On 2009-10-09, Paul Jones <news@news-only.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Oct 2009 09:59:26 +0000 (UTC), David Taylor
> wrote:
>
>>On 2009-10-09, Paul Jones <news@news-only.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 9 Oct 2009 09:41:12 +0000 (UTC), David Taylor
>>> wrote:
>>>>On 2009-10-09, Paul Jones <news@news-only.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 10:01:00 +0100, RevK  wrote:
>>>>>>Posted at 2009-10-09 09:40 BST by RevK
>>>>>>Update #3: 2009-10-09 10:01 BST
>>>>>>    
>>>>>>  Customers on the 1GB basic tariff now will get an extra benefit.
>>>>>>  Currently they get 1GB peak and 50GB peak. However the new tariff will
>>>>>>  mean they get 2 units at the same price, which gives 1GB peak and 100GB
>>>>>>  off-peak (or 2GB peak and none off-peak, or 200GB off-peak and none
>>>>>>  peak, etc).
>>>>>
>>>>> Why would anyone want this?
>>>>
>>>>Why _wouldn't_ anyone want this?
>>>
>>> Thanks that explains it!
>>
>>It wasn't supposed to.  The original status post exlained it.
>>I was merely trying to get more information on why you seemed
>>to think it wasn't beneficial to be able to allocate any
>>previously-unused off-peak bandwidth allowance to peak (or
>>vice versa).
>
> Why bother posting then?

I posted: "to get more information on why you seemed
to think it wasn't beneficial to be able to allocate any
previously-unused off-peak bandwidth allowance to peak (or
vice versa)."

> I asked a question to a status post. As I asked it, I did not feel it
> was explained. Fool!

In order to more effectively answer your question, I asked for
further information.  I am not sure why you feel you need to insult
me as a result?

-- 
David Taylor

On 9 Oct 2009 17:53:42 GMT, Bob Eager  wrote:

>On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 17:58:11 +0100, Paul Jones wrote:
>
>> On 9 Oct 2009 16:44:19 GMT, Bob Eager  wrote:
>> 
>>>On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 17:36:24 +0100, Paul Jones wrote:
>>>
>>>> I like:
>>>> A certain amount of inclusive gigabytes for peak and off-peak.
>>>> 
>>>> Purchase topups if needed (I never have): 1 off-peak GB costs x
>>>> amount. 1 peak GB costs x amount
>>>> 
>>>> Oops that is what we have now. Guess we have been doing things all
>>>> wrong up to now.
>>>
>>>It's not, quite. I pay for 4GB peak and 100GB offpeak per month. I don't
>>>know how much one peak GB costs. Or how much one offpeak GB costs. I
>>>just pay a lump sum.
>>>
>>>You've just described the new pricing model!
>> 
>> Really? Note I did not need to use the word 'unit' once.
>
>That's because you didn't describe it very well. In fact you described it 
>so badly, you didn't notice you were describing it.

That is because I was describing the existing system.

>If you don't mind me asking, what package are you on at present? It'd be 
>interesting to see if you would be worse off...

Please see my new  post in the other newer thread. I would appreciate
some feedback and my calculated costing.