John Linton
As the number of ADSL2 exchanges that have one or more provider's ADSL2 capable DSLAMs in them an interesting scenario has begun to arise - that is the fact that some providers have begun to move their ADSL1 customers on to their own DSLAMs thus preventing any easy migration for those customers to another provider and this is being done without the knowledge of the customers concerned.
I have only become aware of this because a growing number of customers of these providers are being rejected when they attempt to churn away from their current ADSL1 provider (and not unnaturally assumed that as they joined under the 'fast churn' process they could transfer to another ISP using the same 'fast churn' process). They initially get very angry with Exetel because we tell them that their current provider is no longer part of the churn process and, having checked with their current provider who denies all knowledge of any change of status calls Exetel back and again abuses our incompetence. Eventually the person attempting to 'churn' realizes that their provider has mislead them and we aren't to blame.
I'm sure that the providers concerned will attempt to browbeat those unhappy customers who now, without their knowledge or permission, have been locked in to their ADSL supplier by saying 'read the terms and conditions' or whatever. However the fact remains that the customer has been mislead and has been purposely mislead by the provider making a change to the service provided that seriously disadvantages the end customer without giving the customer prior notice that included the ability to move to another provider of ADSL1 services before becoming locked in.
I checked on the web site of the ISP whose customers have complained the most to Exetel about our 'refusal' to churn them and that ISP's web site still proudly states that "fast churn is available" ( it just doesn't say it's only available on the way in - after you've been conned in to churning the metaphorical door is slammed shut and they throw away the key). It seems a customer of that ISP who has been locked in without their permission has a very good case for suing them for damages and exposing them for what they obviously are.
Yet another example of the lack of ethics, morals and any other expected characteristics of too many people in the communications industry in Australia at this time.
Of course Telstra (who else) is to blame for this piece of chicanery on the part of the unscrupulous ISPs who indulge in these unethical practices. Not that Telstra has acted in any way unethically or in any way other than totally correctly as they and their lawyers and any other impartial commentator would see the situation. But what they have done is charge so much money for a 256/64kbps connection (both to activate it and then in monthly 'port' charges) that ANY small DSLAM deployer can deliver an ADSL2 service to an end user for a fraction of what Telstra Wholesale is charging for the very lowest speed ADSL1 service.
You can see that it would be in ANY ISP's interests to move its out of contract ADSL1 customers on to their own infrastructure asap as it saves them between $40.00 a month and $8.00 a month per customer (depending on ADSL1 speed). The problem in doing that is that the customer loses the fast churn ability (ADSL1 to ADSL1) and the 'no downtime', usually free transfer, ability from ADSL1 to ADSL2 using ULL.
At this moment, Exetel has between 19,000 and 13,000 ADSL1 customers on ADSL2 enabled exchanges (depending on which future ADSL2 provider we choose to use) and it's inevitable that, once we make a decision on which ADSL2 provider we will use from July 1st (and yes, we still haven't made a final decision), there is little doubt that, given the choice, a pretty substantial number of those ADSL1 customers would move to an ADSL2 DSLAM if we reduced their ADSL1 plan price (which as there is a significant cost saving to us we could easily do).
So, we could give them the choice of the same plan at a lower cost (256 - $7.00, 512 - $12.00, 1500 - $19.00, 8192 - $35.00) or the same plan at ADSL2 speeds - It wouldn't be the hardest 'sell' in the world and the only downside is that they would have to wait and see whether a ULL to ULL or ULL - SSS 'fast churn becomes available - and there is no technical reason why it shouldn't.
Of course, Exetel would notify the customers on the basis they had a choice of whether they wanted to transfer to either of the two ADSL2 options or remain on their 'fast churnable' ADSL1 service.