DaveNJ
No Fear
join:1999-09-01
New Jersey
 ·Comcast
·Patriot Media
| Old Story, new Technology
The Bells havent been know for reducing prices in anything, for example when has called id ever been free from a bell, yet it costs basicly nothing to provide. The fact that prices havent fallen is proof they are soaking there customers, and the investors dont like it when your not fleecing them.
--
Liberalism weakening The USA everyday... |
|
Biskit
join:2003-02-07
Fenton, MO
| So.....Since they run a vertical service on the line that basically cost them nothing means? They should give it to you for free, right?
"The fact that prices havent fallen is proof they are soaking there customers"
Isnt that what the article is about, falling prices? Why shouldnt investors be worried, whether it is fleecing or not, isnt profits why you invest in any company??! |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
3 edits | Are they really losing money?
How much is a quantity extra subscriber? Isn't the HW and support paid for whether you have 10 subs or 11? How much does it actually cost to add an 11th subscriber?
It's like an airline flight. It costs little more than the difference in fuel and a meal to put 1 more passenger on the plane cause everything else is done and costs viturally same whether there is 1 person on the flight or 400.
--
Life is good without the headache of Comcrap HSI |
|
Camelot One
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-21
Sarasota, FL
clubs:
| They'll still turn a profit on it
Since SBC has no real plans to offer Naked DSL, they could easily market their DSL service for $5 a month and still turn a nice profit by jacking up the POTS costs. Which I'm sure they will. It's all about hitting customers with hidden costs anyway.
--
AMD A64 3200+/ MSI K8N Neo/ 2x 512Mb Kingston HyperX PC4000/ WD 74Gb Raptor/ Gainward GF4 4600/Gainward 5200PCI/ Antec 550 True Control/Custom water cooler |
|
sweintz
Premium
join:2002-03-01
Hamden, CT
| Telecom Investors...
Telecom Investors need to get their heads out of their @sses.
If they want the company to be competitive at all, in any way, shape, or form in the long run, and wind up with stock that is still worth something 10 years from now, then they need to bite the bullet and accept the fact that, for the time being, ANY telecom that is forward thinking should be posting NET LOSSES. Big ones. Unless they have a HUGE war chest that they can raid.
Right now technology is changing. Any telecom company that wants to remain in business in the future needs to be dumping mega amounts of money to migrate their infrastructure away from circuit switched technologies, retrain all their staff, and start deploying a packet switched infrastructure. They need to bite the bullet and start deploying fiber direct to all their customers. Not just to the curb, but fiber to the premises.
That is where the future lies. Any telecom company unwilling to accept it has a dim future. |
|
dslwanter
Why would I want DSL? I have FTTH
Premium
join:2002-12-16
Lowellville, OH
·Armstrong Zoom In..
 ·AT&T Midwest
1 edit | Losing money?
You figure this, just about 4 years ago DSL was going for $45-50 a month for basic service. You make that up if you get 3 or 4 new subscribers on the $15 plan. Also keep in mind how many more people are able to get DSL now compared to just a few years ago. I can't tell you how many people have switched from Cable to DSL for the price as well and plus these people are locked into 1 year contracts. I think SBC made a wise choice and they are ahead of the game.
Just my $0.02 either you agree or don't.
--
"and he will raise you up, on eagles wings, there you are the breath of dawn, make you to shine like the sun, and hold you in the palm, of his hands" |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
| reply to Biskit
Re: Old Story, new Technology
I'm sorry, who is giving away free DSL? Investors are ALWAYS worried, no matter what a business does.
If they raised their prices investors would be worried about losing customers to competitors. If they drop the price they worry about margin.
This is nothing new. The article should be about how investors put their money in businesses they really don't understand, then freak 'cause they don't understand it.
--
Life is good without the headache of Comcrap HSI |
|
zoebisch01
join:2003-11-10
Julian, PA
| reply to sweintz
Re: Telecom Investors...
I can agree with that. Either they have realized it and are just riding it out for whatever they can still get, or they have very bad analysts! I always thought a good approach would just be to cut your prices and keep your customers rather than see them migrate. Kind of reminds me of the movie theater, if they would just lower the price on popcorn and soda a bit sales would most likely increase to the point of outperforming higher prices to begin with. The reason I think is simple, people know they are getting taken for a ride and do not like it. Same thing with copper, I mean in all honesty when was the last time you saw the copper lines swapped out (ie...they are more than bought and payed for)? |
|
cool_coda
join:2004-09-08
Brownsburg, IN | reply to dslwanter
Re: Losing money?
Because of this price ($15) I am now seriously considering moving to it and saving myself $30 a month for a year. And I am one of the serious geek types that spends a lot of time on the computer and downloading stuff. |
|
wwdubbia
join:2002-06-03
Clinton, NY
| reply to sweintz
Re: Telecom Investors...
said by sweintz  :Telecom Investors need to get their heads out of their @sses. If they want the company to be competitive at all, in any way, shape, or form in the long run, and wind up with stock that is still worth something 10 years from now, then they need to bite the bullet and accept the fact that, for the time being, ANY telecom that is forward thinking should be posting NET LOSSES. Big ones. Unless they have a HUGE war chest that they can raid. Right now technology is changing. Any telecom company that wants to remain in business in the future needs to be dumping mega amounts of money to migrate their infrastructure away from circuit switched technologies, retrain all their staff, and start deploying a packet switched infrastructure. They need to bite the bullet and start deploying fiber direct to all their customers. Not just to the curb, but fiber to the premises. That is where the future lies. Any telecom company unwilling to accept it has a dim future. Haven't you heard of Fios?
And there aren't too many companies who can afford to post six or seven figure losses repeatedly and A. expect be a viable investment, B. pay their employees' salaries let alone pay for training, and C. provide adequate customer support. All of those things require significant cashflow.
The reason why you see so much convergence in the industry today is because people overextended themselves in terms of infrastructure and could never recoup the costs. Build the network, get a few subscribers, sell out... that was the formula for many early telcos/ISP's, etc. and largely it did more harm than good in terms of prices and service to the end user. Profits = good service = happy you and me. Debts = poor service = mulitple migrations between providers = headache.
--
vertiblog.com |
|
ib50MbSoon
Formerly TwoKDialup
Premium
join:2002-06-07
Coloma, MI | DSL is a flawed technology...
The problem is they can't deliver the faster speeds (like Comcast) so they have to chop the price. I'm 2.2 miles from SBC's central office and can't even get DSL. Hell, I cant even get 56k dialup.
Comcast is kicking SBC's butt! |
|
djrobx
join:2000-05-31
Valencia, CA
 ·PHONE POWER
 ·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T CallVantage
·Time Warner VOIP
·RoadRunner Cable
| $30? Where did that number come from?
quote:
SBC's CFO however, notes the $15 price-tag shifts to $30 after a year, and the deal is a great way to migrate customers to additional services.
That's interesting. The regular month-to-month price for for DSL Express is $49.95/month. Does this mean they plan on havng the contract price set at ~$30/month at this time next year (when everyone's $14.95 contracts run out)?
--
\\ROB - a part of the SCB local network |
|
techjoe
Premium
join:2004-02-20
Schererville, IN
| reply to cool_coda
Re: Losing money?
I've heard from a lot of people they are getting this for a backup line..Something to run the downloads on while gaming on their main, etc. These folks wouldn't keep it at $30/month, and will drop after the first year I bet. SBC gains a $180 that year, and the user gets a lotta bandwidth (potential) for that little cost..That can't possibly turn any profit at all for SBC.....Sure, some folks may switch to SBC for the promo, and keep it after the first year, but I haven't heard anyone myself with plans to keep it past the end of the $15/month rate.
Looking at that yearly total for this, I think I'll go cry now. I pay more than that over two months for 144kbit still. 
--
www.clanc.cc |
|
Cod
join:2000-07-05
Greensboro, NC
| reply to DaveNJ
Re: Old Story, new Technology
said by DaveNJ :The Bells havent been know for reducing prices in anything, for example when has called id ever been free from a bell, yet it costs basicly nothing to provide. The fact that prices havent fallen is proof they are soaking there customers, and the investors dont like it when your not fleecing them. haha, I love it when people try to justify that caller-id should be free. Ok, so lets put your theory to use:
-Satellite companies charge an extra 5 bucks a month per additional receiver. Is it costing them any more to provide a satellite signal to additional receivers? No. They do it because they can. Not saying I agree with it.
-Cell phone companies over charge for text messages. With each message being a measly few bytes, I seriously doubt that 10 cents per message (incoming & outgoing) is what it costs to provide this service. But by your theory, doesn't text messaging basically cost nothing to provide thus should be "free"?
You see, if you knew the architecture of the telephone system, you'd realize that there are servers & switches that do cost money to run which provide you with caller id. There are technicians who get paid to maintain these switches. Yes, caller-id could be a bit more reasonable pricewise, but to justify that it should be free is bogus. |
|
cool_coda
join:2004-09-08
Brownsburg, IN | reply to techjoe
Re: Losing money?
Reading in the SBC forum they say call up at around 10 months of the contract and they will renew another year for the $14.99.
If not.. back to something else for their special price for awhile.
Competition is good. |
|
dslwanter
Why would I want DSL? I have FTTH
Premium
join:2002-12-16
Lowellville, OH
·Armstrong Zoom In..
·AT&T Midwest
| said by cool_coda :Reading in the SBC forum they say call up at around 10 months of the contract and they will renew another year for the $14.99. You can call just about anytime and in most cases, no matter how far in the contract you are, as long as you agree to another year, they will agree you to 12 more months.
--
"and he will raise you up, on eagles wings, there you are the breath of dawn, make you to shine like the sun, and hold you in the palm, of his hands" |
|
Jim Gurd
Premium
join:2000-07-08
Plymouth, MI
·Comcast
| reply to ib50MbSoon
Re: DSL is a flawed technology...
said by ib50MbSoon :The problem is they can't deliver the faster speeds (like Comcast) so they have to chop the price. I'm 2.2 miles from SBC's central office and can't even get DSL. Hell, I cant even get 56k dialup. Comcast is kicking SBC's butt! Yeah, that's true but I think Comcast will be forced to cut their prices eventually. I say this as a satisfied customer of Comcast. They can't keep charging $46 per month and expect people not to go with a lower price from SBC. I know one person who switched already.
I have considered it but since I get POTS from Talk America instead of SBC I would see my phone bill rise by being forced back to SBC in order to get DSL on the line, thus offsetting the savings from leaving Comcast. |
|
Sebastian
Premium
join:2000-12-22
New Haven, CT
| reply to Biskit
Re: Old Story, new Technology
said by Biskit :So.....Since they run a vertical service on the line that basically cost them nothing means? They should give it to you for free, right? "The fact that prices havent fallen is proof they are soaking there customers" Isnt that what the article is about, falling prices? Why shouldnt investors be worried, whether it is fleecing or not, isnt profits why you invest in any company??! on my cell phone i get caller-id, 5-way calling, callwaiting, voicemail, and many more at no extra charge.. try adding those service to your land-line. it'll cost an arm and leg.
my land line phone cost $50 a month with no long distance, and with just a caller-id.. pretty basic for $50. my cell phone however cost $60/m and i can call anywhere i feel like it for no extra charge.. time for the Bells to lower prices or everyone might switch their land-line phones for wireless..
--
BBR Gaming Server Admin.
gaming.broadbandreports.com, cstrike-planet.com |
|
DaveNJ
No Fear
join:1999-09-01
New Jersey
·Comcast
·Patriot Media
| reply to Cod
said by Cod :said by DaveNJ :You see, if you knew the architecture of the telephone system, you'd realize that there are servers & switches that do cost money to run which provide you with caller id. There are technicians who get paid to maintain these switches. Yes, caller-id could be a bit more reasonable pricewise, but to justify that it should be free is bogus. I work on phone switches everday, and all i have to do is enable a feature, a single field, thats built into the switch. It doesnt cost anything to provide it, all those features just need to be turned on. --
Liberalism weakening The USA everyday... |
|
tsu9
join:2001-08-17
Wheeling, IL | reply to Sebastian
Cellphones include those "standard" as a means to justify a substantially higher premium price. It isn't the only thing that does this, but it does attribute. |
|
