Here's the Reason for the Slowdown..?

/conspiracy on

Your Theory makes sense, in way that makes me feel all strange and tingly inside...

/conspiracy off

35% Signal
[36]Scummyside
 
If what you said is in fact true, then Sentech need a serious business strategy rethink. Afterall, strategies like this, inevitably lead to wealthy management, big bonuses, but a company that CANNOT sustain any long term growth.

Take me for example .. I have been following this forum avidly, and I will NOT go with Sentech. So they have saved some bucks, but are losing potential customers. Why would I get into bed with these guys ... would I want to jump into bed with someone, without a contraceptive, who say they may or may not have and STD. Not really!

But to the people who do have the service, I wish you luck and hope everything improves. Being in the IT industry, I know things don't go 100% all of the time, but at the same time, consumers are not a charity, and in this day and age, they should not be charged for services they do not receive.
 
Now this does make more sense than some of the call centre fob offs.

Sentech - Broadband Pirates of the Air Waves
 
"Personally, I think...."

methinks TheRodent has hit the nail on the head.

<font color="blue">Bay of Plenty: </font id="blue"><font size="1"><font color="black"> Signal 46% - SNL 17 - ber 71%
</font id="size1"></font id="black">
 
its actually very simple....pure mismanagement from top to down, with a dash of arrogance
 
I hate to ruin a good conspiracy theory, It does make a lot of sense, but if bandwdth removal was the case, why were many towers getting full speeds, surely the bandwidth shortage would've affected all towers.
Heres another theory, Sentechs bandwidth management rules involve saying: we have x MB bandwidth , and y towers, each tower gets x/y MB.
towers with few users have awesome speed, towers with many users get **** speeds.
From my understanding of sentechs network, and authentication methods, this probably isn't the case, but also an interesting theory.

Hey, maybe its a combination of the 2!
 
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by TheRoDent</i>
<br />I have another theory as to Scummyside tower's poor performance.

Nigerian 419 scammers living in countless flats in Sunnyside have discovered that an unbundled modem and R650 a month allows one to send a lot of spam [:)]<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

[}:)] I think I might just take a drive through sunnyside with my "Nigerian 419 scammers living in countless flats in Sunnyside have discovered that an unbundled modem and R650 a month allows one to send a lot of spam" detector
 
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by markiemark</i>
<br />Afterall, strategies like this, inevitably lead to wealthy management, big bonuses, but a company that CANNOT sustain any long term growth.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I don't know about that - with good marketing and strategy, MWeb managed to continue growing for YEARS as by far the slowest ISP, and they're still going strong. They market to the "bottom end" of the market, the LCD, not to technically literate people. Sure Sentech will lose out on a few technically literate customers who know better, but the majority of their customers probably wouldn't even realise most of the time if they're getting bad service. There will be some long-term negative effect on Sentech's growth from this, but thanks to Telkom and government's snails-pace market deregulation, most South Africans are so desperate for proper telecomms that Sentech will continue to grow anyway. And Sentech's management KNOWS THIS, so it seems very likely their attitude was something like "Well, where else are the customers gonna go? We can make more money allowing the bandwidth to suck, most will buy our product anyway, and the few (mostly technically literate) customers we lose, we'll make up for the income with lower bandwidth expenses".

I think I agree with LoneGunman's analysis - I think they most likely made a 'short-term-thinking' business decision to make a quick buck by letting service deteriorate, perhaps blindly hoping that there would be no (or little/controllable) backlash. Or perhaps they are just "testing the tolerance levels" of their customer base, in order to find the optimal point (bandwidth expense vs size of customer base) at which to let available bandwidth settle. It would be naive to think they hadn't thought all this through very carefully already.
 
i also think they were just unprepared. Too busy thinking BIG and not doing BIG.

They propably never thought they will get this many bandwith hungry clients in such a short space of time. I'm also sure the bandwith thy allocated wasn't unlimited. So we just quickly reached the limit!!

Now they must consolidate and decide how much more bandwith can they buy and how to allocate it.

:)
 
Wtf did they expect to get when they advertised a broadband service in a broadband crippled country? People who'd like to check their email maybe twice a day at high speeds?
 
I believe it's technical inexperience on the behalf of Sentech that is the problem. They need to plough some money into thier Human Resources division to find out what the hell thier hands are doing.

It's a good analogy - the head is looking the right way, but the hands are fumbling. The technology is there, the training isn't.

I haven't posted here in a while - I've been having steaming service - 14k per second for weeks, why ? - I don't know. Maybe the techies at the tower/s near me are on the ball ?

Maybe that's all it really boils down to - the efficiency of the people that administer any given tower ?

But then, inefficiency can only come from the top, to who's heads the blame inevitably falls.

But how bad actually is the service ?

How many people <i>here</i> can be represented <i>out there</i> - IOW, how many people suffer or otherwise enjoy the service in silence ?

If this forum represents 5% of sentech users, then at best, sentech can say only 5% of users complain, so it's not that bad.

Of course, we don't know that - I do know it's often impossible to get through on the support tel, so that says something.

Still, whatever the figures, this is the only decent place to get info about MyWireless !
 
bb_matt, actually I must disagree, it's not technical inexperience at play here, but rather executive management incompetence. Plain and simple.
(I have been dealing with them for years!!!)
If anything, the reason for the Slowdown is probably a total lack of management planning and strategic thinking! Yes… they have probably run out of bandwidth and now lack the wherewithal to confront their poor business plan. (This would require throwing money at the problem .. something they had not prepared for - and being a parastatal, cannot easily solve).

<font color="blue">Bay of Plenty: </font id="blue"><font size="1"><font color="black"> Signal 48% - SNL 17 - ber 71%
</font id="size1"></font id="black">
 
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by TheRoDent

Let's say 1600 subscribers, at R800 per person = R1 280 000
That'll buy a bit of bandwidth, yes.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And don't forget the 100 Vstar subscribers who had their bandwidth cut from 512 to 128 (because Sentech "Didn't undrstand the technology when they sold the product") who are paying R3000.00 each = R300 000.00
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X