cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

PN more expensive than BT for phone

driveconsultant
Grafter
Posts: 164
Registered: 03-08-2007

PN more expensive than BT for phone

A friend is looking to install broadband and I suggested PlusNet for phone and broadband. I was a bit disappointed that it actually costs more (50p/month) to get both from PN than it does to get the phone from BT and ADSL from PN.
How does PN expect to get the phone business if they are more expensive?
Also does anyone know how much it costs to get a line installed with PN? I have searched the site but all it says is "free to move to PN from BT", not how much if you have no line at the moment. My friend does not actually require a phone line, except to host the ADSL connection, so is not the slightest bit interested in free calls etc.
11 REPLIES
Mand
Grafter
Posts: 5,560
Thanks: 1
Registered: 05-04-2007

Re: PN more expensive than BT for phone

Hi there,
I can appreciate the issue here, as your friend does not actually intend to use the phone, but in general terms both of our products stack up very well against BT's offering.
In terms of getting a new line, this is a manual process at the moment, and involves some pixie magic on our part Wink, which is why it's not advertised on the site.
If there is no line at all in the property the cost to supply a new line would be £105. If you friend wished to go ahead with this he would need to register a free dialup account and add payment details before raising a ticket requesting us to add the phone service.
Hope that helps, but if you have any further questions just yell. Smiley
driveconsultant
Grafter
Posts: 164
Registered: 03-08-2007

Re: PN more expensive than BT for phone

Quote from: Mand
I can appreciate the issue here, as your friend does not actually intend to use the phone, but in general terms both of our products stack up very well against BT's offering.

Well no, they don't, in this case. It would cost him 50p/month more for the PN product than BT's option 1, which is all he really needs. Why doesn't PN have a cheaper product with no free calls to compete with BT option 1?
OK the activation is £20 cheaper, but £105 is still a lot. Is pixie magic so expensive? Or is it just that the work has to be subbed out to BT anyway?
Looks like he might have to make do with a sub-standard broadband service (Virgin) to avoid the silly installation costs.
Mand
Grafter
Posts: 5,560
Thanks: 1
Registered: 05-04-2007

Re: PN more expensive than BT for phone

Hi there,
I've raised the idea of a wires only Home Phone product with our products team, but in reality I don't think this would reduce the base price of £11 by much if at all.
BT Retail have some buying power, in that they have more Home Phone customers than anyone else, so they have a lot more leeway in their product prices.
£105 is a lot I agree, but that is the cost of the order. Pixie magic comes free in these cases! Cheesy
LiamM
Grafter
Posts: 5,636
Registered: 12-08-2007

Re: PN more expensive than BT for phone

Quote from: driveconsultants
OK the activation is £20 cheaper, but £105 is still a lot. Is pixie magic so expensive? Or is it just that the work has to be subbed out to BT anyway?

So, it would take over 3 years to get the benefit of the 50p a month saving with BT?  And you get the convenience of only one bill and you're able to make free calls eves and weekends.
I think I'd take the PlusNet option.
Mand
Grafter
Posts: 5,560
Thanks: 1
Registered: 05-04-2007

Re: PN more expensive than BT for phone

I can't give too many details at the moment, but I reckon if you watch out over the next few weeks your friend will be pleasantly surprised as we have some good changes coming up. Smiley
driveconsultant
Grafter
Posts: 164
Registered: 03-08-2007

Re: PN more expensive than BT for phone

Quote from: Liam
Quote from: driveconsultants

Yes I think he's going to.  Smiley
When I first posted I didn't know that the installation was cheaper than BT.
AND he will get a referral fee for himself that adds £20 + 75p/month savings. Yay for Plusnet!!
driveconsultant
Grafter
Posts: 164
Registered: 03-08-2007

Re: PN more expensive than BT for phone

Quote from: Mand
I can't give too many details at the moment, but I reckon if you watch out over the next few weeks your friend will be pleasantly surprised as we have some good changes coming up. Smiley

So should he order now or wait a while?
I think he is going to order - the pixie magic swung the decision.
As it happens he is already a customer at another address - his Mum's. I'll have to remind him to refer himself.
Mand
Grafter
Posts: 5,560
Thanks: 1
Registered: 05-04-2007

Re: PN more expensive than BT for phone

The changes will apply for everyone, so he can safely order now and not miss out. Smiley
Make sure one of you gets a referral anyway. Wink
glocal
Grafter
Posts: 86
Thanks: 2
Registered: 11-09-2007

Re: PN more expensive than BT for phone

PN's and BT's offerings appear a lot less appealing with the likes of www.1866.co.uk and www.18899.co.uk around charging only a connection fee of around 4-5p per successful call on all UK calls to geographical numbers 24/7. There are no duration restrictions or subscription fees either. As for international calls, these are often 20 times or more cheaper.
N/A

Re: PN more expensive than BT for phone

Before moving to Homephone Anytime I used two of the aforementioned override services and find my current provider to be more economical.  I've had various telephone services and found this one to the best and most convenient - just the one bill and I know exactly how much it is going to be.
With regards to the override services, it is true that they charge only for the connection but it appeared to me (from my invoices) that if the call was not successful (i.e. not answered), the charge still applied as it began from the time that their operator voice was activated.
For anyone making short, frequent calls it might not be so economical.
Also, it is a real pain dialing their number and the geogaphical one although you do get used to it.
A couple of my friends have abandoned one of the override services as they have found some reliability issues.
glocal
Grafter
Posts: 86
Thanks: 2
Registered: 11-09-2007

Re: PN more expensive than BT for phone

You are confusing 1866 and 18899 with the various other 08xx services listed here: http://niftylist.co.uk/calls/ and http://callchecker.moneysavingexpert.com/ukcallchecker/
With 1866 and 18866 you open a subscription-free account and only successful calls to national and international numbers are charged. For calls to UK geographical calls the charge is 0p/min regardless of duration, time of day or day of week. The only charge is 4 or 5p *successful* connection charge depending on which one you use. This is confirmed by many years' worth of bills I've received. I and many others have been using these services for years and in my experience their reliability is indistinguishable from BT's. You can also register your mobile phone number(s) with them and make calls via their geographical access number, using your free minutes inclusive with your mobile phone talk plan. There is no contract, you can still use BT's caller display, 1471 and call minder for free, which PN charges extra for.
As for the 08xx override numbers, it's true that charging starts from the moment the provide answers the call, so even if the called number is engaged you will still be charged. They have occasional reliability issues particularly when you call mobile numbers abroad. However, at e.g. 0.5p/min for calls to fixed numbers on the continent they are hard to beat even for Skype, and most people I know are happy to use them anyway.
A combination of a BT line for the free value-added services (eg caller display), 1866 for UK calls and 08xx for international calls is really hard to beat. I find it very amusing when alternative line providers still compare their prices to BT's! The links are above -- compare the prices and see what other people have to say on uk.telecom here: http://groups.google.co.uk/group/uk.telecom/topics?hl=en and see for yourself.