Why are we being forced to pay for a service the ISP's can't provide?

si1verf0x

I've just moved in to a rented flat in the B35 area of Birmingham. And as you do, I checked the internet speeds that I will likely to get. To my shock and horror, the max average speed that I will be likely to achieve is 3.5mbs.

Because I stream a lot of content, skype and do some online gaming, the best package for me is an "ultimate" package. Most of the ISP's all boast of 17mbs speeds. Which is pretty much the UK's average DL speed.

As I can only receive 3.5mbs, I asked the ISP's if they done a cheaper "unlimited" deal as they can not supply me with the advertised 17mbs speed. All of the ISP's that I spoke to, they all said "it all depends on your area, for the speed that you get & not the package". Which is fair enough. But when I asked "why don't you have unlimited packages that reflect different speeds ie 5,10,15 etc?" they all refused to answer it directly. I also asked "you can only supply me with 3.5mbs and yet, you insist I pay the full package price for 17mbs, which is around 70% difference. So…I'm paying 70% of the package for a service that you can not supply me?" Again, they all refused to answer directly.

Because of this, I spoke to Ofcom and they said that "because I was not a customer of an ISP, there is nothing they could do". But I was advised to ask BT when they were planning to upgrade the network. So I done just that & yet again, I was given cold shoulder.

Is there anything we can do, to stop these scrupulous ISP suppliers, taking our hard earned money for a service that they are not providing us?

Jemma-T

si1verf0x wrote: »

Is there anything we can do, to stop these scrupulous ISP suppliers, taking our hard earned money for a service that they are not providing us?

Don't give them your business? Why are you forced? It's not a water supply.

I think all the adverts I see are clearly described as "Upto". It's your choice. I think that speed you quote is better than many many other people get.

If you must have more think about bonding 2 lines, a satellite supplier or move to an area that has better speeds.

si1verf0x

Jemma-T wrote: »

Don't give them your business? Why are you forced? It's not a water supply.

I think all the adverts I see are clearly described as "Upto". It's your choice. I think that speed you quote is better than many many other people get.

If you must have more think about bonding 2 lines, a satellite supplier or move to an area that has better speeds.

As much as I hate too, I have to go with an ISP. As I live & work away from my family. And it's the best way to speak/view (skype) with my family.

Your correct, all ISP's quote "upto" speeds, but the average UK DownLoad (DL) speed is 17.3mbs

Bonding 2 lines will cost a bomb. So that's out if the equation. So us moving. I've just moved in a week ago & I'm in a 12 month contract.

Hens, why I can't to fibre broadband, as all fibre packages are 18 month contracts.

Tyler_Du

si1verf0x wrote: »

To my shock and horror, the max average speed that I will be likely to achieve is 3.5mbs.

I stream a lot of content, skype and do some online gaming

I do all of the above fine on my connection which is also around 3 meg.

spyhunter

si1verf0x wrote: »

=

Hens, why I can't to fibre broadband, as all fibre packages are 18 month contracts.

Zen do 12 month fibre contracts

http://www.zen.co.uk/home-office/broadband/fibre-optic-broadband.aspx

si1verf0x

spyhunter wrote: »

Zen do 12 month fibre contracts

Thanks for that.

I'll have to ask my landlord if I can get it installed or not.

marvin

Do they not have Virgin Cable service like the rest of Birmingham or is it that the property does not have a cable connection? (and I thought all houses in Birmingham did but can be corrected on this notion)

kwikbreaks

The cost of providing a 3.5Mbps service is no less than providing 17Mbps. The fixed costs they pay BT for infrastructure are identical and it's unlikely that there would be a substantial reduction in your total data usage either - certainly not enough to make any impact on the price they'd need to charge to break even - the BT 10GB services are only ~ £5 less than their unlimited and many people on them get hit with excess use charges anyway. 10GB would be a bad choice for some who does a lot of streaming.

Xplozion

BT Wholesale charge ISPs the same amount to provide their service whether the speed is 0.1 Meg or 24 Meg so it isn't the ISPs at fault here, if it was up to them I'm sure a few of them would be doing tiered packages based on line speed but they can't now as they wouldn't make a profit. It's a shame how it is a post code lottery so to speak but it's just how it is.

Re gaming: bandwidth doesn't have nearly as much of an effect on gaming as latency does. 3 Meg should be fine but if your latency when pinging a UK server averages anything above 60ms, gaming performance is probably not great. Unfortunately there's no reliable way to predict latency.

si1verf0x

marvin wrote: »

Do they not have Virgin Cable service like the rest of Birmingham or is it that the property does not have a cable connection? (and I thought all houses in Birmingham did but can be corrected on this notion)

When I checked the virgin media web site checker, I can not get their fibre service. But when I spoke to Sky & BT, they both said that fibre can be installed. I thought that it would be in the area, as the flat is only 5 years old & the area is not that much older.

kwikbreaks wrote: »

The cost of providing a 3.5Mbps service is no less than providing 17Mbps. The fixed costs they pay BT for infrastructure are identical and it's unlikely that there would be a substantial reduction in your total data usage either - certainly not enough to make any impact on the price they'd need to charge to break even - the BT 10GB services are only ~ £5 less than their unlimited and many people on them get hit with excess use charges anyway. 10GB would be a bad choice for some who does a lot of streaming.

When I spoke to the ISP's they all refused to answer directly any questions I asked them about updating the line. Only Ofcom suggested I speak to BT wholesale department, to see when they be updating the line. But when I did, they passed the buck & when I spoke to the other operator, they passed the buck again.

Your right, there is no point in me getting anything other that an "unlimited" package. I stream a lot of content & I'll be over the 10gb limit in no time.

si1verf0x

Xplozion wrote: »

BT Wholesale charge ISPs the same amount to provide their service whether the speed is 0.1 Meg or 24 Meg so it isn't the ISPs at fault here, if it was up to them I'm sure a few of them would be doing tiered packages based on line speed but they can't now as they wouldn't make a profit. It's a shame how it is a post code lottery so to speak but it's just how it is.

Re gaming: bandwidth doesn't have nearly as much of an effect on gaming as latency does. 3 Meg should be fine but if your latency when pinging a UK server averages anything above 60ms, gaming performance is probably not great. Unfortunately there's no reliable way to predict latency.

That's what is annoy me. Years ago, all of the ISP's had different tiered for the download speed you could achieve. But not any more. They are all now a greedy bunch & they only want our hard earned money & give us next to nothing in return. In my case, the ISP will be making around 70% profit on my monthly bill. That's a massive profit margin.

I'm not too bothered about the gaming side of things, it's more the streaming & Skype. 3Mbs is cutting it fine. But I don't think I'll be able to stream HD quality content