You could get that from a couple of busy mailing lists.

In reply to a post by 12eason:

They've recently applied an email/month limit.

Ah. Thanks. Forgot about that
Didn't that come about through the performance issues they had with mail a little while ago?
Seem to remember there should be some new servers with go faster stripes coming on line soon.

ok thanks. just seems odd why aaisp wouldn't make it easy to find that info as its a good selling point,

Brighton Freegle group: http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/GreenCycleSussex/ Typically around 1300 posts a month.

A lot of people in that group still belong to what was the old FreeCycle group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/freebrighton/ which is still receiving 800 per month. Before the split it was typically 2500 to 3000 per month.

I was very seriously considering moving to AAISP later this year (once I've moved domains around), but this miserly allowance has made me think again.

This includes us processing up to 1,500 emails per month

Does this include spam messages that are rejected or just emails actually delivered?

Having been with AAISP for about 8 months now, and being very pleased with the service, I am now giving serious consideration to looking elsewhere snce the halving of the 20CN allowance from 100Gb/unit to 50Gb/unit, at the beginning of April.

For my £40/month I am now getting the equivalent of 3 units/month compared to the 6 units I was getting prior to April 1st.

This seems a major drop in useability to me, and it is only the 2am-6am "bonus" that is currently making it worthwile staying, though how long I can justify the £40/month outlay for that remains to be seen.

Could there not have been a less drastic reduction for a time (say, a 3 month trial) to see if such a level was sustainable (say 75Gb/unit) before going as low as 50Gb?

I do hope that some of the AAISP team read these particular thread entries and take the comments onboard, and maybe even makes some comment.

It does feel like us poor people who are (through no fault of our own) stuck on 20CN equipment, with no timescale for a 21CN upgrade in the next 2 years, are being overly penalised to the point where it is not really cost effective to be with AAISP, irrespective of how good they are, if you have a 20CN line anymore.

Any comments or thoughts are welcome.

Kevin.

In reply to a post by KevinM2:

It does feel like us poor people who are (through no fault of our own) stuck on 20CN equipment, with no timescale for a 21CN upgrade in the next 2 years, are being overly penalised to the point where it is not really cost effective to be with AAISP, irrespective of how good they are, if you have a 20CN line anymore.

I hear your pain but equally it is not AAISP's fault that BT charge so much more for bandwidth on IPSC (20CN) connections. You may well find a cheaper ISP but if it supplied over BT lines they will probably be achieving that by not buying sufficient bandwidth to meet the peak demands of their users or using some sort of traffic shaping/throttling. Either way the service will probably be poorer but you may be able to live with that.

Terry

I don't know the pricings as far as what BT charge ISP's, but if AA are halving the allowance of 20CN accounts, (and bearing in mind, they already charge more for 20CN accounts than 21CN accounts), does that mean that BT charge ISPs twice as much for a 20CN line connection than they do for a 21CN line connection to justify it (for the same download limit).

Does seem a bit excessive.

Also, I am pretty certain I can get one of the more "top range" ISP's for £40/month, and that is what I am looking into right now.

I am not looking for cheaper, I don't mind spending £40/month, but I just want better value for money, and I feel that at 50Gb/unit now, £40/month for half the download limit I used to get isn't good value for money anymore. Especially when you factor in the (effective) limitations of daytime use.

I have got used to not downloading anything between 9am & 6pm, and I accept that, but I only accepted that based on the fact that the evening/overnight limits were relatively good.

Now that the evening limits have been decimated, the whole package isn't looking anywhere near as attractive.

I'd rather not say goodbye to AA, but this move really does push me in that direction.

In reply to a post by KevinM2:

I don't know the pricings as far as what BT charge ISP's, but if AA are halving the allowance of 20CN accounts, (and bearing in mind, they already charge more for 20CN accounts than 21CN accounts), does that mean that BT charge ISPs twice as much for a 20CN line connection than they do for a 21CN line connection to justify it (for the same download limit).

Does seem a bit excessive.

Quote from AAISP:
We have been asked why 21CN get more for the same money as 20CN. Basically, our costs for 20CN are more than twice that of 21CN to BT. BT are showing no signs of improving this situation. Obviously we are continuing our programme of free migrations from 20CN to 21CN following BTs exchange upgrades.

Terry

Thanks for that bit of info. Looks like things aren't going to change anytime soon then

It doess seem then that BT are not playing the game. They appear quite happy to charge more than double for 20CN access, yet they don't appear to have much of a plan to upgrade 20CN to 21CN.

Maybe that's because at the moment they can charge double for 20CN lines, so why would they? Sounds like a bit of a gold mine for them, at the expense of the customer.

BT at their best.

In reply to a post by TerryN:

Quote from AAISP:
We have been asked why 21CN get more for the same money as 20CN. Basically, our costs for 20CN are more than twice that of 21CN to BT. BT are showing no signs of improving this situation. Obviously we are continuing our programme of free migrations from 20CN to 21CN following BTs exchange upgrades.

Terry

It seems to me as if every ISP that has moved to IPSC has had to decimate their 20cn packages. Entanet being the other prime example. The argument used for switching to IPSC is always the same, ie to save money by combining the costs of some parts of 21cn with 20cn. Yet even though it seems cheaper on paper, it looks like it works out to be more expensive than running centrals quite frankly.