With pricing approximately equal and bandwidth proposals basically the same, some differences between UBB and other ISP’s are manifested in the following areas:
Utah Broadband – One client reported, “From the first day we met with Utah Broadband to the present time, their communication was consistent and they proactively offered proposals to improve our network.”
“Other ISP” – The same client reported, “Communications were inconsistent, inaccurate or inapplicable. These communications included but were not limited to: answers to residents’ issues, capabilities of the current network equipment, reasons for existing network problems, support escalation paths and the ability and willingness of ‘Other ISP’ to provide the HOA Board with network utilization reports. Additionally, proposals to improve our network required solicitation and guidance from the HOA Board and the proposals were lacking in strategy, design and accountability.”
Utah Broadband – Research indicates an excellent customer service rating. HOA’s and property management companies have verified fewer reported issues from Utah Broadband’s service versus “Other ISP” services.
“Other ISP” – An HOA President reported, “When we met with them (Other ISP), their technical team explained that they could provide the HOA Board with elegant graphs, charts and reports of network bandwidth utilization. When asked by the HOA Board to produce a bandwidth utilization report, the ‘Other ISP’ indicated they did not want to provide the report because they felt it would give competing Internet service providers some sort of advantage.”
“Additionally, a number of customer service complaints were raised from our residents, including issues relating to Xbox, VoIP, etc. The response from the ‘Other ISP’ referred to their inability to manage the network without newer network equipment, challenges with bandwidth utilization and challenges with VoIP service, but the response did not address the specific residents' issue. Even after a follow-up inquiry from the HOA Board regarding the specific issues, the response from ‘Other ISP’ restated general network and VoIP challenges, but did not address the specific issue.”
Utah Broadband – One community indicated, “Utah Broadband immediately recognized our current problems with our contention-based network and proposed a strategy for implementing a managed network.”
“Other ISP” – They further reported, “After specifically soliciting a proposal for a network management plan, ‘Other ISP’ proposed each resident purchase their own personal router/firewall, thereby placing the major onus for security on the residents.”
Quality of Service (QoS)
QoS refers to managing the quality of services running on the network. One of these services is Voice over IP (VoIP) phone service, which is used by a number of one particular client’s residents.
Utah Broadband – They stated, “UBB proposed a strategy for managing any and all of the different VoIP services our tenants were using on the network.”
“Other ISP” – “On the other hand, ‘Other ISP’ proposed a strategy for managing only their VoIP phone service, with no guarantee for VoIP services from other providers.”