discriminatory pricing

[#1]

This may be partially down to Ofcom but Plusnet could ignore the definitions of "low price market" - ie Market 3 - if it wanted.
I live in a rural area. My local exchange is market 2 and unlikely to ever become market 3 (the one which gets the discounts).
BT have no plans to upgrade my exchange to 20Mb (21C?) although Talktalk already provide such from that exchange.
Now I've been a PN customer for a few years now but a new customer, just 7 miles away served by a market 3 exchange could get the services for about 2/3 what I pay - and very likely also get 20Mbps speeds.
I can understand that PN speeds will be limited by whatever BT does or doesn't do in its exchanges. What I cannot see is how PN can charge me more than it charges market 3 customers and often for a slower service.

I may be wrong but I'd guess that PN pays BT wholesale just the same for use of equipment for my connection as it pays for the bloke 7 miles away. Or , to put it another way, why is Plusnet making an extra £5 a month profit from me? Some justification is called for.

[#2]

I was asking similar question
http://community.plus.net/forum/index.php/topic,89249.msg743470.html#msg743470

[#3]

Quote from: bewick

I may be wrong but I'd guess that PN pays BT wholesale just the same for use of equipment for my connection as it pays for the bloke 7 miles away. Or , to put it another way, why is Plusnet making an extra £5 a month profit from me? Some justification is called for.

You are wrong.
Plusnet pay less on a Market 3 exchange and pass the saving on to the lucky ones

[#4]

Quote from: Oldjim

Plusnet pay less on a Market 3 exchange and pass the saving on to the lucky ones

Although it would be 'fairer' if PN normalised their costs across Market 1/2 and 3 exchanges and just charged a single rate regardless of the market classification of a customer's exchange, much like almost all other ISPs. It would make the various products a lot easier to compare as well - the current advertising is hardly transparent 

[#5]

It wouldn't be fairer to me as I would be subsidising the customers in Market 1 and 2 exchanges

[#6]

Oldjim got there before me!  It would make it "fairer" by charging some people more; neither I nor the original poster would get charged any less....
Chris

[#7]

Quote from: Oldjim

It wouldn't be fairer to me as I would be subsidising the customers in Market 1 and 2 exchanges

Very true but Market 3 customers also get to see the potential benefits (price, performance, wider choice of tariffs, why) of better competition, while those on Market 1 & 2 don't.

[#8]

If you want to enjoy the benefits of Market 3, I suggest you move to location with Market 3.

[#9]

Quote from: Oldjim

It wouldn't be fairer to me as I would be subsidising the customers in Market 1 and 2 exchanges

I don't know, I think it'd be fairer to have one uniform price and I say that as a market 3 user… broadband is such an essential service these days that I feel everyone should have access to it at the same price and not be penalised on a price basis simply because of where they live. Ultimately, what I'm describing is no different to Royal Mail's universal service obligation… would it be similarly fairer to make people have to pay more to send letters from rural areas? I personally feel it wouldn't be.
Of course, the reason Plusnet offer their market-based pricing isn't through any act of ‘fairness’, rather, it's so they can compete with the LLU operators on the exchanges at which they operate – which will often be market 3 exchanges too.

[#10]

Quote from: fourfourdevon

I suggest you move to location with Market 3.

I personally don't give a damn as I'm happy with what I've got. But that doesn't mean to say I think the current system is equitable to the customer which, seeing as it's mandated by OFCOM, it ought to be.

[#11]

@Be3g
So you believe that home owners in the Towns should subsidies rural home owners for everything? 

[#12]

The telecoms market has never been equitable, but given the restrictions under which Plusnet operate, I think their pricing is both transparent and fair.

[#13]

Quote from: itsme

So you believe that home owners in the Towns should subsidies rural home owners for everything?

No, hence this statement (emphasis added):

Quote from: Be3G

broadband is such an essential service these days that I feel everyone should have access to it at the same price and not be penalised on a price basis simply because of where they live.

I simply feel that broadband should be treated the same as things like landline and the postal service, both of which are not priced by location.

[#14]

But they should. End Uses should pay what it cost to supply the service.

[#15]

A bit like fuel and public transport then.