Reliability 72%
Technical support 63%
Customer service 71%
Speed satisfaction 65%
Would recommend 77%

How do you turn that in to "90% of longstanding customers very unhappy"?

In reply to a post by jelv:

Reliability 72%
Technical support 63%
Customer service 71%
Speed satisfaction 65%
Would recommend 77%

How do you turn that in to "90% of longstanding customers very unhappy"?

As usual, it is best to engage brain before opening mouth. I was not referring to the star ratings. Trawl ALL the way through that very very long thread, and take note of the number of long standing customers that have seen things deteriorate, then compare them with the few that are happy with PN, As I said, my nightmare experience can be varified here. There are many many others.

Truth is something people often don't want to here, particularly if it does not meet their experience.

Truth is all providers have their ups and downs, and will have migration problems, service problems, usage problems.

Online reviews are always prone to one pro or anti person skewing them, for example a disgruntled ex-employee may try to get revenge, or if people are getting referrals, cashback and other incentives they may talk positively.

If going to use reviews and others opinions, you have to spend time seeing what people have said in the past etc, plus build a general consensus picture.

That all said what do people expect in terms of service for £6.49 a month.

Hi batchano,

Sorry about the experience you've had so far, would you be willing to post a ticket ID or PM me your username so I can have a look at the account for you? Sounds like there's a few things we should look into there.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

Truth is something people often don't want to here, particularly if it does not meet their experience.

Truth is all providers have their ups and downs, and will have migration problems, service problems, usage problems.

Online reviews are always prone to one pro or anti person skewing them, for example a disgruntled ex-employee may try to get revenge, or if people are getting referrals, cashback and other incentives they may talk positively.

If going to use reviews and others opinions, you have to spend time seeing what people have said in the past etc, plus build a general consensus picture.

That all said what do people expect in terms of service for £6.49 a month.

I totally agree. Nobody is more aware than my of forum trolls and the fact that you will not find an ISP that is not slated somewhere, so am capable of reading between the lines. That said, the many posts on the other site by many many PN customers of 6 or 7 years standing just rings too true to disbelieve, it seems without doubt quality of service has dropped. As you have said what do you expect for £6.49 a month. Well I would expect "Honest" Broadband for £6.49 per month, but we all know that is not the case with PN. You only get the cheapest BB if you are in the right area and request it, the same as uncapped upload, though you need to threaten to leave to get the hidden unlimited BB. As I said not very "Honest", but that is the reality of the fact that nobody can resell BT broadband and undercut them without cutting several corners. As the old saying goes there is no such thing as a free lunch, though that does not excuse the total incompetence I have endured from some PN customer services.

In reply to a post by XRaySpeX:

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

It would help as well if they force ADSL2 or ADSL, rather than ADSL2+.

OP is connecting ADSL2 at the mo.

@ OP: The BT Checker estimate, which all ISPs consult when they are giving their own estimates, of 5.5 Meg is far too high for your line. This is probably because your line has no previous BB history or is based on a reused phone # from a different location. Your line will never get much more that about 2.5 Meg on ADSL.

Can i ask what your basing that on ?, As you maybe or maybe not aware i've just finished the SRA trials with BE and have tried numerous different combinations both with and without SRA, my Attenuation on ADSL2+ is 58db and on a standard 6db profile with interleave was able to get 4.1Mb, with a 3db profile with interleave i managed 4.6Mb with fastpath i got 5.1Mb, that's without SRA.

I'm currently running with SRA 3db profile and fastpath and getting 5.7Mb and have been synced for nearly 4 days now, even before SRA i was running on ADSL1 and that gave me a 56db attenuation and got 5.3Mb on 6db profile with interleave.

All this and i was told via BT database including BE before my connection was live with them and every other person that the line would only manage 2.5Mb at best, It just shows you cant say 100% that this line or that line will Never get this or that, now i'm not saying for one moment he will get the levels i'm getting of course with a slightly higher attenuation then me he wouldn't but he Could get some what near to the 4.1Mb i was getting on ADSL2+ without the SRA.

Of course there are numerous factors to take in to account like interference, line quality, internal wiring etc, also i believe the ISP can play a part in whether they are willing to help get the best from the line like BE are or just stick to BT databases etc and fob people off, All i'm saying is I don't believe in the blanket no you cant get more than this because this says that or the computer says no, every line is different and should be treated as such, the databases and the Attenuation graphs etc should be a guide / starting point not the be all and end all.

Hi Matt,

Thanks for your response.

I have sent a PM with my username and ticket ID.

So what about the 100,000 other long standing customers who haven't posted in that topic?

I could set up a brand new forum, make one post saying e.g. Andrews and Arnold are **** and then on the basis of that say 100% of people are unhappy with them. Based on that forum it would be factually accurate, but is wouldn't be a statistically valid conclusion.

In reply to a post by jelv:

So what about the 100,000 other long standing customers who haven't posted in that topic?

I could set up a brand new forum, make one post saying e.g. Andrews and Arnold are **** and then on the basis of that say 100% of people are unhappy with them. Based on that forum it would be factually accurate, but is wouldn't be a statistically valid conclusion.

In which case, I will leave you in peace to educate the world.
______________________________________________________________________________________
Fora - Where everybody knows everything - Everyone else knows nothing.

So you missed my point, that your experience is just your experience.

Extrapolating to use figures of 90% is the wrong thing to do. Plus your attempt to say they are not honest, smacks more of a troll than someone who is genuinely agrieved by a poor service they have received.

Two statements:

1. I will never eat at that restaurant again due to poor service received
or
2. Do not eat at restaurant xyz

Generally (1) is a better review, and reflects personal experience. 2 - will mean many may see it as being vindictive and ignore what may or may not be valid.