OnePlus 5 review
Having just swopped from cable to ADSL (no choice, no NTL at new address) I noticed that the price of BB doesn't include the line rental of £10.50/month. This of course makes the TRUE cost that much dearer.
The fact that "..you have to have a phone line for phone calls anyway so that doesn't come into it.." falls flat if VOIP is to be taken up big time. I know that VOIP is not to be used for emergency calls but who of us nowadays do not have a mobile?
I make very few (if any) calls from home and therefore begrudge having to pay the line rental just to get online. When I was with NTL I did in fact have a phone line as well but I didn't HAVE to. So my £17.99 2Mb ADSL service is actually costing me £28.49 a month. The cable companies are offering 10Mb for not much more.
Of course BT are there to make a profit but the TRUE cost should be stated on the ADs and not just in the micro-print at the bootom.
So will we ever be able to use VOIP only for all our calls or will BT be offering FREE* voip calls?
*Bt line required
Spleen vented :)
Nothing is ever free for long.
As an emergent technology VOIP is relatively free at the present. Barring your Hardware costs, and of course, a physical connection to the net.
How much is it that you have to spend to enable VOIP if you haven't got a PC yet?
"(no choice, no NTL at new address)"
Surely you did have a choice, but you chose to move to a new address that doesn't have NTL.
I do sympathise with you though. I am on NTL cable TV/Broadband/Telephone. I do not pay a telephone line rental. I only pay for the calls I make and, of course, much cheaper than BT.
Its rumoured that BT will be allowing the line rental charges to be paid to the provider of choice.I departed BT as they were forever turning off my phone,and the rep from OneTel stated that if we'd gone to them(OneTel)we wouldn't have to pay BT any longer,not even the line rental.I signed up right away,but then OneTel chose to ignore us completely for over three weeks so I switched again to my ISP for my calls,but still am beholden to BT for the rental.
Surely if a company provides a line to your premises, and an exchange and distribution system to enable it to interface with the rest of the world, and a support and repair service for it, they are entitled to expect payment for such a service?
Just be glad that a privatised BT does make a profit, and thus contributes to public expenditure, instead of just being a drain on it.
This may be going a bit off the subject.
I have often felt that this monopoly breaking excersise [not only phone but all utilties] is but a money making scheme not an efficiency/cost cutting device.
Take other utilities as an example.
We are urged to go to other suppliers to reduce the bills. Indeed prices paid can be cheaper.
But what is happening here?
The 'other suppliers' do nothing but write invoices and collect money, after paying the 'Wholesaler' cash up front for the right to do so,there is no other service offered.
Pipeline/cable maintenianceare in other hands-are also profit making centres.
The original supply network[pipes and cables in large part remain in the hands of the original monopoly- albeit under another name - Transgas NG etc.,
This is the same as Supermarketrs [lets say] who 'Outsource' their distribution system.
It is a cost adding exersise- the Company that does the jobs has similar costs - Warehouse/transport/Staff and then has to add a margin to do the same thing
How is it money saving?
More like it is Buck passing.
Point taken but it's the 'hidden' cost of the line rental that has to included in the true cost of ADSL. NTL for example don't advertise their 2 Mb BB for £24.99 and then at the bottom of the advert add the £10.50 line rental to cover the support and repair service for it. The cost of the infrastructure must be included in the total cost.(?)
The ADSL way seems to have the attitude of "well, you have to have a landline anyway, so what's the problem?", but as originally posted, with VOIP you DON'T have to have a landline.
This does make the Unlimitd BB offers (over £25.month) seem very expensive.
You're right about the suppliers, I work for EDF Energy and therefore (with very few exeptions) if you live in the south-east of England your electricty comes through our equipment and cables no matter who your 'supplier' is.
"Surely if a company provides a line to your premises, and an exchange and distribution system to enable it to interface with the rest of the world, and a support and repair service for it, they are entitled to expect payment for such a service?"
I have frequently been left with no internet/phone as BT in their majesty turned off my phone-line.I contacted BT to be told there's a fault on the line(patently not,as my phone/ADSL were working fine prior to their meddling)and it would be a few days before it would be fixed.A week later,still no phone I contact BT again and am then informed we owe them money.This,despite us having kept the receipts to prove otherwise.We had to pay to get a phone back on,then pay my 1st ISP a reconnection charge.I refused as the initial disconnection was not of our making and switched ISP.When several months later,the exact same thing occurred,I again contacted BT and again was told there's a line fault,and again a week later still had no phone.Yet again,BT were demanding payment for an outstanding bill and once again we had the receipts to prove otherwise.My 2nd ISP reconnected my ADSL without charge as they agreed it was a BT generated problem.When BT did it a third time,my ISP took on BT and we were able to simply wait.We got the phone back on a week later.
Then I moved house,and shortly after getting the phone on here,BT turned off the line.I ended up without a phone that time for over 6mths as BT refused to reconnect it until we repaid an outstanding bill for the second time.Anyone see a pattern here?
Since switching to my ISP as "provider" we have had no switch-off's,so I feel highly miffed at having to pay anything to BT for line-rental.
The line rental you pay to BT is to cover the cost of providing and maintaining a pair of copper wires from your house back to the exchange. This charge is fixed and does not depend on how far you live from the exchange. Just imagine asking Onetel or NTL or any of the other providers to supply a telephone line to your address in the outer Hebrides or miles across Dartmoor, can you honestly believe they would even entertain the idea ? I know BT is not perfect, far from it, but they are trying to get away from the old dynasaur they were. Just wait till these new "providers" get control of the "last mile", fault clearance will be limited to sometime soon, when our spotty faced 17 year old is trained. !
We all have experiences, good and bad, with the suppliers of all types of goods and serivces. With restect, taht's not the point - you get a service, you pay for it - that's a reasonable state of affairs AFAIK.
If you go to another copany for your ADSL, and they bundle up te line charge (and still they have to pay BT) - that's OK too. If you pay a company on top of the line charge just for the ADSL portion - well that's OK too. You do have a choice of who you pay and how you apy in most cases - it's down to personal choice. If some people charge different rates than others - that's what a free market is.
It's not down to BT to give a free service just because of the way other suppliers charge for other services over their lines.
This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.