facebook rss twitter

‘Frustrated’ consumers want broadband advertising overhaul

by Sarah Griffiths on 2 September 2010, 14:57

Tags: Virgin (NASDAQ:VMED)

Quick Link: HEXUS.net/qazuz

Add to My Vault: x

Transparency trauma

Nine out of ten consumers find broadband advertising misleading while 98 percent of people believe the ‘up to' speed tag is unhelpful when choosing a broadband provider.

Independent research by ICM commissioned by Virgin Media found broadband speeds are second only to price for consumers when selecting a broadband provider, but 90 percent of people find it tricky to compare different services as they cannot be sure of the speed they will actually receive. The firm questioned 1,000 Brits in July.

A recent report by Ofcom found the average download speed for residential broadband connections remains ‘well below' the speeds that some internet service providers (ISP) continue to advertise.

With many internet service providers advertising speeds of "up to" 20Mb or 24Mb while delivering an average speed of just over 5Mb, almost 70 percent of consumers are frustrated with internet service providers that routinely fail to deliver on their promises.

The report found a massive 93 percent of people believe advertising rules should be changed to stop internet service providers making a speed claim unless it matches the experience of most of their customers.

In a bid to boost transparency, Virgin Media will publish the typical average speeds each month for its 10Mb, 20Mb and 50Mb services at www.virginmedia.com/speedhonesty. The firm said it calculates the typical speeds based on the average speed received by 66 percent of its customers over 24 hours.

The report also highlighted widespread cynicism towards current broadband advertising with over half of people unsurprised when shown the difference between advertised and actual speeds. Furthermore, fewer than 10 percent of people think advertised broadband speeds are accurate.

Jon James, executive director of broadband, at Virgin Media said: "People are paying for faster and faster broadband but being ripped off by unscrupulous providers who can't deliver their promised speeds to even a single customer. A change in advertising is urgently needed to build consumer confidence in super-fast broadband and the industry more generally."

The advertising Standards Authority has recently banned a BT broadband advert on the basis the firm got a bit carried away with its speed claims.

The advertising of broadband is set to be thrown into sharper relief after Ofcom has strengthened the Voluntary Code of Practice on Broadband Speeds to ensure consumers are given clear information about possible line speeds when they buy a package from a provider.

Under the bolstered code consumers whose internet is much slower than expected will be able to terminate the contract with the provider within three months of its start if problems cannot be resolved.



HEXUS Forums :: 26 Comments

Login with Forum Account

Don't have an account? Register today!
The firm said it calculates the typical speeds based on the average speed received by 66 percent of its customers over 24 hours.
Why only 66%? Why aren't they telling us which 66% this is?
How do they measure the speed? If I use the connection for 1 hour a day, how do they figure out the speed I get? Does the 66% include any of the “few percent” of people who get bandwidth throttled?

It's easy to see why Virgin wants to promote this - cable gives guaranteed bandwidth at least up until the backhaul, whereas ADSL the bandwidth between you and the DSLAM could be pretty much anything between zero and the stated maximum.

But until ofcom gets off its bum and comes up with a clear, open to scrutiny policy on how speeds should be measured and stated, this just amounts to a marketing ploy.
kalniel
Why only 66%? Why aren't they telling us which 66% this is?

As the other 33% might not be connected as we know what lengths some people go to to save money and unplug EVERYTHING when they are not using them ;)

Speaking of saving money, they've highlighted that cost is first followed by speed second. I'm sorry but anyone who goes on an ISP just because of their “price” is doing it wrong. No wonder we see so many complaints about the cheap mass-market ISPS at night such as talktalk, tiscali etc and it's down to the amount of people on their network grinding everything to a halt and the adslguide forums are a good indication of this as there are always forum posts regarding speed and latency on these ISPS.

This is because ADSL has a contention ratio which is usually between 20:1 and 50:1 per BT guidelines, meaning that 20 to 50 subscribers, each assigned or sold a bandwidth of “up to” 8 Mbit/s for instance, may be sharing 8 Mbit/s of uplink bandwidth.

As such, imagine the speeds you'd get when ALL of the people are online at the same time all trying to download a file from say the BBC iplayer.

Until people understand about contention, ratios and how ADSL works in relation to line length and signal ratio we'll see more and more people complain about how suppliers are advertising incorrectly.

I'll get back under my rock now and be back banging this drum the next time people moan about ‘upto’ speeds ;)
I find the article bias against ADSL
Independent research by ICM commissioned by Virgin Media

Speed varies greatly because of the way ADSL technology works, no point attacking ISPs for using the “up to” label when its about the best they can do, unless they all change and use “Speed will vary depending on how far you live from your nearest telephone exchange and other factors that might make you sleep if we try to explain it to you” label for all their packages.

How about VM, “enjoy 20Mbps… but only if you don't use it too much.”
Then they should publish contention ratios and speed/100m of distance to the exchange.

Cheap can be good - O2/BE have some of the cheapest packages and also the best latencies etc.