Uncapped ADSL – what does it mean?

in this case the ISP collected moneys for 3GB and pocketed the profits made when the customer only used 1.1).

I admit that our offering is different because we advise our customers to buy the 'least' amount of bandwidth that they use in order to make sure they are not paying for what they don't use

So what you're saying is that lite users, who don't usually use up their cap, will benefit from your uncapped service. Am I understanding you correctly; your uncapped service in not really aimed at heavy users?

So, let's see how much it would cost me to download 5GB on the uncapped service:

(5000MB - 500MB) x 10c = R450
R450 + R39 = R489 (this is just the ISP portion)

My Telkom 384k 5GB:
ISP part: R239
ADSL part: R152

That means that your uncapped service is only useful to people who use more than 500MB, but less than the average user? Am I making any sense, or am I missing something? I'm not being sarcastic - I just don't get it! (maybe my calculations are wrong - don't flame me guys :o)
 
Idmelsa, I am guessing that you have to pay for the ADSL part even with Alan's package. But I will admit to not having read his whole post after having seen his was a post-paid uncapped.
 
Hi,

I'm responding as the person responsible for the R39 uncapped advert. I've been in the ISP business - providing access - for 15 years and I participate in various global forums for the governance of the Internet infrastructure.

Great, thanks for taking the time to explain your view to the MyBB members.

My dictionary defines a cap in this context as: "an upper limit imposed on spending or other activities e.g. a cap on legal immigration". This is my understanding of the term and as an ISP we believe that the term cap is a swearword. It creates grief for people who need access but have been cut off because they reach their cap. It also has been a way for the big ISPs to convert customers and obtain revenue for bandwidth which is NOT used by the customer (i.e. when we started offering this product - almost three years ago - the average usage on a 3GB account at one of the largest ISPs was 1.1GB, in this case the ISP collected moneys for 3GB and pocketed the profits made when the customer only used 1.1).

Yes, thus, you cannot put uncapped and the limt of 500MB together. You are playing mathematical magic tricks that are great for the kids, but what about us adults...the ones that have to do the real world calculations...

I admit that our offering is different because we advise our customers to buy the 'least' amount of bandwidth that they use in order to make sure they are not paying for what they don't use (e..g in December most people go away and use a fraction of what they have paid for). This almost always works out cheaper for the customer and because we're delivering metered bandwidth we can afford to deliver the highest quality of bandwidth. The economics does not allow for fixed price uncapped services to be of the best quality and we try to provide the highest quality connectivity.

Yes, a beautiful gesture of goodwill on your part. It still does not equate to "Uncapped"...No matter how many times you say it.

One of the reasons we developed the 500MB unshaped uncapped product is for gamers (mostly WOW) and individual share traders that need low latency connections for this specific purpose. We also support these users to setup their routers (and clients) to be able to use both shaped and unshaped when they need to.

This is where I go "Wow!" You mean people spend only 3-4hours a month in online games...? I use 500MB up in 3-4hours in Secondlife...when I throttle the speed to 50k/s, which is just playable then, at a real rate of about 39k/s on my 384k speed.

Rudolph, I respectfully disagree with your comment that post paid uncapped accounts are not uncapped. By definition they are, and any presupposition in the market that these are not uncapped is wrong. I also respectfully request that anyone that accused us of 'lying' please backup your statement, it is unjustified.

You're wrong. No matter how many times you say it. "Uncapped" cannot be put together with the "500MB", or whatever amount. There, I backed up my statement with a mathematical fact. Your definition is hokus pokus.

In future please refer to a "fixed price uncapped service" as a fixed price uncapped service. Caps are not good because it means people pay for bandwidth they don't use. In the South, metered bandwidth is essential if we want any access to high quality bandwidth. Metered bandwidth also puts South Africa (and Australia) in a good position for the future (in the North there will be more demand for metered bandwidth as quality does not continue to improve and as users have more demands for IPTV and VOIP).

If we must refer to real uncapped, that is, the uncapped term you are aware of, but are trying to obfuscate, as "fixed price uncapped service", then shall we refer to your product as "pay as you use uncapped service"? True, no?

Also, do not try the old telkom trick of telling us there is a scarcity of bandwidth in SA.

Firstly, now suddenly, with SEACOM here, telkom can, without even blushing, for their blatant greed and callousness, increase the SAT3 capacity tenfold. Please, do try bulls**t us.

Secondly, with all the cables coming, your statement becomes even more insulting.

Thirdly, your ultimate insult to us, is that we are a population of about 47 million, of which 10,5% or 4.59-million people only, are using the internet. http://www.mediaclubsouthafrica.com...&id=101:south-africa-online&catid=36:media_bg

Thus, even with SA Broadband subscriptions showing a growth rate of 60%, of that small 10.5%, do not compare our bandwidth availability with places like Europe, at 50.1% internet user penetration, or the USA, where the penetration is 73.9%. http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm

Even more insulting, when you realise that the USA, with a population of 305,529,237 million, for Jan. 1, 2009, therefore has 225,786,106,143 million internet users. http://www.usnews.com/articles/opinion/2008/12/31/us-population-2009-305-million-and-counting.html

That's 5 times our entire population....Even if every single person in SA had 4Mbps uncapped, we could not saturate the cables that are here, over the next few years.

As for this future you speak of...
http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/showthread.php?t=188139

We do also provide competitive fixed price uncapped services but these are for a different market segment. As another example think of the retired person (we support the South African Association of Retired People - SAARP) who a) cannot afford to pay for a 1GB account when they only use 200MB and b) don't know why the Internet is not working when they are cut off (and can't afford to sit waiting at the end of a support IVR). For them the R39 option is ideal. Similarly a user that uses 1.3GB will only pay R69 prepaid + R27 postpaid [300(MB) x 9c] = R86 as opposed to have to prepay for 2 or 3GB. For those users that don't want a fully uncapped service (in case their machines/connections are exploited) we also use a term called provisioning, where we will provision their account with what you may refer to as a security 'cap' - although they don't pay for that.

Great. :)

I hope that you can consider my comments and hopefully I have explained well enough for you all to see the benefits of a prepaid/postpaid uncapped service.

Sincerely,

Alan

Yes, thank you. We do see the obvious benefits for clients. I hope you don't mind us not believing that you should use the word "uncapped", the way you do.

"Pay as you use uncapped service" is being truthful.

Sincerely,
Wayne
 
Last edited:
it is interesting how MraL has maintained a low profile since being shown up by MyADSL users. I would urge Rudolph to try and get him to respond in this thread seeing as he tried to defend/advertise his product as uncapped.

I eargerly await his response.
 
@ Lightscribe
Lengthy... But necessary.
+1

Originally Posted by Seamus6917
I trimmed your post into the bit I wanted to answer...

At the rate we are going we will need a kind of "Isabel Jones" on Steroids with Bill Gates' money for the legal cost...
We have uncapped NOW at R999 from Neotel.
How's the service delivery going with them lately? (asking honestly)

Yes, and Openweb and Axxess... And a few others at prices that make me ill...

PeterCH... See you were using the uncapped(rw - real world)...
Where I was thinking uncapped (ICASA, ISP and MraL definition)...
As I understand our (the consumer) dilemma...
The Competition commission have been told they cannot go after Telkom because they have no power over Telecomms. That's ICASA's jurisdiction. ICASA is incompetent. This article shows the poor thought that went into the regulations. (Or from a certain point of view, well thought out, if you are on the selling end).

So, MraL used this article to show how he/they were working within the framework of the Regulations...

We can abuse ISP execs for a long time on myBB but until 1) that definition changes or 2) the Local Loop is unbundled... I don't see us getting a customer friendly change...
 
....y we havent seen any new Telcoms companies except for Neotel etc.. is that our last minister of Telecoms refused 35 to enter into the country at a personal level because she didnt want Telkom to lose its monopoly. Now tell me how on earth do us as consumers fight that we cant hence y we are so far behind everybody
We have a few hundred licensed telecoms... None of them seem willing to build a proper network though...
 
@ Lightscribe
Lengthy... But necessary.
+1


How's the service delivery going with them lately? (asking honestly)

Yes, and Openweb and Axxess... And a few others at prices that make me ill...

PeterCH... See you were using the uncapped(rw - real world)...
Where I was thinking uncapped (ICASA, ISP and MraL definition)...
As I understand our (the consumer) dilemma...
The Competition commission have been told they cannot go after Telkom because they have no power over Telecomms. That's ICASA's jurisdiction. ICASA is incompetent. This article shows the poor thought that went into the regulations. (Or from a certain point of view, well thought out, if you are on the selling end).

So, MraL used this article to show how he/they were working within the framework of the Regulations...

We can abuse ISP execs for a long time on myBB but until 1) that definition changes or 2) the Local Loop is unbundled... I don't see us getting a customer friendly change...

I agree.

Using Mral's definition you could call iBurst PPU - uncapped too, as is the Vodacom 3G offering - its also uncapped - just that you need to have lots of $$ in the bank to spend on that uncapped for every MB you download or upload.

We do however have semi-affordable UNCAPPED from Neotel in some parts of SA, alas not where I live and possibly not where you live either, also its speed has been said to be substandard at times and signal strength has been poor according to many. However, if Neotel can do uncapped at R999 for a max speed of 2.6Mbit/sec I would assume that we could see genuine uncapped solutions or at least 50GB caps at R999 from ADSL providers at R999pm all inclusive or even less.

Mral has used the term "UNMETERED" I believe this is what we should demand for since ICASA/other reactionary forces are now referring to PAY-PER-USE as UNCAPPED.
 
short reply

it is interesting how MraL has maintained a low profile since ...
I eargerly await his response.

I apologise for not responding to you all individually yet (I do still intend to) but I wanted to give a quick reply asap. I hear what you're saying and I agree with many of the comments (i.e. our use of the word uncapped could be misleading to some). I can assure you at no time have we ever intended to mislead anyone. It's very clear on our website and when we discuss with people that we are upfront about our billing.

In the meantime I've checked where we use the term uncapped and I expect that those of you who are really bothered, it's just about our Google ad that is titled "from R39 uncapped".

I now want to change that to something that will communicate what we offer and won't bother you (or will bother you less). So please can you (all) help me communicate that we are different (not from WebAfrica and Axxess who you say also have something like our 'pay as you use uncapped service') from more than 80% of the dsl accounts out there which will result in the user being cut off when they reach their cap (and hence leads to them buying more than they need).

I have a limit to the number of letters I can use (25), so 'from R39 pay as you use' is just a little too many letters and is unclear to me. In the meantime I've changed it to 'from R39 not capped'. It's not ideal (I know) and I will update it as soon as we have something that communicates it better.

I look forward to seeing your replies and as soon as I can I will reply to each of your useful individual comments.

Sincerely,

Alan
 
I would use the phrase "soft capped" as that implies that people can still use the service after they have hit their thresh hold.

Truth is... we dropped the ball on this one. We should have taken you to the ASA and used you as a test case.

If the ASA would rule that you use of the term uncapped was incorrect, we could have then turned around and sued Telkom for doing the same thing with the local bandwidth.

We ultimately want to force Telkom to comply with the ADSL regulations regarding uncapped local bandwidth. ICASA meant for it to be uncapped and charged for under a flat rate plan, but they never spelled that out clearly enough.

So now Telkom is doing exactly what you were doing... charging continuously for "uncapped".

To continuously charge for usage beyond the thresh hold is not uncapped because people will eventually run out of money and be forced to stop using.... thereby nullifying the concept of "uncapped"
 
In the meantime I've checked where we use the term uncapped and I expect that those of you who are really bothered, it's just about our Google ad that is titled "from R39 uncapped".

I now want to change that to something that will communicate what we offer and won't bother you (or will bother you less). So please can you (all) help me communicate that we are different (not from WebAfrica and Axxess who you say also have something like our 'pay as you use uncapped service') from more than 80% of the dsl accounts out there which will result in the user being cut off when they reach their cap (and hence leads to them buying more than they need).

I thought I needed to say that I am impressed with the way in which you are dealing with this. Congratulations on engaging with the consumer at this level, many companies out there could take a lesson from this.

Also I agree with Gary, I mentally associate the service that you are offering with the term "soft capped".
 
Last edited:
I apologise for not responding to you all individually yet (I do still intend to) but I wanted to give a quick reply asap. I hear what you're saying and I agree with many of the comments (i.e. our use of the word uncapped could be misleading to some). I can assure you at no time have we ever intended to mislead anyone. It's very clear on our website and when we discuss with people that we are upfront about our billing.

Thank you for coming and talking to us. We appreciate it.

In the meantime I've checked where we use the term uncapped and I expect that those of you who are really bothered, it's just about our Google ad that is titled "from R39 uncapped".

Yes, that is a terrible way to explain the actual service. :)

I now want to change that to something that will communicate what we offer and won't bother you (or will bother you less). So please can you (all) help me communicate that we are different (not from WebAfrica and Axxess who you say also have something like our 'pay as you use uncapped service') from more than 80% of the dsl accounts out there which will result in the user being cut off when they reach their cap (and hence leads to them buying more than they need).

I have a limit to the number of letters I can use (25), so 'from R39 pay as you use' is just a little too many letters and is unclear to me. In the meantime I've changed it to 'from R39 not capped'. It's not ideal (I know) and I will update it as soon as we have something that communicates it better.

500MB@R39+Uncap@10c/MB!!!

From R39+Uncap@10c/MB!!!

R39!!!-500MB+Uncap@10c/MB

There you go. 3 Free ads, all at 25 letters or less, from me. :)

I look forward to seeing your replies and as soon as I can I will reply to each of your useful individual comments.

Sincerely,

Alan

Great to have you here. Hope your newly named product ads will pull in the clients.

Sincerely,
Wayne
 
Last edited:
I disagree that the term "soft capped" describes a process of charging beyond being capped. To me "soft capped" implies a cap, beyond which a modified service is provided either with throttled speed, limited site access, or a further discretionary bandwidth allowance for which you are not charged extra. Telkom's free local allowance and iBursts 64k throttle are examples of soft caps.

What most ISP's allow are "top ups". Just because an account can be topped up does not mean there is no cap or that it is soft capped.

I think the term "metered" best describes the service offered by MraL.

But it is not our job to come up with a catchy 25 character slogan. For an unusual product, adwords might not be the best way to advertise it, and certainly not the best medium to describe it. Lines like

Metered ADSL. No wastage.
Save $ with metered ADSL.

might work, but are not likely to elicit as much interest and outrage as "ADSL from R39 uncapped"
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X