dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2011-11-04 09:15:41: Of the 75 million broadband subscribers in the US around 42 million, or 56%, have some form of data cap in place from their internet service provider (ISP) according to data from Leichtman Research Group. ..

page: 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · next

pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium Member
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD

pnh102

Premium Member

Absolutely

There's 2 scenarios under which an ISP can make a lot of money with a cap:

1. Caps and overages give ISPs a huge disincentive against upgrading their networks. Why spend the millions of dollars on upgrades to allow for higher speeds when you can pocket the money spent on overages instead?

Or:

2. Upgrade the networks but leave the caps the same, or lower them. More customers will hit the cap faster.

Either scenario is a big winner for the ISPs.

battleop
join:2005-09-28
00000

battleop

Member

What PR disaster?

"which begs the question why would internet providers pursue a policy that is such a PR disaster?"

It's only a PR disaster here at DSLR. If it really was a PR disaster then customers would be upset and the carriers might make some changes. According to the editorial caps effect about 2% of users which means that 98% of people could care less about caps because they don't reach them.

MRCURAnon
@airband.net

MRCURAnon

Anon

That was my first thought as well. This editorial, and DSLR, assume caps are a "PR disaster". Ask any average consumer if they have a cap or if they care. Doubt you'll see the same "outrage" you do around here.

whome123
@att.net

whome123 to battleop

Anon

to battleop
People are upset but what alternative to they have then the gov supported duopolies?

If were going to artificially pick the winners and losers in Broadband shouldn't we plebians at least have uncapped connections?

JasonOD
@comcast.net

JasonOD to battleop

Anon

to battleop
said by battleop:

....According to the editorial caps effect about 2% of users which means that 98% of people could care less about caps because they don't reach them.

Then the caps are a failure and need to be lowered. This needs to become a pay-for-use model if providers are going to grow enough to remain profitable.

As a stockholder, it pisses me off to no end that Comcast has caps but no way of monetizing the overages.

jmn1207
Premium Member
join:2000-07-19
Sterling, VA

jmn1207

Premium Member

Control Infrastructure Updates

The caps are being implemented to prevent something from coming along that would drastically increase the customer demand for an increase in data usage. Caps are being set at a number that the ISP engineers feel is acceptable to allow for the network to operate efficiently with their current build-out plans.

It is simply a preventative measure that protects the business from being blindsided by some new, must-have service that would otherwise have their customers gobbling up bandwidth at a rate the ISPs promised when sold, but realistically are not prepared to actually provide. With these caps in place, the ISP can update the infrastructure at their own pace, without having to be worried about consumer demand and standard market tactics interfering and forcing competition to take root.

pjcamp
@spelman.edu

pjcamp

Anon

AT&T is complaining about a normal distribution?

There's always a tail at the high end and the low end. AT&T is really complaining about the central limit theorem. Perhaps we can pass a law banning it.

They do this because they are all monopolies or duopolies seeking monopoly status. PR is actually irrelevant.
Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Skippy25 to JasonOD

Member

to JasonOD

Re: What PR disaster?

said by JasonOD :

As a stockholder, it pisses me off to no end that Comcast has caps but no way of monetizing the overages.

Poor guy. That makes me so sad. Be sure to voice your concerns at the next meeting. Maybe they could really lower the caps and get a little more profit in there before consumers start flocking to other carriers (provided of course they have a choice). Then you can dump the stock as it tanks and buy into the next get rich quick scheme.

Bill Neilson
Premium Member
join:2009-07-08
Alexandria, VA

Bill Neilson

Premium Member

Even with this article, it has already become clear

that the ISP's see the data growth and want to cash in on it as much as possible.

This idea of ISP's putting caps in to "free their networks" is a joke. Can the ISP's actually show us proof of this? At all? Has anyone here even seen their speed increase because of this?

Also, who here actually expects the ISP's to raise their caps anytime soon? Anyone? The ISP's will soon release statements claiming that "Consumers dont want caps raised" and that their studies found that "99.9% of customers say caps dont need to be raised"

Right
mogamer
join:2011-04-20
Royal Oak, MI

mogamer

Member

2%?

So only 2% of customers are affected by caps. Can such a small amount of customers really affect the performance of the other 98%? I really have my doubts. I bet if they raised the caps to something like 500gb, you'd have less than 0.5% affected. These same companies that cap residential service have no problem selling uncapped business services. So are residential and business services run on two different networks?

I left U-Verse for an uncapped service and would be considered a heavy user by a capped service. Yet, I only get near 300gb per month very rarely. And most of the time it's under 250gb. But I don't like the very idea of caps, so I switched. I don't torrent or run a server out of my house. My family and I just play a lot of video and games. If my current provider (WOW) instituted caps, I would bit the bullet and get a business service. But I wouldn't get phone service, I would get an inexpensive VOIP instead.
Crookshanks
join:2008-02-04
Binghamton, NY

1 recommendation

Crookshanks

Member

154 hours of TV a month?!

That's 21% of the time in a 30 day month, or five hours of television watching per day. And we wonder why our country has an obesity problem....

I know I'm on the low end of the scale (I might watch 10 hours of TV a month, if that) but 154 hours is really the average? That's frightening.

TwiztedZero
Nine Zero Burp Nine Six
Premium Member
join:2011-03-31
Toronto, ON

1 recommendation

TwiztedZero

Premium Member

Lies!

Lies, greedy corporate capitalist gobblins!

Bandwidth hogs are a Myth!

FREE THE WEB!

#OccupyTheInternet!

JasonOD
@comcast.net

JasonOD to Skippy25

Anon

to Skippy25

Re: What PR disaster?

So you prefer getting kicked off as a subscriber than paying a fair overage fee? That makes no sense for anyone.

disaster
@sbcglobal.net

disaster to battleop

Anon

to battleop
DSLR and many users here are ahead of the tech curve, so you can expect to the general population to slowly become aware in time. With smart phones and tablet devices on the rise AND streaming becoming more common, this is a PR disaster brewing.

The solution to this insatiable greed of telco and cableco is have a common pipe and let providers compete with service over the same network. It can be done. See Utopia now, and in the future Google's Fiber project in Kansas city.

Bill Neilson
Premium Member
join:2009-07-08
Alexandria, VA

Bill Neilson to mogamer

Premium Member

to mogamer

Re: 2%?

I have always wondered whether the 2% number was even true.

I mean, how many people here have said they reach 2%? I know some personally that use above 250gb....and other tech forums also have 2%

Now, I understand that those who use 250gb are likely to be the tech-forum people....but considering how many people just around here use that number....I just can't believe a more % is not hitting the caps.

Matt3
All noise, no signal.
Premium Member
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC

1 recommendation

Matt3

Premium Member

Great perspective, but where is the proof-reader?

Great article Rich. I think we need more articles like this so more attention is focused on the real motivation behind caps.

I'm not usually one to publicly comment on grammar, but this article is chock full of egregious grammatical errors. Did anyone proof this thing or just paste it directly from first draft to print?

This is a trend I am starting to see more often on the web and it drives me batty.
ADL
join:2000-12-20
USA

ADL

Member

Caps Protect TV revenue

All the big ISPs offer TV service now. Caps will make sure you keep their television offerings or you will be spending the same if not more in data overages.

FFH5
Premium Member
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ

FFH5 to TwiztedZero

Premium Member

to TwiztedZero

Re: Lies!

said by TwiztedZero:

Lies, greedy corporate capitalist gobblins!

Bandwidth hogs are a Myth!

FREE THE WEB!

#OccupyTheInternet!

sarcasm, right?

Camaro
Question everything
Premium Member
join:2008-04-05
Westfield, MA

Camaro to pnh102

Premium Member

to pnh102

Re: Absolutely

I am taking a shot in the air here but you are either a shill for the industry,or are rich as hell.You say some of the most outrageous anti consumer comments I have ever read here.ISP are making all the money they need and then some without needing more revenue streams.What happened over the years did isp's forget to upgrade any of there network and just put a giant band aids on there network to get by because all the years I have lived in my city which has been for 30 years the only upgrade I have ever seen was the docsis 3.0 upgrade.Oh and one more upgrade I read about this year,our city council forced Comcast to run coax out to a new nursing home that was a 1/4 mile to far and Comcast said no.
FactChecker
Premium Member
join:2008-06-03

FactChecker

Premium Member

Occupy the message!

As part of the 99%, I am unhappy with the fact that I am subsidizing the 1% that consume the majority of the broadband ISP resources..

Stop complaining and buy the dedicated capacity you expect via a business line.

FFH5
Premium Member
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ

FFH5 to MRCURAnon

Premium Member

to MRCURAnon

Re: What PR disaster?

said by MRCURAnon :

That was my first thought as well. This editorial, and DSLR, assume caps are a "PR disaster". Ask any average consumer if they have a cap or if they care. Doubt you'll see the same "outrage" you do around here.

I agree. My friends all had high tech jobs in computers and telecomm fields, use the internet at home extensively, and the issues of caps doesn't even come up at all. The vast majority of customers don't even know that caps even exist.
talz13
join:2006-03-15
Avon, OH

talz13 to pnh102

Member

to pnh102

Re: Absolutely

said by pnh102:

2. Upgrade the networks but leave the caps the same, or lower them. More customers will hit the cap faster.

My usage tends to stay the same or go down over time. There are only so many TV shows and movies to watch, and after I'm done with them, what is there left to download?
talz13

talz13 to jmn1207

Member

to jmn1207

Re: Control Infrastructure Updates

And the month that happens, they will have booted off 50% of their subscriber base. What are they supposed to use to fund network upgrades then?

juilinsandar
Texas Gooner
Premium Member
join:2000-07-17
San Benito, TX

juilinsandar to battleop

Premium Member

to battleop

Re: What PR disaster?

I've got a friend who didn't know about AT&T's caps until I told him. He wondered why his phone bill had almost doubled. He's switching to Time Warner for internet only as he already has DirecTV and is happy with it for now.
drslash (banned)
Goya Asma
join:2002-02-18
Marion, IA

drslash (banned)

Member

Mediacom has a cap

You can add Mediacom to the list of ISPs that have a data cap.

»www.mediacomtoday.com/aup

I guess it would be a soft cap since Mediacom does not have a specific schedule of overage charges and does not provide a way for the customer to monitor their usage.

SimbaSeven
I Void Warranties
join:2003-03-24
Billings, MT
·StarLink

SimbaSeven to JasonOD

Member

to JasonOD

Re: What PR disaster?

Define overage. The entire industry thinks that data is like water, fuel, electricity, etc. It is not. If you want it to be, the entire industry needs to become a utility, which they clearly don't want to be.

It's the ISP's that think it's a good idea to issue caps to gain more revenue. Unfortunately, most don't bother upgrading their network and not giving a damn about their own customers.

Maybe if most of the ISPs were more honest with their customers, they'd be fine with caps.. but when they can't even get the cap meter to work properly.. Ya.

t3ln3t
@clearwire-wmx.net

t3ln3t

Anon

Unlimited Internet Access

Remember the day, when ISPs sold "Unlimited" Internet access accounts? The account not on the "Unlimited" plan, were for 30 hours or so of use, per month.

Then a national ISP began selling plans that would only permit 30 hours of "residential" Internet access, as an "Unlimited" Internet access plan.
That company is no longer in operation for a reason I think :/

Me personally, I've preferred the business class services for a few years now. I had at&t's U-Verse, when the product first launched. Not bad ... but it wasn't the best thing since sliced bread either.

For the sake of many, many users, I pray this is just a passing fad in the Internet provider circles.

pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium Member
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD

pnh102 to Camaro

Premium Member

to Camaro

Re: Absolutely

said by Camaro:

I am taking a shot in the air here but you are either a shill for the industry,or are rich as hell. blah blah blah

With all due respect, STFU and re-read my post. Did I say I personally support these policies? If you had bothered to read, you would see that I never said such a thing.

Read before you post.

Morac
Cat god
join:2001-08-30
Riverside, NJ

Morac to pnh102

Member

to pnh102
said by pnh102:

There's 2 scenarios under which an ISP can make a lot of money with a cap:

1. Caps and overages give ISPs a huge disincentive against upgrading their networks. Why spend the millions of dollars on upgrades to allow for higher speeds when you can pocket the money spent on overages instead?

Or:

2. Upgrade the networks but leave the caps the same, or lower them. More customers will hit the cap faster.

Either scenario is a big winner for the ISPs.

Neither of those explain Comcast's cap implementation, which has no overages. If a user exceeds Comcast's 250 GB cap, something that is more and more likely to occur as time goes on, Comcast simply cuts off service.

So Comcast actually loses a customer and the money that customer is paying when the cap is exceeded.

tim_k
Buttons, Bows, Beamer, Shadow, Kasey
Premium Member
join:2002-02-02
Stewartstown, PA

tim_k

Premium Member

you ain't seen nothin' yet

Verizon would love to replace DSL with LTE altogether, yet maintain the same type of caps as for mobile data plans. Suddenly a 100 Gb cap doesn't look so bad
page: 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · next