Faulty router charge

So I just got off the phone with Sky as I think my router is on its last legs. Did the usual troubleshooting [censored] and managed to convince her that the router is at fault as you cannot access the device when it crashes.

They told me as due to it being out of warranty I have to foot a £35 bill - which seems ridiculous as they provide you with the router, yet don't allow you to connect your own.

I respectfully declined the offer and said I would wait until it dies completely.

What are your experiences with this?

Edited by deleted (Wed 28-Dec-11 15:58:22)

Get another off of ebay. So long as it is a working SKY router it will work on your line

I asked them recently if there was anything to stop Sky from charging out-of-warranty broadband customers £100 for replacement routers, which they'd either have to pay or cancel their broadband contract (or visit ebay as suggested). The answer I got suggested there isn't.

In reply to a post by Kiggs:

So I just got off the phone with Sky as I think my router is on its last legs. Did the usual troubleshooting [censored] and managed to convince her that the router is at fault as you cannot access the device when it crashes.

They told me as due to it being out of warranty I have to foot a £35 bill - which seems ridiculous as they provide you with the router, yet don't allow you to connect your own.

I respectfully declined the offer and said I would wait until it dies completely.

What are your experiences with this?

I 'm a little surprised at the attitude from sky, as they are insistent on customers using the router that they supply,And more so that if you have a potential fault with your connection,How could they troubleshoot without first sending out a replacement router? it seems that by asking for a replacement they thought that they would and try & extract some extra wonga out of you,

On another note any compatible router will work, you just need the sky log on details ,connect using PPPOA

Edited by tommy45 (Wed 28-Dec-11 16:47:18)

I had this. They refused to replace the router so I asked for cancellations who also refused. I asked them to escalate this and got a callback within a day offering a free router.

If it's a choice of losing a customer or a new router. They'll send you one out.

Infact I got two (presumably by mistake). I'd send you the spare but no idea where they are

Thanks for the offer mate, though I'm hoping that they send me one after firing an e-mail off to their support staff. They're usually pretty helpful.

Will let you know how I get on.

I find this interesting and wonder if it may be a Trading Standards issue.

I have no doubt they have the right to insist their equipment is used, it is after all a part of the contract you sign up to and is reasonably up front if you look for it.

What is not clear to me is what happens when the equipment they supplied breaks down out of warranty. I do feel that at the initial sign up that information should be provided, with an indication of likely costs of replacement as it has a bearing on the suitability of the contract....... facts you need to know....... for it is at their insistence that their equipment is used.......a condition that extends beyond the initial contract period.

As it stands you are a hostage to fortune because it is Sky who insist their equipment is used. It may be even more pertinent now as all new customers are full LLU with the added complications involved if they want to move.

Do you own the equipment after a year? Just cancelled sky if thats the case you can have mine?

IIRC the equipment is your property from day one of the contract. When using Sky you are obliged to use it.

I have seen the odd post where when leaving Sky they flash the router to the original makers configuration and use it for the new ISP, or sell it on. This used to be for the original Netgear, not sure about the newer stuff.

Thanks for the info. Offer stands for op just send address in pm and its yours

Edited by deleted (Thu 29-Dec-11 11:02:37)

Only word of warning is that if you decide to return to Sky at any point they won't send you a router as they believe you already have one. I gave my old one away and when I went back to Sky wondered why they didn't send me a new one... They did send one for free in the end but I was without Internet for about 4 days because of it.

Reply from Sky E-mail Support:

Thank you for contacting Sky Help Centre.
In answer to your question,out with your years manufacturers warranty router replacements are chargeable. The equipment is not rented but owned by the customer so out with warranty is the customers responsibility to maintain. In regards to the use of a non Sky router we do not assist with the use, set up or providing log in details for the use of the routers but if a customer chooses to try and use one they can but if you were to have any faults in the future with your broadband we would not be able to troubleshoot a non Sky router.

So they officially allow non-Sky routers now then? When did that policy change?

In reply to a post by Kiggs:

Reply from Sky E-mail Support:

Thank you for contacting Sky Help Centre.
In answer to your question,out with your years manufacturers warranty router replacements are chargeable. The equipment is not rented but owned by the customer so out with warranty is the customers responsibility to maintain. In regards to the use of a non Sky router we do not assist with the use, set up or providing log in details for the use of the routers but if a customer chooses to try and use one they can but if you were to have any faults in the future with your broadband we would not be able to troubleshoot a non Sky router.

Good question Adamant. I've not bothered using my own router as they have never been clear on their position. I use separate wireless access points so the router is just doing the wired connections which it is OK at but might want to change it at a later date for a better router.

In reply to a post by Adamant:

So they officially allow non-Sky routers now then? When did that policy change?

They don't officially allow it, they unofficially allow it. It's almost impossible to get your PPPoA login details from Sky staff, but they will say there are ways of doing it "on Google".

In reply to a post by Sadoldman:

What is not clear to me is what happens when the equipment they supplied breaks down out of warranty. I do feel that at the initial sign up that information should be provided, with an indication of likely costs of replacement as it has a bearing on the suitability of the contract....... facts you need to know....... for it is at their insistence that their equipment is used.......a condition that extends beyond the initial contract period.

I agree, during sign up you are told you have a free router. What is not made fully clear is that in the event of a router failure after 12 months, you are obliged to purchase a new router from Sky without being able to enter the free market.

In reply to a post by Oliver341:

In reply to a post by Sadoldman:

What is not clear to me is what happens when the equipment they supplied breaks down out of warranty. I do feel that at the initial sign up that information should be provided, with an indication of likely costs of replacement as it has a bearing on the suitability of the contract....... facts you need to know....... for it is at their insistence that their equipment is used.......a condition that extends beyond the initial contract period.

I agree, during sign up you are told you have a free router. What is not made fully clear is that in the event of a router failure after 12 months, you are obliged to purchase a new router from Sky without being able to enter the free market.

My answer to that would be provide me with the login details in order to use a router of my choosing, or send me a replacement free of charge, or i'll be moving to an isp who will

In reply to a post by tommy45:

My answer to that would be provide me with the login details in order to use a router of my choosing, or send me a replacement free of charge, or i'll be moving to an isp who will

It's a shame that it would have to come to threats, but I suppose in many cases it does.

There are many Sky subscribers who use their own routers. Unfortunately one of the most popular sites for getting your Log in details from the Sky router is down at the moment. It should be back up in the early New Year.

There are instructions elsewhere on the Internet on what to do once you have the details.

Whilst technically it is against Sky's T&Cs to use your own router, they do not appear to be in the habit of punishing people for this task.

As for replacement out-of-warranty routers, there are fixed prices:

WiFi g router : £28 (inc postage)
WiFi n router : £35 (inc postage)

You may get an adviser who will not charge you the £28 for an old-style router, but they are currently unable to supply the WiFi n router for free.

So if the OP was asked to pay £35, then I suggest it was for the WiFi n router and that this should have been made clear.

There was no mention of a g router at £28. She said I would have to pay £35.

In reply to a post by Kiggs:

There was no mention of a g router at £28. She said I would have to pay £35.

In this case, might I suggest that you make another friendly call to Sky to see what it is that you are being offered now that you have a better idea of what is available?

Should you be offered another router for £35, then double check which one it is that you are being offered.

If you do not require a WiFi n router, then make this clear.

£35 isn't a bad price for a modem/router though!

In reply to a post by YHCIR:

£35 isn't a bad price for a modem/router though!

Quite reasonable in fact considering it includes delivery. First time I have seen a price posted and I say again if people were told up front I don't see much of an issue.

In reply to a post by Sadoldman:

In reply to a post by YHCIR:

£35 isn't a bad price for a modem/router though!

Quite reasonable in fact considering it includes delivery. First time I have seen a price posted and I say again if people were told up front I don't see much of an issue.

Apart from the fact that if they want their customers to buy routers then the customer should have a choice of different brands ect, you wouldn't go to a shop and buy a router that you didn't like or had features that you did not need would you?
I wouldn't so sky should just provide the customer with their username and password, so that they can buy their own router and use that or offer to supply them with one,
As for not being able support other routers ,that is unfounded, and more like that they do not wish to provide support to those with other routers, as the isp can see or should be able to see potential issues regardless of brand/model of router, this i have had 1st hand experience of, in sky's world "one size fits all "in reality it does not

In reply to a post by Sadoldman:

Quite reasonable in fact considering it includes delivery. First time I have seen a price posted and I say again if people were told up front I don't see much of an issue.

It's £35 at the moment, but from what I gather they can charge whatever they like, whenever they like.

If you are suggesting that new customers should be told a price for router replacements at the time of sign up, fixed for the duration of their contract, then yes, that would be agreeable.

Edited by Oliver341 (Thu 29-Dec-11 21:26:41)

We can get a free Sky HD box. If that fails after a year can we get a new one free of charge? I don't think so!

Same scenario with their routers surely?

In reply to a post by broadband66:

Same scenario with their routers surely?

Sky HD boxes are heavily tailored towards their TV service, with things like custom EPG's and broadcast decryption. Sky router/modems on the other hand are just bog standard router/modems, same as any Netgear or Belkin you can buy on the free market (except that Sky go out of their way to prevent you doing this). So yeah, there's a difference.

Sky need to either provide the username and password for their DSL service or send out a replacement router free of charge. It is actually that simple.

On another note, will Sky need to send out replacements due to their migration to MER or will they keep PPPoA up simultaneously - not sure if the NETGEAR DG934 supports the new authentication method.

Edited by deleted (Thu 29-Dec-11 22:42:54)

The MER network overlay uses a different VCI/VPI to the PPPoA encapsulation. Both exist simultaneously.

The userid and password are generated automatically by the router - I can't see how the call centre can provide the information?

In reply to a post by Kiggs:

On another note, will Sky need to send out replacements due to their migration to MER or will they keep PPPoA up simultaneously - not sure if the NETGEAR DG934 supports the new authentication method.

They are rolling out MER support for the original DG834GT, so I imagine all generations of router will get firmware updates for it. My D-Link was switched to MER many months ago.

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

The MER network overlay uses a different VCI/VPI to the PPPoA encapsulation. Both exist simultaneously.

The userid and password are generated automatically by the router - I can't see how the call centre can provide the information?

Presumably the back end servers know what the username and password is otherwise why bother having them? And if that's the case then presumably it could be feasible to write something that gives the user the password

The fact that there are third party websites that can create the password for you would suggest it would not be beyond Sky to do the same?

Sky don't want to make it easy as if someone rings up with a fault the people at the call centre can talk them through the router pages easily as they have sky's interface and all look the same. If other routers are used then the call centre staff would need more knowledge and that does not fit with scripted cheap labour and therefore would affect Sky's support model.

However, it does seem Sky (and Be) are fine relatively OK with using your own kit as long as you plug their router in if you call up for support - if you don't plug theirs in then they can't talk you through checking things on your router as there are so many different router interfaces out there that it makes it too complex.

There are many Sky Customers who use their own routers. I frequent another forum where this topic is discussed a lot. Recently the site that is used to extract the log in details from Sky routers went down and it has generated a huge number of posts. This is now being resolved.

As for the price, it has been mentioned and discussed a large amount elsewhere on the Internet. The Sagem 2504N was launched last July/August. The price was known about at this time.

If you are a new customer who has been supplied the Sagem 2504N, then you will not be charged for a replacement at present as it will still be under warranty (12 months). However, if you have any of the other Sky routers and wish to have the new Sagem 2504N then you will need to pay the £35 whether or not your router is under warranty.

As for the log in details, these are unique to each and every Sky router, not the Customer. A router becomes associated with your account as it is used on your telephone line, but another working Sky router could easily be used instead.

Annoyingly, when you call Sky, the people in the call centre can see the router's log in details on their screens. However they are forbidden from revealing this information. If they do reveal it, they face disciplinary action and could be sacked.

Getting back to the price of routers, if you received another Sky router, but joined within the last 12 months, you are still under warranty. A replacement router would be free, but you will receive one of the following:

Sagem 2504
D-Link 2640S
Netgear DG934G
Sagem 2304n (WiFi = 72mb/s)

Unless noted, they are all WiFi g (54mb/s). The Sagem 2304n has a stronger signal, but IMHO the GUI is incredibly slow.

Personally speaking I do use my own router and make use of the benefits that this provides (300mb/s WiFi on both 2.4 & 5 GHz channels, 1Gbit LAN, USB ports for sharing drives, better GUI & tools).

Finally there are steps being made by Sky which could make things difficult for people to use their own routers in the future. Currently Sky are using both MER & PPPoA on the broadband connections. Their implementation of MER is different from the recognised standard and this could make it difficult, but not impossible, in future. However this should be discussed in another thread and is being discussed heavily elsewhere on the Internet.

In reply to a post by Kiggs:

On another note, will Sky need to send out replacements due to their migration to MER or will they keep PPPoA up simultaneously - not sure if the NETGEAR DG934 supports the new authentication method.

As has been pointed out, the original Sky router (Netgear DG834GT) recently had a firmware update. This now allows it to support WPA-PSK, and possibly WPA2-PSK, over the WiFi and MER.

It is possible that the roll-out of this firmware was halted as there are many associated problems.

There is a new firmware due for release for the Netgear DG934G. This is still under development with Netgear though. There may be some Sky employees testing it, but I cannot confirm this as I do not know.

For the present, not all the exchanges support both MER & PPPoA, so both systems are currently in use.

Both boxes are supplied by Sky. They are owned by the user from day 1 and have a 12 month warranty like all other products. That's the point, surely?

One could actually try using the small claims court as there is a 6 year something-or-other to do with warranties or just get a MAC and leave or spend little money on a new router.

In reply to a post by broadband66:

Both boxes are supplied by Sky. They are owned by the user from day 1 and have a 12 month warranty like all other products. That's the point, surely?

One could actually try using the small claims court as there is a 6 year something-or-other to do with warranties or just get a MAC and leave or spend little money on a new router.

Netgear offer a 2yr warrantee don't they ? I think there are some others too,

In reply to a post by broadband66:

Both boxes are supplied by Sky. They are owned by the user from day 1 and have a 12 month warranty like all other products. That's the point, surely?

All well and good, except with every other ISP in the UK I am not forced to buy a replacement router from said ISP in order to connect to their service, I am free to buy a Netgear, Belkin or whatever else. Sky specifically make it difficult for customers to use third party routers by withholding PPPoA passwords and using non RFC compliant MER protocols. Again, this is a unique approach, presumably to create themselves a captive market for replacement routers. The price for replacement routers isn't even quoted on their website, essentially when you sign up to Sky Broadband you accept that you have to write Sky a blank cheque in the event of an out of warranty router failure.

My attitude is such that each ISP can and does operate with their own rules. Customers or potential customers should have the knowledge to make informed decisions about the suitability of an ISP.

If Sky want to insist that customers must use their equipment the cost of any replacement should be part of that knowledge and for many £35 would not be a deal breaker I reckon.

As I see it the bigger issue now that so many are full LLU the implications of moving are far different from the old MAC system, so even more important that Sky firms up the policy when a replacement is needed. To me £35 is more than comparable with the open market but without a firm policy that could double it if they so wanted I suppose so it is not unreasonable to want to see a policy on this, perhaps routers provided on a cost plus basis.

Those that on principle want to use a router of choice will no doubt do so with a blind eye turned, or find a different ISP

Presumably Sky's 'Unlimited' offering is aimed at a slightly more advanced consumer rather than say, BT's Broadband product - due to its lack of cap. This should infer that the end-user would want to use their own router, if they so chose and not be essentially forced into buying what ever they offer at the time.

Worth forwarding this thread onto [email protected] ?

With everyone knowing their T&Cs then you pays your money and takes your choice!

Sky users pay sod all for an unlimited connection and complain when having to spend a few quid on replacement kit.

In reply to a post by broadband66:

Sky users pay sod all for an unlimited connection and complain when having to spend a few quid on replacement kit.

A few quid I don't mind paying. An unspecified amount of Sky's choosing is quite another matter.

In reply to a post by Kiggs:

Presumably Sky's 'Unlimited' offering is aimed at a slightly more advanced consumer rather than say, BT's Broadband product - due to its lack of cap. This should infer that the end-user would want to use their own router, if they so chose and not be essentially forced into buying what ever they offer at the time.

Worth forwarding this thread onto [email protected] ?

Unlikely they will change this one. Bumping the replacement router fee up to £60 or £70 could be an instant revenue raiser, they probably wouldn't want to lose out on that.

In reply to a post by Oliver341:

In reply to a post by Kiggs:

Presumably Sky's 'Unlimited' offering is aimed at a slightly more advanced consumer rather than say, BT's Broadband product - due to its lack of cap. This should infer that the end-user would want to use their own router, if they so chose and not be essentially forced into buying what ever they offer at the time.

Worth forwarding this thread onto [email protected] ?

Unlikely they will change this one. Bumping the replacement router fee up to £60 or £70 could be an instant revenue raiser, they probably wouldn't want to lose out on that.

Which in time may well turn out to be the more realistic reason behind why they are so insistent on customers using the router chosen by the isp solely on price and not what the customer needs or wants or performance , whilst the supplied router may work on their network it will quiet possibly not work as well as other brands/models will&do, but that's what a typical isp who sees that one size fits all is about

Quite apart from being held to ransom by Sky for replacement routers priced at whatever price they see fit at the time, it's also crazy that many people have two or three spare routers in their home, but in the event of a Sky router failure they would be without broadband for a few days while the replacement is on its way.

As it happens I have my PPPoA details so "I'm alright jack". But it doesn't of course stop me from disagreeing with Sky's policies.

While the TV boxes are more custom made, that does not affect consumer rules, so if your router ot sky settop box dies in month 13 i.e. one month out of warranty, and there is an expectation for the device to last longer than the warranty period, then a free replacement (or just postage) seems reasonable.

This is even more the case if you are seeing lots of peoples devices fail after a similar period of time.

The UK is fairly rare in the large ADSL modem, it is very common around the world for a bridging ADSL modem to be a requirement, and then a cable/DSL router of your own choice sourced. FTTC/P is heading that way in the UK now.

13 months may be outside the Sky 'warranty' period but in fact, with anything you buy the 12 months is not necessarily relevant. Under the Sale of Goods Act a consumer has the right to expect the product to be of merchantable quality and fit for purpose given the amount paid. With many items, it is possible to successfully argue that some time after the 12 months period the consumer has the right to expect a product to not go wrong and as such, receive some recompense for failure.

However, Sky ship these routers free of charge initially and given that their T&C's are pretty clear on this matter, I see no reason why a reasonable sum of £35 shouldn't be paid for a replacement.

Whining about this is penny pinching in the extreme and ignores the fact that whilst Sky make profits, they do so on small margins per customer and to not control this sort of issue would simply make everything else more expensive to compensate.

I'm not with Sky yet or work for them. I am being connected in two weeks time.

In reply to a post by peewee:

However, Sky ship these routers free of charge initially and given that their T&C's are pretty clear on this matter, I see no reason why a reasonable sum of £35 shouldn't be paid for a replacement.

I think it's £35 at the moment. My point is what is stopping sky from making it £80 in a few months time? Who makes sure it's a reasonable charge given that market forces aren't allowed to work here?

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

The UK is fairly rare in the large ADSL modem, it is very common around the world for a bridging ADSL modem to be a requirement, and then a cable/DSL router of your own choice sourced. FTTC/P is heading that way in the UK now.

Interesting point. What happens when the Openreach VDSL2 modem fails outside of warranty?

Users would vote with their feet!

I suppose. But in the process of switching providers over this issue, the customer would be without broadband for days or weeks, so coughing up the £80 could be seen as the lesser of two evils. Sky pretty much have the customer over a barrel in this instance.

I think the concern is that the customer is without broadband.

Many now rely on it for daily use, banking, shopping,contacts with family and would not be inclined to keep arguing the point whilst not having the service, and even less inclined to consider moving supplier with the possibility of further of downtime and additional costs.

Sky do very much have the upper hand here....just a bit too much for my liking.

In reply to a post by ScubaGirl:

Personally speaking I do use my own router and make use of the benefits that this provides (300mb/s WiFi on both 2.4 & 5 GHz channels, 1Gbit LAN, USB ports for sharing drives, better GUI & tools).

Not one of these is a routing function though, lol. So, you do not have to replace the Sky router or break the Sky T&C to benefit from them.

If we are getting into the theory of genuinely valid reasons for a typical home user to object to the Sky router - these would mainly be modem performance, and any WAN-LAN functions and performance (firewall, QoS, port forwarding, VPN).

Fair point.

A lot of people to criticise the poor facilities on the Sky router firmware for parental controls. This could most certainly be improved by using your own router.

More people are wanting features such as VPN properly supported, Xbox & PS3 always seem to be an issue for port forwarding & being able to host games for some people.

Additional features are always desirable though.

Sky's stance on not supporting work based traffic is starting to get to a point where it should be revisited and amended. More people are working from home and if they are going to sell Fibre packages, then this will be even more important. It is important to realise that Sky BB is a domestic product, but as I just said, more people are working from home, even if it is just in the evenings.

As I mentioned earlier, there are currently two fixed prices, depending on which router you go for.

WiFi g (or n-Lite) - £28 - Includes:
Netgear DG834GT (no longer shipped, but mention as the rest would be a replacement for this)
Netgear DG934G
D-Link DSL-2640S
Sagem F@ST 2504
Sagem F@ST 2304n (all still under warranty unless was a replacement for any of above)

WiFi N - £35
Sagem Path F@ST 2504N (new router - all under warranty)

All these prices include VAT & carriage.

If you wish to get a Sagem 2504N (whether or not your current router is faulty) to replace one of the other models, then you will need to pay the £35.

It is also worth pointing out that some of the people who work in the call centres will replace your FOC even when it is out of warranty. This is discretionary though.

Openreach modem remains their property, but if you damage it then you might get billed, e.g. the dog eats it

But as Sky is not BT then the regulator is not too concerned, UK regulation is about reducing the influence of BT i.e. more retail competition is seen as good.

The small details of what each firm gets up to is rarely looked at.

Sky is applying something that it has been allowed to do with the TV settop boxes for years.

Phone up one day, courier dispatch, should be with most people in the UK next or second day.

Given BT undertakes to only do phone faults (which is considered a lifeline service) in 4 days for residential customers, then delivery time for a replacement is probably better than most people see from a phone fault.

If having no broadband for a day is going to cause lose of money, then time to look at other providers who offer the appropriate care levels.

Broadband is a utility yes, but if my power at home goes off and it is only my house, the electricity company don't move fast to restore power. Now due to rules they move faster for some categories of customers during cold weather.

If Sky is seen to be milking modem replacements for profit then it is a lot more of an issue, but so long as price remains reasonable, it is just a market practice that not everyone is comfortable with. The joy/pain of the free market.

I think in many cases Sky's policy is doing them no favours. I've read of people who were annoyed at being charged £28/£35 by Sky when they had perfectly good third party routers available to use. On occasions the cancellations department will waive the replacement router fee, but in some cases, amazingly, they seem happy to let customers leave over the issue.

When I joined I made sure there was a way to connect to Sky with a third party router, if there wasn't, I probably wouldn't have signed up. If they push forward with their non RFC compliant MER connection method and scrap PPPoA they will probably push a lot of users away.

When I signed up they migrated my line in two working days. Sounds impressive, except the router did not have time to arrive, and I was without broadband for 4 days waiting for a Sky router to arrive.

In reply to a post by Oliver341:

Interesting point. What happens when the Openreach VDSL2 modem fails outside of warranty?

As long as you're still paying a CP (ISP) for service that requires it, you'd report it to your CP (ISP) who would organise OR to send you a replacement. Pretty much the same for cable modems on Virgin Media.

Its required by the service that you're paying a subscription, and provided by the technical delivery team.

Surely if a broadband user is so dependent on a daily internet connection then they should use an appropriate ISP with SLA, etc.

Granted, I would be a bit miffed if I was without an internet connection for a few days but I could cope, just like most people could.

In reply to a post by broadband66:

Granted, I would be a bit miffed if I was without an internet connection for a few days but I could cope, just like most people could.

Of course one could cope, but Sky in this instance is inconveniencing the customer in a way that no other ISP does, and it's all rather pointless to do so.

In reply to a post by ScubaGirl:

A lot of people to criticise the poor facilities on the Sky router firmware for parental controls.

Good point! I forgot about controlling parents!

What's the deal with work traffic?

I think even just a few years ago Sky's own router was a good idea for the average user, and it mirrored their Satellite box model. However, times and demands have changed. Even your average Joe and average family now has a real need for QoS, port forwarding, VPN tunnelling etc.

Still, I don't know what all the fuss of this thread is. You know when you sign up that you technically have no choice of your own router. If you're out of warranty with your router, you're also out of contract with your broadband and are free to leave if you dont like the replacement cost. If you bought your own router with another ISP, you would have to buy or repair that one too just like you have to with Sky. The comparable cost for this is not just reasonable, it is actually a bargain. An equivalent router with wireless performance of the 2-spatial stream 2504N would cost at least twice the £35 Sky charge their customers.

Market forces and customer retention and reputation do keep costs in check. It's the same for specialised replacement parts in consumer goods - we keep faith that these parts will be sold by the manufacturer at a reasonable price, we don't whine about hypotheticals that we are held to ransom by it. £35 is a great price, and it sounds like often waived. Best keep quiet about the charges rather than give Sky ideas...

So if Sky are making peanuts (if anything) on the cost of replacement routers, and customers are inconvenienced for a few days when their Sky router dies, who is Sky's unique policy on third party routers benefiting?

In reply to a post by Sadoldman:

I think the concern is that the customer is without broadband.

Many now rely on it for daily use, banking, shopping,contacts with family and would not be inclined to keep arguing the point whilst not having the service, and even less inclined to consider moving supplier with the possibility of further of downtime and additional costs.

Sky do very much have the upper hand here....just a bit too much for my liking.

See I've not really had this big issue.

I was out of contract. I rang up Sky. They wouldn't replace the router for free, but I rang up a few times until I got somebody who would. They got it sent via 'express delivery' as I asked for it. They did this for free.

The following day a router arrived. The day after another arrived.

It's a real mixed bag. Sky are cracking down on it though. They confirmed this too me.

In reply to a post by ukhardy07:

It's a real mixed bag. Sky are cracking down on it though. They confirmed this too me.

Cracking down on sending free routers outside of warranty?

In reply to a post by Oliver341:

So if Sky are making peanuts (if anything) on the cost of replacement routers, and customers are inconvenienced for a few days when their Sky router dies, who is Sky's unique policy on third party routers benefiting?

Who said Sky are making peanuts? I'm sure they make a very healthy margin out of router sales and replacement, in the order of that of any router manufacturer - which being electronics means big profits.

The lack of choice and flexibility for the customer does not mean she is automatically getting a bad deal. Let's go over some basics of business models and practices. It's not rocket science.

When you contract out a single OEM piece of equipment exclusively on this scale, you can buy it cheaper and therefore offer it much cheaper to the end customer, especially without a distribution and reseller network and their profits inbetween. A Sagem 2504N if it were on sale in a shop would be about £70, it's simple.

The Sky branding and packaging of the router is a marketing, identity and advertising tool which generates long-term real-world profit. And by picking out and testing a stable model and firmware with good interoperability, decent performance, and most importantly - having zero-configuration with everything even cables colour-coded to boot, it also buys them reputation among average consumers, albeit at the expense of a tiny minority of advanced consumers. "Sky have their router, it works fine at Uncle Bob's. Better than that HomeFub. And Auntie Minnie got that other broadband, she had to go to PC World to get it to work. 300, 450, N, Dual-band, D-Link, Linksys - in the end she bought a £100 router. Then when she got it home, there was nowhere to plug the phone cable into! I asked my expert friend, he said she needed a modem, but we can't find them in the shops, only routers. Then he said we can use a router as a modem, when I plugged that in, email and games wouldnt work probably. Then he said we need a bridge mode or some double NATALIE or something or the other. Or was it a half-bridge we needed to cross. In the end, Aunt Minnie just phoned up Sky"

And on top of all this, you didn't think to work out the real point. The router is for customers only. Every sale generates service income worth many, many times more on top. And the real, major purpose of the router policy is in fact to save £millions on support staff. Scripted telephone staff employed by Sky directly and working through flowcharts are a whole lot cheaper than a basic-trained IT support centre...

So, it sure benefits Sky. But only a small part is from direct router profit. For the customer, the Sky router price is not a bad deal at all.

In reply to a post by Oliver341:

In reply to a post by ukhardy07:

It's a real mixed bag. Sky are cracking down on it though. They confirmed this too me.

Cracking down on sending free routers outside of warranty?

Yep. The guy who eventually sent mine out said they were cracking down sending them out of warranty & even within warranty as it was 'getting out of control.' His words not mine.

I think recently there has been a tightening up on this.

Personally I think it's ridiculous given that you cannot use your own equipment.

In reply to a post by vimto_girl:

And the real, major purpose of the router policy is in fact to save £millions on support staff. Scripted telephone staff employed by Sky directly and working through flowcharts are a whole lot cheaper than a basic-trained IT support centre...

Makes you wonder how all the other ISPs survive really, wasting millions of pounds asking people to plug in the ISP-supplied router before offering support.

In reply to a post by ukhardy07:

Personally I think it's ridiculous given that you cannot use your own equipment.

It's not a popular policy with anyone really, not even the staff. They will often say, unofficially, that you can use your own router on Sky Broadband, but that it is not supported and you will have to find out how to do it "on Google". I think they sympathise with the customer on this one.

In reply to a post by Oliver341:

Makes you wonder how all the other ISPs survive really, wasting millions of pounds asking people to plug in the ISP-supplied router before offering support.

Why are so many boys on this forum so thick? What is this whole thread about?

"Please Sir, plug in your old faulty Sky router. We must do testing."

Erm...

Edited by deleted (Thu 05-Jan-12 13:07:13)

In reply to a post by vimto_girl:

Why are so many boys on this forum so thick? What is this whole thread about?

I suppose I could reply to your sexist comment and say you're too thick to realise that conversations can evolve within forum threads, but I think I'll refrain from stooping to your level.

In reply to a post by Oliver341:

In reply to a post by vimto_girl:

Why are so many boys on this forum so thick? What is this whole thread about?

I suppose I could reply to your sexist comment and say you're too thick to realise that conversations can evolve within forum threads, but I think I'll refrain from stooping to your level.

It wasn't sexist - I very much meant you and one or two other boys in particular. Who appear to pounce on anything I say and try to stir an argument, no matter how wrong they are and how desperate their line of thought ends up becoming. I'm probably being too hard on you, you genuinely just have strong opinion on this issue I think - but search through my post history and you'll see what I'm talking about...

Anyway, let's follow your line of thought through. An ISP who insist on you buying their new router before they offer support - arent they also holding their customers to ransom, and at the worst possible time? How are they better than Sky?

Read my other post again. And see why letting people opt for non-Sky routers harms Sky profits in ways many times worse than anything they gain from equipment profit.

Without the guaranteed sales and re-sales, the router would be more costly to Sky and consumer alike. Sky shift these out for free with new contracts all the time, it saves them £lots.

Without them, the brand identity and image so carefully built up gets gradually eroded as people opt for other routers.

Without them, the average person will run into all kinds of setup problems and generate more traffic to support, which means more £cost. It also means reputation, brand identity and image of switch-it-on-and-it-works is eroded - Sky work so hard at maintaining this because they are not dumb, they know what this achieves. (And read my post - its not easy to buy, choose and setup your own equipment for ADSL these days, even for people who would consider themselves quite adept.)

Sky want to provide good support, keep up an image and reputation of "everything just works and is easily fixed with a phone call", and not generate call traffic and complaints and the reputation that they wont help. If that is different from other ISPs, so be it. But it recoups them £millions in other ways. Or if you want to look at it your way, generates them £millions. The customer and Sky benefit from a support system that works well. You asked what the benefit was. Here it is. Do not underestimate the power of things like brand, image and Uncle Bob and Aunt Minnie.

You can keep on thinking this is all about profits from a router sale. But you've kind of missed the point. And missing the point has made you angry thinking that the customer is being ripped off. But they're not. It's a good router at a great price, there's nothing to complain about.

In reply to a post by vimto_girl:

A Sagem 2504N if it were on sale in a shop would be about £70, it's simple.

It's simply wrong actually. The Sky D-Link I have is available on Amazon for £40.

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

In reply to a post by vimto_girl:

A Sagem 2504N if it were on sale in a shop would be about £70, it's simple.

It's simply wrong actually. The Sky D-Link I have is available on Amazon for £40.

On my quick search that ones is £46.99 on Amazon (although sold by a 3rd party through Amazon). This is of course still more than the £28 Sky sell these for.

I assume Sagem don't sell any own branded routers? The only thing I can find searching for the Sagem is the Sky router which I can only find through Sky. Difficult to compare like for like prices when I can't find the router elsewhere.