Re: Old Story, new Technology in http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r13590870 en Thu, 03 Dec 2009 08:40:12 EDT Thu, 03 Dec 2009 08:40:12 EDT Re: Old Story, new Technology http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13593624 fiberguy : So, let's have the government take over this, run it at a break even and just remove the ability for companies to generate profits all together. Where do you get the right to say what the service is worth? You have options, take them!

Rather, what I hear is "becuse Vonage does it, I want SBC to do it too!" You are a price leach then! Support Vonage and like like if you want that price. Don't expect because Voip provider are pricing in your range that SBD has to or must. With out customers, the whole competition idea is moot as the competition will go out of business. You want OTHERS to support cheaper VOIP so you can have cheaper service. Put your money where your complaint is.

This is REALLY silly.

There are several people who with no idea how business runs. Seriously, you can easily identify yourself by not looking at simple reason being offered you by those WTIH a clue.

You have answered your own question. You want free caller ID? Go to one that provides, or "bundles" it in the cost of service. Those services also don't have thousands of miles of plant to maintain, they don't have thousands of employees, brick and mortar costs, you name it. Yes I think the cost is relative to the service.

I sugges you go to vonage or others like you said who give it away. You also get service that is WORTH the $14/$24 fee you pay. Service that has NO SLA to be available 99.99% of the time, the quality, and all the service available to you when something goes wrong.

Vonage and other services have few employees and some servers to operate - that's it! They don't even have to provide the transport, cable or telephone providers do with broadband. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13593624 Mon, 06 Jun 2005 19:16:07 EDT Re: Old Story, new Technology http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13593556 LinuxJunkie : Obviously nothing is absolutely free to provide, but to charge $5 extra a month for a service that costs them about .01 cent to provide to every customer a month is a little exorbinate... it's highway robbery with a 50,000% profit margin -- and that's not an exaggeration. Same goes for text and pix messaging on cell phones. Most people don't realize how little it costs these companies on a per customer basis to provide these services, yet they'll charge 50,000% more for it.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13593556 Mon, 06 Jun 2005 19:09:08 EDT Re: Old Story, new Technology http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13593531 fiberguy :
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.
Except for Caller ID, and Voice Mail (which is usually resold), you mentioned services that they WANT you to use. 3-way calling, call waiting, and some of these other services make you use more minutes which means more profits.

Comparing the cell phone model to landline services is not a great example.

But I agree, if I were investing in a company that was not trying to get the most $$ from each customer, I would think twice about my investment.

Also, the $14.95 service is a loss in profit. Please read the article again and pay attention to the WHOLE thing and not just what makes people happy.

Like I have said in other forums, SBD is doing this to draw custoemrs away from Cable who is on thier butts to get them as a captive audience. A captive customer is easier to migrate into higher charges.

Did anyone also notice how they stated that after the $14.95 promotion is over it reverts to the *$30.00* monthly charge? Also, SBC is not being honest on this "prmotion" as they will offer this to anyone who asks for it without argument and over the phone.

Disagree if you want, but SBC won't be running this promotion as loose as they currently are for long. I don't think cable has much to worry about with this.. it's all the balance of the business coming to play.. competition, you know? I know most of you can't see this because it's not government forcing the price drop. However, the last thing I want is either cable or telephone to go under.. because what are you left with? NO CHOICE!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13593531 Mon, 06 Jun 2005 19:07:07 EDT Re: Old Story, new Technology http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13593237 anon :
Just like it cost them nothing to provide touch tone service, with the switch actually set up to prefer touch tone, but they still raped you for $2-3 per month for it untill they were basically forced to stop fleecing customers for it. The telcos problem is that they have been pulling such ripoffs for so long that they cant think any other way. It doesn't cost them anything to use 20 year old lines that have long been amortized, and all the "features" are provided by computer.

I'm sure there are basic costs like power and maintenance, however, these are business expenses which they likely write off to a large extent. Why should the customers be fleeced for outrageous fees for every individual service the computer can provide? Just because "they can" doesn't make it right. They have just been getting away with it for so long generating that cash cow that they cant concieve of anything else. It's their business model. This has a lot to do with why many people are migrating to cellphones as their promary line.

However, this does not mean you are getting anything at "no extra cost" with a cellphone either You are surely paying for everything you get as part of the monthly charge, no matter if you use it or not. Why do you think your minutes are limited, with high charges for each minute above what you are allowed, billed with computer accuracy? Because many subscribers go over their alloted "anytime" minutes on a regular basis and since SBC, Verizon, etc own the major cell providers, you are getting screwed no matter what you do. It does not "cost" them $30 per subscriber, per month to provide service that is, essentially, computer driven and managed over their own private network. The only real cost is for power and for repairs/maintenance when needed. This is why the profits are so high.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13593237 Mon, 06 Jun 2005 18:35:12 EDT Re: Old Story, new Technology http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13591956 grumpygeek : It really isn't relevant what it costs to provide. If you want to start your own phone company, you can give it away for free. (And you'll get a lot of customers like myself).

I think it costs you nothing to do an extra hour of work each day - I mean, really, what does it cost you? So, you should do that work for free. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13591956 Mon, 06 Jun 2005 16:26:32 EDT Re: Old Story, new Technology http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13591154 DaveNJ :
said by Cod See Profile:

said by DaveNJ See Profile:

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.
So do I, Dave. And I assume that depending on what type of switch you work on, that Lucent/Nortel/Siemens or whomever didn't charge your company millions of dollars for that software feature in the generic release of your switch software?

How about the money it costs to pay your salary to maintain that switch or the bills your company pays to power that switch...

How about the costs of the SS7 network that retrieves and relays that callerid info for millions of customers?

How about the costs of the database & employees who maintain and run that database?

There's more to it then the "oh its just a software option that needs to be turned on" mentality. Its a feature/service that they have a right to charge for like any other company who does the same. Whether their pricing is fair or not is not for me to judge but it is ignorant to say it should be free.
Okay answer me this then, what is the actual cost for caller-id ? I have read it costs at most 20 cents to provide a month. Plus how come companies like vonage can provide it free, is it just the cost of the copper wire, which is at least 20 yrs old. How come voip, cellular, and clecs can sell it as a free option, but because we are connect via copper its more expensive. hmmm ?
--
Liberalism weakening The USA everyday...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13591154 Mon, 06 Jun 2005 15:07:48 EDT Re: Old Story, new Technology http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13591149 dogo88 : And would you be willing to do this for free?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13591149 Mon, 06 Jun 2005 15:07:10 EDT Re: Old Story, new Technology http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13591131 cptmiles : Don't forget that most of those big companies that own the landline owns that cell phone service as well. No one is clean.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13591131 Mon, 06 Jun 2005 15:05:04 EDT Re: Old Story, new Technology http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13591089 Cod :
said by DaveNJ See Profile:

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.
So do I, Dave. And I assume that depending on what type of switch you work on, that Lucent/Nortel/Siemens or whomever didn't charge your company millions of dollars for that software feature in the generic release of your switch software?

How about the money it costs to pay your salary to maintain that switch or the bills your company pays to power that switch...

How about the costs of the SS7 network that retrieves and relays that callerid info for millions of customers?

How about the costs of the database & employees who maintain and run that database?

There's more to it then the "oh its just a software option that needs to be turned on" mentality. Its a feature/service that they have a right to charge for like any other company who does the same. Whether their pricing is fair or not is not for me to judge but it is ignorant to say it should be free.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13591089 Mon, 06 Jun 2005 15:00:32 EDT Re: Old Story, new Technology http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13590897 tsu9 : 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.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13590897 Mon, 06 Jun 2005 14:40:49 EDT Re: Old Story, new Technology http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13590879 DaveNJ :
said by Cod See Profile:

said by DaveNJ See Profile:

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...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13590879 Mon, 06 Jun 2005 14:38:37 EDT Re: Old Story, new Technology http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13590870 Sebastian :
said by Biskit See Profile:

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]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13590870 Mon, 06 Jun 2005 14:37:22 EDT Re: Old Story, new Technology http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13590734 Cod :
said by DaveNJ See Profile:

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. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13590734 Mon, 06 Jun 2005 14:21:05 EDT Re: Old Story, new Technology http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13590381 oliphant : 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]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13590381 Mon, 06 Jun 2005 13:41:49 EDT Re: Old Story, new Technology http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13590321 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??!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13590321 Mon, 06 Jun 2005 13:35:10 EDT Old Story, new Technology http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13590267 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.
--
Liberalism weakening The USA everyday...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13590267 Mon, 06 Jun 2005 13:29:39 EDT