With careful wording on adverts it would work

But can see some bright spark wanting to limit upstream or similar to ensure they are visibly different

Stats may have changed in the other direction over the past 6 months.

Theory
For a significant number of exchanges with BT ADSL2+ FTTC has been provided, this has reduced the number of lower speed customers living further away from the exchange, leaving the higher speed ones that are EO served. This has the effect of increasing the average ADSL2+ speed.

Could well mean that 10% get 16Mb or higher.

The rubbish stat is that no-one mentions that this means 89% get less than 16Mb!.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

With careful wording on adverts it would work

All posts seem to assume that the customer has and can test their connection, being speed; data throughput, sync etc. because obviously he is connected!
What about a new customer who does not have or never has had a connection to the internet? If ISP�s do not display the �up to� or just have a link to a checker, the new customer won�t know what he is buying into, simply because he can�t check his telephone line etc. So how can this new customer compare ISP�s statistics?
Dose this new ASA rule benefit the consumer or has it given the ISP�s a way out of displaying statistics?

In reply to a post by scopio:

has it given the ISP�s a way out of displaying statistics?

As the OP, I feel only fair to answer this.

Far from it. We as an ISP feared and we feel is now already happening is there now appears many different ways for ISPs to present the same exact data (percentages, up to's, regional variations, ADSL v's ADSL2+ v's FTTC) making comparing for the consumer a far harder process.

Our view has always been, when we were consulted, that it's practical to address the concerns raised by the ASA/CAP if the solution introduced was a consistant model across the industry (similar to how energy ratings are found on many goods etc). This way the consumer could compare without all the redtape, as those clever marketing bods could have little room to move.

All we have had this week since we removed data is phone call after phone call with confused pre-sales. We even been asked by we don't listed up to speeds. We now having to flip back to up to in some way as a temp solution :/

Virtually every ISP web site has a line checker or they offer speed estimates over the phone. This is a requirement and has been field tested for accuracy by OFCOM.

The BT Address checker gives an estimate where no phone line data is available.

So the unconnected are catered for. Why can't he check his telephone number ?

I refer learned people to http://blog.thinkbroadband.com/2010/09/labelling-of-...

If BT enabled the whole of Greater London, population 7.9million or so, for exceptionally fast speeds, let's say 200 meg, would they then be able to advertise 'up to 200 meg' service nationwide, based on the fact that more than 10% of the population could get that speed, even if it was concentrated in a very small area and 90% of the population (the rest of the country) were still unlikely to get above 16meg?

In reply to a post by yarwell:

Virtually every ISP web site has a line checker or they offer speed estimates over the phone. This is a requirement and has been field tested for accuracy by OFCOM.

The BT Address checker gives an estimate where no phone line data is available.

So the unconnected are catered for. Why can't he check his telephone number ?

I was just asking in general, as no mention of how new customers would be able to make a choice has been delt with in earlier posts, only for those already connected to one or other ISP. Your reply answers my query

they could say that the service used in London was a 200M service, but would have to say it wasn't available in areas where that technology wasn't deployed. Bit like Virgin Cable.

(sig's are annoying on this site, mod/admin can you please put an ------------ line between the post and the Sig for every one so we know its an sig, Yarwell Sig is good point on merged post with sig )

its very rare that i ever see an connection any higher then 8mb, on avg its norm 5mb or less (think i have only ever seen 20mb Lock 3 times in my life and that was due to the fact they was less then 200-300m from the exchange)

FTTC is a lot more predictable norm most i have seen have more then 30mb, 1 customer had 15mb but that was due to where the Cab was, still it was better then 0.8mb on ADSL (most on FTTC are closer to 40mb or at 40mb, not seen any upgraded 80mb connections yet)