Not so fast..
Thanks to all who repsonded to our earlier post about Fraudband Britain. And guess what? If you bury deep into Ofcom's latest International Communications Market report, on page 158, it says:
The biggest gap between claimed headline speeds and perceived actual speeds was in the UK
The report also says:
Because of the reduction in speeds caused by degradation over distance and contention, headline broadband speeds are not always a useful metric for understanding the actual consumer experience.
Two early thoughts. Why are broadband providers able to sell something that they're seemingly unable to deliver? And why is the gap here in the UK between the headline and the actual speed so big? This chart from the Ofcom report is also interesting. Leaving aside the above, there are only a handful of European countries who have slower internet connections than the UK. The figures for Japan are enough to make your eyes water.
(Had to shrink to fit on blog - see full chart on pg 158 of the Ofcom report)
As we speak the calls are going into the Advertising Standards Authority, Ofcom and The Internet Services Providers' Association If you haven't done so already, you can find out how to test the speed of your broadband here.
Email us
Our Twitter
Join our Facebook group
Listen to iPM
Technorati
Google
Ice Rocket
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~14~RS~)
Comments
This whole "fraudband" issue is nonsense. All the services are advertised with "up to", and it's perfectly clear what that means, assuming that consumers are willing to do ten minutes' research in order to understand how broadband works. Consumer groups aren't helping by stoking up the fires when they should be explaining the issues.
Complaining that you get less that the advertised "up to" speed is like buying a 180mph Ferrari and then complaining that you're limited to only 30mph when going through towns. Only an idiot would write to Watchdog and say "I thought 'up to 180mph' meant I would be able to drive at 180mph all the time!!!!1!!!!one". Why are these same idiots entertained re: broadband?
Chris - thks for the post. I am willing to bet that for thousands of users it is an issue. At least looking at the comments so far. Think it's a bit harsh to brand us all as "idiots". For Ofcom it is an issue. Equally, for the Advertising Standards Authority it is an issue. The thing about a Ferrari is you know it is capable of 180mph and sure you are not going to want to drive everywhere at that speed - still you're buying something that can perform if pushed. My sense so far is that those who pay for faster broadband access have to make do with a couple of old nags than the prefered prancing horses. Perhaps, they'd be better off plumping for a bog standard package because evidence suggests that you are lucky to ever get anywhere close to the highest possible speed promised.
Having followed your links, I find that my exchange is 2 miles away, and my current broadband speed is only 918. Given that I've subscribed to BT Option 3, with speeds reputedly of up to 8 Mb, I think I'm getting a very raw deal here. However, I'm aware that I only have a basic modem (the one supplied by BT when I subscribed aout 3 years ago). I'm wondering how much the modem will be impacting upon the performance? And is 2 miles a 'long' way from an exchange?
I would be pleased to get ANY form of Broadband. BT refuse point blank to provide the service to my home on the grounds of distance from the exchange whilst providing the service to my neighbour down precisely the same telephone lines. In fact, the last BT operative I spoke to said they would NEVER provide this community with this service (although they already have, which they denied, of course). Now we are becoming second class citizens in the internet world . . . even my employer EXPECTS me to have it!