Plusnet: 1.2% (ab)using 28% of bandwidth

Some more info from Josh Berry of Plusnet customer support -

Quote: "The service sold is unlimited this means without limits and until
they change this then it is very fair for people to use what they
have been sold."


That is true at the moment, so customers can use whatever they want but
since the changes to the BT pricing structure (i.e. the introduction of capacity
based charging) it is not sustainable to have customers using 300GB
going forwards.

At the current time 1.2% of the customer base on broadband uses 28%
of the bandwidth we use - you can see the problem here immediately as
these customers do not pay enough for their account for us to even break
even - let along make a profit.

Obivously this is delicate subject and close to many peoples hearts so
how we approach it is critical. We have been having an extended internal
discussion on the matter as well as working with the usergroup to work out
the best way of addressing this issue but the bottom line is that all ISP's who
use the new charging system will need to implement some sort of AUP on
useage or charge extra for heavy users.

Regards,
_________________
Josh Berry


At the moment they are tackling 0.3%, but I wonder how long it will be before
the net is widened for the other 0.9%?

"Plusnetsucks" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) om...
> Some more info from Josh Berry of Plusnet customer support -
>
> Quote: "The service sold is unlimited this means without limits and until
> they change this then it is very fair for people to use what they
> have been sold."
>
>
> That is true at the moment, so customers can use whatever they want but
> since the changes to the BT pricing structure (i.e. the introduction of
capacity
> based charging) it is not sustainable to have customers using 300GB
> going forwards.
>
> At the current time 1.2% of the customer base on broadband uses 28%

oh look 2 more new figures LOL

> of the bandwidth we use - you can see the problem here immediately as
> these customers do not pay enough for their account for us to even break
> even - let along make a profit.

Oh if thats the case why let people even sign up??, Oh and then there is
the question that if they are so concerned about profit, why are they
upsetting a certain amount of users that could be paying anything up to
65.99 per month, im sure thats really gonna help their profit situation if
they lose customers that have been paying that amount of cash per month.
LOL perfect Plusnet logic I guess????

>
> Obivously this is delicate subject and close to many peoples hearts so
> how we approach it is critical. We have been having an extended internal
> discussion on the matter as well as working with the usergroup to work
out

Perhaps if they actually started realising the possible effect that the
brainwave is gonna have instead of having secret squirrel meetings about it
they would have thought about the wording of their automated email that has
been sent out when its customers have tried to contact them regarding the
situation.

> the best way of addressing this issue but the bottom line is that all
ISP's who
> use the new charging system will need to implement some sort of AUP on
> useage or charge extra for heavy users.

Is this the 'charging system' that is spose to come into effect next year?
Or is that something else im thinking about?


>
> Regards,
> _________________
> Josh Berry
>
>
> At the moment they are tackling 0.3%, but I wonder how long it will be
before
> the net is widened for the other 0.9%?

If i was with em, i would have gave them 24 hours to speak up in a language
we can all understand rather then the what i and others see as pure BS
percent figures they keep spouting, if they by that time were not
forthcoming on what is and what is not acceptable use i would have been
straight on the blower to cancel the account swiftly followed by the
cancellation of whatever means i paid by see come the end of the month
there was no "misunderstanding or confusion ;D" on whether or not i was
still a customer. In fact the way they have handled the sad situation i
would be cancelling the account even if i was not in there 0.3% (whatever
that means?) as i like to know what im allowed and not allowed to use with
any service i pay for. Especially if the company concerned has the nerve
to tag the word 'premier' to it.
While i can understand that they cannot indefinately sustain heavy use, how
the ^&*% are there users spose to know what is and what isnt classed as
heavy use?? when they havent even bothered to tell them a GB figure, a
monthly allowance figure, or anything else which makes good common sense.
This is just my opinion.... Oh yeah and im just a sad 56k user that doesnt
at the moment even have broadband, i would have said they must be joking,
but the situation and how it has been handled is so hillarious that the
word joke doesnt do it justice.

On 17 Nov 2004 in uk.telecom.broadband, "Dave" wrote:

>that could be paying anything up to 65.99 per month

Big deal. Seems like the costs from these 250 or so users would be
much higher than anything they bring in as monthly fees (and a portion
of those fees goes straight on to BT Wholesale for the link to the home)




--
PlusNet <http://tinyurl.com/24ymz> - I recommend them and save some cash.

"Dave" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:cnejgg$fs$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> "Plusnetsucks" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed) om...
>> Some more info from Josh Berry of Plusnet customer support -
>>
>> Quote: "The service sold is unlimited this means without limits and until
>> they change this then it is very fair for people to use what they
>> have been sold."
>>
>>
>> That is true at the moment, so customers can use whatever they want but
>> since the changes to the BT pricing structure (i.e. the introduction of
> capacity
>> based charging) it is not sustainable to have customers using 300GB
>> going forwards.
>>
>> At the current time 1.2% of the customer base on broadband uses 28%
>
> oh look 2 more new figures LOL
>
>> of the bandwidth we use - you can see the problem here immediately as
>> these customers do not pay enough for their account for us to even break
>> even - let along make a profit.
>
> Oh if thats the case why let people even sign up??, Oh and then there is
> the question that if they are so concerned about profit, why are they
> upsetting a certain amount of users that could be paying anything up to
> 65.99 per month, im sure thats really gonna help their profit situation if
> they lose customers that have been paying that amount of cash per month.
> LOL perfect Plusnet logic I guess????
>
>>
>> Obivously this is delicate subject and close to many peoples hearts so
>> how we approach it is critical. We have been having an extended internal
>> discussion on the matter as well as working with the usergroup to work
> out
>
> Perhaps if they actually started realising the possible effect that the
> brainwave is gonna have instead of having secret squirrel meetings about
> it
> they would have thought about the wording of their automated email that
> has
> been sent out when its customers have tried to contact them regarding the
> situation.
>
>> the best way of addressing this issue but the bottom line is that all
> ISP's who
>> use the new charging system will need to implement some sort of AUP on
>> useage or charge extra for heavy users.
>
> Is this the 'charging system' that is spose to come into effect next year?
> Or is that something else im thinking about?
>
>
>>
>> Regards,
>> _________________
>> Josh Berry
>>
>>
>> At the moment they are tackling 0.3%, but I wonder how long it will be
> before
>> the net is widened for the other 0.9%?
>
> If i was with em, i would have gave them 24 hours to speak up in a
> language
> we can all understand rather then the what i and others see as pure BS
> percent figures they keep spouting, if they by that time were not
> forthcoming on what is and what is not acceptable use i would have been
> straight on the blower to cancel the account swiftly followed by the
> cancellation of whatever means i paid by see come the end of the month
> there was no "misunderstanding or confusion ;D" on whether or not i was
> still a customer. In fact the way they have handled the sad situation i
> would be cancelling the account even if i was not in there 0.3% (whatever
> that means?) as i like to know what im allowed and not allowed to use with
> any service i pay for. Especially if the company concerned has the nerve
> to tag the word 'premier' to it.
> While i can understand that they cannot indefinately sustain heavy use,
> how
> the ^&*% are there users spose to know what is and what isnt classed as
> heavy use?? when they havent even bothered to tell them a GB figure, a
> monthly allowance figure, or anything else which makes good common sense.
> This is just my opinion.... Oh yeah and im just a sad 56k user that doesnt
> at the moment even have broadband, i would have said they must be joking,
> but the situation and how it has been handled is so hillarious that the
> word joke doesnt do it justice.
>
>
>

I think 200Gb a month far exceeds the fair usage of an unlimited service, if
one month you download 200Gb then the next only 20 then that is fair enough,
but these guys are downloading 1000Gb + in a couple of months, wtf is a
company supposed to do, I would say I am a fairly heavy user around 20-30Gb
a month download but fuck me some of these guys are downloading 500Gb.

It will be the minority that spoils it for the majority as is always the
case with these damn leechers, and before people spout about "unlimited"
usage I know the term unlimited should mean unlimited but come on, if I
offered you unlimited alcohol in a pub for 20 quid a night, would you sit
there drinking 200 glasses of wine just to put the pub out of buisness?

Use some common sense guys, dont take the piss out of companys genorosity,
or you will all have a stupid cap put in place, and terms and conditions
which tie you down.

With BT putting a 15Gb cap on there top service this must show you how in
the scheme of things you are taking the piss out of plusnet, If I had my way
I would put you all back on 56k and let you suffer

Ronny

"Peter M" <us-(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On 17 Nov 2004 in uk.telecom.broadband, "Dave" wrote:
>
> >that could be paying anything up to 65.99 per month
>
> Big deal. Seems like the costs from these 250 or so users would be
> much higher than anything they bring in as monthly fees (and a portion
> of those fees goes straight on to BT Wholesale for the link to the home)

my point was that in the previous posters message they are whining about
profit, yet by upsetting customers, to the stage that some may leave is not
gonna help their profits is it?unless you think that by getting shot of
paying customers in any business makes money!

"Ronny" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote
snip....
> I think 200Gb a month far exceeds the fair usage of an unlimited service,
if

I would kinda agree with that, its just a pity that the some of the people
that got the original email from them are not doing 200Gb

> one month you download 200Gb then the next only 20 then that is fair
enough,
> but these guys are downloading 1000Gb + in a couple of months, wtf is a

Thats rubbish, most which have had the email are nowhere near "1000Gb+ in a
couple of months" you should have a look on the adslguide.org forums to see
one person that got the email claims their actual use in the last 3 months
was just over 80Gb

> company supposed to do, I would say I am a fairly heavy user around
20-30Gb
> a month download but fuck me some of these guys are downloading 500Gb.

I think 20-30Gb a month is perfectly acceptable, 500Gb i would say is not,
however its only a very small number that have reached that number, most
that got the email seem to be around the 100Gb-150Gb amount per month, Im
not gonna say if that figure is acceptable or not, obviously plusnet dont
think it is, however it might be nice if the paying customers knew what was
and was not, for all you know 6 months down the road you 30Gb may by them
be seen as unacceptable.

>
> It will be the minority that spoils it for the majority as is always the
> case with these damn leechers, and before people spout about "unlimited"
> usage I know the term unlimited should mean unlimited but come on, if I

There is no proof that anybody has spoiled the service for anyone at all,
all the users know is that plusnet dont like 0.3% (whatever thats spose to
mean) users. As for the term unlimited, i dont think they actually use
that in their terms, however if they do then they should be selling what
they advertise, if they are not, that is against the law.

> offered you unlimited alcohol in a pub for 20 quid a night, would you sit
> there drinking 200 glasses of wine just to put the pub out of buisness?

Some would, and they know they would, hence the reason no pub owner with
any brain would offer such a scheme.

>
> Use some common sense guys, dont take the piss out of companys
genorosity,
> or you will all have a stupid cap put in place, and terms and conditions
> which tie you down.

Terms already technically tie them down, as for a cap, im sure some would
prefer that, at least then they would understand what is and isnt allowed.

>
> With BT putting a 15Gb cap on there top service this must show you how in
> the scheme of things you are taking the piss out of plusnet, If I had my
way
> I would put you all back on 56k and let you suffer

The users that only use around 3Gb a month would probably say the same to
you about your 30Gb.

On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 06:30:50 +0000, Peter M <us-(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> On 17 Nov 2004 in uk.telecom.broadband, "Dave" wrote:
>
>> that could be paying anything up to 65.99 per month
>
> Big deal. Seems like the costs from these 250 or so users would be
> much higher than anything they bring in as monthly fees (and a portion
> of those fees goes straight on to BT Wholesale for the link to the home)
>
>
>
>

Hi,

In terms of the customers that we contacted you're right that £65.99 per
month wouldn't cover the costs we pay to BT Wholesale. The per GB cost is
around £1 so you can easily see how much it costs. On top of that there's
the port cost as well as the costs of all the other services and support
staff.


With Regards,

Dave,
--
| Dave Tomlinson Broadband Solutions For
| Customer Support for Home & Business
| PlusNet plc @ http://www.plus.net
+ ----- My Referrals - It pays to recommend PlusNet -----

"Dave" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:cnfign$mdq$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> "Ronny" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote
> snip....
>> I think 200Gb a month far exceeds the fair usage of an unlimited service,
> if
>
> I would kinda agree with that, its just a pity that the some of the people
> that got the original email from them are not doing 200Gb

I was just using the statement from Plusnet, not from adsl guide

>> one month you download 200Gb then the next only 20 then that is fair
> enough,
>> but these guys are downloading 1000Gb + in a couple of months, wtf is a
>
> Thats rubbish, most which have had the email are nowhere near "1000Gb+ in
> a
> couple of months" you should have a look on the adslguide.org forums to
> see
> one person that got the email claims their actual use in the last 3 months
> was just over 80Gb

I dont see that as being "over the top"

>> company supposed to do, I would say I am a fairly heavy user around
> 20-30Gb
>> a month download but fuck me some of these guys are downloading 500Gb.
>
> I think 20-30Gb a month is perfectly acceptable, 500Gb i would say is not,
> however its only a very small number that have reached that number, most
> that got the email seem to be around the 100Gb-150Gb amount per month, Im
> not gonna say if that figure is acceptable or not, obviously plusnet dont
> think it is, however it might be nice if the paying customers knew what
> was
> and was not, for all you know 6 months down the road you 30Gb may by them
> be seen as unacceptable.

I'm not with PN, so in that respect it doesnt effect me, but I would hope my
ISP would contact others who were abusing the "always on" privilege

>> It will be the minority that spoils it for the majority as is always the
>> case with these damn leechers, and before people spout about "unlimited"
>> usage I know the term unlimited should mean unlimited but come on, if I
>
> There is no proof that anybody has spoiled the service for anyone at all,
> all the users know is that plusnet dont like 0.3% (whatever thats spose to
> mean) users. As for the term unlimited, i dont think they actually use
> that in their terms, however if they do then they should be selling what
> they advertise, if they are not, that is against the law.
>
>> offered you unlimited alcohol in a pub for 20 quid a night, would you sit
>> there drinking 200 glasses of wine just to put the pub out of buisness?
>
> Some would, and they know they would, hence the reason no pub owner with
> any brain would offer such a scheme.

Plenty offer "drink as much as you want" for a fixed fee, its why I used
that anology

>> Use some common sense guys, dont take the piss out of companys
> genorosity,
>> or you will all have a stupid cap put in place, and terms and conditions
>> which tie you down.
>
> Terms already technically tie them down, as for a cap, im sure some would
> prefer that, at least then they would understand what is and isnt allowed.
>
>>
>> With BT putting a 15Gb cap on there top service this must show you how in
>> the scheme of things you are taking the piss out of plusnet, If I had my
> way
>> I would put you all back on 56k and let you suffer
>
> The users that only use around 3Gb a month would probably say the same to
> you about your 30Gb.
>
>
>

But the users using 3 Gb would be better off moving to a capped service,
They have no cause to complain as they do not even need to be on an
un-capped service.

You pay £25.00 a month or whatever for the reason of using your connection
to download what you want when you want, it's not rocket science to work out
that people are abusing the "uncapped" status as being a free for all to
download as much as they like.

I'm not a big beliver of AUP and capping, but I can see why people bring
them in, it's because of the heavy users spoiling it for the rest.

I dont see 80Gb a month as big usage, but when I see people doing 150Gb+ it
starts get silly.

Ronny

> In terms of the customers that we contacted you're right that £65.99 per
> month wouldn't cover the costs we pay to BT Wholesale. The per GB cost is
> around £1 so you can easily see how much it costs. On top of that there's
> the port cost as well as the costs of all the other services and support
> staff.

Quite frankly I am astonished you did not just dump them just as most other
ISPs would do. I really don't believe that there is anything to be gained by
allowing a tiny number of users to abuse the system.

On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 13:13:05 -0000, Dave <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

Hi,



> Thats rubbish, most which have had the email are nowhere near
> "1000Gb+ in a
> couple of months" you should have a look on the adslguide.org forums to
> see
> one person that got the email claims their actual use in the last 3
> months
> was just over 80Gb

Certainly not everyone we contacted was doing 1000GB, I've asked the
person I think you are referring to to contact me so I can check it out.



> There is no proof that anybody has spoiled the service for anyone at all,
> all the users know is that plusnet dont like 0.3% (whatever thats spose


It's isn't a case that we don't like anyone, want we are trying to do is
ensure that the for the vast majority of our customers isn't spoiled and
still offer the highest quality service to all customers.


> mean) users. As for the term unlimited, i dont think they actually use
> that in their terms, however if they do then they should be selling what
> they advertise, if they are not, that is against the law.


The service hasn't been marketted as unlimited. For starters it wouldn't
be technically possible to offer an unlimited service because even maxing
out upload and download you'll hit a limit. But I'm being pedantic now.


>> offered you unlimited alcohol in a pub for 20 quid a night, would you
>> sit
>> there drinking 200 glasses of wine just to put the pub out of buisness?
>
> Some would, and they know they would, hence the reason no pub owner with
> any brain would offer such a scheme.


They did this at a couple of clubs near me a couple of years back, but
people being people drank that bit too much, not for the clubs, but for
the police who asked them to stop this type of promotion.





With Regards,

Dave,
--
| Dave Tomlinson Broadband Solutions For
| Customer Support for Home & Business
| PlusNet plc @ http://www.plus.net
+ ----- My Referrals - It pays to recommend PlusNet -----