By Peter Cochrane, 11 June 2009 16:33
COMMENT
Compiled on KLM 1508 flying Norwich to Amsterdam and dispatched to silicon.com via wi-fi from my Amsterdam hotel a day later
The expression 'a baker's dozen' originated around the 13th century in an early statute instituted by Henry III called the 'Assize of Bread and Ale', which aimed to prevent customers being short changed.
Bakers who didn't provide a full dozen items to buyers could be liable to severe punishment such as losing a hand on an executioner's chopping block. So bakers started the practice of giving 13 for the price of 12 to prevent short measure and being accused of cheating.
A few centuries on from the initiation of the baker's dozen, and we have trading standards funded and operated by the government. Their remit extends far wider than preventing the short changing of customers, and also includes misrepresentation in advertising and supply, some aspects of hygiene, cold calling by telephone and much more.
But when we look at today's ridiculous practice of sellers including those magic words 'up to' in the fine print, they appear to be able to get away with just about anything.
Take broadband service. If two of us purchase a broadband service of 'up to' 8Mbps at £22 per month, and I get 6.5Mbps and you get 2.7Mbps, should we be content, and should trading standards officers let it slip through?
I rather think not!
Think of what this would mean when applied to other products:
Would you accept an unopened pack of Cornflakes sold by weight at 350g that only contains 290g? A new jar of preserves marked up at 450g but has only 220g? A box of a dozen eggs with three missing? A litre of petrol that is only 330ml? Or a pair of trousers with legs which are supposed to be 85cm, yet turned out to be only 46cm? Actually those trousers are a pair of shorts!
It appears that, as long as 'up to' is in the small print, a dozen eggs is really 'up to a dozen eggs'. That seems reasonable, why didn't I get it first time around?
In short: The words 'up to' ought not to be a license for short changing in the supply or trading of anything.
Hands, or heads, on the block anyone?
Comments
There are 16 comments. Join the discussion
1. anonymous
The same is true of battery claims, especially for mobile phones. My HTC Magic (great phone) lasts less than 4 days, as expected, but "specs" say upto 17.5 days - that's just nonsense
2. Charles Smith
If you want Bandwidth guarantees be prepared to pay more for the service. ADSL and Broadband is a shared service also limited by the quality of the copper to your home/business.
Would Peter be will to pay for the infrastructure necessary to deliver a guaranteed delivery? The technology is available, but he may not like the price.
3. John Sniadowski
I'll vote for Peter Cochrane to be the next prime minister.
4. Simon
@ Charles Smith
You are preaching to the choir here - you know it, I know it, Peter knows it. But I think you've missed the point - the ISPs are able to advertise a product that in practice is never delivered. Even if you live in the exchange and ge the max that an ADSL circuit will do, you still don't actually get 8M - and in practice you will not get 8M during the busy evening period due to backhaul contention.
I've said for a long time that what we need is more openness - and in particular ISPs required to specify minimum rates (aka CIR). If ISPs had to guarantee a CIR then we'd quickly see a change in attitude as people realise just how little they are actually buying.
Until this happens, 'good' connections with low contention (ie high CIR) will remain a very niche market - as the great majority of the population can't see any reason to pay £20+ a month when they can buy teh "same" up to 8M for £5/mo.
5. Peter Cochrane
Charles = Hmm - let's see: EU19 in Scandinavia for 200Mbit/s, $35 in Korea for 100Mbit/s, Ditto Japan et al - and all guaranteed and both-ways - no asymmetry and no contention. Very happy indeed to pay! Meanwhile back in the technological backwoods of the UK....Peter
6. Peter Cochrane
John =Noooo please noooo. It is difficult to think of anything much more pitiful than a life wasted in politics. Peter
7. Peter Cochrane
Simon = Even if you are prepared to pay - you still can't get it in the UK! Peter
8. Peter Cochrane
Anonymous = You gotta read the small print....Peter
9. anonymous
The answer is really simple...
The electricity supply to my home is capable of 'up to' 60amps - but I don't pay for 13.8KWh all the time; I pay only for what I use... This is because my actual usage is recorded by a meter.
Why can't broadband be charged the same way? We all expect, and to some degree accept, a fluctuation in delivered throughput - what we are agrieved about is paying for a bandwidth we don't always (if ever) get...
10. Ollie Clark
Oh come on. We all know why the ISPs sell "up to" whatever connections. They simply CAN'T know what speed connection you're going to get until they connect you. Anyone who actually knows what 8Mbps means also knows how ADSL works.
If you want a guaranteed connection speed, plenty of people will sell it to you. You'll just have to pay for it and it won't come over the phone line. If you want a cheap service, then you get what you pay for.
I can't really see how they'd advertise ADSL any differently. The speed is up to the maximum depending on the quality of the line and your distance to the exchange. What figure should they use? Average speed of connection? Theoretical average for all people who could be connected? Average of everyone in the country including those who can't get ADSL at all? Minimum speed? Mean speed? Mode speed? Median speed? Are any of those more honest than "up to" the maximum?
11. Dave Machin
You can get away with the "up-to" label if there's some technical reason why you can't get the specific number advertised. A 9 volt battery should be advertised as an up-to-9 volt battery; there's an internal resistance ensuring that you will get the exact 9 volts only if the load is infinitely small.
More to the point, the UK government should have invested the 22 billion pounds gained from the sale of 3G licences in fibre to the home.
12. Mark Hosey
I agree whole heartedly!
At the very least they should be forced to publish a minimum average speed.
13. Peter Cochrane
Anonymous Midlands
Because unlike the electrons that power your home, the bits that power the internet cost to transport! Metering would cost a lot more than the delivery - and so it makes no sense. The same is true of the telephone and mobile services also!
Peter
14. Peter Cochrane
Ollie = A problem that just 'goes away' when you get fibre. Stick with ancient technologies and pay the price - and how we are now paying! Peter
15. Peter Cochrane
David = And then of course there is the £29Bn BT raised by selling off its building stock.....What a lot of money and opportunity the UK has wasted. We only need £9Bn to fibre up the country! Peter
16. Peter Cochrane
Mark = Yep - let's remove 'up to' and replace it by 'at least'....it would be a start! Peter