major marco
Res Firma Mitescere Nescit
Premium
join:2003-02-13
Stepford, CA
clubs:
| What's the IQ level of a corporate shill?
Former FCC Commissioner Deborah Tate, who worked at the FCC until earlier this year, stirred up some geek angst recently by tying World of Warcraft to the college drop out rate. Ever notice how technical understanding deficiency levels, particularly in tools like Tate, are inversely proportional to how well the tool is connected to the industry they whore for. The deeper the political connection goes to the industry, the closer to zero the technical knowledge is. Industry whores like Tate should be forced to take a Computers & Internet 101 class at her local library, but then that would completely defeat the purpose of a whore, wouldn't it.
--
The Toll
Tracking Lord Stanley
|
|
phantom6294
join:2002-02-27
Abingdon, MD
 ·Comcast
| Devil is in the details...
As always... the devil is in the details.
I do not have a fundamental problem with notion of metered billing. In essence, that is similar to what we have with cell phones. On my plan, I get 450 Minutes to use to call non-Verizon Wireless customers during certain times of the week. If I exceed those minutes I pay for each additional minute.
The problem I have... is that ISPs don't seem to be able to prove a desperate business case for moving to metered billing, beyond further increasing their profits (which, isn't, in and of itself, a bad thing). Since it seems most of the ISPs are doing just fine with unlimited (or relatively reasonable or high caps [i.e. Comcast]) usage paradigms at their current prices, suddenly capping usage at ridiculously low levels and maintaining the monthly cost is absurd. It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out that said move is nothing but an attempt at gouging.
Instead, if an ISP said... they were going to reduce the basic cost of having service to say $10 and then charge a (reasonable) amount per gigabyte... then I could believe the ISP really had grandma's interests in mind. Rather, it seems most ISPs are going to keep Grandma's and everyone else's rate the same and tack on (insane) per gigabyte overage fees. It seems Grandma aint' going to be paying anything less than she already is... and why Grandma can see clear as day the ISP doesn't really care about her occasional/lite internet use. |
|
SomeoneTriedThat
@tn.gov
 from:
whfsdude 
| Tiered billing has been tried
In the '90s AOL had tiered billing and started bleeding customers to the flat-rate ISPs by the late '90s. By the time AOL went flat-rate, they were too far gone.
Many users used their flat-rate ISPs for most of their internet activity and used the AOL "Bring Your Own Internet" rate plan for access to the AOL-specific content.
Let the major carriers have their tiered pricing as long as you protect wholesale ISP resellers from anti-competitive business practices by the majors. Then the majors will see most of their revenue derived from wholesale bandwidth rather than the more profitable retail market.
Perhaps we would be better off if the major carriers concentrated on fattening the backbone pipes and providing city-wide, county-wide, and state-wide infrastructure and let CLECs provide the customer service and retail accounts.  |
|
DrModem
Premium
join:2006-10-19
USA | reply to major marco
Re: What's the IQ level of a corporate shill?
It's easier to blatantly spread lies if you don't know you're lying. |
|
sheezyfromba
join:2002-08-03
Las Vegas, NV
| I would like to see the 'Grandma service' when I see the cap
Everytime they have introdoced caps with ridiculously low caps they never have also introduced the 5 dollar teir for ultra-light users. They always hav the same tiers just with overages, yeah thanks for helping us out there. I would not mind if the usage meters were closer to a cell phone. I pay around 60 a month for my internet and around 70 for my phone minutes (dont get me started on my pda data $ rate). But most carriers also now offer an unlimited tier for around a 100 bucks. I would pay a $100 for a reasonably speedy service that is unlimited, but they had better not stimulate what I do on the line such as hosting my own web page or watching hulu. |
|
GlobalMind
Domino Dude, POWER Systems Guy
Premium
join:2001-10-29
Hollywood, FL
| FAIL, and FAIL alike
As I tweeted earlier....
Dear ISP shills: Metered billing has nothing to do with customer choice & control, and we all know it. #FAIL
Metered is about extracting max dollars while not upgrading networks. While optimization is laudable and good, screwing customers over in the process all under the guise of "consumer choice" isn't.
Until I can effectively sue for misappropriation of my bandwidth by spammers, etc which would cause my bill to increase to download their crap, metered billing is an epic fail.
I am curious how she takes to paying for minutes used by telemarketers who call her mobile phone.
--
TheGlobalMind.com / Speed costs money. How fast do you want to go? / Trust the instinct to the end, though you can render no reason. - Ralph Waldo Emerson / Free market capitalism is the best path to prosperity. |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
 ·AT&T Southeast
| reply to phantom6294
Re: Devil is in the details...
said by phantom6294 :Instead, if an ISP said... they were going to reduce the basic cost of having service to say $10 and then charge a (reasonable) amount per gigabyte... then I could believe the ISP really had grandma's interests in mind. If I were responsible for transitioning consumer billing from flat rate to metering and the public persuasion that goes along with it, I would incrementally raise the rates across the board for flat rate billing, while providing a "discount" back to the normal rate to entice customers to opt into metered billing. That way the ISP increases their revenue and leaves the metered billing decision to the customer. And if ISPs really need to cover pay TV lost revenue, they can continue to raise rates for the flat rate billing to "force" consumers into metered billing. It's a strategy that would need to happen over the course of a few years, not months or days, but ultimately it give the consumer choice. |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
|  reply to phantom6294
All good points. There is nothing wrong with billing by traffic consumed. In fact, that makes much more sense than the existing system.
The trick is in setting the "Fixed portion" rate(say $10/mo) and then setting the variable use rate. Should the variable rate be 1 number no matter how much is used. Or should it be like electric rates that rise in the summer as more is consumed to discourage overuse. For example(and this is an example only and not rates I feel should be used), say setting the variable rate at $1/GB up to 40GB used, and then $1.25/GB for every GB used above that.
Ultimately however, whatever rates are set, they should result in the same profit percentages over costs for the company. That is, the new rate system should be NEUTRAL as to existing income and profits, but one that would then also allocate costs to users based on their usage.
The discourage overuse part is needed so that the system is not terribly slowed down at peak times. The rate structure needs to develop ways to charge those users driving peak usage higher so that infrastructure can be expanded to grow peak capacity.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO
 ·VOIPo
| Questions!
Why isn't it fair for grandmas to pay the same if THEY ARE PAYING FOR SPEED? They can't say charging $20 for 768/384 un-caped is NOT profitable enough when in Korea for $2 a month you can get 2Mbps/512Kbps, that is 128k MORE upload and 2m=2048k which is 256k LESS than than 3 times 768k so they charge 10 TIMES the price and give you almost 3x less DL and 25% less UL and they STILL don't make enough money??? You know I think smaller ISPs may have a boom soon, I mean yeah they may have to charge more but with ISPs like TW and ATT cap and metering while STILL charging for speed when the overages kick in the smaller ISPs may be less costly. |
|
travelguy
join:1999-09-03
Santa Fe, NM
| reply to GlobalMind
Re: FAIL, and FAIL alike
said by GlobalMind :Metered is about extracting max dollars while not upgrading networks. Not exactly. Metered billing is about participating in the value of content. The broadband providers see that IPTV is the future. Flat rate billing works (for them) when they sell broadband as an addon to their core business. When the tipping point occurs and broadband becomes the primary business, flat rate billing works (for them) as well as selling every seat on an airline flight for the same price would work for the airlines. |
|
SLD
Premium
join:2002-04-17 | All I can say is...
OMGWIN!!! |
|
eri3k
join:2009-07-10
Walnut Creek, CA
| Of course they should bill based on usage...
I absolutely agree with Ms. Tate. People should pay for what they use.
Since these companies are primarily motivated by a sense of fairness, I'm sure they want to extend this principle to the television side of the business. Why should I, a working professional who watches little TV, pay the same as a grandmother who stays home and watches Perry Mason all day? My TV bill should be prorated based on the number of hours I actually use it. |
|
sonicmerlin
join:2009-05-24
Cleveland, OH
| reply to TKJunkMail
Re: Devil is in the details...
The institution of tiered pricing should not be allowed until there is significant competition in every territory. Significant denotes at least 4 ISPs offering very similar product.
Otherwise, a return to dark age early 90's usage based pricing should be predicated on turning the internet into a highly regulated utility. |
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| reply to openbox9
said by openbox9 :said by phantom6294 :Instead, if an ISP said... they were going to reduce the basic cost of having service to say $10 and then charge a (reasonable) amount per gigabyte... then I could believe the ISP really had grandma's interests in mind. If I were responsible for transitioning consumer billing from flat rate to metering and the public persuasion that goes along with it, I would incrementally raise the rates across the board for flat rate billing, while providing a "discount" back to the normal rate to entice customers to opt into metered billing. That way the ISP increases their revenue and leaves the metered billing decision to the customer. And if ISPs really need to cover pay TV lost revenue, they can continue to raise rates for the flat rate billing to "force" consumers into metered billing. It's a strategy that would need to happen over the course of a few years, not months or days, but ultimately it give the consumer choice. Yes RAISE rates. Especially in this economy. So basically what you are saying is the ISP should fuck people over for a few years then fuck them over again by making them think they are getting a "discount" when they are paying what they would have been paying anyways.
Most ISP also offer TV. Now if they are going to play games then I'll either cut back on my internet or cut back on my TV. So they are going to LOSE revenue somewhere if they decide to be cute. So why bother? Besides they make enough with their bullshit fees anyways. |
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| reply to phantom6294
said by phantom6294 :As always... the devil is in the details. I do not have a fundamental problem with notion of metered billing. In essence, that is similar to what we have with cell phones. On my plan, I get 450 Minutes to use to call non-Verizon Wireless customers during certain times of the week. If I exceed those minutes I pay for each additional minute. yes and Verizon gives you nights and week-ends free. Do ISPs have such plan to offer cap free times? If congestion is an issue then convincing people to use their conection for downloading larger files durring non busy times would help would it not? So who plans on offering these? No one I know of. |
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| reply to eri3k
Re: Of course they should bill based on usage...
said by eri3k :I absolutely agree with Ms. Tate. People should pay for what they use. Since these companies are primarily motivated by a sense of fairness, I'm sure they want to extend this principle to the television side of the business. Why should I, a working professional who watches little TV, pay the same as a grandmother who stays home and watches Perry Mason all day? My TV bill should be prorated based on the number of hours I actually use it. Ironic isn't how they want to be "fair" to those that use less internet, but absolutely are dead set against ala carte for TV for those of use who juts want a few channels. Somehow it's unfair for a light internet user to subsidize a heavy user but it's ok for a light TV watcher to subsidize the heavy watchers. |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
·AT&T Southeast
| reply to BF69
Re: Devil is in the details...
"This economy" hasn't shown an impact to the number of customers, or the prices they're willing to pay for service, so that's a non-issue as of now.
One of the arguments against metered billing around this forum is that it doesn't provide any perceived consumer benefit. If consumers actually have a choice to pay up for flat rate billing or save money with metered billing, how is that not a good thing in the eyes of consumers? Besides, based on numerous remarks on this forum, when metered billing finally gets here, a lot of DSLR users will be paying more anyway, so why not have a choice of how much more we'll have to pay? |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
·AT&T Southeast
| reply to BF69
said by BF69 :If congestion is an issue then convincing people to use their conection for downloading larger files durring non busy times would help would it not? So who plans on offering these? No one I know of. I've seen a few smaller ISPs around with caps that open things up in the wee hours of the morning and other "non-primetimes". Although Comcast is metering your usage, my understanding of their congestion management system essentially does what you're discussing. |
|
dathing
join:2002-01-09
Sykesville, MD | 768k DSL is the Grandma tier.
768k DSL is commonly offered for around $14.99. Isn't that already the Grandma tier? |
|
firefox
Premium
join:2000-12-03
San Jose, CA | reply to major marco
Re: What's the IQ level of a corporate shill?
It's the Dunning-Kruger Effect.  |
|
