TalkTalk's £5 offer is for the initial 12 months, after which it rises to £15. I was just making the point that comparing that with BT's £12.50 offering required a little more depth.
The complaints ratios are not necessarily related to reliablity are they? I suspect that BT have risen to the top of the list because so many new initiatves have gone wonky after a very short time - not a great idea for a company whose front-line customer service so often comes up way short. I've had a large helping of admin problems with BT, but (apart from a couple of minor phone-side issues, swiftly rectified) the service has been rock-solid for years. I know I could save a bit as a rate tart but that reliablility, coupled with avoidance of the hassle potential in switching, is well worth the proverbial pint or two of Guinness a month.
-- You can click the thumbs up icon below this message if you think it was helpful.
I think you get my point that saying "it's only a fiver a month" is totally missing the real costs. ie it's only a fiver a month IF your broadband cost the same as the cheapest elsewhere.
Complaints are indeed not necessarily related to reliability. It's the best I have though. If you have a better measure I'd love to see it though it's really a side issue to the main point.
To be frank the £5 is not even remotely my biggest gripe, it's the incompetence of the handling of it. No option presented that allows me to downgrade without a new contract is the disgraceful bit for me. If BT want to pay extortionately for sport and charge that is their business. I won't pay Sky and I won't pay BT. Despite BT continuing to offer a free channel I can no longer receive it (after 01/08) unless I accept a new contract. My existing contract means nothing to BT. That is the bit that galls and the bit that means I will not be a BT customer come the end of my broadband contract. Well that and the HH5 being a crippled piece of junk too.