Best broadband provider by far has to be...

BT of course! Look at this deal from them:

£17.99 pm for 1Mbps with a 1 GB cap.

Isn't this generous of them? Which means that in under 3 hrs, you could
reach its cap, or about £6 per hour online, or less than 0.5% usage a month.

Surely this is the WORST company in Britain by far, it is a national
disgrace. Never mind the talk of breaking this company in 2, it should be
sold off to its local competitors, their employees at the top consigned to
the dole, as well as the regulator.





Truth Seeker

Truth Seeker wrote:
> BT of course! Look at this deal from them:
>
> £17.99 pm for 1Mbps with a 1 GB cap.
>
> Isn't this generous of them? Which means that in under 3 hrs, you could
> reach its cap, or about £6 per hour online, or less than 0.5% usage a month.
>
> Surely this is the WORST company in Britain by far,

Aren't you glad you are not forced to use them then.

In uk.telecom.broadband, Wireless Reader wrote:

>Aren't you glad you are not forced to use them then.

Not forced to, but if you go the BT broadband checker, and it says you
are OK, the next step is to order one of their products.

I'm sure that a very large percentage of the population do not realise
they have a choice. I wonder if OfCom are aware of this?


--
Nigel M

"Time may be a great healer,
but he's a lousy beautician"

Nigel M wrote:
> In uk.telecom.broadband, Wireless Reader wrote:
>
>
>>Aren't you glad you are not forced to use them then.
>
>
> Not forced to, but if you go the BT broadband checker, and it says you
> are OK, the next step is to order one of their products.
>
> I'm sure that a very large percentage of the population do not realise
> they have a choice. I wonder if OfCom are aware of this?

A valid point if their linking isn't fair - why don't you call/email
Ofcom for their comment on this?

On Thu, 05 May 2005 14:50:12 +0100, Nigel M <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>Not forced to, but if you go the BT broadband checker, and it says you
>are OK, the next step is to order one of their products.

that is not correct if you use the wholesale checker
www.bt.com/broadband there are many ISPs listed and search tools and
the rest. http://62.172.198.79/broadband1/suppliers/index.asp for
example.

If you pre-select BT Broadband the ISP to use their checker
www.bt.com/btbroadband then, just like any other ISP checker, its next
step is to offer you the choice of their products.

>I'm sure that a very large percentage of the population do not realise
>they have a choice.

indeed.

> I wonder if OfCom are aware of this?

what, the stupidity of the majority ?

Phil

On Thu, 05 May 2005 13:43:28 GMT, "Truth Seeker"
<bounce@micro$haft.con> wrote:

>
>Surely this is the WORST company in Britain by far

Tiscali and Wandoo (to name but two) have very similar offers with 2GB
per onth inclusive. Why wouldn't they, if their customers fit within
that limit or their research says ther eis a market for that product.

Should beer only be sold in gallon cans ? or are we allowed to drink a
half or a pint if that's what we want.

Phil

In uk.telecom.broadband, Phil Thompson wrote:

>that is not correct if you use the wholesale checker
>www.bt.com/broadband there are many ISPs listed

Strange! The first time I tried this link, it too me to the list of BT
packages, but the second time it took me to the BT Wholesale page.


--
Nigel M

"Time may be a great healer,
but he's a lousy beautician"

"Phil Thompson" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Thu, 05 May 2005 13:43:28 GMT, "Truth Seeker"
> <bounce@micro$haft.con> wrote:
>
> >
> >Surely this is the WORST company in Britain by far
>
> Tiscali and Wandoo (to name but two) have very similar offers with 2GB
> per onth inclusive. Why wouldn't they, if their customers fit within
> that limit or their research says ther eis a market for that product.

Perhaps some people are too stupid to know better? You get loads of
customers who can't be bothered to shop around.

> Should beer only be sold in gallon cans ? or are we allowed to drink a
> half or a pint if that's what we want.

Erm, I just wonder why people come to the defence of a company like this?
Would you prefer it if *only* BT provided an internet connection? In which
case, it'd probably be at 14 400 bps(premium package), cost about £50 pm, or
be at something like 10p p/min. or worse.

What does BT do better than any of its competitors in this area?

Phil Thompson <(E-Mail Removed)>said

> Tiscali and Wandoo (to name but two) have very similar offers with 2GB
> per month inclusive. Why wouldn't they, if their customers fit within
> that limit or their research says there is a market for that product.

> Should beer only be sold in gallon cans ? or are we allowed to drink a
> half or a pint if that's what we want.

I see no problem in any company providing a 'half-pint' service - IF
they advertize it as such. What happens in reality is the the
headline tells the customer that they can get 1GB broadband for £17.99
(or whatever) and there is no mention that there are limits - until
you have signed up and eventually (ever?) read the small print. I see
this as underhand practice.

JG

On Thu, 05 May 2005 15:42:33 GMT, "Truth Seeker"
<bounce@micro$haft.con> wrote:

>"Phil Thompson" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:(E-Mail Removed).. .
>> On Thu, 05 May 2005 13:43:28 GMT, "Truth Seeker"
>> <bounce@micro$haft.con> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >Surely this is the WORST company in Britain by far
>>
>> Tiscali and Wandoo (to name but two) have very similar offers with 2GB
>> per onth inclusive. Why wouldn't they, if their customers fit within
>> that limit or their research says ther eis a market for that product.
>
>Perhaps some people are too stupid to know better? You get loads of
>customers who can't be bothered to shop around.
>
I had a customer recently who had been signed up to AOL dialup at
£5.99 a months for years. He thought it was a license to use the PC!
By my estimates he spent 5 - 10 mins a week online (max)

>> Should beer only be sold in gallon cans ? or are we allowed to drink a
>> half or a pint if that's what we want.
>
>Erm, I just wonder why people come to the defence of a company like this?
>Would you prefer it if *only* BT provided an internet connection? In which
>case, it'd probably be at 14 400 bps(premium package), cost about £50 pm, or
>be at something like 10p p/min. or worse.
>
>What does BT do better than any of its competitors in this area?
>
>