The cliff for ADSL2+ is such that as you approach 20Meg the drop off is rapid.

So I don't doubt that BT can demonstrate the 10% figure for 16 Meg. Plusnet is confident enough to quote 17 Meg on its business range.

Of the providers in our listings, plenty still have up 24 Meg and up to 20 Meg showing. Not always on the main page, but somewhere in the product listings.

Remember that complaining that BT website does not suit your personal view will get nowhere, only if you can show it breaks the guidelines. Now if provider ABC has data that suggests less than 10% get 16Meg from BT connections, then they are free to challenge - we could see the SamKnows testing hardware actually subject to review and how providers nominate lines to be used for it.

your mention of Samknows got me thinking....

http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/market-data-researc...

Fig 1.6 says that 10% of ADSL2+ customers get over 14M

In reply to a post by yarwell:

Fig 1.6 says that 10% of ADSL2+ customers get over 14M

Are they talking about the same thing?
e.g. I have between 17.2 and 16.8 megabit sync, but downloads are 14.1 to 14.8 megabit.

I have a samknows box, so contributing to the above data.

they are talking speed tests, as they don't know the sync speed from Sam's boxes.

The ASA effectively requires speed tests to be used now, despite having failed to explicitly say so.

Providers have access to the data themselves, as some pay for the SamKnows services I believe.

So would seem daft of BT to have not checked this. Also as data was from Nov 2011, and would have included earlier results, then the rollout of 3dB target will have had a positive effect on the numbers.

yes after robertos posted those links I see there is worse offenders, although after seeing the 14mbit figures I posted I am not so sure now 16mbit will be below 10%, although 20 and 24mbit defenitly are unless an isp deliberatly rejects longer lines.

is it the case tho the ASA doesnt care about the isp's own website but only marketing campaigns? that might be why some isps have seemingly not changed much.

is it the case tho the ASA doesnt care about the isp's own website but only marketing campaigns?

No. That used to be the case - adverts on 3rd party web sites were the only web interest for ASA but now they have remit over supplier's own web sites. ASA site has a list of web sites that are "bad boys" for not cooperating with them.

the ASA reported noted that the average speed on the ADSL2+ services was declining as more lines were added with more exchanges carrying it. If say half the users get <6M on MaxDSL and move onto WBC they won't do a lot for the average speed of WBC.

Could make sense to keep an "up to 6M" product portfolio with users of that managed to reflect those who don't gain much from ADSL2+.

Perhaps, but at 4 Meg an extra Meg is worth having if it allows Netflix full quality to play smoothly, plus upstream

There is scope for providers playing some odd games, or being more careful in who gets picked for speed monitoring. for example the picture for UK broadband for Ofcom is from just 1700 locations, split across ADSL and ADSL2+ and cable, and the 6 to 10 providers.

Now we are told it is statistically sensible, but I am not sure the numbers are enough to give a good line speed profile, i.e. decent number of lines for each provider at various line lengths.

I await the next ofcom report that mentions advertised speeds, hope they get it right.

it would only be an administrative classification - we all know the services do the best speed they can within their parameters, regardless of what advertising know-nothings, consumer advocates and policy wonks may think.

So put all the sub 10M sync on a 6M service description, bob's your uncle. Top speed (10% basis) increases for the ADSL2+ customers on a different service description.