ADSL accounts cut off

lordnokon said:
Apparently there is a lady which did almost 5 times my amount .

Look at the last part of the speeds that you can do...

big
Click to expand...

I can't believe you. You bitch and moan bitterly when Mweb cut you off after you have used over R20000 of local traffic for a small fraction of that cost. Did you really expect them to subsidise you forever? Mweb would probably have happily kept the deal in place if people had just been reasonable with their usage.

People can go on and on about what uncapped means etc but at the end of the day, we live in a country where Telkom still control most broadband. Peering links etc all need to be paid and Telkom charge handsomely for everything they can (hence their massive profits). No business is going to keep going if they make a loss and that applies to Mweb too. People keep QQ'ing about the rest of the world this and the rest of the world that. Those are reasons why this forum exists. They will probably still be in place until LLU in 2011/2012. Why can't people just try to be a little reasonable in the mean time instead of buggering up all of these deals for everyone.
 
bwana said:
Mweb could have simply capped the local at something like 100gb - voila "abusers" gone - that they chose to end it says to me it has nothing at all to do with a few heavy users.
Click to expand...

I think it has everything to do with the heavy users. In this economic climate, companies are trying to run a tight ship. The heavy users would have ensured that the local internet costs to Telkom stood out like a sore thumb. Without them, it would have been likely to run under the radar. Just looking at the figures posted here and there is no doubt in my mind that they were making a big loss with this deal.
 
Abe said:
I think it has everything to do with the heavy users. In this economic climate, companies are trying to run a tight ship. The heavy users would have ensured that the local internet costs to Telkom stood out like a sore thumb. Without them, it would have been likely to run under the radar. Just looking at the figures posted here and there is no doubt in my mind that they were making a big loss with this deal.
Click to expand...
Then why not simply remove the heavy users from the equation? There were other options.
 
There's cell phone contracts that give you free minutes a month - don't use it they may label you an abuser of their service!! Frakken noobs.
 
This stinks of Sentech all over again.
Spent many a good afternoon explaining what unlimited was to their phone-sharks
 
Abe said:
People can go on and on about what uncapped means etc but at the end of the day, we live in a country where Telkom still control most broadband.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, but then again if MWeb can't provide uncapped local, they should not claim they can. The guys who used the priviledge to the max did not do anything wrong. I would do the same.
 
bwana said:
Then why not simply remove the heavy users from the equation? There were other options.
Click to expand...

exactly. If they had clearly (in writing and by e-mail) set the cap at 100 Gb a month with fair warning to cut off abusers all would be well and good.
 
Garyvdh said:
exactly. If they had clearly (in writing and by e-mail) set the cap at 100 Gb a month with fair warning to cut off abusers all would be well and good.
Click to expand...

Because setting the cap at 100GB would make it likely for users to target that. It will become a 100GB account and people would use it to the max. At R145, you are probably looking at around 15GB-20GB per account (taking into account the people who under use along with the heavy users) to keep it viable. The point then becomes, "Why go through all this effort if people are just going to milk it. We can make more money without those users so lets just can the whole thing.".
 
Abe said:
Of course they were entitiled to do so, but they should also not complain when it gets cancelled which it ultimately will.
Click to expand...

um, do you read the news? The service has not been cancelled. It has been capped at 10Gb free and charged 3 cents per megabyte for use over the free allowance.
 
Abe said:
Because setting the cap at 100GB would make it likely for users to target that. It will become a 100GB account and people would use it to the max. At R145, you are probably looking at around 15GB-20GB per account (taking into account the people who under use along with the heavy users) to keep it viable. The point then becomes, "Why go through all this effort if people are just going to milk it. We can make more money without those users so lets just can the whole thing.".
Click to expand...

dude, plz tell me you have more of a brain than that??? :eek:

The service was uncapped and Mweb said only a tiny portion of people milked it. Now you say, oh if they cap it at 100 Gb then everyone will use it to the limit! Just think about what you just wrote.
 
did Sentech take over Mweb while no one was looking?? :D

why do Internet "Service" Providers keep on advertising things as free when they are not free, or unlimited, when unlimited cannot be sustained?

This is a case for the Advertising Authority.

I doubt that the top heavy users will follow that route though, since there is a great likelihood that the data was used for illegally downloading or sharing software and movies.

Companies who used it of VPN will now look elsewhere, and Mweb won't see their money again.
 
Abe said:
Because setting the cap at 100GB would make it likely for users to target that. It will become a 100GB account and people would use it to the max.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes: :confused:

And what the the feck is wrong with that? They advertise a service at Rxxx, consumer signs up for service at Rxxx. Now you tell me I'm not entitled to use advertised service witin the conditions of the contract?

Are you for real? Do you read what you write?

*We are missing the smiley that bangs his head against a brick wall*
 
Last edited:
Garyvdh said:
um, do you read the news? The service has not been cancelled. It has been capped at 10Gb free and charged 3 cents per megabyte for use over the free allowance.
Click to expand...

The "uncapped" part has been cancelled.

Garyvdh said:
dude, plz tell me you have more of a brain than that??? :eek:

The service was uncapped and Mweb said only a tiny portion of people milked it. Now you say, oh if they cap it at 100 Gb then everyone will use it to the limit! Just think about what you just wrote.
Click to expand...

If you tell people they can use 5GB, they will use 5GB. Tell them there is 10GB available, again, they will use 10GB. How many times do you get people posting here saying "I have x GB available, what can I download today and tomorrow"?

People will look around and see that you can get 100GB for R145 and guess what, they will sign up and use 100GB. How many people are presently using most of their 30GB local IS accounts? It becomes a story of I am paying for X and I will damn well make use of X.
 
Last edited:
ponder said:
:rolleyes: :confused:

And what the the feck is wrong with that? They advertise a service at Rxxx, consumer signs up for service at Rxxx. Now you tell me I'm not entitled to use advertised service witin the conditions of the contract?

Are you for real? Do you read what you write?

*We are missing the smiley that bangs his head against a brick wall*
Click to expand...

Did you read what I wrote in the message just before the one you quoted? Of course they were entitiled to do so, but they should also not complain when it gets cancelled which it ultimately will.

Uncapped is not sustainable in SA without some "fair use" clause. MWeb made the mistake of going in with such a solution and cancelled it. People who have "raped" the solution up to now are complaining because it was cancelled and they were capped. No business will offer a solution if they are losing money on it. It does not matter whether I or anyone else thinks it's unfair that we don't have a viable uncapped solution in SA. It cannot survive because people will use it to the max.
 
Garyvdh said:
The service was uncapped
Click to expand...
Correction ... The trail was uncapped

From what I've seen, they clearly indicated it was a trail. Again a bit unfair to blame them for the self-induced disgruntlement of ppl around here who assumed it would be permanent before any such announcement had been made.

To their credit, no other ISP inc. Big T has attempted to provide unlimited local on std ADSL accounts. So it didn't pan out financially, deal with it, anyway there a much bigger goggas in the system responsible for this state of affairs.

Also on the subject of adherence to ADSL Regs, they contain a single line referring to the matter ...

3.4 Local bandwidth usage shall not be subject to the cap.
Click to expand...

As this can be interpreted in numerous ways, its obvious who's at fault here.
 
Abe said:
Did you read what I wrote in the message just before the one you quoted? Of course they were entitiled to do so, but they should also not complain when it gets cancelled which it ultimately will.

Uncapped is not sustainable in SA without some "fair use" clause. MWeb made the mistake of going in with such a solution and cancelled it. People who have "raped" the solution up to now are complaining because it was cancelled and they were capped. No business will offer a solution if they are losing money on it. It does not matter whether I or anyone else thinks it's unfair that we don't have a viable uncapped solution in SA. It cannot survive because people will use it to the max.
Click to expand...

I replied to your your 100GB post, where did I mention uncapped? If I wanted to reply to your uncapped post I would have quoted it.

If they advertise 10GB then I'm entitled to 10GB. What part of false advertising do you not understand? You can NOT advertise a service as something that it is not.

Even if uncapped is being abused as you and the ISPs would call it it is only by a small percentage. When you bring a product to market you should do a feasibility study/research to work out your margins, usage etc. Don't blame the consumer for a lack of planning on MWebs behalf.
 
Last edited:
Abe said:
The "uncapped" part has been cancelled.
Click to expand...

*** Bangs head against wall ***

No it hasn't. You can still use as much as you want, there is NO LIMIT! As long as you are willing to pay for it, you can use as much as you want.

Abe said:
If you tell people they can use 5GB, they will use 5GB. Tell them there is 10GB available, again, they will use 10GB. How many times do you get people posting here saying "I have x GB available, what can I download today and tomorrow"?

People will look around and see that you can get 100GB for R145 and guess what, they will sign up and use 100GB. How many people are presently using most of their 30GB local IS accounts? It becomes a story of I am paying for X and I will damn well make use of X.
Click to expand...

Mweb told them it was unlimited, uncapped, no limits, unrestricted. so according to your theory 100% of the people should have used it as much as they can... did they? NO! They didn't. Mweb said that less than 2% of the users used more than 100Gb. so why should it be any different under your scenario? :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X