So £11 p/m cheaper for the first year, and after that you could switch provider (
). You don't mention what KC's download limit is either at that price. Virgin is unlimited (although I suspect there may be a fair usage policy attached to that) while KC is limited to 70GB. That might seem a lot to those of us on cable, but at 50Mbps you [ucould[/u use that up in just over 3 hours.
But neither are available to me, so I instead have to look at the value of what is available. At £32 a month for slow cable and a 35GB limit (still 50p p/m more expensive than Virgin incidentally), I was not getting good value. There is an article in the mail today stating that an equivalent service can be had for £19 - £20 p/m.
It is undeniable also that Hull has been left behind in terms of broadband. As the sole provider in the area, the blame for that lands squarely at KC's door. Although I will admit that things might be a little better if Offcom weren't such a waste of space.
On a sidenote, maybe KC should have used the sponsorship money from a certain rival clubs stadium to instead provide that service to people or reduce their prices. Why spend such vast amounts on advertising when most people can't get the service being advertised, and for those that can, you have no competitors?
'"
