NTL Cap 6 Months Anniversary (07 Aug 2003)

A review of the issues and consequences

As AntiCap members will be all too aware, the NTL:home 1GB a day download limit was introduced through the Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) on the 7th February 2003. 6 months later a good opportunity to review the facts and hype surrounding the cap's imposition and effects.

The furore created by the quiet no contact of customers policy change through the AUP, prompted clarification from ntl that there would be a 60 day monitoring of use before customers were contacted. This period expired yet ntl remained quiet. At this time whilst the policy remains in the AUP, and could therefore be enforced by ntl at any time they choose, it appears that only a handful of customers may have been contacted. AntiCap has not heard from any cut off users and thus must accept ntl’s statements that they did not intend to disconnect customers (that would have been poor for churn rates). Indications we have seen on other sites suggest that any customers who have been spoken to by ntl were phenomenal bandwidth users (10GB a day – is that possible?). These would have fallen foul of the older more vague, but reasonable policy of not to use your connection in such a way that affects other customers. So why the fuss?

We have met with some of the ntl directors responsible for internet and broadband policy. Unfortunately much of the meeting was informal and off the record and so could not be reported on fully. However one of the key statements made was the cap was a proactive step, ntl anticipating a problem, rather than having to resolve an issue. ntl have previously emphasised the desire for their broadband customers to have an enjoyable experience. AntiCap continues to wonder how the restriction of users to 1GB of data a day, makes high speed broadband enjoyable, when you have to worry about when you cross the threshold.

So has the cap had a positive or negative effect for ntl? Official statistics from ntl show that their broadband customer base is increasing but the rate of increase has slowed dramatically. From 31 March to 30 April 2003 broadband subscriptions increased by only 30,100 to 691,000. Compare this to the previous two quarters, where total subscriptions had increased from 386,000, a rate of over 45,000 per month. Consider this drop against the efforts being made by ntl to promote new subscriptions and reduce churn. One cannot escape the incessant propaganda trailers on ntl’s digital channels and advertising elsewhere, together with bundled service (buy one gets something free) packages and too good to refuse offers to customers wanting to leave. As customer choice increases with more and more BT exchanges becoming ADSL enabled, ntl’s market position becomes increasingly perilous.

As awareness increases of what broadband can do for the customer, the cap policy will be increasingly restrictive. Ntl’s own advertising already exposes it’s limitations when the Buy NTL channel’s speed comparisons for file downloads quote large file size and times for 25MB or larger files, yet the AUP policy talks of 100 large files making up the 1GB allowance (you do the maths). Why bother with the 1MB speed broadband service which can use this limit in 2.5 hours? As for ntl offering an even faster service, what would be the point?

No other major UK ISP has seen the need to impose a cap type policy. Even AOL who now offer a broadband connection over the ntl cable network with no caps (but do admit that ntl could force them to impose a limit, if ntl can prove the use is affecting the network).

It’s not as though ntl can now even argue their broadband service is especially cheap. OK so they may have a low cost entry level service at the 150kpbs speed but the users interested in that are unlikely to feel the effects of the cap limits. It’s the 512 (ADSL) and 600 NTL range where price comparison becomes more muddled, and similarly the faster 1Mb speeds are also becoming a crowded market place. As 2Mb ADSL speeds are increasingly available, ntl risk being left behind, competing neither on cost, speed or terms of service. If ntl cannot invest in their network to provide the necessary bandwidth capacity for existing and new customers they will be increasingly sidelined.