 Duramax08Win8 sucksPremium
join:2008-08-03
San Antonio, TX | ... I dont like where this is taking us. |
|
| It's designed to save light users money Ha, ha, ha. That's the funniest thing I've read all day. Note they say this plan can save you $5/month or cost you $20/month extra.
If they really wanted to save users money, once the overage charges added up to the unlimited pricing, they would switch you to the unlimited rate. But they don't want you to save money, so they won't do that. |
|
Mr Matt
join:2008-01-29
Eustis, FL
kudos:1 Reviews:
 ·CenturyLink
 ·Comcast
·Embarq Now Centu..
| Time Warner should disclose how usage is determined.  Its the same old bull feces. An ISP wants to establish usage sensitive billing but refuses to disclose how usage is calculated. Will subscribers have to pay for system overhead? How about encapsulation overhead for PPPOE subscribers? What about usage generated by VoIP? What about service packs from Microsoft? Virus signature updates? How about advertising from the ISP making a sales pitch for some crap that they are selling? |
|
 LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | 5GB/mo not enough for almost all landline users This might work for my 90 yr old Uncle who gets on Facebook 1x/day to check on the doings of his children & grandchildren & great-grandchildren. And that is because he never has his PC updated with software fixes.
At an absolute minimum for a landline connection, it has to be at least 10GB/mo which could work for a limited number of users. I am on the internet daily and have had months as low as 12GB with some video streaming from Netflix and all the monthly software updates from MS, Adobe, etc. But more typical usage is in the 20-30GB/mo range with a few hours a week of Netflix usage.
If TWC offered this discount for 10 or 15 GB/mo usage, it could satisfy quite a few light users.
--
The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, I'm from the government and I'm here to help.
»www.politico.com/2012-election/
|
|
| Don't think for a second that they haven't done all the calculations regarding usage, costs and the allowance just like ATT and VZW have done.
ATT's plans are such that most users fall in between the tiers, so most users use more than 250MB of data, but not 3GB, so they either pay the 30 dollars for data they never use, or pay the 20 dollar and incur overages. Voice plans are the same way, either you pick a minutes tier where you go over constantly, OR you pick a minutes tier where you amass thousands of never going to be used rollover minutes. Wouldn't it be nice if you could simply pick a plan closer to your usage minutes and save money?
So TWC has come up with a plan where most users will break the allowance keeping ARPU even while slowly introducing the frog to the warming water. |
|
|
|
 djrobx
join:2000-05-31
Valencia, CA
kudos:1
 ·VOIPo
 ·Verizon Wireless..
·RoadRunner Cable
 ·AT&T U-Verse
| reply to Tee Dubya
Re: It's designed to save light users money As structured now, someone will get a "warning" if they exceed the cap, and they can just switch back to unlimited. Someone would have to be totally asleep at the wheel to pay an overage.
That means, as Karl noted, that TWC is going to try and boil this frog slowly. Maybe TWC doesn't realize that the fable is a lie.
--
AT&T U-Hearse - RIP Unlimited Internet 1995-2011
Rethink Billable.
|
|
Reviews:
·Earthlink Cable ..
·Verizon FiOS
| reply to Linklist
Re: 5GB/mo not enough for almost all landline users said by Linklist:This might work for my 90 yr old Uncle who gets on Facebook 1x/day to check on the doings of his children & grandchildren & great-grandchildren. And that is because he never has his PC updated with software fixes. Metered billing would be terrible for this. Once you get a rootkit/virus or two in that insecure system, you can get 100+ gigs/month, easy. |
|
Reviews:
·Earthlink Cable ..
·Verizon FiOS
| Not about congestion Data caps do not prevent congestion. Being limited to 10 gb/month does not stop anyone from using it when everyone else does. Makes about as much sense as putting 300 miles/month limits on cars to clear the freeways. It does not stop anyone from driving home at 5 when everyone else does. |
|
 roc5955Premium
join:2005-11-26
Rosendale, NY | The real design of this Is to take money from those who can least afford it. Someone who doesn't have a lot will choose the less expensive Internet service. When they find out how much they will have to pay after they go over their useless limit, they will be paying through the nose, and getting nothing. The same people who only have basic cable, because it is all that they can afford, will more than likely get this service, because they need Internet, and this is what they can afford....
Smooth move, ex-lax!
--
"Understanding is a three-edged sword." |
|
 Oh_NoTrogglus normalus
join:2011-05-21
Chicago, IL | Save Customers Money? - Lies! said by AOLtimeWarner :
Usage-based consumption is optional, and it’s designed to save light users money
That makes no sense. Regardless if you are a light or heavy user the connection and equipment costs the same if you use it or not.
So they want us to believe they will sell users light use connections for less money that does not cover all the costs?????
If the light user calls customer service just once, they they cost more than any heavy user for the entire year.
If they really want to save customers money they would offer lower cost unlimited plans where you have to pay each time you want to call customer service. |
|
 skeechanAi OtsukaholicPremium
join:2012-01-26
AA169|170
kudos:2
·Cox HSI
·Clear Wireless
| Funny Here in SoCal TWC is raving about how Time Warner makes the Internet better, touting 3rd party services like Netflix. Meanwhile they'll then turn around and use Netflix as the reason the world will end if TWC doesn't throttle their subs for more money.
You gotta love these MSOs, and telcos like AT&T for that matter, always whining about Netflix traffic when it is one reason subs bother subscribing to their overpriced tiers in the first place (and they know it).
Without compelling content, we don't need TWC. I can get my email on dial-up. |
|
djrobx
join:2000-05-31
Valencia, CA
kudos:1 | I caught that also. I was pretty shocked to see Time Warner proudly display the Netflix logo on their Road Runner commercial!
--
AT&T U-Hearse - RIP Unlimited Internet 1995-2011
Rethink Billable.
|
|
| reply to Tee Dubya
Re: It's designed to save light users money We all know these Caps are utter bullshit and only hurt Consumers.
Expect a big grassroots Campaign to set these assholes straight. |
|
| 50% I bet they will just cut your data usage bill down 50% to make it fair. |
|
PoppaC
join:2010-11-01
High Point, NC | 5.00 a month savings??? WOW.. I am so happy I live in an area that TW has serious competition from our local phone company that provides DSL speeds up to 80/30. TW offers their "turbo" package which tops out at 15/768K.
BTW: I live just a few miles away from one of the the "test" markets they tried to push this crap on back in 09. (Greensboro, NC)
Every time I see their local ads mentioning their superiority to "slow DSL" I have to resist the urge to throw something at the TV screen.  |
|
| Do something simple... If a customer uses less than 5GB in a month they get an automatic $5 or $10 credit to their account. They don't have to change plans or be on a special plan or any of this complicated nonsense. |
|
 rcdaileyDragoonflyPremium
join:2005-03-29
Rialto, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
| This TWC plan offers $5.00 per month savings, but that's just not worth the trouble, it seems to me. I guess that would buy a gallon of gas, with some left over, depending, or a burger and fries. It's simpler to have the flat-rate plan and not think about a cap.
--
It is easier for a camel to put on a bikini than an old man to thread a needle. |
|
 The LimitPremium
join:2007-09-25
Greensboro, NC
kudos:2 | reply to PoppaC
Re: 5.00 a month savings??? WOW.. OT, but what ISP is this, and is it available in Greensboro? I live in Greensboro.
--
Do or do not, there is no try! - Yoda |
|
BiggA
join:2005-11-23
EARTH Reviews:
·Comcast
| Terrible plan The idea of light users having caps is fine, but the implementation of this is just DUMB.
I could see having caps on the sub $50 tiers, and then unlimited at the $60 price point or something like that, but this optional system just makes no sense. |
|
 antdudeA Ninja AntPremium,VIP
join:2001-03-25
United State
kudos:4 | No thanks! Maybe if it was 99% saving. :P |
|
