It's not like you'd end up with loose change from your direct debit payment is it
Sky internet speed doubling for free
- Thread starter NeilF
- Start date
Annually is regularly when talking about things like this
To me at least...
Anyway I'll be playing the Retention Department game with them again in a couple of months...
Annually is annually, most utilities/insurances rise year on year as does council tax in most regions, at least this time round, Sky are giving something extra in return, yet amazingly people still get bent out of shape. Costs rise, if you're in contract you're likely on preferential pricing anyway, its not rocket science.
Yes, but when it is generally every year, and is generally significantly more than inflation, then personally I don't find it amazing that "people can still get bent out of shape". Costs can indeed rise, but it's not rocket science to realise big companies use apathy and more importantly leverage their market share and position to "squeeze" more out of its customers where it feels it can.
Anyway! We're off topic, so I won't post anymore on this matter...
Caporegime
- Joined
- 8 Jul 2003
- Posts
- 30,063
- Location
- In a house
Had my price rise letter through, an extra 50p a week!.
Had my price rise letter through, an extra 50p a week!.
Username checks out
People have some strange misconception that a commercial service provider - who’s primary focus is to make a profit - should limit its price increases to ‘inflation’. This notion is laughable. The first test is usually to ask which ‘inflation’ figure they would like to use - you’re normally met with a pause while some googling takes place or a WTF look in person. The fact that of many accepted measures of inflation differ significantly and aren’t in any way representative of the actual costs to provide a service in an individual business seemingly gets ignored, because the notion that actual costs are directly related to what a business charges it’s customers is somehow magically not relevant.
Sky - potentially - doubled its customers speeds and yet people still get bent out of shape about a relatively insignificant price rise (hint: wholesale costs increased). Sky commits to partnering to developing a non OR network and again people are still upset prices have to go up (hint: actual new network build can be stupidly expensive and the payback period can be decades, just look at the cable industry and how well that played out). Sky spends money to defend it’s users rights against ‘speculative invoicing’ from 3rd party rights holders, it does so rather than handing them over without a fight (others literally folded at the first opportunity) and literally takes the case as far as is legally possible people still moan (hint: legal costs are quite horrific at this level). If people want to pay less, others will provide them with similar connectivity for less money, that’s the beauty of a competitive market - you have a choice and can leave mid contract if you feel the need without penalty.
I don’t and haven’t worked for Sky, but claiming moral outrage based on above ‘inflationary price rises’ without even bothering to try and understand how costs are made up is laughable.
Username checks out
People have some strange misconception that a commercial service provider - who’s primary focus is to make a profit - should limit its price increases to ‘inflation’. This notion is laughable. The first test is usually to ask which ‘inflation’ figure they would like to use - you’re normally met with a pause while some googling takes place or a WTF look in person. The fact that of many accepted measures of inflation differ significantly and aren’t in any way representative of the actual costs to provide a service in an individual business seemingly gets ignored, because the notion that actual costs are directly related to what a business charges it’s customers is somehow magically not relevant.
Sky - potentially - doubled its customers speeds and yet people still get bent out of shape about a relatively insignificant price rise (hint: wholesale costs increased). Sky commits to partnering to developing a non OR network and again people are still upset prices have to go up (hint: actual new network build can be stupidly expensive and the payback period can be decades, just look at the cable industry and how well that played out). Sky spends money to defend it’s users rights against ‘speculative invoicing’ from 3rd party rights holders, it does so rather than handing them over without a fight (others literally folded at the first opportunity) and literally takes the case as far as is legally possible people still moan (hint: legal costs are quite horrific at this level). If people want to pay less, others will provide them with similar connectivity for less money, that’s the beauty of a competitive market - you have a choice and can leave mid contract if you feel the need without penalty.
I don’t and haven’t worked for Sky, but claiming moral outrage based on above ‘inflationary price rises’ without even bothering to try and understand how costs are made up is laughable.
I like this one.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 8 Jul 2003
- Posts
- 30,063
- Location
- In a house
Username checks out
People have some strange misconception that a commercial service provider - who’s primary focus is to make a profit - should limit its price increases to ‘inflation’. This notion is laughable. The first test is usually to ask which ‘inflation’ figure they would like to use - you’re normally met with a pause while some googling takes place or a WTF look in person. The fact that of many accepted measures of inflation differ significantly and aren’t in any way representative of the actual costs to provide a service in an individual business seemingly gets ignored, because the notion that actual costs are directly related to what a business charges it’s customers is somehow magically not relevant.
Sky - potentially - doubled its customers speeds and yet people still get bent out of shape about a relatively insignificant price rise (hint: wholesale costs increased). Sky commits to partnering to developing a non OR network and again people are still upset prices have to go up (hint: actual new network build can be stupidly expensive and the payback period can be decades, just look at the cable industry and how well that played out). Sky spends money to defend it’s users rights against ‘speculative invoicing’ from 3rd party rights holders, it does so rather than handing them over without a fight (others literally folded at the first opportunity) and literally takes the case as far as is legally possible people still moan (hint: legal costs are quite horrific at this level). If people want to pay less, others will provide them with similar connectivity for less money, that’s the beauty of a competitive market - you have a choice and can leave mid contract if you feel the need without penalty.
I don’t and haven’t worked for Sky, but claiming moral outrage based on above ‘inflationary price rises’ without even bothering to try and understand how costs are made up is laughable.
Deleted member 66701
Deleted member 66701
Hmm, do they not do Fibre Unlimited Pro anymore? I'm on that and my bill is showing 32 quid a month. Is that better or worse than Fibre Max?
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 21 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 47,142
Has finally doubled, only noticed a week or so ago. Was meant to be by October. Now get 8Mb/s. Works for me.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 8 Jul 2003
- Posts
- 30,063
- Location
- In a house
Yeah they do still do the Pro, as i know someone who only got the Pro about a month or so ago now, and the MAX is just double the Pro.
Last edited:
It was announced in October, but the email clearly stated the rollout was between December and spring.
Pro is still 80/20 but with a 12 month contract and no discounts. It'll only be offered if a customer specifically says they want a 12m contract.
Last edited:
Deleted member 66701
Deleted member 66701
Double? I'm on 80/20 with Unlimited Pro.
The maximum FTTC profile available on a line is 80/20, that hasn’t and likely won’t change (technically it could, but the cost to roll it out relative to the number of people who could benefit when the plan is FTTP for everyone makes no sense).
Caporegime
- Joined
- 8 Jul 2003
- Posts
- 30,063
- Location
- In a house
Sky now doing Transparent DNS
Soldato
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2008
- Posts
- 12,082
Not willing to provide any context for this?
Comes as part of the new sky broadband buddy parental monitoring service we're now offering most likely. This works at a DNS level AFAIK.
Associate
- Joined
- 24 Mar 2019
- Posts
- 10
I had no idea what this was and looked it up.
It appears nearly all ISP's use it, and force lookups through their own servers regardless.
This could also be cobblers as im not that techie
It appears nearly all ISP's use it, and force lookups through their own servers regardless.
This could also be cobblers as im not that techie
So any/all DNS lookups WILL use Sky, no matter what your machines DNS definitions?
Makes sense if they are trying to take greater control of adult/child access etc? Not good for your general end use though I guess?