| |Duramax08To The MoonPremium
San Antonio, TX
"somebody who reads email once a week" If you have someone that reads email only once a week i.e. grandma, give them dial up. No use to have broadband if you arent going to use it that much.
Next excuse in line please
Re: "somebody who reads email once a week"
said by Karl Bode:Our most popular start-up tier is $15 per month for 512 Kbps speed capped at 10GB per month,and most people usually upgrade to the $20 1,024 speed after couple of months (but still 10GB cap).]
Yes, that phantom $5 for 100 kbps grandma tier that never materializes....
·Bright House Net..
said by Wilsdom:How so?
and if the top 25% of bandwidth users canceled TWC's profit would probably only increase.
The network is currently supporting those users and still has some excess capacity available (headroom). If the hogs dropped out, all you'd have is more UNUSED capacity, NOT lower costs, because the ISP will not DOWNGRADE the network if utilization drops a few percent.
So you've lost the monthly revenue those ex-customers were paying, and ended up with more of something that's (now) sitting there un-used.
Given a choice between (a) having unused/slack capacity, or (b) filling up some of that slack capacity with paying customers, as a business owner I would choose 'b'.
You act like bandwidth is a rare-earth element (and only finite quantities exist) and those 500 bandwidth hogs paying $49/month are taking up resources which COULD BE given to 5,000 grandmothers at $49/month.
And that's just NOT the case.
Bandwidth is plentiful, and getting MORE plentiful every year. AND the cost to acquire/deliver that bandwidth is going down. This is nothing more than (another attempted) money grab by TWC.
| |said by megarock:It's an investor conference. Where do you think money comes from to expand capacity and build infrastructure? Paying customers are only one piece.
When an internet provider is attending not a tech conference but a BANKING conference it should give you the full indication of who TWC is in bed with.
said by megarock:We're a consumption, gotta have it, society and many aren't willing to make that sacrifice. Witness the continuing cost increases in pay TV.
The only way to stop them is to stop the flow of money and if that means shutting off your internet for a few months isn't that worth the loss to save the internet you've been using for years?
| Common man,|
You know, Its the Ceo's and the few others at the top that suck these
company's dry for everything there worth, then cry crocodile tears about
having to raise prices, so they can repeat the raiding of cash for them self's
over and over again.
You hear about 100 million CEO salerys, like its no big deal, were do you think
the money comes from? foolish Investor's and inflated consumer prices
remember for every cent you personally make off a stock a ceo makes
around a hundred dollars. not to mention when you add all CEO salerys
up and the inflated prices of everything that causes, throughout a avg workers
life the stock market as it is now is destroying any decent quality of life for the
Think this is BS
Look at your Portfolio, check out what YOU made from owning a particular
company's stock then compare that to what a CEO and a few other top exc
got paid during that time period and you will see, its nothing but a ponzi
scheme, thats kept alive only by increasing consumer prices.
Someone once told me, wall street was nothing more then one giant booky
I said please don't give bookys a bad name, gambling doesn't effect food,
gas or housing prices for millions of workers on a national scale. causing
starvation and wars over oil, so a few could live like kings
said by ArrayList:Thanks for solidifying my point. The market is still willing to bear price increases.
Pay TV only increases in price because the market hasn't stabilized yet. The powers that be realized that they can get away with charging more and more for the service and people keep paying for it.
said by ArrayList:No competition in the pay TV market?
There is no competition therefore the products will just go up in price all the time.
Re: Gee... Don't know, and I really don't care since Disney is a major reason as to why pay TV costs continue to increase. Anyway, cable + 2(sat) + IPTV appears to give you four choices for ESPN porn.
| |antdudeA Matrix AntPremium,VIPReviews:
·Time Warner Cable
Re: Maybe Glenn Britt Will Finally Get It
said by Nightshade:I can't even get another broadband ISP in my area.
I would laugh if TW does go to a usage model and another ISP company comes in (or already exists) that does flat rate and all the TW internet customers flock to the flat rate ISP in droves.
Maybe then Britt will finally get it. Then again maybe he's too stupid not to get it at all in that he'll probably think of another lame excuse to explain as to why TW customers are leaving for the flat-rate ISPs. Ten bucks says he'll blame piracy.
Not true No one will pay less, but many people will pay more.
It is not true metered billing, but low caps and high overage charges.
If I use almost 0 electricity this month I will pay almost 0, but even if I turn off my cable modem, I will not pay 0 no matter what plan I choose.
| |espaethDigital PlumberPremium,MVM
Because Repeating It Over And Over Magically Makes It True? You're just annoyed that they're stealing your approach, Karl.
| |baineschile2600 ways to livePremium
Sterling Heights, MI
Proposal: Speed AND consumption pricing models. A while ago, I thought of a speed/consumption based model. I dont think per-gig is the answer, but there may be overages.
This is just an example
3mb - $10
10mb - $20
25mb - $35
100mb - $70
10gig - $10
100 gig - $20
500 gig - $35
Unlimited - $50
That way, people that need a lot of bandwidth, but may not need the speed (big file transfers, work related) can buy a large useage, but maybe a lower speed. If someone needs a lot of speed, but not necessarily a lot of usage (occasional video online, gaming), it can support them. Then, people who want a super fast connection with as much as they can download will have an option, but it will be more expensive than the rest. "Grandmas" can get a lower internet, and low usage, for the "reading the emails once a week" as a reasonable cost.
Again, these are just ballpark figures more than anything. Obviously over time, speed and consumption will increase, but a foundation where people actually have a CHOICE would be nice.