RE: BTInternet does it again !!!

["KF" <ignotis@xxxxxxx>]

If BT performed such a good job, why were they losing customers so quickly<= BR> that they repeatedly ran 'Come back to us, you know it makes sense' adverts=
ad nauseam, 'all for only =A3x.xx'? BT have restricted every field of the market they have entered and made moves to stifle competition at every
attempt - fair enough, you may say, it's running a business.
I have used Dial-up, ISDN2e and am now on TW broadband. When with BT I aske= d
for a second phone line; the response was laughable, quoting several weeks<= BR> delay, followed, two days after the enquiry, by a letter from BT claiming complaints had been made against my (non-existent) number for nuisance
dialling by my (non-existent) fax machine! When I had ISDN installed, the sheer incompetence of the BT machine left me breathless, I chased them for = 5
weeks before a successful install.
I contacted TW for a phone line (I already had cable TV installed because<= BR> of poor local reception problems). The line was in and working 24 hours
later. Broadband was also installed later, within a very reasonable time an= d
on the specified date.

BT have previously generally restricted ISDN access for years by charging sky-high installation and monthly charges, their approach seeming to be to<= BR> milk the customers for as much as possible until competition /legislation forces a change of tack. Their business philosophy  has not changed, o= nly
the focus is now on broadband.

To return from my meanderings, If BT are changing the conditions for
unmetered access, it's down to one of two reasons:
a) Incompetence -  They didn't think the business model through proper= ly and
have been caught short.
b) Sneering mendacity -   Grab the suckers first, then squeeze. S= queeze too
far and lose customers. Drop price a little, run a disagreeably patronising=
advertising campaign, 'Come back to us...'  (Repeat as necessary)

The cynic in me rates it as 80% (b), 20% (a).

As you've no doubt guessed, I'm no BT fan (and somehow I don't feel
lonely...)

  Keith Flanagan

Chorley, Lancs
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Harrison [mailto:Mark.Harrison@xxxxxxx]
Sent: 16 May 2002 09:33
To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx Subject: RE: [ukha_d] BTInternet does it again !!!

Lee,

Good points, however...

BT is not quite like the other telcos, in that it inherited (from the
taxpayer) a large asset base in the local loop.

While the flotation raised a significant sum for the public purse, it was,<= BR> nonetheless, cheap compared to the installation cost of installing a
nationwide local loop.

The "quid pro quo" for the shareholders receiving this "free= by" from the UK
public, was twofold:

- firstly, that the UK public should receive a "fairly priced" se= rvice
- secondly, that BT should open up its infrastructure to competition

Now, on the first, I actually believe that BT has done a good job. Phone usage prices (in real terms, let alone compared to average incomes) have fallen tremendously.

On the second, however, BT have steadfastly tried to block competition, in<= BR> some cases illegally (see the Oftel site), and overall put barriers into th= e
path of firstly, any domestic Internet usage, and secondly Broadband
Internet usage. Compare rates in the US to those here... and _those_
companies had to pay for their own infrastructure!

Regards,

Mark




-----Original Message-----
From: Lee Varga [mailto:lee@xxxxxxx]
Sent: 15 May 2002 23:28
To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx Subject: RE: [ukha_d] BTInternet does it again !!!


>I am not getting into a discussion about whether people should leave >their PCs connected for more than 12 hours a day or whatever but it is<= BR> >the very use of "To make things fairer for everybody, we've change= d the
>daily internet use limit for Anytime and SurfTime  customers from = 16
>hours to 12 hours of 'unmetered' access in any 24-hour period." ..= . It
>almost screams "We make money until you use more than 12 hours a d= ay and
>so we'll allow you to use phone time until that point and if you use >less then we're laughing."

I don't want to start an arguement here but...

<dons asbestos suit>
I'm not defending BT for 1 second, but let's be realistic here, the
telephone voice network is meant for voice calls that (generally) don't las= t
too long.

There are a finite (and generally very small) number of sockets at each
exchange, and if all the unmetered crowd are using the sockets 24x7 then th= e
1p/min crowd will never get a look-in.

Contrary to what most people believe, the internet is not 'free'. BT have t= o
pay for the fat pipes to carry your data up/down the country and over to Europe and the US. This does not come cheap, and must be paid for ultimatel= y
by the endusers.

BT are a company, and like all conpanies, are there solely to generate
profit for shareholders.
If BT offered unlimited voice calls for ?12/month it wouldn't be in busines= s
for long.

When everyone paid 1p/min, the ISP and BT and Colt/Energis/etc. would all making a profit.
I regularly paid ?70/month in internet call charges alone, and I was a
lightweight, I had friends who paid ?150+/month for net access.

It doesn't take a genius to figure out that the profit margin from ?20-?30<= BR> (never mind ?70-?150) is a serious step down, and BT (and most other telcos= )
have huge debt mountains to sort out.

Ultimately, unmetered access is just that, access that is not metered by th= e
second like a standard voice call. If people used net access like they did<= BR> when it was 1p/min then it would still be ?9.99/month. but there are an
increasing number of the ?12/month crowd who are downloading P2P/newsgroup<= BR> warez by the gigabyte 24x7 with their PCs on autopilot, this a pushed the backbone bandwidth required thru the roof, which costs, so something has go= t
to give. Hence the reducing number of hours.
If you're complaining 12 hours isn't enough, would it be fair to said you'r= e
one of ones causing the problem?

Spreading even more doom and gloom, I can see this going in the other
direction too, to the ADSL crowd.
I can see BT/Ignite starting to impose quantity limits, just like in the US=
and Oz. Where you may have a 512K line, but you're only allow to download (for example) 5GB/month. Anymore and you are charged by the GB. May not be = a
problem, for most, but downloading movie trailers @ 20MB a pop and listenin= g
to internet radio stations and it all soon goes...

Oh, the joy of being in the digital age... :

<climbs out of hot asbestos suit>









For more information: http://www= .automatedhome.co.uk
Post message: ukha_d@xxxxxxx Subscribe:  ukha_d-subscribe@xxxxxxx Unsubscribe:  ukha_d-unsubscribe@xxxxxxx List owner:  ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



________________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan
service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working
around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com
________________________________________________________________________

For more information: http://www= .automatedhome.co.uk
Post message: ukha_d@xxxxxxx Subscribe:  ukha_d-subscribe@xxxxxxx Unsubscribe:  ukha_d-unsubscribe@xxxxxxx List owner:  ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Yahoo! Groups Spons= or

ADVERTISEMENT
=

For more information: http://www=
.automatedhome.co.uk 
Post message: ukha_d@xxxxxxx 
Subscribe:  ukha_d-subscribe@xxxxxxx 
Unsubscribe:  ukha_d-unsubscribe@xxxxxxx 
List owner:  ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.