rep. just say you don't agree. it's more polite.
Any webmaster can see your IP address and resolve it to find your ISP.
Can they disclose it though? :rolleyes:
I have to say after being customer on cable for over 8 year now
Telewest were superb 2 faults in 6 year all resolved in a day or 2.
Virgin Media since the rebrand awfull overcongested for a FULL year sneak rollout of stm, sneak trials and changes to T&C's that make you wonder what the hell are they in self destruct mode for.
I canna take much more captain i think my engines about to blow for the last time.
they havent disclosed the IP address tho, just said he wasnt on a VM IP address and was using <deleted>
whydoIneedatech
21-10-2008, 16:43
No, you just say that because you can't think of anything else to say. you think that saying that you get full speed and no problems cancels out what someone else has said otherwise.
you haven't even said that yes some don't get the speed they should get, but the priority of getting as much money as possible by taking more users on than they should, is more important. not that I'd expect you to say that anyway ;)
I did not say I was getting Full speed, I said my connection was rock solid, but now we know you are a <deleted> customer and all these polls are you just stirring it because you had what you believe to be poor service from Virgin.
Be honest and admit your true agenda.
The are over 3 million Virgin broadband customers and a very low proportion of that figure actually go on Forums, the figure is probably way way less than the 5% that Virgin say get STMed.
but now we know you are a <deleted> customer and all these polls are you just stirring it because you had what you believe to be poor service from Virgin.
Do you know that because Rob told you that? :)
---------- Post added at 16:47 ---------- Previous post was at 16:45 ----------
they havent disclosed the IP address tho, just said he wasnt on a VM IP address and was using <deleted>
I'm not going to comment on anything in particular, but any information shouldn't be disclosed. if that information isn't publically available, and in this case only available to the say webmaster or those with access to that information.
That's what privacy policies are there for :)
whydoIneedatech
21-10-2008, 16:47
Do you know that because Rob told you that? :)
It got posted above in the thread, I do not care if you are because many customers including possibly yourself get great service from <deleted> and I hope you are one, and I mean that.:)
It got posted above in the thread, I do not care if you are because many customers including possibly yourself get great service from <deleted> and I hope you are one, and I mean that.:)
Thanks :)
Does it matter what isp hes on? forums are to debate things not let someone distract the thread by deflecting the topic (especially a mod breaking privacy polices wth?) i agree with some points he makes and there will be probably more people in the future on different isps posting same as garyl just some people want to dismiss him as soon as he starts a topic most seem to work for vm in some capacity judging by replies.
Im off for tea and then the nightly 7-9pm packet loss, vm should be trying to retain some customers by having a full review of its broadband and policies or its just going to get worse especially in credit crunch times.
whydoIneedatech
21-10-2008, 17:15
It is good that Gary L (http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/members/35663.html) posts on here because his views are from the other side of the fence if he is actually with <deleted> and therefore he can give a different perspective and even give people advice if they are thinking of swapping ISP.:)
A serious question Gary, what is the context of your original post please?
So as we are talking about Proportional bills, do you think I can get <deleted> to knock money off my bill as I only get 15Mb when they advertised a 24Mb service?
Does it matter what isp hes on? forums are to debate things not let someone distract the thread by deflecting the topic (especially a mod breaking privacy polices wth?) i agree with some points he makes and there will be probably more people in the future on different isps posting same as garyl just some people want to dismiss him as soon as he starts a topic most seem to work for vm in some capacity judging by replies.
I can agree with all of that. I can see why people have different opinions to the OP, but when they feel that they have to have a different view. and have a different view just for the sake of it :)
---------- Post added at 17:32 ---------- Previous post was at 17:30 ----------
It is good that Gary L posts on here because his views are from the other side of the fence if he is actually with <deleted>
We don't really know. we don't know if Rob was joking or not :)
and therefore he can give a different perspective and even give people advice if they are thinking of swapping ISP.:)
I could do, but I don't. funny that :D
---------- Post added at 17:33 ---------- Previous post was at 17:32 ----------
A serious question Gary, what is the context of your original post please?
It was a thread in virginmedia.feedback. I should have quoted it.
---------- Post added at 17:36 ---------- Previous post was at 17:33 ----------
So as we are talking about Proportional bills, do you think I can get <deleted> to knock money off my bill as I only get 15Mb when they advertised a 24Mb service?
No because that is the nature of ADSL as everyone knows it to be. I think they even say something along the lines of if your line supports the stated speeds.
they advertise an upto 24Mb, depending on line distance and condition. natural circumstances, not manually administered circumstances as done by Virgin.
No because that is the nature of ADSL as everyone knows it to be. I think they even say something along the lines of if your line supports the stated speeds.
they advertise an upto 24Mb, depending on line distance and condition. natural circumstances, not manually administered circumstances as done by Virgin.
From a Virgin advert:
"Speed of internet connection assumes components working at optimum speed and capacity. Both cable and ADSL broadband are affected by user volume"
Which is the cable of equivalent of the line distance disclaimer.
Should traffic managment not be seperate to line speed. If you download and you are not managed, you are more likely to get the advertised speed with Virgin than ADSL based ISPs
With what you are saying means that customers of ADSL based providers that traffic manage (such as BT) should get a proportional bill, it shouldn't be just directed at Virgin cable broadband
MovedGoalPosts
21-10-2008, 18:27
I've edited some posts to remove reference to the specific ISP being used by Gary L. For those who became aware of it, please don't repeat it, unless he posts about it elsewhere.
Now let's please return to the topic ;)
Don't know why you edited my posts. I am with Be* and was referring to my own ISP ;)
From a Virgin advert:
From the same advert they said
The waiting is well and truly over when you have Virgin Broadband. This is because our broadband travels through fibre optic cable, unlike all other providers, whose copper wire broadband trickles down telephone lines. This means ours doesn't slow down on its way to your home. No matter where you live
The ASA said
the ad did not include a disclaimer in the small print that cable broadband was affected by user volume. Notwithstanding that, we considered that the discrepancy between the headline speed and the actual speeds achieved by 20Mb customers was significant enough to warrant a more detailed disclaimer in the body copy of the ad that speeds could be affected by user volume. We therefore concluded that ad (a) was misleading.
They said that the ad breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation) and 7.1 (Truthfulness).
and even if we just look at the statement itself where they say that
Speed of internet connection assumes components working at optimum speed and capacity. Both cable and ADSL broadband are affected by user volumeThat is what Virgin say, not what another ISP is saying. and I said that is all well and good about the speeds can be affected by user volume. but I'm saying not when they intentionally slow the speed. or overload the UBR intentionally.
That isn't a natural occurence, it is manually administered by Virgin.
that isn't covered in the ad. only the natural reasons and instances of why it can be slower than expected.
whydoIneedatech
21-10-2008, 19:24
I wish you had posted that in the first place and then we would not have had this convoluted thread which even went down the route of which ISP the OP used, now we know the real subject of this thread maybe we can all settle down and discuss the merits of the ASA conclusions on the descriptions used.
Most people who have no problems with virgin tend to not post here. Which makes Virgin look like everyone is unhappy with the service they provide.
Only thing i am unhappy about with virgin is the lack of HD channels and the fact they wouldnt let me have another v+ box.... Service wise my broadband has been rock solid with 19-19.5mb connection speeds 95% of the time.
I wish you had posted that in the first place and then we would not have had this convoluted thread which even went down the route of which ISP the OP used, now we know the real subject of this thread maybe we can all settle down and discuss the merits of the ASA conclusions on the descriptions used.
That's already covered in the other thread. the merits of the ASA conclusions.
is it only me that pays attention around here? :)
whydoIneedatech
21-10-2008, 19:43
That's already covered in the other thread. the merits of the ASA conclusions.
is it only me that pays attention around here? :)
Well you did post that in post #30 in this thread in answer to what this thread is about.;)
alferret
21-10-2008, 19:44
No, you just say that because you can't think of anything else to say. you think that saying that you get full speed and no problems cancels out what someone else has said otherwise.
you haven't even said that yes some don't get the speed they should get, but the priority of getting as much money as possible by taking more users on than they should, is more important. not that I'd expect you to say that anyway ;)
You must admit though Gary you do seem to have a rather large chip on your shoulder where VM are concerned, especially STM and speed.
Anyway back to the subject at hand.
Everybody knows that VM do have a capacity issue, they may say they dont but its a bit obvious. But where do they get the money from to update the infrastructure?
STM was brought in so that those people who hammered their connection to the detriment of others had their speed shaped for 5hrs at a time so that people who dont normally get their stated speed or as close and dont abuse the service can get a more normal stable speed.
STM is here to stay and if people dont feel that they are getting what they think they should get then there are plenty of other ISP's that are willing to take their money.
In your initial post you seem to be missing the point.
No, there is an issue with bandwidth availability caused by lots of users downloading an unusually large amount of data per day.
That really doesn't make much sense. Do VM buy their bandwidth per unit,
and cant afford the costs, or that theirs plenty of seats on the bus, as
long as people don't sit in them.Doesnt matter how VM aquire their bandwidth if the service is running at its maximum capable speed because people are maxing out their 20mb connections downloading linux distro's then then people like me come along and want to stream a bit of TV or play a game we cant because all the bandwidth hoggers are using all the pipe. Which is why we have STM, if someone doesnt understand that then, well what can I say.
I dont believe there is an ISP network that could cope with all of the users downloading all of the time.
That's interesting because when VM were trying to convince me not to go
to adsl they said that all adsl services were 'up to' and I'd never
achieve the stated speed......VM are correct again no ISP could handle a 100% load 24\7 it would just grind to a halt which sadly does happen ocassionaly in certain area's.
If you have a problem with VM trying to convince you not to go to ADSL and your so unhappy with VM leave. But I can more or less guarantee that unsless you are quite close to an exchange you wont get a stated speed it will be up to.
STM was introduced to try and give a fairer service to all by stopping users using all of the bandwidth 24 hours a day.
Even though retentions claim that adsl doesn't give you the stated
speed, and cable does? Again VM are trying to do the right thing, a fair service to all.
Cable can give you the sated speed, many, many people do get the speed that they pay for but like many companies they over subscribe.
It happens all the time its called maximising profit.
A cable service running at its optimum will give users the stated speed within the networks own infrastructure.
An ADSL service when running at its optimum will give users an up to speed dependant on line lengh and noise.
Its like having a speed limit on the motorway, its stated 70 as a max and you can get 70 but sometimes during peak hours you might only get 40 or 50. So when your stuck in congestion and only going at a slower speed what you gonna do write to the highways agency.
Hopefully over the coming months as people take up the 50mb service and docsis 3 this will ease some of the congestion for those on 4, 10 & 20mb.
I have to say after being customer on cable for over 8 year now
Telewest were superb 2 faults in 6 year all resolved in a day or 2.
Virgin Media since the rebrand awfull overcongested for a FULL year sneak rollout of stm, sneak trials and changes to T&C's that make you wonder what the hell are they in self destruct mode for.
I canna take much more captain i think my engines about to blow for the last time.
I fully agree with Bonglet. I was a very satisfied NTL BB customer for several years, from 600kbps up to the original 10Mbps, then back to 2Mbps for a while, rock solid full advertised speed, low latency, brilliant service that I recommended to everybody!
However, no more! Since early this year the speed is all over the place, loads of nulls, huge latency at times and packet loss issues, website connection issues, etc.
The product is being oversold and the infrastructure is creaking under the pressure. VM is applying Draconian STM measures and blaming its customers for trying to do what their advertising tells them they can do!
I would be very happy with a bandwidth package from VM, a form of proportional billing, where the tier you are on includes a basic download allowance, maybe 2Mb@10GB/mth, 10Mb@50GB/mth, 20Mb@100GB/mth then pro-rata for usage above that. Maybe that would get the 24/7 bandwidth hogs off the network. Interestingly something similar was proposed and shelved by NTL about 3 years ago! See http://www.cableforum.co.uk/article/186/ntl-to-make-10mb-broadband-speed-as-standard
Well you did post that in post #30 in this thread in answer to what this thread is about.;)
No it was in reply to a question asked in post #24 :help:
:)
whydoIneedatech
21-10-2008, 20:23
No it was in reply to a question asked in post #24 :help:
:)
Its still in the same thread so no worries.
Anyway back to the subject at hand.
I have read your post. really I have :)
but it's not our fault the company is in debt. it is not our fault that the company has to have STM so they can take on more customers at the detrimental effect to other customers. it's also not our fault that we all have to be squeezed onto a UBR and suck whatever bandwidth isn't there, but has been advertised and sold as it's there.
---------- Post added at 20:26 ---------- Previous post was at 20:24 ----------
The product is being oversold and the infrastructure is creaking under the pressure. VM is applying Draconian STM measures and blaming its customers for trying to do what their advertising tells them they can do!
You say it so much better than I do :)
You say it so much better than I do :)
Thank you for that, however I prefer to see it in the context of my post at #36
Maybe this is a stupid question, but if the original post was on a VM newsgroup service, how can a non VM user see it (assuming that Gary L isn't on the VM service), those groups are private to Virgin customers only I thought?
alferret
21-10-2008, 21:02
I have read your post. really I have :)
but it's not our fault the company is in debt. it is not our fault that the company has to have STM so they can take on more customers at the detrimental effect to other customers. it's also not our fault that we all have to be squeezed onto a UBR and suck whatever bandwidth isn't there, but has been advertised and sold as it's there.
But it is there, you cant use words like we all have to be squeezed onto a UBR and suck whatever bandwidth isn't there I get my full 10mb 24\7 apart from when I have downloaded my 2nd linux distro (which isnt that often) my area AFAIK isnt over subscribed where other area's are but not all.
Its not our fault the company is in debt your right and it is us who have to deal with it. But as an individual you need to decide whether or not you need to subscribe to services supplied based on information given if the service is not as described then complain, if the service does not improove then the only option is to leave.
But it seems like some people keep complaining for the sake of complaining and are not prepared to go elsewhere to get a better service. If there is such a thing.
But it is there, you cant use words like we all have to be squeezed onto a UBR and suck whatever bandwidth isn't there I get my full 10mb 24\7 apart from when I have downloaded my 2nd linux distro (which isnt that often) my area AFAIK isnt over subscribed where other area's are but not all.
ok maybe my use of the word all was inapropriate, and is just a figure of speech.
Its not our fault the company is in debt your right and it is us who have to deal with it. But as an individual you need to decide whether or not you need to subscribe to services supplied based on information given if the service is not as described then complain, if the service does not improove then the only option is to leave.
But it seems like some people keep complaining for the sake of complaining and are not prepared to go elsewhere to get a better service. If there is such a thing.
So basically we shouldn't complain and just go elsewhere. but we should complain and if it doesn't improve then go elsewhere again.
why can't we complain and stay if we choose to for any number of reasons?
---------- Post added at 21:17 ---------- Previous post was at 21:10 ----------
Maybe this is a stupid question, but if the original post was on a VM newsgroup service, how can a non VM user see it (assuming that Gary L isn't on the VM service), those groups are private to Virgin customers only I thought?
They are private to Virgin customers only. I'm not certain but I think he might be a Virgin customer.
They are private to Virgin customers only. I'm not certain but I think he might be a Virgin customer.
Thanks again, but who's he BTW?
Thanks again, but who's he BTW?
Gary L.
Thanks again, but who's he BTW?
Gary L.
You speak about yourself in the third person?
So, you are the Queen......:D
Either that, or, as you put I an he in the same sentence referring to the same person, multiple personality. ;)
You speak about yourself in the third person?
So, you are the Queen......:D
Either that, or, as you put I an he in the same sentence referring to the same person, multiple personality. ;)
I think he's weird too :)
I think he's weird too :)
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2008/10/28.jpg
alferret
21-10-2008, 21:33
So basically we shouldn't complain and just go elsewhere. but we should complain and if it doesn't improve then go elsewhere again.
why can't we complain and stay if we choose to for any number of reasons?
First port of call is to complain, if your not happy with the result then go else where, isnt rocket science is it?
But also there is nothing stopping you complaining and staying, but if you do complain and then put up with a sub standard service there is no need to keep banging on about it as we have already heard it from you in the first place. Telling the same people the same things time and time again isnt going to get you a better service. After exhausting the services of helpful VM employee's on this site and possibly newsgroups as well all your left with is VM or another ISP.
So all I'm saying is if your really not that happy with VM go elsewhere. If your not prepared to walk you could always start up your own www.i-hate-vm.co.uk website.
OK, I'm officially lost.
Where did you last see yourself?
---------- Post added at 21:45 ---------- Previous post was at 21:34 ----------
First port of call is to complain, if your not happy with the result then go else where, isnt rocket science is it?
:sleep:
there is no need to keep banging on about it as we have already heard it from you in the first place.
Telling the same people the same things time and time again isnt going to get you a better service.
After exhausting the services of helpful VM employee's on this site and possibly newsgroups as well all your left with is VM or another ISP.
I presume all them are about me. I'm puzzled about the exhausting of the services of VM employee's on this site given to me. I can only assume you are making that part up because it's not true is it.
If your not prepared to walk you could always start up your own www.i-hate-vm.co.uk website.
You keep banging on about me leaving VM. it's now coming across as I have to do it because you are telling me to.
I've been considering www.i-love-vm.co.uk, it'll be where you can go and discuss others saying that you have to hate them if you complain about them.
First port of call is to complain, if your not happy with the result then go else where, isnt rocket science is it?
But also there is nothing stopping you complaining and staying, but if you do complain and then put up with a sub standard service there is no need to keep banging on about it as we have already heard it from you in the first place. Telling the same people the same things time and time again isnt going to get you a better service. After exhausting the services of helpful VM employee's on this site and possibly newsgroups as well all your left with is VM or another ISP.
So all I'm saying is if your really not that happy with VM go elsewhere. If your not prepared to walk you could always start up your own www.i-hate-vm.co.uk (http://www.i-hate-vm.co.uk) website.
Reading your posts you seem to be one of the people who has retained a good service from VM.
Until a year ago I was a veritable NTL/VM fan-boy, great service, great speed, no problem, thought the moaners were a pain. But having seen the deterioration of the service over the last 12 months as VM oversell a product based on an infrastructure not having the capacity to meet advertised benefits to users demands is frustrating.
I don't really want to jump ship, and know of many ADSL disasters, but the VM service in this area is becoming a joke. I am hanging in there at the moment hoping the service will improve, but with 21CN roll-out in this area next year I shall be looking very carefully at what that may achieve
STM was brought in so that those people who hammered their connection to the detriment of others had their speed shaped for 5hrs at a time so that people who dont normally get their stated speed or as close and dont abuse the service can get a more normal stable speed.
Except that STM does not do this. It penalises all users, regardless of their hammering their connection. It's clear STM is about getting more customers onto limited bandwidth, which has made the situation far worse than any effect heavy downloaders had.
Except that STM does not do this. It penalises all users, regardless of their hammering their connection. It's clear STM is about getting more customers onto limited bandwidth, which has made the situation far worse than any effect heavy downloaders had.
Sorry, it isn't penalising all users, although it has the potential to do so. I think I have been STM'd no more than twice, and generally enjoy a consistent speed as stated for my package, and good speeds at peak times. There would be much more of an outcry by many more users, and there would be other measurable factors such as independent speed tests if "all users" are being affected. Above all that, there would be massive migrations to other ISP's, and yet the figures from VM's own qarterly results do not supposrt this theory.
How this has made the situation for worse for those who do not hammer their connections is quite frankly a common statement that has no reasonable evidence to support it.
whydoIneedatech
22-10-2008, 11:29
If I download then my speed drops, but once I stop downloading my speed goes back to norma,l and I do not pick times outside of 4pm till 9pm I download when I feel like, and the last time I was STMed was around March.
How this has made the situation for worse for those who do not hammer their connections is quite frankly a common statement that has no reasonable evidence to support it.
Supposing there is one sole person using his connection and downloading an abnormal amount, such as 1GB. only him connected to the internet, everybody else is dead. he would still be STMd.
how is that helping others who are not even using their connection? it isn't. he is being penalised regardless of the circumstances and regardless of what they say STM is there for.
If there were 10 people all downloading on the same UBR. they would all be STMd. but STM is there to give them a better experience, but has actually gave all 10 of them a bad experience now. they are all talking to each other on MSN saying was I making it worse for you? no you wasn't mate. I was happily downloading and you wasn't affecting my speed when you were downloading too.
They all have to wait now for a few hours because STM is helping them.
STM is not helping them, it's helping Virgin save bandwidth by taking it from those who want to use it.
xspeedyx
22-10-2008, 11:34
But that's crazy as THAT will never happen and I don't wanna die yet I am only 24, tell tiny Tim I love him and will miss him and his mom
I did not say I was getting Full speed, I said my connection was rock solid, but now we know you are a <deleted> customer and all these polls are you just stirring it because you had what you believe to be poor service from Virgin.
Be honest and admit your true agenda.
The are over 3 million Virgin broadband customers and a very low proportion of that figure actually go on Forums, the figure is probably way way less than the 5% that Virgin say get STMed.
I was with you all the way till you said 'way less than 5%'
Your whole post fell apart for me there, most techs will not be afraid to tell you its a hell of alot higher than 5% in most areas.
whydoIneedatech
22-10-2008, 11:42
I was with you all the way till you said 'way less than 5%'
Your whole post fell apart for me there, most techs will not be afraid to tell you its a hell of alot higher than 5% in most areas.
You misread that part, I was not talking about STM, I was saying that less than 5% go on Forums to complain or praise.;)
There would be much more of an outcry by many more users, and there would be other measurable factors such as independent speed tests if "all users" are being affected. Above all that, there would be massive migrations to other ISP's, and yet the figures from VM's own qarterly results do not supposrt this theory.
How? on letters you get from VM, there is no mention of STM, if you sign up through a letter, no mention of STM, unless you know where to look for it on their site, you wont know about it, its not in their T&Cs nor is it in their apparent FUP.
No mention when you sign up at all.
I think you'll find that most users who get slow speeds just think there is too many people signed up and get a tech called out or just 'put up' with it because its easier than change providers, alas, most people also stick around with the slow speeds because they keep getting really good retention deals to keep them on.
Alas, you need to look at their results properly, they had 30,000 net disconnects/losses, barely -any- sign ups, thats right, all those new customers? where? they are all current customers getting retention deals or upgrading to VIP etc, there is hardly any new customers, VM are infact losing them.
How this has made the situation for worse for those who do not hammer their connections is quite frankly a common statement that has no reasonable evidence to support it.
STM is there so they can oversell bandwith, there is nothing more to it than that, one person gets stm'd, it boosts for another but slows for everyone else while that person downloads, all STM does ironically is help you get stm'd quicker and go in a loop of them being able to sign even more customers up.
100:1 contention ratio in baguley, fair?
---------- Post added at 11:44 ---------- Previous post was at 11:44 ----------
You misread that part, I was not talking about STM, I was saying that less than 5% go on Forums to complain or praise.;)
Oh ok ok i let you off then :p: for now ;)
How? on letters you get from VM, there is no mention of STM, if you sign up through a letter, no mention of STM, unless you know where to look for it on their site, you wont know about it, its not in their T&Cs nor is it in their apparent FUP.
No mention when you sign up at all.
I think you'll find that most users who get slow speeds just think there is too many people signed up and get a tech called out or just 'put up' with it because its easier than change providers, alas, most people also stick around with the slow speeds because they keep getting really good retention deals to keep them on.
Alas, you need to look at their results properly, they had 30,000 net disconnects/losses, barely -any- sign ups, thats right, all those new customers? where?
Alas "I" need to look at their results properly? Have YOU looked properly?
Q4 2007 (http://library.corporate-ir.net/library/13/135/135485/items/281619/VM_q42007_final.pdf) (PDF)
111,200 total broadband net additions
Q1 2008 (http://library.corporate-ir.net/library/13/135/135485/items/292630/VM_q12008_final.pdf) (PDF)
88,400 on-net broadband net additions
Q2 2008 (http://media.corporate-ir.net/media_files/irol/13/135485/quarterly/FINAL_VM_Q208_Press_Release.pdf) (PDF)
On-net broadband net additions of 54,600 (Q2-07: 45,800)
• Customers taking top-tier broadband up 82% year-on-year
So customers taking upper end tiers increasing too. Sorry Fatec, I am in possession of the facts, and whilst STM is certainly unpopular with heavy and persistent download/uploaders it isn't impacting on all users all of the time, fact.
There is no mass migration to other ISP's due to STM, neither will there be when it does not affect the majority of normal users.
Sorry Fatec, I am in possession of the facts, and whilst STM is certainly unpopular with heavy and persistent download/uploaders it isn't impacting on all users all of the time, fact.
There is no mass migration to other ISP's due to STM, neither will there be when it does not affect the majority of normal users.
Oh dear it's the one with all the facts :Sprint:
Can you show us proof of all the facts that you have. or won't Virgin let you show us?
Should we just take your word for it?
Supposing there is one sole person using his connection and downloading an abnormal amount, such as 1GB. only him connected to the internet, everybody else is dead. he would still be STMd.
how is that helping others who are not even using their connection? it isn't. he is being penalised regardless of the circumstances and regardless of what they say STM is there for.
If there were 10 people all downloading on the same UBR. they would all be STMd. but STM is there to give them a better experience, but has actually gave all 10 of them a bad experience now. they are all talking to each other on MSN saying was I making it worse for you? no you wasn't mate. I was happily downloading and you wasn't affecting my speed when you were downloading too.
They all have to wait now for a few hours because STM is helping them.
STM is not helping them, it's helping Virgin save bandwidth by taking it from those who want to use it.
And yet, since the introduction of STM my average download speed at peak time is much nearer the 20Mb mark than it used to be? A friend of mine living in student territory land has seen massive improvements during colledge / university terms since STM.
You can quote "what if's" and "ah but's" till the cows come home, but the reality is that for most users there appears to be an improvement
Tell me how that isn't a good thing, aside from a few people being affected by STM , when they could have probably done their downloading at another time.?
---------- Post added at 12:41 ---------- Previous post was at 12:40 ----------
Oh dear it's the one with all the facts :Sprint:
Can you show us proof of all the facts that you have. or won't Virgin let you show us?
Should we just take your word for it?
Well, Fatec quoted something like a 33K net loss, and I posted actual results, including links, that any good for you?
And yet, since the introduction of STM my
What percentage are you of the total amount of customers?
what percentage of you and others that are getting full speed are of the total amount of customers?
what has you getting full speed got to do with what has been said about STM affecting peoples speeds when they are not affecting others speeds?
---------- Post added at 12:47 ---------- Previous post was at 12:45 ----------
Well, Fatec quoted something like a 33K net loss, and I posted actual results, including links, that any good for you?
You posted something that is available to all who want to read them. where's the facts that you are in possession of, that we might be able to see but have to take your word for?
What percentage are you of the total amount of customers?
what percentage of you and others that are getting full speed are of the total amount of customers?
what has you getting full speed got to do with what has been said about STM affecting peoples speeds when they are not affecting others speeds?
---------- Post added at 12:47 ---------- Previous post was at 12:45 ----------
You posted something that is available to all who want to read them. where's the facts that you are in possession of, that we might be able to see but have to take your word for?
Well, that was my whole point, I am in possession of the facts because I have taken the time to read what is publicly available, and offered to help those who may not know where to look so that they can be in possession of the facts also.
Please Gary, calm down, this is nothing personal. :)
For the record then, VM have about 3.8M Broadband customers, just over 3M are cable, or thereabouts?. STM has been in force for over a year now?
Where are the masses of customer losses that appear to be a direct cause of the STM policy? Those figures I have quoted must surely show net decline quarter on quarter if the STM policy was causing migration?
All I can see is a few moaning about it here and on the official VM newsgroups, and yet they seem to scared of the alternative because they have not moved on to an alternative supplier.
Well, that was my whole point, I am in possession of the facts because I have taken the time to read what is publicly available, and offered to help those who may not know where to look so that they can be in possession of the facts also.
Please Gary, calm down, this is nothing personal. :)
I am calm. I promise you that I do not think that you are being personal :)
It would help if you were to try and not to post like it reads that here's some publically available links, and believe me I also have the facts.
For the record then, VM have about 3.8M Broadband customers, just over 3M are cable, or thereabouts?. STM has been in force for over a year now?
Where are the masses of customer losses that appear to be a direct cause of the STM policy? Those figures I have quoted must surely show net decline quarter on quarter if the STM policy was causing migration?
All I can see is a few moaning about it here and on the official VM newsgroups, and yet they seem to scared of the alternative because they have not moved on to an alternative supplier.
would you agree that Virgin class those that upgrade their packages and have been given retention deals as new customers, and publish them as such?
would you agree that Virgin class those that upgrade their packages and have been given retention deals as new customers, and publish them as such?
If they have not had a particular service, such as BB, then take up the service, then that is an additional BB unit yes. New customer? No. Retention deals means that a customer is kept, so no customer loss, yes. New customer? No.
Nice copy paste from news groups Gary ;)
Oh dear it's the one with all the facts :Sprint:
Can you show us proof of all the facts that you have. or won't Virgin let you show us?
Should we just take your word for it?
Gary, are you stating that the figures that Virgin Media publish to the City and their shareholders are false?
I doubt he'd know,
his first post is just a copy/paste from the groups. The content is not his, the argument is not his. All that he has contributed to the thread is ** suprise, suprise ** hate mongering, for want of a better 5 letter word.
Nice copy paste from news groups Gary ;)
Yes, and I already said that it was from virginmedia.feedback when you asked me earlier.
why you mentioning it again for? :confused:
---------- Post added at 21:22 ---------- Previous post was at 21:21 ----------
Gary, are you stating that the figures that Virgin Media publish to the City and their shareholders are false?
No, are you going to?
r00ts answer was interesting though, where he says I doubt he'd know :)
---------- Post added at 21:26 ---------- Previous post was at 21:22 ----------
I doubt he'd know,
his first post is just a copy/paste from the groups. The content is not his, the argument is not his. All that he has contributed to the thread is ** suprise, suprise ** hate mongering, for want of a better 5 letter word.
If someone posts a joke about an irishman in the funny section. would you say that the joke is not his, the content following posting the joke is not his and surprise surprise everyone, he don't like Irishmen!
Please r00t, calm down, you are taking this too personal. :)
---------- Post added at 21:37 ---------- Previous post was at 21:26 ----------
If they have not had a particular service, such as BB, then take up the service, then that is an additional BB unit yes. New customer? No. Retention deals means that a customer is kept, so no customer loss, yes. New customer? No.
I can't really understand that much because of the way it's laid out, but I think you're saying that in one instance they're not classed as a new customer but are classed as an additional unit?
as I say, I can't quite understand from how it's laid out.
Gary L, it was me who asked you about your original post, not r00t, and I would have thought you could have edited that post by now to show that. :)
To answer your other question, net additions to a particular service can be attributed to new customers, or existing customers taking new products.
In a nutshell the claim made by Fatec that there has been a loss in BB users of plus 30K is simply not supported by the facts, hence therefore STM, whilst unpopular with some, is certainly not causing mass panic within cable land, and is likely doing what it intended to do.
If the figures I had quoted showed net losses, they would be clear, but just to add some basic clarity......
20,000 BB customers cancel in Q1, and go to an alternative supplier, but 30,000 new BB units are added in the same quarter, then the net gain is 10,000 BB units.
Reverse those figures and its a net loss of 10,000 BB units.
Anyway, its academic as VM aren't going to offer reductions to customers who have been STM'd
Personally all i have EVER seen in Gary L's posts are attacks on Virgin Media. now i don't know if he is or is not a customer of VM but if he is not a customer of VM then WTF is his problem with VM, If he is a customer of VM and has such a bad time with them WTF is he doing staying with them, because if i had been on the receiving end of the bad service he always goes on about then i for one would have changed my provider.
As for his posts they do seem to be plagiarism of other posts and seem to be reports of other peoples post on the news groups, which i can just as easily read on the news groups.
End of the day his posts seem to me to be completely and always anti VM and as such bore me in the extreme.
Personally all i have EVER seen in Gary L's posts are attacks on Virgin Media.
Is that because you ignore the other ones?
now i don't know if he is or is not a customer of VM but if he is not a customer of VM then WTF is his problem with VM,
I am a customer of VM.
If he is a customer of VM and has such a bad time with them WTF is he doing staying with them,
I don't have such a bad time with them.
because if i had been on the receiving end of the bad service he always goes on about then i for one would have changed my provider.
Be's supposed to be excellent.
As for his posts they do seem to be plagiarism of other posts and seem to be reports of other peoples post on the news groups, which i can just as easily read on the news groups.
You can, you do, or you can but you don't?
End of the day his posts seem to me to be completely and always anti VM and as such bore me in the extreme.
Have you finished?
:wtf:
---------- Post added at 21:42 ---------- Previous post was at 21:40 ----------
Gary L, it was me who asked you about your original post, not r00t, and I would have thought you could have edited that post by now to show that. :)
I would have edited it but I've been on holiday :)
Oh dear it's the one with all the facts :Sprint:
Can you show us proof of all the facts that you have. or won't Virgin let you show us?
Should we just take your word for it?
Gary, are you stating that the figures that Virgin Media publish to the City and their shareholders are false?
...snip....
No, are you going to?
r00ts answer was interesting though, where he says I doubt he'd know :) ...snip
Gary, try answering the question I asked, not the one you wanted me to think I asked.
The figures that VM provide to the City in it's results were the figures quoted - you appear to be stating that these figures are not in fact accurate.
I think they are - what do you think?
Have you finished?
Not at all
Gary, try answering the question I asked, not the one you wanted me to think I asked.
The figures that VM provide to the City in it's results were the figures quoted - you appear to be stating that these figures are not in fact accurate.
I think they are - what do you think?
Are you basing your question on how you've quoted me where I said Can you show us proof of all the facts that you have. or won't Virgin let you show us? Should we just take your word for it?
because if you are then that was in relation to do with seperate facts that he appeared to be stating he had. and I didn't say they were not correct.
which he later said when I asked him about having these what appeared to seperate facts to those that are available to the general public on their website.
I am in possession of the facts because I have taken the time to read what is publicly available, and offered to help those who may not know where to look so that they can be in possession of the facts also.
the only thing I asked was whether the change of packages were being counted as additions. you might want to read bit more slowly so you don't read things that aren't there as often :)
---------- Post added at 22:14 ---------- Previous post was at 22:12 ----------
Not at all
I always sleep with one eye open.
So does my very big dog :D
You might not want to keep deliberately (imho) avoiding and twisting the questions.:)
You might not want to keep deliberately (imho) avoiding and twisting the questions.:)
You've only asked the one question (afaik) :)
and I already answered it the first time you asked it :confused:
Originally Posted by foreverwar
Gary, are you stating that the figures that Virgin Media publish to the City and their shareholders are false?
Gary L
No, are you going to?
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.