Core problem: People's perception of broadband and its benefits.

Dangger

I'd like to start a discussion regarding what I consider to be the next looming battle.

For some time now the telco's have been claiming that there is not sufficient demand for broadband service. I realise that some may disagree with this claim and ask is it surprising given that most businesses and home users are unaware of exactly what they are missing in terms of an always on true broadband connection.

The telco's have done themselves no favours in educating people and business about the benefits of broadband. But there was of course a reason for this, the dial up and leased line revenue was too great to go letting people have more for less.

But now it appears that ironically their greed is going to hit them where it hurts revenue wise. Given that they have all had to spend, spend, spend to get their infrastructure broadband enabled, they simply must start getting returns from it.

My concern is that the telco's will view the education and increasing of awareness to be the government's role, and that the government will fail to carry it out sufficiently, leaving us with pockets of broadband in high deamnd spots only - what we have currently.

Is it simply a case of telco's carrying out educational and relevant advertising campaigns? I've heard some incredibly apalling radio adverts for broadband using someone reciting a wedding speech, which has no connection to the product whatsoever.

Or should there be an Internet/Broadband day declared at a national level with the Dáil sitting for a session answering questions posed by various school pupils around the country over their school connections?

These are just examples, but I'd really value hearing more.

This is not obvious stuff! At a recent conference in Athlone on the digital divide in rural area I met with a company who had a practical way of keeping their ISDN costs down. They simply unplug the line from the socket for a few hours a day unbeknown to their staff!

Increasing awareness is the next key step. In here especially in this forum we all know what its about and what we can /could do with it. But consider yourselves the technical elite minority!

Boston

My experience "halo i'd like to get braodband from your company"
sorry not available in your area.
"but i live in the centre of the capital of ireland, a major european city."
Sorry sir

What balls.

Anyway the point, broadbands great when its saving you money and all but unless you getting some real use out of it, people will never spend even 45 euro a month on it, let alone 100 euro. and that cap will crush the thing, because even if 90% of people never go over it, they all would like to feel they could.

SkepticOne

Another piece of evidence that Eircom would rather you not bother with broadband: remember the piece of software that you could download to see if your computer (not the line) qualified for their broadband.

If I remember correctly, it had a battery of strict tests on memory and processor speed, OS type and browser type, none of which was actually necessary for the basic broadband that they supplied. You had to have a specific version of Internet Explorer (not any version, certainly not Netscape, haeaven forbid).

I think Windows XP was also excluded.

This same company talks about stimulating demand.

Dangger

I see the merit in both your points, particularly to do with the restrictive availability of broadband, and how it's not in the telco's interest to provide. But as I mentioned before surely this is changing, they have made investment in enabling their network to provide braodband to the home, and thy are waking up to the fact that they must get a return on it. Or is this investment just a drop in the ocean?

However I'm not fully convinced by the points so far. I feel there is a huge perception deficit that will prevent people from making a speedy conversion to broadband.

I hear it from wireless operators who have reasonably priced offerings in residential areas but poor take up. Can this be just attributed to poor marketing on their side? Surely this is tied to awareness. It does not cross people's minds that that they can get online withtout a phone line.

Damage has undeniably been done to how the average punter percieves the Internet and what benefits exist with faster connections. After all didn't we amazingly pass through the whole dot com madness with the average Irish home user rarely breaking 56k! What were we missing?

Don't get me wrong I'm not nay saying (well maybe I am!) but its for educational purposes, it's something I want to tackle.

Ardmore

Originally posted by Dangger
II hear it from wireless operators who have reasonably priced offerings in residential areas but poor take up. Can this be just attributed to poor marketing on their side?

An installation fee of €250 is still a big barrier. A large part of the "mass market" appeal in the UK had to do with relatively cheap installation charges.

If the installation charge is more than 2 months fee, the "ordinary punter" isn't going to bother. A "free" modem, and a connection charge equivalent to one or two months rental is the norm in more active markets.

Lemming

Originally posted by Dangger
Or is this investment just a drop in the ocean?

With respects to eircom, I think they very much gave a token gesture of "We DO have broadband available, so quit whinging. So what if it's obscenely overpriced and no one can get it". But the other operators I think are probably cringing at the Bit-Stream costs more than any "must protect other revenues". And unfortunately the wireless OLO's aren't large enough to make a sufficient dent yet, and knowledge of their services is still largely the domain of the more tech-savvy users.

However I'm not fully convinced by the points so far. I feel there is a huge perception deficit that will prevent people from making a speedy conversion to broadband.

On this you're absolutely right I think. The consumer sees this uber-speedy connection, but thinks "why should I pay 50/100 euro for this per month, when my bi-monthly eircom bill is only , say, 30 for internet usage from my kids, etc."

I hear it from wireless operators who have reasonably priced offerings in residential areas but poor take up. Can this be just attributed to poor marketing on their side? Surely this is tied to awareness. It does not cross people's minds that that they can get online withtout a phone line.

Damage has undeniably been done to how the average punter percieves the Internet and what benefits exist with faster connections. After all didn't we amazingly pass through the whole dot com madness with the average Irish home user rarely breaking 56k! What were we missing?

I'd imagine that few people actually HAVE considered that internet usage can be delivered outside of a phoneline-esque medium, given that for so long we've been used to hearing internet, dial-up, and phone-lines in the same sentence for years.

Well, that's my two cents.

SkepticOne

I think the 'core' problem is:

1. Affordable broadband only available to around 2% of the population.

2. Unbelievably priced broadband available to 1/3 of the population. Alledgedly available.

3. Broadband not available at all to 2/3rds of the population.

Point 1 is the most important. For must people, unafordable broadband may as well not exist.

Basically, only 2 percent are beinge offered anything realistic. What is the point of raising awareness among the remaining 98%.

Some of this may change if DSL at 54 euros comes out, but it will still only be available to the minority initially and is still too expensive at 54 euros.

The reason for the above is:

1. Monopolistic bloated incumbent.
2. Lasy "competition" who exploit wholesale rates forced by the regulator.
3. Regulation that emphasises the needs of the market players rather than those of the market or consumer.

Sort those out first.

When we have cheap widely available broadband, then awareness might become the core problem.

Dangger

Okay you win!

zz03

Originally posted by Dangger
Okay you win!

I'd agree, but

"When we have cheap widely available broadband", then surely awareness will no longer be a problem either!


zz..

PiE

Another thing about the Wireless options, (apart from the installation costs) is that wireless seems like a lot of effort. Getting a big antenna on the roof, running a cable down through the attic etc. Potential for problems is also higher. So much easier to just plug a phone line into a DSL modem.

That's why I'm waiting for the new offers to materialise anyway.

spongebob

Covered in the later parts of This thread today.

Eircom 'could' supply Broadband to 500,000 lines. They spent a fortune advertising in November and bragging about this. 3,5000 took them up, 0.7% of the total potential lines (I think its not that many potential lines but still not more than 1% takeup)

The Cable operators 'could'supply 40,000 housholds...thats also probably optimistic. Nevertheless it seems that 10% of households have taken them up on it.....or 4,000

The Cable takeup is 10 times that of the Eircom takeup.

a) The Cable companies have spent NOTHING on advertising, its almost all word of mouth

b) The typical cable product is either Uncapped or else 10Gbit a monh as in Chorus.

c) The typical Cable product is 512 symmetrical (256 in Dungarvan)

d) The cost is between €35 and €50 a month while

e) The ADSL entry level price is between €100 and €110 a month.

Therefore, widescale Broadband takeup is Highly price/package sensitive. Eircom and ESAT are proposing a new tranche of products which will be significantly inferior to the Cable offerings at prices between €54 and €60 a month. I think they must drop to around €40 given the low quality of their proposed 256k offerings.

If I were to recommend one strategic government intervention, it would be for a tax break @ the 20% rate for 12 months for products at no more than €50 a month. If it costs a single cent more , no tax rebate at all.

Call it an Educational Resource Facilities Allowance, any citizen can avail of it once during their lives and for one year.

M

maxheadroom

Originally posted by Muck

c) The typical Cable product is 512 symmetrical (256 in Dungarvan)

Emmm..... NTL is 512 (actually 600) down, 128 up

Xian

The present providers of internet access are best compared to shy debutantes: The centre of attention, holding out for the best dowry. You won't get their attention 'cause you poor.

Put a couple of friskier young things in the room and you'll quickly see their demeanour becoming less than demure. Soon they begin to doubt themselves, realize that they aren't the "bright young things" they used to be. They'll be a bit more forward. Soon they realize all the money they spent on making themselves more attractive isn't having the same effect. Soon it's "Me love you long time".

Bring on the Wireless Service Providers and you'll soon see things falling into place for the consumer.

yellum

Originally posted by PiE
Getting a big antenna on the roof, running a cable down through the attic etc. Potential for problems is also higher. So much easier to just plug a phone line into a DSL modem.

The antenna is fairly small actually and it can be stuck on a sidewall too once it has line of sight. Running a cable through te attic is no biggie, its less hassle than getting a phone line installed really.

Some of the offerings are an antenna, a box that does all the magic that the antenna plugs into and a cable from this antenna that plugs into your network card.

As much hassle getting a 2nd line just for DSL.

The barrier to access to wireless products is high though unless the installation costs and the CPE (the magic box) are covered in the monthly costs.

The one good thing with wireless and customer purchased equipment is you own that line going into the house in a way. Once theres wireless competition you can just switch provider instantly. Repoint your antenna and thats it.

yellum

Originally posted by Dangger
I hear it from wireless operators who have reasonably priced offerings in residential areas but poor take up. Can this be just attributed to poor marketing on their side? Surely this is tied to awareness. It does not cross people's minds that that they can get online withtout a phone line.

Poor take up ? Look at the Irish Broadband and Irish Wisp threads in this forum alone. Theres been 100s of people trying to get online using wireless. I don't think there is poor take-up due to peoples ignorance about non phoneline options. Its availability thats an issue. Once the availability increases and people start signing up to a reliable service, word of mouth will push the take-up rates higher.

People are sceptical to a degree now thanks to idiotic government planning and all the promises (blantant lies) they made about broadband being available real soon now. They also got majorily burned by the telcos promising stuff for years.

The wireless companies need to market themselves too of course and they need to do it properly. How do people know that there are other oprions in their area. How many people have heard of Leap, irishWisp and Irish Broadband and what they can do for them.

Its all fine setting up in an area but people need to know you are there.

sceptre

Originally posted by yellum
The antenna is fairly small actually and it can be stuck on a sidewall too once it has line of sight. Running a cable through te attic is no biggie, its less hassle than getting a phone line installed really.

<snip>

As much hassle getting a 2nd line just for DSL.

I'd have to agree with yellum there. For most people, choosing between Sky and cable for their TV doesn't come down to being concerned about having to place a dish on their wall (I say "most people" because living in a listed building in Limerick, my Sky dish is now mounted in my bathroom. Fight the power etc).

Ardmore

Originally posted by yellum
As much hassle getting a 2nd line just for DSL.

Why would you get a 2nd phone line for DSL? That's one of the big advantages of DSL - it works over your existing line, without conflicting with your use of the phone!

pork99

I was trying to explain the benefits of flat rate to some off-line relatives and each time the first question they ask is "do you still have to pay e30 pm even if you dont use it all?"

I think they are pretty typical of the mass of people not online at this stage, they cannot see the benefit of friaco nevermind bb

but i live in the centre of the capital of ireland, a major european city

I can help you there Boston - the mistake you are making is to assume that you are in a "major european city"

I'm afraid that, "this is not city, it is town for peasants" (as I once heard a Dutch bloke say)

DeVore

I hug my wireless connection every night before going to bed.

I call it "George".


DeV.

Dustaz

Originally posted by pork99
I was trying to explain the benefits of flat rate to some off-line relatives and each time the first question they ask is "do you still have to pay e30 pm even if you dont use it all?"

Hammer - Nail - *bonk*


Thats what i think dave was getting at with the initial post. This is the problem telcos face in the next few years. We all know plenty of people who just dont 'get' the internet , whether they never use it or just email and browse from work.

Theres a lot of work to be done. Eircom could start by looking at what BT have been doing.

MDR

MRBI ...

LFCFan

Originally posted by SkepticOne
Another piece of evidence that Eircom would rather you not bother with broadband: remember the piece of software that you could download to see if your computer (not the line) qualified for their broadband.

If I remember correctly, it had a battery of strict tests on memory and processor speed, OS type and browser type, none of which was actually necessary for the basic broadband that they supplied. You had to have a specific version of Internet Explorer (not any version, certainly not Netscape, haeaven forbid).

I think Windows XP was also excluded.

This same company talks about stimulating demand.

Here's an example for those who haven't seen this masterful piece of software at work. Check out this image....So Called Browser Error

SkepticOne

I coudn't get the thing to run at all even though I have a fairly up to date version of Linux.

Boston

I think i may be able to help clear this up abite.

Ask the average block, does he have the internet, most likely he will say yea, i use it one every other month, costs me about a five a year. Now ask him to spend 40 euro a month on the internet and see the reaction. People simply do not use the internet enough in ireland to be interested in broadband. The first hing you find out about when you use some kind of unlimited service is broadband. You will never see the kind of interest here untill you have a flat rate narrowband offering in the mainstream. Your expecting people to go from a wheelbarrow to a sportscar, its not going to happen.

Ardmore

Originally posted by Boston
I think i may be able to help clear this up abite.

Ask the average block, does he have the internet, most likely he will say yea, i use it one every other month, costs me about a five a year. Now ask him to spend 40 euro a month on the internet and see the reaction. People simply do not use the internet enough in ireland to be interested in broadband. The first hing you find out about when you use some kind of unlimited service is broadband. You will never see the kind of interest here untill you have a flat rate narrowband offering in the mainstream. Your expecting people to go from a wheelbarrow to a sportscar, its not going to happen.

People who won't spend €5 a month for per minute calls (or who don't know how much they currently spend accessing the internet) aren't going to sign up for FRIACO either. In fact, at €40 a month (ala NTL's cable offering, or IrishWISPs offering), broadband would probably be an easier sell than even €20 a month for "all you can eat" dialup. (Though we'll see if that changes with the new 1892 phone numbers, when it becomes a lot more obvious how much those "free" internet calls really cost).

€19.60 for a 2nd phone line plus €30 a month for a FRIACO package, versus €54 a month for ADSL (no need for a 2nd phone line)? You do the math :-)

I think FRIACO might have very limited appeal in areas where DSL is actually available. It certainly isn't going to do anything to spur takeup of broadband, unless it's a nominal €5-€10 a month, and that's not likely to happen.

Boston

Originally posted by Ardmore
People who won't spend €5 a month for per minute calls (or who don't know how much they currently spend accessing the internet) aren't going to sign up for FRIACO either. In fact, at €40 a month (ala NTL's cable offering, or IrishWISPs offering), broadband would probably be an easier sell than even €20 a month for "all you can eat" dialup. (Though we'll see if that changes with the new 1892 phone numbers, when it becomes a lot more obvious how much those "free" internet calls really cost).

€19.60 for a 2nd phone line plus €30 a month for a FRIACO package, versus €54 a month for ADSL (no need for a 2nd phone line)? You do the math :-)

I think FRIACO might have very limited appeal in areas where DSL is actually available. It certainly isn't going to do anything to spur takeup of broadband, unless it's a nominal €5-€10 a month, and that's not likely to happen.

I'm just speaking from experience of trying to convince people to get broadband. Most peoples experience of the internet in ireland is so limited they really think to themselves "why do i need to do it 10 times faster" But if people where in a situation where they are using the internet much more, then i can see it having a bigger effect.

Ardmore

Originally posted by Boston
I'm just speaking from experience of trying to convince people to get broadband. Most peoples experience of the internet in ireland is so limited they really think to themselves "why do i need to do it 10 times faster" But if people where in a situation where they are using the internet much more, then i can see it having a bigger effect.

But you're making the mistake of thinking that FRIACO is going to get them using it more than they currently use it.

If they weren't using it now because they were afraid of getting a phone bill for €100 at the end of the month, then FRIACO might make a difference. Ask them. That's not what's stopping them using the Internet. If anything, the "free" internet access that we have now is more likely to encourage the non-technical user online than any flat rate product that costs "real money" (over €10). How many people by €30 top-ups for their mobile phones, instead of €5/€10 top-ups?

pork99

Originally posted by LFCFan
Here's an example for those who haven't seen this masterful piece of software at work. Check out this image....So Called Browser Error

oh boy :eek:

Hornet

I agree with Dangger's opinion: Education is the biggest problem.

People don't use the Internet because they don't know what to use it for and what benefits they get. Parents are concerned about the dangers, companies are in panic over the reduced efficiency of their employees, Internet is in the last 1.5 years a synonym for Child Porn distribution, girl-friends and wives (not sexist, just an observation) are concerned about the luring women (and football sites) out there. [Ok, I admit the last point is not the biggest problem.]

Everybody talks about Broadband in Ireland, but hardly anybody knows what they are talking about. Don't get me wrong I am not talking about people on these boards. Most people on these boards are experienced Internet users who know what they want to use the Internet for and people who have a BIG bandwidth hunger.

But this is a tiny group among the Irish population.

Many people think if Eircom says it's Hi-Speed, then it is. They don't know the difference between 56 kbit/s or 128 kbit/s or 1 Mbit/s and in all honesty, WHY should they know it.

Sky sells them a service without challenging them with techno babble. More channels and other channels is what makes Sky often a winner over NTL. It is very often NOT the price comparison and it is NOT the delivery mechanism.

That's where we make a big mistake. Why should the less-experienced Internet user have to worry about ADSL vs Wireless vs ISDN vs FRIACO. We talk about technology and bandwidth and antennas and copper loops and fiber rings and have lost probably 90% of the population in Ireland in the first 3 minutes.

A staged approach is in my opinion necessary:

1) Educate people about the tangible advantages and life(style)-improving effects the Internet can have for them.

2) Reduce their fears by putting the dangers in perspective. (NO, you don't trip over Child Porn pictures everytime you connect to the Internet. No you don't get a Virus automatically. No, your are not automatically robbed off your credit card information.)

3) Give people a POSITIVE Internet experience. Let them use it at dial-up speeds. It is fast enough for the first few steps.

4) Now you can carefully introduce the concept of "slow" and "fast" or "expensive" and "cheap".

WE (all our fault) have with our discussion about Broadband and FRIACO caused a certain panic in less-experienced users. They think using the Internet is expensive and REALLY slow. It is for Power users, but not for the person who wants to send an E-Mail every now and then or occassionally book a Ryanair flight. I am digressing here, (and I am probably inviting another flame war), but in my opinion FRIACO is not necessary for the low-profile Internet user. It is only something for Power Users (who don't want FRIACO anymore, but something a lot faster). I see kids on the street typing SMS messages as if there would be no tomorrow. People are buying "Top-up" cards for their Pre-Paid mobiles like crazy. A Pre-Paid user pays (on Vodafone) up to 64 cent per minute!!!! And most Pre-Paid users don't even think about it! This would give you 64 minutes off-peak Internet access! BUT: Internet Access is perceived as expensive and it seems that a minute on the mobile is not seen like that!
I think Ardmore said it: FRIACO is NOT cheap for low-profile Internet users, it is expensive in comparison to dial-up. But the problem is that the public has a different perception.
[end digress]

5) After the user gets a bit more familiar with the Internet in general, he/she will look for a faster connection automatically. Now, the education has to introduce the differences whilel removing the technology hurdles. Who cares if Provider X is delivering the service over the air and Provider Y is delivering it over some (already available) copper pairs. The end user should not have to worry. Sell them "more channels" and they are happy to get the "dish" installed.

Someone used the high level of interest for information about Wireless ISPs on these boards as a proof that there is a high interest for broadband Internet access. This is a group of experts/gurus/freaks, naturally the interest is high. If it wouldn't be high here, the Wireless Operators would have no chance at all! But the low profile users will not be attracted by Wireless until they have used the Internet and know what to use it for.

Eircom has failed to promote Internet Access as a facility you HAVE to have. The stupid mouse won't convince anybody.

I know of (non-IT) trade fairs in other countries where they had Internet Corners, educating people about the use of the Internet. I know of free courses given by lobby groups about the use of the Internet. I know of schools inviting the parents to events where the advantages of the Internet where pointed out (and the dangers put in perspective). This is what we need in Ireland in the beginning.

Only when the Internet usage has reached the mass acceptance as it has in other countries, we can expect a mass request for the things (performance etc.) we freaks want.

IOFFL and everybody here can help in that educational process.

BTW: I do not agree that it is the government's role to promote the use of the Internet. It is the role of everybody who has a vested interest in education and personal improvement. Schools (private and public), universities, employers, FAS, IOFFL, Telcos should together with government and Enterprise Ireland and IDA work on this. I am aware that many of the mentioned organisations are fully or partialy financed by the government, but they all HAVE money. We have to stop demanding more millions and use the money that is there wisely. (My pet-hate is the waste for some of the Fiber Rings and I keep using Gweedore and Bandon as an example of the most ridiculous location for Fiber Rings. But the fiber rings would be an area where money could be taken away and diverted.)

Or should there be an Internet/Broadband day declared at a national level with the Dáil sitting for a session answering questions posed by various school pupils around the country over their school connections?

I would LOVE To be there and listen to the answers the TDs give to school pupils about Broadband. Apart from the fact that most TDs only care anyway about the school in their own backyard, their Internet awareness is appaling. Someone in the vincinity of Dermot Ahern told me recently, that Dermot Ahern is fully clued in and understands the issues well, he "even reads his e-mails himself and knows how to use the Internet". I thought: WOW, he's the man! But seriously, the civil servant who told me this was honestly amazed about it. Obviously most TDs do NOT know what to use the Internet for.

SkepticOne

Whilst agreeing with most of what Hornet has said, and that education is necessary, I believe that lack of basic flat rate has been one of the most damaging to internet usage (not just among the freaks). I believe that it (not lack of broadband) is the main reason that we in Ireland are lagging behind in internet usage compared to, say, the US. Note not penetration - there are plenty of people with PCs with a built in 56k modem and some sort of 'free' account.

Hard data is difficult to come by to support this, but I would maintain that people have been 'trained' financially to cut down their internet use to the extent that many only use it for essentials, for example, looking up match results, booking the occasional flight and email. Although they believe they have 'free' internet access, they are aware that if they spend any significant time reading articles, they will run up a large telephone bill.

They take this for granted and assume it is the only way. Nevertheless, when they are properly presented with flat-rate (not the abstract concept which they may well be skeptical of, but an actual product) they find will it attractive.

Unfortunately the main data supporting this (apart from the UK experience) is the broadband demand survey undertaken by MRBI last year which did not deal directly with flat rate dial-up. Nevertheless, certain things can be inferred from it.

Main points:

a) Pg 23 - main use of the internet is for information 48%. "quick and easy" - 8%.

b) Pg 29 - 37% fairly interested or greater in some form of unmetered package. Significantly a good proportion of these were potential internet users.

c) Pg 30 - Cost given as main point of attraction for unmetered packages for those interested.

It is important to remember here that this is in a country with no 'internet culture' to speak of and low internet usage overall and no advertising of flat rate, yet a signficant number are attracted to flat rate. I believe that with the intruduction of such services, advertising and the addition of word of mouth these figures can be improved upon. I would be very interested in a similar survey two years from the the introduction.

Quick remark about point a) above. I think this illustrates the difference between mobile phones and the internet. Mobile phones are 'quick and easy', the internet is for information. Comparisons between the two may be difficult for this reason.

As for pricing, none was gatherd for flat rate per se, however 40 euros (in line with the european average) seemed to be what people were prepared to pay for broadband. You would therefore have to go somewhat lower to attract people to flat rate. Obviously the lower the better. You still wouldn't get a lot of people who will never use the internet but you will get a significant minority and it will grow gradually over the course of a few years.

I'm not denying the importance of education, but I think that education in the current climate is very much an up-hill battle. I've always felt guilty about trying to get people to use the internet properly knowing that they will run up significant bills. Once you get rid of the clock-watching, however, everything changes. Then not only will external education become more valueable, but people will be more willing to learn themselves.

Unfortunately, people wanting flat rate won't in itself lead to flat rate. It has to be done through regulatory action. It depends on wholesale rates from the incumbent and there is no incentive for the incumbent to supply it. That is why IOFFL have had to lobby at that level, however once it is in place, a lot of the disincentive for the incumbent for providing broadband goes (this also depends on the price).

I've made certain leaps here, but I don't think it is unreasonable to say that internet usage (increased time spent on line by more people) will increase through flat rate dial-up and that out of this demand for broadband will increase.

It is interesting in that report as well that demand for broadband peaks at 40 euros which is now becoming the norm in Europe and elsewhere. There seems to be several times the demand at this level than at 60 euros.

Anyway that is why - without putting down education and awareness - 'supply' in one form or another remains the core issue for the moment.

El_MUERkO

II hear it from wireless operators who have reasonably priced offerings in residential areas but poor take up. Can this be just attributed to poor marketing on their side?

I understand operators like leap and irish broadband are small companies so they cant do massive marketing campaigns but I havent seen 1 pop up, one add or any form of marketing from them. I heard of both companies on this forum.

The last time I contacted either of them was before christmas, if they've made access to there products available in my area I havent heard about it.

I understand they are aiming for commercial rather than residential customers but I think everyones lossing out because of there underexposure (is that a word?).