| Demand They will never see the "demand" they are talking about at the prices they would charge for such services.
If they are willing to offer 1gbps symmetrical connections to homes for the same price Google is, then demand would be overwhelming. |
|
SunnyD
join:2009-03-20
Madison, AL | But are they willing to deliver on pricing... ... how the customer wants it?
Didn't think so. |
|
| 1 GbPs speed is not warranted at this time for homes unless you happen own a small to medium business. Google is losing money each and every time they lay fibre optics to a dwelling. Then again Google has irresponsibly spent shareholder money on frivolous ventures. |
|
Reviews:
 ·Insight Communic..
 ·Windstream
| said by floyd007:Then again Google has irresponsibly spent shareholder money on frivolous ventures.
Do you have any examples? Other than your clear opinion on Google's Fiber project?
Expanding a business foothold and/or branching out is hardly irresponsible, in my opinion (As a prior stock holder). |
|
| reply to floyd007
Thanks for your input, Mitt Romney. |
|
 Elite
join:2002-10-03
Orange, CT | We should have 1Gps fiber I've reached a point where my LTE is faster than my cable internet at home. Verizon has no intentions of deploying 1Gbps fiber in the immediate future. If they were "ready and willing", they would be offering it right now. You would literally be able to call them up and order it.
Nice try, Verizon. As for the Google Fiber situation, why be mad at Google? They're the ones pushing this whole fiber thing the hardest. And look what the other ISPs are doing in those areas, they're losing customers because they offer a poor value paired with a crappy infrastructure. The fact that so many ISP's/telco's/cableco's are dwelling on copper is the only thing stopping widespread fiber adaptation. Copper will not be sustainable in the long run, but nobody wants eat the initial upfront costs of deploying fiber... except for Google, who had no fucking copper infrastructure to begin with in any of the towns they deployed fiber to. Then, they decide to modestly start rolling out cheap, fast fiber. $70 for 1Gbit/1Gbit? They're setting an example of how the internet should be.
Saddest part: I'll still be using bullshit cable with no upstream and marginally faster downstream in 5 years. And my bill will have gone up!
--
QUAD!!!! |
|
|
|
Gami00
join:2010-03-11
Mississauga, ON | reply to floyd007
Re: 1 GbPs speed is not warranted at this time for homes said by floyd007:unless you happen own a small to medium business. Google is losing money each and every time they lay fibre optics to a dwelling. Then again Google has irresponsibly spent shareholder money on frivolous ventures.
i'm not sure i understand this one...
"irresponsibly spent shareholder money"....
umm last year their stock price was $550 or so.. this year it's $700.
it seems like their doing fine at meeting shareholder interests.. |
|
Reviews:
·Insight Communic..
·Windstream
| reply to Elite
Re: We should have 1Gps fiber said by Elite:I've reached a point where my LTE is faster than my cable internet at home.
It's funny you say this because my cell phone gets about twice the download speed as my home internet, and 4-5 times the upload speed.
Granted, it's under extremely restrictive usage caps. |
|
elray
join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA | reply to aciddrink
Re: Demand said by aciddrink:If they are willing to offer 1gbps symmetrical connections to homes for the same price Google is, then demand would be overwhelming.
Nope. The price is too high, regardless of speed.
Google's $70+/month is beyond the desired reach of majority public. They simply aren't interested or willing to pay that much.
(I count myself among that crowd, though we've paid much more in the past, and I *am* willing and able to pay whatever amount is necessary to obtain a given level of service - we just don't need FTTH speeds.) |
|
rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO | If you can pay $70/month for 1Gpbs with no caps, you can cut the cord (be that FIOS TV, cable or U-Verse) and use the savings over a typical TV + HSI subscription to pay for some streaming services.
I'd drop $70/month on a 1 Gbps link with no limits and cut the cord in a heartbeat. |
|
 Smith6612Premium,MVM
join:2008-02-01
North Tonawanda, NY
kudos:22
·Verizon Online DSL
·Frontier Communi..
| What if I wanted it... ... but the price wasn't right? I would take a Gigabit connection irrespective of the usage I have now for the sake of having it. I never see a problem with having too much, but I'd rather not have not enough during a time where I actually need the connection. |
|
| Dear Verizon, If you can provide synchronous 1gbps for $70/month, then feel free to go ahead with that. (Given that's only a few dollars more than your 3/1 offering, I won't be holding my breath.) Do I demand it? Do I need it? Do I even want it? No, not especially, not for the speed anyway... the speed isn't really the point, is it. Internet access with no caps and at a fair price... yeah, that's the point.
--
"Face piles of trials with smiles; it riles them to believe that you perceive the web they weave." |
|
| Verizon: Cheapskates The network will handle anything they want to throw at it, but they have no interest in having a product significantly better than what cable companies are offering.
Outside of upload speeds, they've sacrificed every advantage they had. The download speeds of Comcast and Cox have caught up. And very few people really value high upload speeds, and those have caught up too, at least at Comcast.
With the Quantum speed increases (and price increases), I don't know why they didn't keep upload symmetrical to download.
When it comes to TV offerings, they've maxed out their HD channels, and they're falling behind the other providers there too. Their only advantage left is premium movie channels, and that's really only against Comcast who seems to hate them.
FiOS increasingly looks like a flash in the pan, even starting with so much promise. Verizon's plan is little different than what Frontier is doing in the divested markets, keep things the same, increase prices, and get whatever cash you can from it instead of really marketing something better. |
|
| Give me the damn Fiber Already!!! I don't care if they think that just give the fiber and compete with google if you think that nobody wants 1GBPS then please look around the world where we are losing more and more when it comes to internet speed. The French are leading the way so lets do the same when it comes to the internet. If they offer me 1GPBS under 100 then i would jump the gun since I'm a cord cutter. |
|
 antdudeA Ninja AntPremium,VIP
join:2001-03-25
United State
kudos:4
2 edits | Just give me fast FIOS service! Come on Verizon. Come to my home neighborhoods so I can get off TWC!!  |
|
Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
 ·DIRECTV
·Optimum Online
·Cablevision
2 edits | reply to osravens
Re: Verizon: Cheapskates Verizon FiOS is better than cable in a couple of ways
Lower pings, No peak time slowdowns and no data caps.
Those set it apart for me and keep me on FiOS
But I have to agree about the price increases, it's really killing demand for the service. Sadly I think their speed tiers are set to make the user notice a speed upgrade, not based on the capabilities of their network. They could be offering much more and killing the cable company's in places they already have FiOS.
I only subscribe to 15/5 because I live alone and I'm trying to save money but it does seem really absurd to limit a fiber connection as much as they do. |
|
| reply to elray
Re: Demand 100% wrong. majority public pays $150+ for tv + internet. If you think the majority isn't willing to pay $100 for tv+internet via google, you are willingly ignorant and/or blind.
There's a reason verizon and TW among others are freaking out, and it's called they don't want to compete and enjoy their monopolies. |
|
| reply to antdude
Re: Just give me fast FIOS! Dont know why people are so po'd about this statement.
If the demand is there they'll provide it.
Makes sense from a business standpoint. |
|
| STFU and deliver service first before talking about speeds Seriously. |
|
| reply to pittpete1
Re: Just give me fast FIOS! maybe because you don't understand that how they define demand is "however we want to"? Not by actual, real demand.
they agreed to not compete with comcast for example, so all the areas that demand better than comcast (as comcast sucks), are now not provided. Those are enormous markets with millions of potential customers, all who have LTE at the same time.
try not to be so ignorant. |
|
