ADSL accounts cut off

Roman4604 said:
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.
Click to expand...

WTF is a trail? a pathway through the woods?

don't you mean a Trial? And WTH does that have to do with anything anyway?

Roman4604 said:
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.
Click to expand...

Where have you been living? Prior to 2005 local bandwidth WAS uncapped 24/7/365!!! it was like that for years.

When Telkom brought it back for their subscribers in 2008 they also made it uncapped for a few months before imposing the cost restriction.

Do you have any clue what you are talking about?

Roman4604 said:
Also on the subject of adherence to ADSL Regs, they contain a single line referring to the matter ...

As this can be interpreted in numerous ways, its obvious who's at fault here.
Click to expand...

yes, both ICASA and the ISPs...

ICASA for not making it clearer... and the ISPs for taking advantage of the loophole to make more money in their greed!
 
Garyvdh said:
Trial? And WTH does that have to do with anything anyway?
Click to expand...
If you don't understand this, you have not mastered the skill of comprehending the English language.

Garyvdh said:
Where have you been living? Prior to 2005 local bandwidth WAS uncapped 24/7/365!!! it was like that for years.

When Telkom brought it back for their subscribers in 2008 they also made it uncapped for a few months before imposing the cost restriction.

Do you have any clue what you are talking about?
Click to expand...
Do you. All the above decisions were make by one company, to which all other ISP had to adhere.

Garyvdh said:
yes, both ICASA and the ISPs...

ICASA for not making it clearer... and the ISPs for taking advantage of the loophole to make more money in their greed!
Click to expand...
ICASA as the national regulator is responsible for the crafting (clarity) of regulations. It's nobody else's fault.
 
Last edited:
Abe said:
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.
Click to expand...

Firstly I don’t have to explain myself to you. Secondly I'm bitter yes due to the fact that they cut me off, why because by law no ISP has the right to do that. Go read up on communication law.

Instead of you people complaining always about the people who abuse the system, grow some things they call balls between your legs, and stand up for your rights as a South African. We as South Africans have the right to free local bandwidth, there’s no law stating that local has to be charge, nor a law saying it must not. So ISP’s has exploited this and they are making money of us. Why do we always have to except things for what they are...? People like this reminds me of are black brothers who too-too for better service delivering or rise in money etc etc; but your one of those and who don't join, but sit and let some else do the work. Bitching and moaning from the back.
 
Roman4604 said:
If you don't understand this, you have not mastered the skill of comprehending the English language.
Click to expand...
Dude, don't talk to me about the English Language. I'm not the one who can't tell the difference between Trail and Trial!
Roman4604 said:
Do you. All the above decisions were make by one company, to which all other ISP had to adhere.
Click to expand...
And this makes it all better how exactly? am I supposed to be happy because of this, or excuse Mweb's behaviour because of this? WTF is your point anyway? Please use English language to explain it to us! :D
Roman4604 said:
ICASA as the national regulator is responsible for the crafting (clarity) of regulations. It's nobody else's fault.
Click to expand...
Oh ya, their greed is nobody's fault! when they are given a chance to cut us some slack, they dive right in and grab us by the throat. bunch of innocent ISPs, aren't they? What about those ISPs that have not yet even begun to offer uncapped local in accordance with ICASA's regulation? Are they also innocent?
 
Gaz{M} said:
To silence the mob, could you tell us in general terms what this 3 odd TB of data was?

1) Company backups, VPN or similar business data transfer activities
2) Data 'sharing' services :)

or indicate the % of both 1 and 2
Click to expand...

Well none which you have stated her, was all for my personal use. NNTP traffic
 
It never ceases to amaze me in this day and age, when we have been ripped off for so long now, that there are actually dummies who will stand up and pick on the consumers rather than the wrongdoers. It will never cease to astound me about some people. These are the guys who when they got beaten up for their lunch money at school would bring an extra sandwich for the bully the next day... and still get beaten up! :D
 
Last edited:
ponder said:
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.
Click to expand...

Exactly. If they change it to a 100GB account, then people will use 100GB. Nothing wrong with that except that it's not viable to offer 100GB for R145. My post was explaining why they changed it to a 10GB solution and did not offer a 100GB solution.

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.
Click to expand...

I am not blaming the consumer for lack of planning on MWeb's behalf. MWeb did not expect people to do what they did, so they cancelled the free uncapped option when they realised it was not viable.
 
Its interesting to see that they're offering a flat 10gb of local regardless of how much international you buy. Buy 1gb get 10, by 3gb get 10 . . .

http://www.mweb.co.za/productsservi...ernetAccessADSLPricing/tabid/142/Default.aspx
Abe said:
Exactly. If they change it to a 100GB account, then people will use 100GB. Nothing wrong with that except that it's not viable to offer 100GB for R145. My post was explaining why they changed it to a 10GB solution and did not offer a 100GB solution.
Click to expand...
Why would they use 100gb now if they didnt when there was no limit? :confused:
 
Garyvdh said:
It never ceases to amaze me in this day and age, when we have been ripped off for so long now, that there are actually dummies who will stand up and pick on the consumers rather than the wrongdoers. It will never cease to astound me about some people. These are the guys who when they got beaten up for their lunch money at school would bring and extra sandwich for the bully the next day... and still get beaten up! :D
Click to expand...

+2 so true my friend so true
 
Garyvdh said:
*** 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.
Click to expand...

Now you are playing with semantics. Obiously I was referring to the free uncapped.

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:
Click to expand...

Because it's a psycological thing. People tend to eat whatever is on their plate.
 
bwana said:
http://www.mweb.co.za/productsservi...ernetAccessADSLPricing/tabid/142/Default.aspxWhy would they use 100gb now if they didnt when there was no limit? :confused:
Click to expand...

Because more and more people would start signing up for their 100GB @ R145. I remember when Axxess and co started with the 30GB accounts a while back. People who were getting on with 3GB per month suddenly started downloading like crazy. People have this mindset that they have paid for X GB and they will damn well use X GB. Uncapped for most people is "use what you need", 100GB is 100GB and people will look for things to download to use it all.
 
Abe said:
Now you are playing with semantics. Obiously I was referring to the free uncapped.
Click to expand...
then why didn't you say so?
Abe said:
Because it's a psycological thing. People tend to eat whatever is on their plate.
Click to expand...
So let me get this straight....

If I go to Spur, and they have a special.. all the steak you can eat for R100. I am not likely to eat that much.
But if they change their special to Ten Steaks for R100, then I am more likely to eat all ten?
 
Garyvdh said:
So let me get this straight....

If I go to Spur, and they have a special.. all the steak you can eat for R100. I am not likely to eat that much.
But if they change their special to Ten Steaks for R100, then I am more likely to eat all ten?
Click to expand...

Yes.
 
Garyvdh said:
Dude, don't talk to me about the English Language. I'm not the one who can't tell the difference between Trail and Trial!
Click to expand...
Come on the issue at hand here is, do you, or do you not, understand what the term trial means in the context of MWEB's unlimited local offer? Veering off-topic using cheap tricks is irrelevant.

Garyvdh said:
And this makes it all better how exactly?
Click to expand...

You truly do not understand the structure of the DSL market in SA, so let me spell it out for you (no pun intended).

There is only one ADSL network in SA, owned by yours truly Telkom SA Limited. All other ISPs reselling their access capacity or traffic are ultimately bound by their service offerings and associated pricing regimes. Telkom have the sole discretion to alter both service specifications and pricing as they see fit, and have done so in the past.

All reselling ISPs can do is make the most of what is offered (not withstanding taking Telkom to the competition commission on a almost permanent basis). ICASA should be the organisation keeping Telkom in check with pro-competitive regulation, unfortunately so far they've duffed it up.
 
Abe said:
People who were getting on with 3GB per month suddenly started downloading like crazy.
Click to expand...

Has it ever occurred to you that people were only downloading 3GB because that is all they got?

People tend to work within their allocated budget cap, it's not easy either as you have to practice a lot of self restraint. Why do you think people keep on checking their usage all the time. Most people don't just download for the sake of downloading, that's the rare exception.

I see your whole perspective on this issue as severly warped.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X