Best of the rest

anthonymcg

Hi,

I phoned up NTL today at lunch and guess what? Even though I'm in Lucan, my estate isn't enabled yet. She said there was a rollout on at the moment and that it'd probably be in by Christmas but I reckon she may be telling fibs. Anyhow, I'm now having to look at ADSL instead of cable so who's the best of the rest offering broadband? I'd like to get it in fairly soon and I'm set on not getting Eircom cos of their bandwidth cap. Opinions would be much appreciated.

Cheers,

Tony.

aaf

I'm in exactly the same boat. Rang up NTL and one guy said 4-6 weeks and one girl said by Christmas. NTL broadband seems to be in every neighbouring housing estate except mine. Living in Blanchardstown/Clonsilla area. Ordered free 3 month Esat/IOL trial on Saturday to keep me ticking over. They said my modem and instructions will be sent out to me within 21 days. Fingers crossed.

MicraBoy

I asked them to sent me details of the roll out. Dates and areas etc. I got the generic "we'll let you know" response. Although I was mightily impressed with the speed of the response given NTL's reputation!

It's a bit odd to be undertaking a project of that size and not being able to say the approximate time of roll outs. What do they expect, people to wait around for them and not shop else where?

I'm sure they are keeping the info close to their chests so they can't be caught out when they bugger it up.

I dunno....

tribble

MicraBoy wrote:

I asked them to sent me details of the roll out. Dates and areas etc. I got the generic "we'll let you know" response. Although I was mightily impressed with the speed of the response given NTL's reputation!

Mailed them with soomething similar and while it took them a month to reply, and a negitive one at that, it was at least a personal response.

tribble

BigMoose

It's a bit odd to be undertaking a project of that size and not being able to say the approximate time of roll outs.

Given the amount of bitching about IBB saying "4 weeks" when they mean "we have no idea" on here and that in any technical project, let alone one of this scale, timescales are going to be nothing like originaly planned, I am not surprised they aren't more specific (annoying though it is). I am sure some areas will be months or years behind their plans as they stand at the moment.

Its hard enough getting in house technology projects in on time let alone when you have to dig up half of dublin. Having said that do they have to replace cable or just update stuff at their end?

Ripwave

MicraBoy wrote:

It's a bit odd to be undertaking a project of that size and not being able to say the approximate time of roll outs. What do they expect, people to wait around for them and not shop else where?

NTL have indicated that they are deliberately not releasing a roll-out schedule, to avoid a situation where eircom targets an area that NTL plans to enable in 3 months time.

MicraBoy

NTL have indicated that they are deliberately not releasing a roll-out schedule, to avoid a situation where eircom targets an area that NTL plans to enable in 3 months time.

Isn't that in some way anti-competitive and hence illegal?

Aside from that conjecture I wonder how well that balances out with folk who choose another product on the basis of not being prepared to wait indefinitely. Do NTL lose or gain on that strategy? It's kind of a moot point with me coz I wouldn't touch Eircom with a barge pole.

They've certainly lost me because I'm going with IBB 1MB Lite now, I definitely would have choosen NTL otherwise, or waited if I had some sort of timescale.

Ripwave

MicraBoy wrote:

Isn't that in some way anti-competitive and hence illegal?

Huh?

I'm not competing with eircom in selling DSL either - what law am I breaking?

dub45

In fairness to NTL they are dammned if they do and dammned if they dont!

If they tell you that you will have it in say 3 months and they dont deliver what will happen? If they give even a broad delivery schedule their competitors will try and target those areas.

On the other hand if they offer it when its definitely available well we can hardly complain.

And there is nothing to stop anyone signing up with an isp for a year and then going over to NTL at the end of the contract.

NTL deserve a lot of praise for bringing real competition into the market place even if it does reach most people later than they would prefer.

MicraBoy

I'm not competing with eircom in selling DSL either - what law am I breaking?

You are not a service provider so you're not breaking any law. Simple.

By not releasing roll out plans NTL are trying to have a situation where they have no competitors (or the minimum number).

The question I was proposing was it ok to carve up the market so that NTL has one area and Eircom has another. Status quo, companies are happy, la di da, no real competiton, just the illusion.

NTL deserve a lot of praise for bringing real competition into the market place even if it does reach most people later than they would prefer.

I disagree I don't think they deserve any praise. Next year I might pat them on the back. But until then I'll remain bitter and twisted!

dub45

MicraBoy wrote:

You are not a service provider so you're not breaking any law. Simple.

By not releasing roll out plans NTL are trying to have a situation where they have no competitors (or the minimum number).

The question I was proposing was it ok to carve up the market so that NTL has one area and Eircom has another. Status quo, companies are happy, la di da, no real competiton, just the illusion.



I disagree I don't think they deserve any praise. Next year I might pat them on the back. But until then I'll remain bitter and twisted!

They are not carving up the market NTL is competing with all the other ISP's for customers (sooner or later!) in areas where NTL operate. For instance NTL have plans to everntually offer BB in all of Dublin City. How can you say the market is being carved up?

MicraBoy

How can you say the market is being carved up?

I'm not actually saying that. NTL's policy suggests they are afraid of the competition getting the jump on them so they can't become the dominant player in certain areas. It's sort of like a de facto carving up as opposed to a planned one.

Any way I don't really want to get bogged down in that, I'm shooting from the hip because I feel that there is a sort of pseudo-competition in the broadband market. People can start of thinking they have 5 or 6 providers to choose from and rapidly discover they only have one. For e.g. I started off thinking I had loads of choice.

(1) Eircom - 2 packages, but line failure
(2) IOL - as above
(3) UTV - as above
(4) IBB - 2 packages, one available
(5) NTL - 2 packages not available in my area

Ripwave

MicraBoy wrote:

You are not a service provider so you're not breaking any law. Simple.

NTL aren't breaking any law either.

I'm often amused by some of the notions that I see posted on Boards, but I have to say, that this particular one has to be one of the most bizarre that I've come across in a long time. I actually laughed out loud when I first read it.

NTL aren't declining to compete, they are declining to provide their competitors with internal intelligence that would be of benefit to their customers. (Indeed, you'd have a stronger case arguing that NTL would be in breach of their responsibility to their shareholders by releasing such information prematurely).

Ripwave

MicraBoy wrote:

I'm not actually saying that. NTL's policy suggests they are afraid of the competition getting the jump on them so they can't become the dominant player in certain areas. It's sort of like a de facto carving up as opposed to a planned one.

Any way I don't really want to get bogged down in that, I'm shooting from the hip because I feel that there is a sort of pseudo-competition in the broadband market. People can start of thinking they have 5 or 6 providers to choose from and rapidly discover they only have one. For e.g. I started off thinking I had loads of choice.

(1) Eircom - 2 packages, but line failure
(2) IOL - as above
(3) UTV - as above
(4) IBB - 2 packages, one available
(5) NTL - 2 packages not available in my area

By your logic, eircom wouldn't be allowed supply any DSL service in your are until either IBB or NTL or both were also supplying service in your area. And neither IBB nor NTL would be allowed to supply their services until eircom were supplying service in the area.

Even if you can only avail of service from one supplier, you still benefit from competition between the suppliers, because "your house" isn't an effective definition of the market - IBB can't decide to charge you €200 a month because their the only supplier available to you, because you benefit from the fact that they are competing with Eircom and NTL for other customers, and therefore have to pitch their price at a level that allows them to compete for customers that do have a choice.

MicraBoy

By your logic, eircom wouldn't be allowed supply any DSL service in your are until either IBB or NTL or both were also supplying service in your area. And neither IBB nor NTL would be allowed to supply their services until eircom were supplying service in the area.

If you think thats what I'm saying or believe you are way off the mark. I can't even begin to argue with it because I don't know where you got it from.

Even if you can only avail of service from one supplier, you still benefit from competition between the suppliers, because "your house" isn't an effective definition of the market - IBB can't decide to charge you €200 a month because their the only supplier available to you, because you benefit from the fact that they are competing with Eircom and NTL for other customers, and therefore have to pitch their price at a level that allows them to compete for customers that do have a choice.

Fair enough point. But actually I am forced to pay more than originally intended to for BB because of this situation.

(Indeed, you'd have a stronger case arguing that NTL would be in breach of their responsibility to their shareholders by releasing such information prematurely).

So shareholders are happy to lose customers who aren't prepared to wait for NTL with no information. That was the catch 22 I asked about. I don't believe there is a stronger case for that. But I would say that I'm just a customer (or not as the case may be).

Ripwave

MicraBoy wrote:

If you think thats what I'm saying or believe you are way off the mark. I can't even begin to argue with it because I don't know where you got it from.

You implied that NTL have a legal responsibility to compete with eircom. (That's why I asked what law you thought I'm breaking by not competing with eircom). The obvious corrolary of that is that it would be illegal for a service provider to provide a service in an area where there aren't any competitors.

Fair enough point. But actually I am forced to pay more than originally intended to for BB because of this situation.

No, you're not forced to do anything. None of the suppliers are legally required to provide you with any service at all, and you're entitled to take or not take any of the services that are available to you. But if a service isn't available to you, that doesn't indicate that anyone is in any way remiss in meeting their legal obligations, or that you are a vitcim of some failure of competition.

After all, I could live in a house that was served by IBB, NTL and Eircom, and still be only prepared to pay €10/month for broadband. I'd still be "forced to pay far more than originally intended", but it wouldn't have anything to do with "this situation", it would simply be because I wasn't prepared to pay the going rate.

So shareholders are happy to lose customers who aren't prepared to wait for NTL with no information. That was the catch 22 I asked about. I don't believe there is a stronger case for that. But I would say that I'm just a customer (or not as the case may be).

NTL Management, who are in a far better position to make the judgement than you are, have decided that they'll lose as many or more customers by announcing that they won't serve an area for 6 months than they will by keeping schtum.

MicraBoy

You implied that NTL have a legal responsibility to compete with eircom.

No I didn't, I ASKED a question in response to your statement. To which you responded with a "bizarre" question. I was implying NTL are afraid of competition. Nothing more.

No, you're not forced to do anything.

Now you're just being silly. I accepted your point, stop misrepresenting mine.

NTL Management, who are in a far better position to make the judgement than you are, have decided that they'll lose as many or more customers by announcing that they won't serve an area for 6 months than they will by keeping schtum.

I'll take that as a yes.