Disappointing Service

  • 1
  • Problem
  • Updated 5 months ago
  • Acknowledged
I know it won't make a difference, but this is the email I sent to ViaSat this morning. Just needed to get my thoughts out there...

Just need to rant about the terrible service I've had in my first month with ViaSat. I understand that when I signed up I was told my speeds would "slow down" once I hit my data limit. "Slow down" is an understatement. Once I hit my 100MB my connection was non-existent. I need internet for work and not being able to get online presents a real problem for me. When I called in to customer service they basically just said, "too bad, so sad" and were actually quite rude about it. They thing I don't get is why would you want to piss off your customers like this? Services like DirectTV and DISH don't slow down their signals for their TV services based on how much TV their customers watch, I can't think of any logical reason for ViaSat to do it. It seems stupid to charge so much for a service that rarely works. What's even stranger is that the competition is coming for you. Right now the satellite providers have rural communities held hostage as they are the only options in some areas, but that's going to change. With options like AT&Ts AirGig on the horizon in the near future, companies like ViaSat and HughesNet are destined to become dinosaurs if they don't adapt and get away from these predatory practices... and maybe that's the plan. Make some quick money off people and then get out, close up shop when they are no longer a viable alternative, which is unfortunate. They have an opportunity to foster good will in these communities now and thereby establish a loyal customer base. All they have to do is offer a consistent, reliable service (which they obviously can do as the service works passably well until we hit these arbitrary data limits) and most of us would be customers for life rather than looking  for the way to "abandon ship" as soon as is humanly possible. So, anyway, just my thoughts. I was looking forward to a good, long term relationship with ViaSat and it's disappointing to find out so early on that that is not going to be my experience with the company.
Photo of Angie Riemersma

Angie Riemersma

  • 3 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like

Posted 5 months ago

  • 1
Photo of Will Seemore

Will Seemore

  • 386 Posts
  • 125 Reply Likes
Seriously? You need to read around on this site a bit. If your speeds were fine until going over your data cap that is on you, not Viasat. Once over your data cap all bets are off. I am assuming you have a 100 GB plan, not 100 MB? If you need the plan for work, what did you do to go over 100 GB before a month was over. I am guessing it wasn't work related. For the record I am an ex Viasat user and the service was terrible for me. I rarely side against a Viasat customer, but you are out of line, big time.
Photo of Angie Riemersma

Angie Riemersma

  • 3 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Not that it's any of your business, but I'm an indie film producer and editor. My point was that there is no reason for the data caps. Thx for your informed reply.
Photo of Will Seemore

Will Seemore

  • 386 Posts
  • 125 Reply Likes
There is a reason for the data caps, satellite beams can only handle so much traffic. If you need to burn all that data for work and then some it looks like satellite internet isn't a good choice for you. If that is the only option and you can't figure out a way to conserve, looks like you either move if you have to work from home or go rent an office where they have hardwired high speed internet.
Photo of Angie Riemersma

Angie Riemersma

  • 3 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
"satellite beams can only handle so much traffic" HAHAHAHAHA!!!
Tell that to DISH and DirectTV. I've used both of these services in the past and aside from the occasional issue during bad weather the services were great. I guarantee you people watching movies and TV shows on these services are generating way more "satellite beam traffic" than me (or anyone else) that are using said beams to connect to the internet.
Photo of ExSatUser

ExSatUser

  • 1174 Posts
  • 727 Reply Likes
I hate to tell you, but you are 100% wrong. Dish and DirecTV are broadcasting a set number of channels across the country. This is minimal to the amount of traffic satellite internet generates where each individual as a different set of data streaming to them. We are talking 10's of thousands of different streams at any one time compared to a few 100.

Before you laugh at another poster, you might want to have a basic understanding of how satellite internet works and is completely different from satellite TV.
Photo of fmj77

fmj77

  • 893 Posts
  • 536 Reply Likes
Angie, you can't compare satellite TV to satellite internet. They are two totally different technologies.
Photo of lowkey

lowkey

  • 12 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Part of what you said was right until the Direct tv stuff but it is horse crap about there being too much traffic. You have people with 1mbps then people with 100 that’s not traffic but throttling.
Photo of GabeU

GabeU, Champion

  • 2106 Posts
  • 1274 Reply Likes
What "seems stupid" is comparing satellite TV to satellite internet.  A one way system specifically designed to do a single, constant thing, which is provide TV, versus a two way system designed to provide internet, which does numerous things.  That's like comparing a toaster to an entire kitchen. 

It also reminds me of people who compare standalone gaming consoles to computers when it comes to gaming.  Consoles are designed, from the start, to do ONE thing, and that's play games.  Computers, OTOH, are designed to do numerous things.  PC games are designed to work on computers, but computers are not designed to run PC games.  So, a person complaining that games don't play as well on their computer as they do on their gaming console is a bit ridiculous, just as is saying, ""satellite beams can only handle so much traffic" HAHAHAHAHA!!! Tell that to DISH and DirectTV."

There's nothing like critiquing and comparing systems that one doesn't know a thing about.  

BTW.... its 100GB, not 100MB.