topic Re: Market Areas in Plusnet Feedback

Market Areas

collieocoll — Sun, 20 Dec 2009 20:35:25 GMT

This baffles me, I happen to be in a Market 1 Area no competition as such because there aint a lot of folks around here, but if you live in a Market 3 Area where there is Competition you get a Cheaper Rate?, why?.!!!
Why does Market 3 Areas have everything going for them when we get nowt?.
They have far higher Speeds than we are ever likely to get, my average ( 1396kbps ) this to me is an outrage.
It seems to me that the likes of us living in the sticks are actually propping this system up, allowing them the Cheaper Rates and the Faster Broadband Speeds.
This has decided me that my Mac will be in my hands no later than 11th January and I will definitely be on my way. I am only sorry now I have to live with it for another Month.
I hear you say its the same all over! yes, but, I can get a better deal elswhere and more for my money, and, a months contract so I can move till the right one comes along. As I have said before I have my Next ISP lined up.
One disgusted customer.................................................. Why?,
This is why!!!!
Low Cost Area 3 Premium First three Months £11. 99............ then £15.99 per Month
High Cost Area 1 Premium First Three Months £11.99........... then £19.99 per Month
and all because they live in a more densely populated area????
By my calculations thats a Pound a Week more and a Pound a Week Way, Way Too Much.

Re: Market Areas

pierre_pierre — Sun, 20 Dec 2009 20:56:51 GMT

blame Maggie Thatcher and those that split up the public companies, Gas, Buses, Phone, Post Office. Ofcom said you will charge a high rate so that the odd balls will come in, when you have enough competition - 4 LLU or cable supplier you can drop your prices. so a Market 3 can charge what they want, 1 and 2 have to charge high prices, OFCOM said so
so dont blame PN its not their fault

Re: Market Areas

Santiago — Sun, 20 Dec 2009 23:14:00 GMT

If you just want to save a pound a week why don't you sell your house and buy a house in a market three area, problem solved.

Re: Market Areas

collieocoll — Sun, 20 Dec 2009 23:40:05 GMT

I think you miss the point, its not about saving a Pound a Week!!
adie:quote

Re: Market Areas

David_W — Sun, 20 Dec 2009 23:52:00 GMT

If you look at it another way (I'm Market 2 btw), in Market 3 areas BT are having to compete against LLU providers who err provide cheaper DSL, so in areas like that all ISP's would be charging £19.99 a month when LLU's could charge £15.99 per month, no competition there, the LLU's only compete against themselves and BT are at a disadvantage (not BT itself, all ISP's who use BT like PN). In a Market 1 area, there is no competition, there is either BT or BT, in Market 2 you may get 2 or 3 other providers.
By pricing Market 3 lower it should induce competition, and in Market 2 areas LLU's can attract a higher price (and less competition) which should (in theory) prompt them to invest in these areas, which will eventually knock them over to Market 3.
Market 1 on the other hand is getting a 50p/month tax on phone lines to pay to upgrade them to FTTH/FTTC so everyone with a phone line is subsidising Market 1 exchanges.

Re: Market Areas

w23 — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 00:10:51 GMT

Quote
They have far higher Speeds than we are ever likely to get

Not quite correct.
The speed is mostly dependant on distance from exchange, I'm lucky to be on a market 3 exchange so I benefit from the competitive pricing but I'm far enough from the exchange that my line speed is not especially good (my exchange is 21CN enabled which you are less likely to be on Market 1 but my distance means little or no benefit from the 'faster' technology).
I do accept that most market 1 exchanges are 'rural' and have a greater proportion of customers on longer lines so 'average' broadband speeds for those exchanges will be lower BUT the overall operating cost per line will be greater for BT as the lines are longer and further spread, your line rental is the same as a market 3 exchange so most users on market 1 are actually subsidised by market 3 subscribers (with shorter average lines and lower operating costs per line but the same price to the customer to rent the line).
I agree it seems unfair but it's not all one-way.

Re: Market Areas

Chris — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 10:07:36 GMT

Hi there,
I understand your point on the different prices between the markets, however these are not something we classify, take a look at the Ofcom briefing here: http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/wbamr07/statement/statement.pdf
We also have a support page explaining the market areas here: http://www.plus.net/support/broadband/products/faqs_and_guides/low_cost_areas.shtml

Re: Market Areas

jelv — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 12:45:34 GMT

In Market 1 areas the price BT can charge should be capped according to the speed the customer gets (say < 2000 gets a £3 discount) - that way there would be a financial incentive for BT to give a reasonable service to people further from the exchange.

Re: Market Areas

w23 — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 00:12:51 GMT

Quote
In Market 1 areas the price BT can charge should be capped according to the speed the customer gets

I'd like to agree Jelv but providing the service is not less expensive for BT in these areas - in fact, given the longer lines etc. their overall costs to provide telephone / broadband are probably significantly higher per customer in these cases, how can you expect a business to be forced to provide lower prices to their higher cost customers.

Quote
there would be a financial incentive for BT to give a reasonable service

Not unless it was significantly greater then their increased base cost per customer (not to mention the basic technical limitations of ADSL (and variants) on longer lines), even providing new fibre infrastructure is far more costly on exchanges with a larger catchment area (rural exchanges) so that is also not economically viable. On the other hand, the new 'Broadband Tax' might remedy this situation.

Quote
say < 2000 ]

Let's suggest 3500k , after all we're expecting technology improvements all the time, my suggested minimum is what's required for BBC IPlayer HD, seems a decent benchmark to me.