You guys crack me up, presenting the same argument each time on posts such as this. It is such a broken record.
A&A are not an "average" ISP, and their service(s) is/are not average either (much above average, from what I have experienced). So it is of no surprise they do not attract the "average" customer. Even with this fact, they evidently do still have customers (or they wouldn't even be in business) and there must be some kind of demand for the *::1T products from both existing customers and potentials looking to move.
For me, yes, I can't justify the cost. I pay £43.99 a month to Zen for unlimited 40/10 (inc line rental). I would be paying £60 a month if I switched (for effectively, still an unlimited service, at least for the first 1TB per month) - right now, this month, my usage has hit half a TB.
But there are people out there willing to pay this. Maybe they don't want to use the BT back-haul for their FTTC connection (some kind of redundancy requirement if they run a dual line setup), maybe they also want 4 hour business grade response to line faults (a A&A default by the way, on all lines they provision, even for home users) and maybe they just want to go via a back-haul which has less contention and better capacity than BT's, so potentially a faster, more fluid experience for both downloading and general internet usage along with a vast improvement on jitter/latency (if they're a gamer), with lower standard deviation with that (fewer latency spikes during peak times etc).
Like I said in one of my other recent posts, I have noticed performance drops on my Zen connection since October, but it is extremely minor (most people wouldn't notice it). I have noticed much higher latency and jitter with it since switching to them from A&A over a year ago, but the service still works as I need, so no complaints.
Either way, stick to your budget ISPs if that's what works for you. But budget ISPs don't work for everyone, and that is why alternatives like A&A exist.
Edited by mixt (Wed 30-Dec-15 12:42:41)