On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 09:55:01 퍝, RevK wrote:

> We have a page explaining this
> http://aaisp.net.uk/broadband-prices-ubc.html 

Any chance of borders or more padding between rows in the tables? I
had to open the page in a WYSIWYG web editor to be able to make sense
of the one under "Costs". Borders or make the vertical centering of
each row top not middle.

How about another table showing the proposed default number of units
based on current the tariffs. I assume that the current 2GB tariff on
a BT 20CN line would get 3 units as that is equivalent to 2GB peak
and 100GB off peak and the pricing works. What does a BT 21CN line
get? Also 3 units but 1GB more peak download or 2 1/3 units?

I'm still trying to get my head around the system. I think I see how
it works and I think I'll be better off as I'm always up around the
peak usage level but don't use anything like the off peak. So will be
trading unused off peak for peak.

However the terminology isn't clear. The use of the word "unit" is
what is confusing this bear of little brain. In my view a "unit" is
an, immutable, fixed amount of something. Here the amount of
something (GB downloaded) varies with the time of day the download
happens. 

I can cope with the *cost* of a "unit" varying by time of day. For
example with Economy 7 electricity you pay, say, 15p/unit peak rate
and 5p/unit off peak. The electricity unit being a fixed amount of
energy that is easy to measure, like the amount of download that has
occurred in a given time period (peak/offpeak). This would translate
on a BT 20CN line to a charge of £2.55/GB peak rate and £0.0225/GB
off peak. On a BT 21CN line £1.70/GB peak rate and £0.0170/GB off
peak. 

In my view this is far, far, easier to understand. Thus you get a
download "allowance" as part of your chosen tariff to spend as you
will. This would be £7.65 on a BT 20CN line.

Now a gripe. Being out in the sticks on a small exchange the chances
of Be ever being available are minimal to nonexistent and there is no
date set for 21CN WBC... So I'm stuck with paying more for the
foreseeable future.  B-(  What is wrong with a bit of cross subsidy?
21CN customers pay a little more per GB, 20CN customers a little
less. 

I've not bought Be into this as the line costs are considerably more
but are identical for BT 20/21CN lines. It also make the tariff
structure simpler, on BT you pay a line cost of £x and £y/GB, on Be
you a pay line cost of £a and £b/GB.

Simples.  B-)

-- 
Cheers
Dave.

On 09/10/09 18:13, Dave Liquorice wrote:
> However the terminology isn't clear. The use of the word "unit" is
> what is confusing this bear of little brain. In my view a "unit" is
> an, immutable, fixed amount of something. Here the amount of
> something (GB downloaded) varies with the time of day the download
> happens. 

A unit is fixed - it represents UKP2.55+VAT. You get a varying number of
GB per UKP2.55+VAT. GB per UKP or UKP per GB are just different ways of
measuring the same thing.

Roger

On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 22:49:25 퍝, Roger Lynn wrote:

>> In my view a "unit" is an, immutable, fixed amount of something.
Here 
>> the amount of something (GB downloaded) varies with the time of
day the 
>> download happens. 
> 
> A unit is fixed - it represents UKP2.55各. 

Well yes, but ...

> You get a varying number of GB per UKP2.55各. 

Which is arse about face compared to how everything(*) else is
traded. You buy diesel at £/l, cheese at £/kg, gold at £/troy ounce,
oil in $/barrel. ie the amount of the thing you are buying is fixed
not the consideration.

(*)I can't think of anything that is sold in "<unit>per£".

-- 
Cheers
Dave.

On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 04:47:45 +0100, Graham Murray wrote:

>Just think back just a few years to the cost of telephone calls before
>BT changed to per-second pricing. Calls were charged at a fixed cost
>(4.2p ex VAT at the end) per "unit". The length of each unit depending
>on the number you were calling and the time of day. This is directly
>analogous the "unit" in the new A&A pricing. So there is a precedent for
>this usage of the term "unit".

Yes but in a pay phone you buy them before you use them and that makes
them a credit :-)

-- 
Regards - Rodney Pont
The from address exists but is mostly dumped,
please send any emails to the address below
e-mail	ngpsm4 (at) infohitsystems (dot) ltd (dot) uk

On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 04:47:45 퍝, Graham Murray wrote:

>> (*)I can't think of anything that is sold in "<unit>per£".
> 
> Just think back just a few years to the cost of telephone calls before> BT changed to per-second pricing. 

A "few years" make that the best part of, or more than, 20! I had per
second billing from BT back in the mid 80's.

> Calls were charged at a fixed cost (4.2p ex VAT at the end) per "unit"> The length of each unit depending on the number you were calling and the > time of day. This is directly analogous the "unit" in the new A&A 
> pricing. 

Not in the detail. If you went just 1 second into the next unit you
got charged for the whole of that unit. I don't think A&A are going
to do that. 

What is poor about the current proposal is that the amount of the
comodity is variable and the amount you pay fixed. As I said I can't
think of anything that is priced <stuff> per £ these days. 

Having a variable comodity amount makes comparison with other
providers difficult, that makes it bad from a marketing point of
view. Indeed breaking out the line cost could be considered bad
marketing as no other providers do that. They just say £20.50/month
for 40GB (approx 50p/GB) compared to A&As proposed £2.55/GB (HOW
MUCH!) to £0.0255 or even 0.255p/GB.

Marketing isn't easy, it needs to be clear, simple and importantly
follow conventions so that the "obvious" comparisons give the good
impression you want.

I can see where these "units" have possibly come from, A&A want fixed
increments for people to pay for useage. There is nothing stopping
that with a more conventional "credits" system you buy a £2.55 credit
and spend that against useage at variable rates depending on line
type and the time of day. Yes, the end result is the same but the
units system, as described, goes against convention and peoples
expectations, this makes it difficult to understand. "Difficult to
understand" is poor marketing, particulary when there is a much
clearer and conventional explantion of the same thing.

-- 
Cheers
Dave.

On 9 Oct 2009, Dave Liquorice spake thusly:
> (*)I can't think of anything that is sold in "<unit>per£".

Almost all goods are sold in unit per £. We call this the price. :)

(Yes, really, think about it. Buy a pack of sponges at the shop for
£2, that's one pack per £2. This is just the same.)

On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 19:37:59 퍝, Nix wrote:

>> (*)I can't think of anything that is sold in "<unit>per£".
> 
> Almost all goods are sold in unit per £. We call this the price. :)
> 
> (Yes, really, think about it. Buy a pack of sponges at the shop for
> £2, that's one pack per £2. This is just the same.)

But then you are buying a fixed quantity of sponges, not a variable
one. 
You can't (normally) buy 1/2 a sponge or 2 3/4 sponges, only the
fixed pack quantities. 

We are buying a variable amount usage, the bit that is measured and
known, that is *also* charged at variable rates dependant on the time
of day that that usage is used.

To find the cost of 3.14GB at £1.70/1GB is simple: 3.14 * 1.70 =
£5.338. You can even guesstimate that as "3 x 2 less 3 x 0.3 =
£5.10".

To find the cost of 3.14GB at £2.55/1.5GB is not simple: 3.14 *
(2.55/1.5) = £5.338. That is not easy to guesstimate either. (*)

To have variable quantites for the same price just makes life
complicated and confusing. Fix the quantity and vary the price is
*so* much easier.

(*) Maybe there is an age thing here. I'm of the generation that were
just being allowed to have electronic calaculators at O Level (four
function only) and A Levels. Any maths was done long hand and you
always did a quick guesstimate to check that your long hand worked
out answer was sane.

My kids are bright and they both enjoy maths but their "feel" for
numbers is not as good as mine was at their age. Any tricks for doing
guesstimates like the above have been taught to them by us not by
school. To check their answers they just use a calculator, twice.
Which if you have a fundemental error in your workings doesn't do the
sanity check properly.

-- 
Cheers
Dave.

On 10/10/2009 in message  Bob Eager 
wrote:

>Hah! We had to use four figure tables!

That's nothing, we had to write the log tables before we could use them :-)

-- 
Jeff Gaines Dorset UK
I can please only one person per day. Today is not your day.
Tomorrow, isn't looking good either.

Jeff Gaines wrote:

> On 10/10/2009 in message  Bob Eager
> wrote:
> 
>>Hah! We had to use four figure tables!
> 
> That's nothing, we had to write the log tables before we could use them
> :-)
> 
We had to build the difference engine to print the log tables, hand
filing the cogs from old farthings... :)

On 10 Oct 2009, Bob Eager said:

> On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 21:23:42 +0100, Dave Liquorice wrote:
>
>> We are buying a variable amount usage, the bit that is measured and
>> known, that is *also* charged at variable rates dependant on the time of
>> day that that usage is used.
>
> A bit like electricity, if you have off-peak metering.

Or vegetables. (Watch the romance of the Internet, if it ever had any,
drain away: sold like vegetables.)

In article ,
Dave Liquorice  wrote:
>On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 22:49:25 +0100, Roger Lynn wrote:
>
>Which is arse about face compared to how everything(*) else is
>traded. You buy diesel at £l, cheese at £/kg, gold at £/troy ounce,
>oil in $/barrel. ie the amount of the thing you are buying is fixed
>not the consideration.
>
So you can't by half a litre of diesel then? How is this any different?

Mike

On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 10:08:01 퍝 (BST), Mike Pumford wrote:

>> Which is arse about face compared to how everything(*) else is
>> traded. You buy diesel at £l, cheese at £/kg, gold at £/troy
ounce,
>> oil in $/barrel. ie the amount of the thing you are buying is
fixed
>> not the consideration.
>
> So you can't by half a litre of diesel then? How is this any differentOK I used the wrong expression "the amount of the thing you are
buying is fixed not the consideration". Better would be "the *unit*
amount of the thing you are buying is fixed not the consideration".

The current quoted unit rates of 1GB/£2.55, 1.5GB/£2.55 or 8GB/£2.55
are quite nice and "round" but what happens if you want to make a
change to the 21CN rate to be effectively £1.5GB/£2.00 due to a price
change from BT but the cost of usage on other lines remains the same?


As the price of a "unit" is fixed  at £2.55 across all lines/tariffs
one assumes that the 21CN rate then has to become a rather messy
1.9125GB/£2.55. Where as if usage was priced in £/GB one could simply
drop the charge for 21CN usage from £1.70/GB to £1.33/GB.

This sort of price adjustment is a reasonable thing to expect to
happen. After all one of the prime reasons quoted from A&A for this
tariff structure change is to allow better tracking of price changes
from suppliers.

-- 
Cheers
Dave.