UTVi Friaco feedback

Scott Taunton

This seems like an ideal opportunity to pose some questions to you in order to assist us with the development of the product specification for our new Flat Rate offering. It is not our intention to maintain the existing limit of 150 hours on the product going forward but we need to work within the commercial reality that FRIACO is not an ‘always on’ product and cannot be operated as such. The difficulty we therefore face is how do we put in place sensible limits which prevent use of the service in an ‘always on’ fashion but allow the vast majority of users the ability to access the service as and when they need.

One option used widely is that of cutting users off once they exceed a certain level of use in a given month. Typically this limit is not advertised and the first that users are aware of such a limit is upon receipt of a letter or email from the ISP. They may then be prevented from accessing the service for the remainder of the month, or indeed be asked to seek another service from an alternative provider. The main benefit to an ISP in going down this route is that it gives them a fluid limit at which particularly heavy users can be cut off and allows advertising of the service as a true Flat Rate offering as there are no per minute charges and no qualified limit at which the service will not work.

Another option is to charge in a similar fashion to our current UTVip off peak flat rate service in which we advertise up-front a limit to the number of hours which can be used in a month, beyond which per minute charges apply. On a 24/7 service, we would anticipate that this limit may be in the region of 250-300 hours per month with the possibility of per minute charges of around 1c per minute thereafter. Obviously a service of this type would meet the needs of 99.9% of customers but may raise questions in terms of our advertising, as to whether the service is truly flat rate. Within the UK the BT Surftime Anytime service operates in this manner with a limit of 150 hours per month, beyond which call charges apply.

A variant of this type of limit may be to restrict the number of hours in a given day that a user can access a given service rather than as a monthly total eg a 10 hour daily limit as opposed to a 250 hour monthly limit.

We are not fixed on the final product offering and want to be as upfront as we can about the issues that we face in putting forward a commercially viable product.

With that in mind your views would be greatly appreciated and will help to model the new service at the time of launch.

Kind regards


Scott Taunton
Managing Director
UTV Internet

gandalf

Scott,

Personally I prefer the up front approach of saying the limit is 250-300 Hours a month and per minute billing when you exceed that.

Maybe you could have a cheaper 100 hour option for lighter users as well.

Gandalf.

BoneCollector

10 hrs a day seems most resonable, however a question would be.. if someone took this litteraly, this would work out at around 300 hours a month, is UTV ip able to cope with anyone that Would! stay on 10 hrs or would there be a cut off limit for continious usage like say 2hrs continious. (i point this out as an extreem since im sure some people will take this literaly)

Although i feel restraint and fair use would have to come in here, i myself have always felt 150 was quite sufficiant even if it was to run a business on an always on service

since buisiness is run 8hrs a day but take away 2hr for breaks lunch etc... thats 6 hrs multibly by31 days but take a way 8 for week ends is 24 x6 = less than 150hrs of usage

Idle time of about 10 mins when no trafic is passing through before cutoff etc...

Realisticaly i dont think people, at least from a consumer point of view need always on as they think they would (on dialup),
Anyway, what are the chances your going to be using bandwidth 24hrs of the day unless you never sleep or turn your pc off and are a big major business in which case you realy should be getting broadband.

the other question regarding 10hrs per day.. if someone is using it for downloading from say 6pm to after midnight..
they most likely use 6hrs and now after midnight have another 10hrs to use, again i ask can utv handle this capicity or should you be imposing further restrictions.

Im poping these quiestions out just to see if you have thought of these already..
anyway thanks for any feed back.

Mr_Man

Scott,

as a current user of UTVip these are my views on the options outlined in your mail.

Option 1 - Cutting the user off - this seems to be too draconian and could cause a lot of problems for user, especially if they needed the access for work etc. A modification might be three strikes and you are out.

Option 2 - Problems with advertising aside I would favour this option if the initial limit was in the range specified. As you rightly point out this would cover most users and those who need more could pay for it.

Option 3 - a daily limit is much less flexible than having a pool you can draw from in busy periods, and not draw from when its not so busy.

Your willingness to consult with the users and potential users of the system is appreciated.

Please also bear in mind those of us who have ISDN and currently can only use one channel with UTVip. I'd really like to get the full 128k out of the connection when needed,

M.

SkepticOne

What I would like is the "Freeserve" model. Here, no limits are advertised up front, but the price is kept down to attract not only heavy users but a very large number of light users - thus the amount of time to go around per user is large. This affords the most flexibility for both the user and the ISP. Freeserve in the UK attracts a lot of people who might only use the service for about 10-15 hours a month but who are attracted by the ability to use more without phone bills. This leaves plenty of time for those who use it significantly more.

If we go for a tiered model here - with prices charged for 30, 50, 70, 150 up to even as high as 200 hours a month, what will happen is that the 200 hours a month will end up very expensive since this will only attract extreme users. What these users really want is broadband, but by trying to cater to them on the PSTN system for which it is not suitable, the ISP loses the ability to advertise flat rate for the large mass of lighter users.

So I see the freeserve (non-tiered) model being the most successful here both from a commercial and social point of view. According to the MRBI survey commissioned by ComReg, over 30% of the population are attracted to non-metered internet access. This figure would be likely to rise once the actual products by the ISPs are out there. In the UK about 60% of the population use such services and metering has ceased to be a big issue there.

Paddy20

I have to agree with *SkepticOne,

A cheap as possible flat-rate service package based on the "Freeserve" proven model has to be the way too go!.

As a UTVip user who felt aggrieved paying for the 150 hours off-peak package. Which I found I was not utilising to the stated limit, yet I had to pay for the privilege that I might use it.

I had to change to the UTVip Lite package, at €10.99c per month for 30 off peak hours and this suits both my internet online requirements and [Most importantly] my personal budget!!.

Yours,

Paddy20.;)

Moriarty

I would echo SkepticOnes thoughts.

I would also agree with the earlier idea of a "Three strikes and your out" policy with relation to warning excessive users before booting them off the service.

SkepticOne

Originally posted by Paddy20
I had to change to the UTVip Lite package, at €10.99c per month for 30 off peak hours and this suits both my internet online requirements and [Most importantly] my personal budget!!.

The attraction of a relavively cheap flat rate product would be that there would not be pressure on light users to use up some time allocation but the flexibility would be there for people to vary their time online without worry.

I can understand the problem some people might have with potentially being cut off from the service. I'm sure UTV themselves are concerned about people protesting on this forum.

The important thing to remember here is that the vast majority of users will never have to worry about such an occurrance. Those of us who are heavy users will need to be aware that, if they take up the service, they are being granted access to a shared but limited resource of time on Eircom's PSTN system. If a service was designed to specifically cater to heavy users then potentially it could cost a lot more than broadband. The only reason flat rate services (e.g. in the UK) are cheap is because they attract a lot of relatively light users (the vast majority).

So what needs to be encouraged here is an ethos of responsible use. Just because you are given access to a shared resource does not mean that you can grab all of it. Downloads of service packs, etc, should occur at night to prevent ports being taken up during peak evening time - that sort of thing. UTV should be able to take this sort of thing into account.

What UTV can be up front about is that what they are offering is not 'no limits'. There will always be limits to the amount of time to go around. What would be unfortunate, imho, is if they are forced to state in public because that would force them into a tiered system which is essentially metered access by another name. The other thing is that they would not be able to vary this criteria according to usage levels. Less flexibility for them translates into less flexibility for us.

Supercell

I think cutting ppl off SNL style would be a VERY bad idea, maybe a 2-3 strikes rule, a warning letter first and then cutt off...being cut off precursed by a warning emil /letter would be acceptable to me. (still smarting from SNL)

dahamsta

In the UK about 60% of the population use such services and metering has ceased to be a big issue there.

This is indisputable, but it has to be remembered that not only is DSL rollout far more advanced over there, a large proportion of users also have the option of cable. The lack of an alternative last-mile solution for broadband provision in Ireland plays into the hands of the incumbent and makes the possibility of incredibly slow broadband rollouts very tangible. (Unless the Commission or Government steps in of course, but that seems unlikely as of now.)

I don't deny that there will be heavy users abusing the system, but there will also be heavy users that will want to pay to use the network as they see fit. The Freeserve model /as is/ doesn't support those users. Obviously UTV could make the choice to go mass market, but personally I think there's a lot to be said for finding a way of catering to heavy users like most of us here. We are, after all, their biggest cheerleaders.

This is only one aspect of my argument for tiered services. I'll be back with more later.

adam

sunbeam

Well if there was going to be a limit beyond which I would be cut off I'd certainly wan't to know about it!

I frequently use around 200 hours on UTVip and am quite happy to pay for the extra time I use. As I connect at an average speed of 16.8k certain things like downloads simply take a long time to complete. It will be a very long time until broadband is available where I live in rural Ireland so that's not an option. I really don't need 'always on' 24/7 access though and couldn't ever see myself exceeding 10 hours per day!

SkepticOne

Originally posted by dahamsta

This is only one aspect of my argument for tiered services. I'll be back with more later.

Yes, but we already have tiered services (currently off-peak) and UTV have said that once FRIACO is available, the distinction between off peak and on peak will go.

What I'm talking about is a new service that will be priced to attract light users but will have the flexibility for heavy use. There would be a large variation of usage on such a service as there is with Freeserve in the UK.

Anyway, looking forward to the rest of your argument.

dahamsta

That's kind of what I meant Mike. Anyway, I'm still thinking about this, I'll be back later.

adam

SkepticOne

Originally posted by dahamsta
That's kind of what I meant Mike. Anyway, I'm still thinking about this, I'll be back later.

Looking forward to that.

Eurorunner

We're being played like mugs here ....every day of the week. They keep on brainwashing us with the same **** and sad to say it does stick? What am i ranting on about?

I just returned from living in Germany. When i arrived in Germany three years ago, i had flatrate dialup for next to nothing after a simple 4-5 minute phone call.

How long have they had free or inexpensive dialup in the States?


Now they will tell you (and keep telling u) that ireland is a small country - costs of services have to be higher......theres SOME truth generally in this statement but not in the case of dialup - NO WAY!

When are we going to get rid of the shackles in this country?


As for broadband, well im out in the sticks....how long will i have to wait - another 10 years - or just till its superceded.


How do we organise ourselves to not get screwed at every turn??

Please, please tell me cos i'm motivated and mad enough to do it ...just point me in the right direction!!

Dustaz

This really is a good thread and a real chance to have some input into future FRIACO offerings in this country.

Can i just ask that all questions re Broadband are kept out of it? Ask on any of the UTV Broadband threads which im sure Scott reads. Please dont drag this thread off topic.

Falkorre

Originally posted by Scott Taunton
A variant of this type of limit may be to restrict the number of hours in a given day that a user can access a given service rather than as a monthly total eg a 10 hour daily limit as opposed to a 250 hour monthly limit.
Kind regards, Scott Taunton
Managing Director
UTV Internet

Scott,
Personally *I* think this is definitely the most aggreeable and attractive of the listed options. If I were offered say 11 or even 10 hours per day for a flat monthly rate I would sign up immediately. There is, IMHO, no real way for any ISP in this country to run 24/7 unlimited dialup net access as long as eircon are still allowed to do what they do.

The other options u listed, IMHO are'nt as attractive from a customers perspective, whether or not they add up to the same amount of hours is imho irrelevant.
As a interest consumer, I would sign up a lot quicker if somone said to me "you can have 10 hours a day for €insert realistic sum" as opposed to "You get 250 hours a month for €" "" "" ""."

Maybe its just me, or my inability to see that 250 hours a month actually *is* 8.3 hours per week lol ;0) but the above package certainly would sound better to me

B

PiE

The thing about "10hrs per day" limit is, as said, can be detrimental to people who may need to use the net in large chunks rather than spaced 10hrs a day (which is alot for mosy users, I must admit).

I gotta agree with what SkepticOne has said about the Freeserve model. In my opinion it would work very well here, especially if the current UTV users recommend it to our friends and family... which I'm sure most of us will.

tomk

Originally posted by Dustaz
This really is a good thread and a real chance to have some input into future FRIACO offerings in this country.

Can i just ask that all questions re Broadband are kept out of it? Ask on any of the UTV Broadband threads which im sure Scott reads. Please dont drag this thread off topic.

Apologies, Dustaz. The original topic was Scott's SR interview, in which he mentioned both FRIACO and BB possibilities.

bk

Originally posted by tomk
Apologies, Dustaz. The original topic was Scott's SR interview, in which he mentioned both FRIACO and BB possibilities.

Yes, maybe this thread should be split, from Scotts post on and given a new Topic subject ("UTVi FRIACO Options" maybe).

This would also give it better visibility on the boards.

Dustaz

Tomk, your right, id forgotten that

Good idea bk - thread split.

Keep it on topic

shinzon

If your going to offer a friaco product, please do not offer your telephony package as part and parcel of signing up for it, that was the only thing preventing me from moving to you in the first place


Regards

Shin

El_MUERkO

If your going to offer a friaco product, please do not offer your telephony package as part and parcel of signing up for it, that was the only thing preventing me from moving to you in the first place

UTV's telephony service is really good and it saves you a bunch of money, also I owe them loads of money and they havent threatened to break my knees like eircom

Valentia

My preference would be for the "unlimited" service with heavy users getting the boot after a warning.

Failing that the 250-300 hour option, but I wouldn't be keen on the 10 hour limit. I have occassionally needed to go over this limit.

All in all though I am looking forward to the launch.

BTW any chance of a two line ISDN package?

Nuphor

If your going to offer a friaco product, please do not offer your telephony package as part and parcel of signing up for it, that was the only thing preventing me from moving to you in the first place

I concur. While most users want cheaper calls too, I'd really like the option of opting out. I don't own the phone line, and the people who do wouldn't be mad about changing.

Valentia's (and probably someone elses) suggestion to hit abusers with a warning seems like a viable option.

Moriarty

Originally posted by Valentia
BTW any chance of a two line ISDN package?

T'would be nice..

LCaff

Good thread this...

I hope it is not too late for my suggestions...

I am a teleworker with an 128k ISDN line. I typically work more than 100 hours per month from home.

In spite of this I wouldn't describe myself as a heavy user. Heavy time wise, but mainly doing e-mails, connected to a remote database, doing development work, no major amount of traffic - just need to be connected.

When I need 128, I want 128, this would only be occasionally.

I looked at the BT/Esat offering and found it was too fiddly for me. Different number in the evening for the flat-rate. Most of my work is done during the daytime.

I would be interested to see how any of your products would suit me.

Liam

mike65

I think charging per minute after the 250-300 hrs per month is up
is the most fair way foward, you dont loose the service but if greedy you pay for the extra.

Mike.

Dotsie~tmp

Firstly the idea of kicking users for using your product to its fullest extent is ludicrous. Much bad will was creted for Esat when they did it to us and i made it clear to them that they would have no more of my business and could whistle for they money i owed them.

Second why are lite users dictating what heavy users should get. Heavy users are not some sort of parasite sucking the service dry they just have different needs. Why then dont you expand your current scaled system and have a cheap lite option for say €15 then €30 - €40 for 300 hrs for intermediate and some uppedr scale for the extremely heavy users (a stop gap most likely for people waiting on broadband and will probably get it off you). After these limits are crossed just go to perminute as before. Its obvious that a one option fits all satisfies only the ones who fit in the middle of the two extremes.

For my own personal preference id be intermediate and think 300 hrs (bout 10 a day) would be ideal as i see my account use going from 150 to bout 220 soon. Btw if there is a new say 300 hrs option will we still be able to get it for the same price if u signed up since the start and upgrade? Please dont leave the limit at 150 though.

rymus

I'm a UTV 150 hours user at the moment with a very erratic usage pattern. Some days I'll only go on for 10 mins to check my email, other days I could be on from 6pm to 3am. Id much rather see an increased limit 250-300 hours per month instead of a daily limit of approx 10 hours.

If anything my usage pattern will only become more erratic when I can connect any time of the day so for me at least a daily limit would be a disaster.

morgana

Like many others, I would prefer a reasonably priced flat rate product with the proviso that heavy users can be cut off after a warning. As I am working from home, flat rate day time access will be a major boost and change my working habits considerably (no more waiting for 6 o'clock for more time-consuming research). From a marketing point of view this would most probably the most attractive option too - maybe with, like the banks do, "Terms & Conditions apply" rattled off at the end.
Failing that, I'd be very happy with a 250/300 hour limit, with anything over the limit being charged at the mormal local rate like now.

The 10h/day model doesn't appeal to me as Internet use may more erratic, also it can be harder to track if you are not connected for the entire stretch (not all timers let you set a daily limit).
Anything will be an improvement over what we have now, and I for one, can't wait.

Cheers

aidan_dunne

My vote goes to:

300 hours per month, go over that and you get charged per minute. Seems the fairest option to me.

Oh, and as shinzon and Nuphor suggested, make it a seperate thing from the whole phone package. Not everybody living in a house/flat actually owns the line and would be willing or able to change their home phone provider.

Neil_Sedaka

Originally posted by aidan_dunne
My vote goes to:

300 hours per month, go over that and you get charged per minute. Seems the fairest option to me.

I agree!

Rags

I second that, seems like the fairest option to me

BigEejit

10 hours a day limit sounds very good to me ... and like others have said, dont bundle it with a voice calls ... I definitely will not go with it if its bundled with something that I dont want

bk

It might be handy if the mods created a poll for this, just so Scott can easily see what the majority prefer.

Maybe:
1) 250 - 300 hours a month with per minute billing after that.
2) 10 hours a day
3) No limit, but posibility of heavy users getting a warning and then disconnection for continued abuse.

Personally I'm in favour of the 250 -300 hour option, I believe it is the most balanced and fair option.

I really don't like the 10 hour a day option, it is just too inflexible.

One thing Scott needs to be wary of, many Joe Soap users say they like the idea of FRIACO, because there isn't any limit and that they don't have to clock watch. Many of these people mightn't like the idea of the 250 -300 hour option or the 10 hour option for this reason.

Even though they will probably never come near these limits it is just the idea they don't like. If Esat or others launch their service as a nolimits service (however we all know the reality, they will probably kick off heavy users), you might lose customers to them who don't know reality of such services.

bk

Also Scott, if it is possible in anyway, I would like to see the continuation of some form of cheaper Off Peak packages.

Many Joe Soap users don't need on peak access as they are at work or school during the day. Something like your current off-peak packages only cheaper would be really good for these sort of users.

Also it would be nice if you made it easy for people to change between packages, I could imagine many students wanting the 24/7 package during the summer and then wanting to switch back to an off-peak package during the college/school year.

As others have said it would also be nice if you could get the service seperate from your telephone service. Maybe you could sell it by giving a further reduction or increased hours or something to people who do decide to take up your phone service.

Maybe something like EUR X if you take up the service with your telephone service and EUR X + EUR 5 for people who want it seperate.

Finally the ability to use dual channel ISDN would be nice, if you go for the 250 - 300 hour option, then maybe dual channel ISDN use could be charged equivalent to 2 hours.

Slutmonkey57b

There are valid issues with all of the options, however what is most important to me (and I suspect a lot of people who switched to UTV) is the company ethos. UTVip is the ONLY telecoms company that has not systematically lied to, ripped off, and abused its customers. Switching is as much about the improved customer service as anything. Actually it's probably the only company in the entire country that behaves like this.

The freeserve model is useful from an organisational and marketing point of view but is complicated to codify and, most importantly, has no transparancy for the consumer. Freeserve is the biggest ISP because it was one of the first flatrate options, and was flogged wholesale by Dixons. A lot of consumers don't like the company though, and certainly don't trust its decisions in respect to booting service. It would be very difficult for potential bootees to monitor their "abuse" of the system and modify their behaviour accordingly.

I would support the monthly limit - it's in keeping with what the customer expects - open, transparant and useful. A daily limit is more of a crimp on user's behaviour, and I for one as a moderate user have never come close to using 150hrs, never mind 300.

Originally posted by SkepticOne
So what needs to be encouraged here is an ethos of responsible use. Just because you are given access to a shared resource does not mean that you can grab all of it. Downloads of service packs, etc, should occur at night to prevent ports being taken up during peak evening time - that sort of thing. UTV should be able to take this sort of thing into account.

Speaking as a previous SNL user I think we can write that idea off altogether. Heavy users by definition are not interested in responsible use, they are interested in slurping as much rubbish as they can 24 hours a day. Let them know where they stand and they'll be fine with this. Leave them open to some "arbitrary" decision making process whereby they get booted (and you can be sure they'll be both vocal and influential - and they'll all have a friend who is on 24/7 and hasn't been booted) and they'll go mental. To someone who plans on downloading *ahem* service packs (cracked gamez) or *ahem* internet radio (illegal mp3s) any flatrate option is a saving on PSTN and they'll jump at it.

SkepticOne

Originally posted by Slutmonkey57b
Speaking as a previous SNL user I think we can write that idea off altogether. Heavy users by definition are not interested in responsible use, they are interested in slurping as much rubbish as they can 24 hours a day. Let them know where they stand and they'll be fine with this. Leave them open to some "arbitrary" decision making process whereby they get booted (and you can be sure they'll be both vocal and influential - and they'll all have a friend who is on 24/7 and hasn't been booted) and they'll go mental. To someone who plans on downloading *ahem* service packs (cracked gamez) or *ahem* internet radio (illegal mp3s) any flatrate option is a saving on PSTN and they'll jump at it.

That's essentially also the argument in favour of caps on broadband services where the resource being shared out being bandwidth as opposed to time. Indeed we've seen examples of people downloading 2 gigs a day on broadband. Ultimately it is down to the ISP to deal with those who use the network to the extent that others' use of the network is degraded. Otherwise you are left with the need to cap the downloads and charge for the amount downloaded thereafter.

fabien

true flat rate or 300 hours gets my vote, but only if UTVi can support 128k isdn...please!

Synkronite

I agree with the majority sentiment..

..No daily limit
..Reasonable limit of 250-300hrs
..Kick abusers OFF!
..Dont worry about backlash (You have loyalty)
..Include a 'lite' package say 50hrs, 100hrs, etc for starters (should help to get many average people who are looking into the internet and just recently bought a computer)
..Chance to use 128Kbps dual-channel (even if it means double subscription.. eh? )

DonegalMan

Originally posted by Dotsie~tmp
Firstly the idea of kicking users for using your product to its fullest extent is ludicrous.

Not if the limits on use of the product are clearly stated in advance - most heavy users should be well aware by now that FRIACO is not an 'always on' product.

Much bad will was creted for Esat when they did it to us

The bad will was mostly because of the manner in which Esat did this:

1. They never gave any indication that there was a specific limit on the service
2. They never gave individuals any warning that they were in excess of that limit
3. Cutting off 1800 users in one foul swoop was a rather crude way of implementing the new policy.

I would be happy with an overall limit of 250-300 hours per month with the facility to go over this when required, but pay for the extra rather than being cut off. One variation on this - I don't know if this is technically viable - is for the time of access to be taken into account; for example a 6 hour download from 1:00 a.m. to 7:00 a.m. IMO should be regarded as more restrained use than someone sitting on continuously for 6 hours during peak time.

Like many other users who have no prospect of Broadband, I would be wiiling to pay for double package to get 2 ISDN lines combined, hope this turns out to be possible.

Martin Harran

flamegrill

I've been using UTVip since it was released back in september.
My monthy average as been around 148 hours, and only last month i went over the 150 hours for the first time.

My usage patterns are generally fairly constant. Come home in the evenings and work online from around 6pm ish to between 2 and 4am depending on how much I've got to do.

Havinig between 200 and 300 hours a month won't make a huge difference to me, but it will mean I can carry on doing as i was and not clock watch, thats the single most annoying factor of internet access via dialup, having to watch the time you spend online.

So what i'd like is 200-300 hours with a per minute charge, an off peak realitive one, after the limit which is charged no matter what time of day it is, as with FRAICO we all know there is no difference to yourselves weather we are on during the day or nite.


Thanks,

Paul

The Clown Man

Would Dustaz or sceptre feel brave enough to maybe take all the possibilities mentioned thus far and put them to poll?

It should prove more useful to the UTVip research.

Maybe a sticky might get the opinions of most of the browsers.


And I personally think that a combination of some of the options would be the best way.

Users that seriously exceed a limit of usage, like the 10 hour per day limit, in one month would be given a warning or two and then booted. Although I think that there should be a certain amount of lenience - for example, a person that uses the service for 24 hours maybe 3 days of a month and then uses it nominally otherwise should be overlooked.

Of course, warning of the possibility of overuse should be expressly given to any potential customers. And it would avoid the No-Limits syndrome.

Fergus

There is an ISP somewhere in the US that provides completely free flat-rate dial-up to the local community. The main way they stopped abuse was that they have on their home page a thing that shows the status of their modem banks, and the names of users that are 'hogging' lines, if any.

De Rebel

Originally posted by Fergus
There is an ISP somewhere in the US that provides completely free flat-rate dial-up to the local community. The main way they stopped abuse was that they have on their home page a thing that shows the status of their modem banks, and the names of users that are 'hogging' lines, if any.

Which of course we would turn on its head and immediatly start a competition to see who could get his name on the list and keep it there for the longest time....