time is relative, isin`t it ?

voyager

considering the offers that have just come out, i think , esatbt and utv, and other groups are not really generating a competitive market, their offers if anything reflect a common theme and price which in my opinion is anti-competitive, also consider this ;

27/7 access would leave a possible 168 hours a week
for internet use ( i stress possible).

however with the current packages on offer only allow a definate usage of;

42 hours a week(i stress definate)

that leaves a massive 123 hours totally unusable unless you want to go over time and start paying through the nose again.

and as a friend of mine rightly pointed out weekend use will eat into the 6 hour daily usage allowance and everyone will be back to clock watching again.:mad:

I really thought utv`s initial 250 - 300 hour (if possible ) package was perfect as it gave a breathing space to most user`s.
well thats my gripe out of the way, things can only get better.

voyager.

SkepticOne

Where's the money in it? When ISPs offer flat rate (or pseudo flat rate like Esat and UTV) they depend on loads of light users and moderate users also paying 25 euros but not using up as much of the expensive limited resources.

Increasing the number of hours will only increasing the number of heavy users. The light users will stay the same. This means less money for the ISP.

Raising the price is not a solution, because this will further put off the light users.

voyager

Granted! , but why would for example a company like utvip even SUGGEST a 250 - 300 hour possibility if it was a no hoper from the beginning. i still think there was more room for manover on these packages. Most people that can afford them are working during the day/night and that takes a chunk out of their usage hours on a 24/7 package plus the fact that MOST users just want a comfortable amount of hours that will cut the need for clock watching , i dont think anyone would stay on 24/7 even if they could, speaking for myself , it`s the restriction of the packages out there that is very annoying. The other gripe i have is that apart from a few very minor perks their is no one isp that has grabbed this by the scruff and made their offer vastly more attractive than the others, that is what consumers look for and what competition is SUPPOSED to promote.

voyager.

SkepticOne

Originally posted by voyager
granted! , but why would for example a company like utvip even SUGGEST a 250 - 300 hour possibility if it was a no hoper from the beginning. i still think there was more room for manover on these packages, most people that can afford them are

Whether or not they intended it it had the effect of swaying the debate in favour of a set time allowance as opposed to true flat rate like freeserve which was the other option they suggested.

Mr_Man

Given that the people on these boards took time and effort to respond to the questions from Scott on potential options, could you outline the rational for arriving at 180 hours as the optimum in your view.

A number of people, myself included, are puzzled/annoyed at the fact that Scott was initially talking of 300 hours, and what came out was 180, the exact same as Esat/BT.

It would also be useful to state whether there is any flexibility in the system to allow for extra hours at somthing less that the full 3.6c rate.

Thanks

M

flamegrill

Originally posted by SkepticOne

Raising the price is not a solution, because this will further put off the light users.

Make it 250 hours a month, make it cost 45 euro inc VAT. Make that as a second tier option, which will still leave the 25 euro/month option in place for light users.

I don't think people will use 250 hours though, I'm quite a a heavy user, but I still don't think I'd manage to break 200m hours a month, but I'd like to have the option if say something comes up and i _need_ to work into the wee hours and into the next day resulting in a 15-20 hours stint online. Which can quite possibly happen 1-2 times a month.

In short a second option with more hours and more cost must surely be a win win solution for all parties involved. Or am I wrong?

Paul

Rags

I see esat have a package 260hours for 45euro. Why cant utv release "another package" at LEAST matching this. If esat are doing it I presume its a money maker so I just dont understand why utv wont do this? Me thinks Utv arent all they are cracked up to be....

BKtje

The esat product (260hrs) is for businesses and therefore you pay VAT on top of that. Just remining you of that

LFCFan

Originally posted by Rags
I see esat have a package 260hours for 45euro. Why cant utv release "another package" at LEAST matching this. If esat are doing it I presume its a money maker so I just dont understand why utv wont do this? Me thinks Utv arent all they are cracked up to be....

that would be a poxy price to pay for only an extra 80 hours a month. I have a feeling that after a couple of months the hours will be increased if the capacity is there and the take up hasn't been at the level they'd like.

sceptre

Originally posted by B-K-DzR
The esat product (260hrs) is for businesses and therefore you pay VAT on top of that. Just remining you of that

Indeed. Cost including VAT is €54.45 per month.

SkepticOne

Originally posted by flamegrill
In short a second option with more hours and more cost must surely be a win win solution for all parties involved. Or am I wrong?

Correct, but if you add another tier with extra hours, this will cost disproportionately more since it excludes light users (who will opt for the less expensive packages). These light users bring the cost down on the smaller packages but not on more expensive ones. I'm not against an ISP specifically going for this market, however.

Ultimately we have to get beyond the idea of hours and minutes and clock watching and focus rather unmetered access. Unfortunately the nolimits fiasco means this will probably never happen.

Rags

that would be a poxy price to pay for only an extra 80 hours a month. I have a feeling that after a couple of months the hours will be increased if the capacity is there and the take up hasn't been at the level they'd like

Its not all that bad, 80hours is a LOT more imo, comon like whos gonna use 260hours. Not many. This would suite me prefectly, never have to worry about clock watching again or going over the limit.

ednwireland

from a guy who advises businesses on a regular basis all these packages are a joke because froma business point of view esp. with windows auto update many people would leave machines and servers on overnight to do updates, the problem occurs is that i can't switch to a 1.9c peak time rate (certainly not with utv) (pay account rates) i go certainly with utv to 3.4c a minute in a couple of days this could still clock a serious bill, all the companies have taken the easy option, cos running a company is about making money out of customers it just depends how shafted you feel at the end of it . if i sell someone such an acount and they go over the time limit and get hit with lots of internet charges this doesn't put me in a good light even though i warned them.
i just can't see this working on a business level i will have to sit down and work out the max cost and put this to my clients something esat and utv should have done but they don't want this market obviously