ADSL accounts cut off

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.
I know perfectly well what a trial is. But a trail in the context of how you used it makes no sense to me. And what is worse, you used it not once, but twice.

The reality is, that whether this was a trial or not, Mweb made a bad job of the PR and terms and conditions on this trial. They utterly failed at informing the public about what was going on. They failed to warn the heavy users. They failed to implement a fair system for the light users and heavy users, and no it would not have been that hard. And they have now utterly failed to keep their subscriber base. Everyone who signed up because of the trial is now leaving. They have gained nothing except to P off the heavy user population (who they should rather have seen as a cash cow, rather than abusers).

So what has Mweb really gained? They made some money out of new subscribers, they lost some money on heavy users, they are still not in compliance with spirit of the ICASA regulation (and everybody knows what the intention of the regulation was).

so all I can say is... Mweb Trial = FAIL

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.

so why have Mweb not matched Telkom then in their local bandwidth offerings? Telkom offer ten times the local for the international and R25 per local Gig thereafter. Mweb can't even match that?

nah, sorry. What they have done is indefensible. Mweb is guilty of bad business practice. Whichever way you look at it. There is nothing stopping them from bringing a competitive local bandwidth product to market, but instead they throttle the consumers with the little bit they do have.
 
This is my summary of Mweb's bad dealings in the whole affair...

In February 2008 Mweb began a trial to offer unlimited local bandwidth to all of its subscribers. There was no limit and no charge for its use. They promised to inform their customers by e-mail when the trial was over. They finally sent that e-mail on the 1st of April 2009 and officially ended the trial. From now on they will only offer 10 Gigabytes of local access and will charge 3 cents for every megabyte over that.

That is all well and good, but there were several problems with this process...

1) The announcement was made without fair warning (on the first of the month) not giving users enough time to cancel the service, and thereby in effect forcing another month's charge on them (May 2009).

2) Mweb began calling users who had made heavy use of the service and suspended their accounts for this "heavy usage". Those who have been using more than 500 Gigabytes of local bandwidth a month have had their accounts suspended without any warning and despite the fact that this was an "unlimited service". Whether or not you believe that this is heavy usage, the fact is there was no warning and no limit placed on the accounts.

3) Mweb has been giving confusing statements about the service for months now. People who called Mweb were told that there was no limit, or that there was a 10Gb limit. they were told that the trial had ended and that it had not ended and it seems like even the Mweb customer service agents had no clue what was going on.

4) In limiting and restricting the local bandwidth Mweb is going against the regulations published by ICASA in 2006. to whit “Local bandwidth usage shall not be subject to the cap.” by placing a charge of 3 cents per megabyte on local usage Mweb is in effect "capping" the service by making it unaffordable to the average user.

5) On the 26th March 2009, Mweb General Manager Natalie Thayer was interviewed by the www.mybroadband.co.za website and stated "MWEB ADSL subscribers will be glad to hear that there are no plans as yet to discontinue unlimited local traffic. MWEB customers will therefore still be able to access all local content despite the status of their overall cap." This was one week before Mweb decided to change the service and start charging for it. This statement was misleading and blatantly designed to lull the subscribers into a false sense of security. She should have instead given the subscribers fair warning that the service was about to be changed.

6) Mweb remains one of the most expensive ISPs in South Africa typically charging 10 to 30% more for their services than most other ISPs. In this case the charge for local bandwidth (beyond the 10Gb free allowance) amounts to R30 per gigabyte. You can buy local access from some ISPs for as low as R10 or R15 per gigabyte! Even Telkom themselves offer 10, 20 or 30 Gigabytes free local access depending on your International cap and they rarely charge for any usage beyond that.

7) The whole issue of capping in general is a sore point with South African Internet users. While most Internet Users worldwide enjoy no caps or large caps of up to 250 Gigabytes we in South Africa are still stuck with an average cap of 3 Gb for our international access. This capping policy is ludicrous and has stifled broadband growth and innovation in South Africa. By making this move to restrict local access Mweb is supporting Telkom's policy of restrictive capping and charging users excessively for accessing what should be a free resource - the local internet!
 
They failed to implement a fair system for the light users and heavy users, and no it would not have been that hard.
If you haven't figured it out by now, there is no synergy between light & heavy users when you're paying per Gig for traffic used.

so why have Mweb not matched Telkom then in their local bandwidth offerings? Telkom offer ten times the local for the international and R25 per local Gig thereafter. Mweb can't even match that?
Well lets see, who do Telkom pay per Gig for local .... aaah I know, themselves!
 
I am not going to keep going back and forth so I will leave my posts with this one.

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.

Would you rather that they would have left the account open and charged you at their 3c per meg?

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...?

Then go and complain to ICASA about Telkom because that is where the problem resides. The ISPs are at least trying to offer alternatives while being forced to buy everything from 1 supplier. Yes, they are making money, but not astronomical amounts and they are certainly not going to spend it all to make a couple of people happy at the expense of their businesses.

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

I am not picking on consumers. I am saying that all businesses are in business to make money and that includes ISP's. I would love to have an uncapped account, as would many other people. In this country, we will probably never (at least not for a long time) have an uncapped account because people will always use it to the max. That means that it is not viable.

It might make sense if a shopping centre offers a free coke to everyone entering the centre in order to boost business. The problem is that there will be a lot of people who will keep going out and back in just to get more and more cokes. It's perfectly legal to do that. It won't, however, take long for the centre to cancel the whole idea and everyone who visits the centre will lose out.

If people just did things in moderation then it's likely that everyone will benefit from these things for longer.

Please don't get me wrong. I have no time for MWeb and think they were wrong not to forsee that this sort of thing would happen when they first offerred the deal. But I can't see how people can complain when the deal gets cancelled. It's obvious that it would if MWeb was losing money from it.
 
Last edited:
By making this move to restrict local access Mweb is supporting Telkom's policy of restrictive capping and charging users excessively for accessing what should be a free resource - the local internet!
And how exactly are ISPs like MWEB supposed to change things when they're at the end of the chain.

The power to shape the DSL industry in this country looks like this ...

Government (DoC)
|
V
Regulator (ICASA)
|
V
Incumbent (Telkom owner of all Cu, thus all physical DSL)
|
V
Reseller ISPs

And since I-ECNS licenses were only handed out a few months ago, and LLU is only expected in a year or two, you cannot expect the ISPs to have built up alternate infrastructure yet.

If you're miffed at the situation, you should really be ventting your anger at the appropriate party.
 
you guys can rant all u want. We are NOT letting Mweb off the hook. They handled this thing really badly and no amount of whining from the peanut gallery is gonna change that.
 
Mweb cut a service and the users want to cut each others heads off, :D you gotta love it !
 
So much for being "uncapped"... Amazing what these comapnies get aways with. Uncapped to me means uncapped, if I want to donwload 1TB then that is fine.

Which is exactly why selling uncapped accounts at low prices does not make sense...

A capped service with a known limit is better than one with a secret limit that you only find out about when your ISP calls you...
 
Last edited:
roguemat
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 99

Cujo
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 99

Lol, im winning :D
:P
 
Uhmm taking a 4Mbit line for 30 days 24hours a day you can download 1.296 TBytes in best conditions according to my calculations. Sorry dont believe it:confused:

Have you never heard of concurrent connections?!
 
Uhmm taking a 4Mbit line for 30 days 24hours a day you can download 1.296 TBytes in best conditions according to my calculations. Sorry dont believe it:confused:

Actually that is incorrect. The data that MWeb has been referring to is total usage, ie up and down.
4Mb line -> 4096 down and 512 upstream. The "heavy users" mentioned by MWeb are predominantly using it for peer to peer transfers, so the uplink connection is also heavily utilised.
83% is maximum after overhead has been removed
-> 425KBps + 53KBps = 478KBps
478KBps x 3600/1024= 1680MB per hour
1680MB/h X 24h X 30 days= 1181 MB. This is also the highest I've ever seen it go.
 
MWEB Cut Off

I have never complained about the Charging for Local if you exceed, but been Totally cut off from Mails, Local banks etc. seems to be against the ICASA regulation.

I have sent the following mail to MWEB, but am also looking for an ICASA E-mail address so they can also be made aware.. Not even Telkom Totally cuts you off from Local...

Quote from my Mail after recieving notification that we would be charged FROM 1 May only:-
Reading this E-mail notice has led me to believe that MWEB would continue its Free Local, unlimited policy up to and including 30April.

I have sent my cancellation via E-mail and fax and was notified that my account would cease at the end of April. Also, that I would need to save any mails on the server prior to that to prevent Data loss.

I have logged in and now found out my account has been CANCELLED… I wish to contest that this goes against what is in this mail below sent to me by you, MWEB.

Please re-activate my line so that I may receive mails as well as adhering to ICASAs ruling that NO ADSL client will be cut from using Local sites after exceeding the international cap.

I have never had any problems with the mail sent below as I felt that it was fair that Mweb provided its clients with 1 months notice of their intentions. But cancelling in totality alone is in contravention of the ICASA act regarding continued/uninterrupted local access.
 
nice drat :)

And with mweb you get the number of sessions equal to the number of int gb. So on a 2gb account you will get 2 sessions.
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X