T1 Rocky
join:2002-11-15
Dallas, TX | reply to fiberguy
Re: ATT naked dsl
I agree with one of you and disagree with the other. But I'm not sure which one is which any more.  |
|
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| reply to plat2on1
I know we're talking business here.
Well, I hate to disagree with you again, but in this case, you're still not on the mark. Are you're suffering from BBRidas in that what goes on here is a representation of the real world? :P This site is largely as liberal and socialist as you can get and what most people here believe or want isn't ever going to happen in this country..
You did happen to see subscriber growth numbers this quarter didn't you? Cable modem service is still growing and growing.
Around THIS site it may matter, but most people go by perceived value and not price alone. I'd rather spend $40 a month for something I feel I've got a better value on rather than $20.00 a month for something that's about a quarter of what I'm getting for $40.
Also, about perception.. there's other factors that I don't think you're taking into consideration.. one is that phone, or as I will call that industry, captain fees and contracts, loves to punish and control their customers.. that is a HUGE part of a problem they face and just don't get. Most people do NOT like contracts and fees and yet every day they seem to come out with a new one.
I'm going out on a ledge and making a simple guess.. you're younger, aren't you?? as in about 30'ish or about? maybe younger? I ask for a real reason.. MOST of the older generation 30 and above remember phone company actions of yesterday... many of us remember the crap phone pulled on the nation until cable came along and put the heat on them.. so as far as perception, you are right.. since cable is a luxury and phone is a necessity, I'll long remember how phone treated me on a necessity of life while cable gets a slight pass because I could have lived with out them. With phone, I had no choice.. so, in my mind, my perception is that they abuse their customers which has long been my perception which is why I was happy as snot to dump them.. their $20 DSL is of no value to me when it's forced on me.
Not everyone shops on price alone... it's much more complicated than you make it sound.
--
"Complaining is the least path of resistance for the self-serving, the lazy, and I’m told it’s a woman’s prerogative..." |
|
plat2on1
join:2002-08-21
Hopewell Junction, NY
clubs: | reply to fiberguy
we are talking business here, where the majority and perception matter. in this area perception IS reality. |
|
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
1 edit | reply to plat2on1
I don't care about the majority.. really.  It has nothing to do with majority... in the old days back when we hunted for food and drug our women around by the hair, the majority of people believed that fire came from the gods and that thunderstorms meant we did something wrong, but it didn't make it right. Closer to current time, the majority thought that putting a certain Texan into office, not once, but TWICE, was a good thing too. lol
And also, there's a reason why this country isn't a true democracy which is a majority rules.. NO ONE here would want that.. TRUST me.. no one would want that. It's why we have systems in place that protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority.
The moral is that the majority is not always right.
--
"Complaining is the least path of resistance for the self-serving, the lazy, and I’m told it’s a woman’s prerogative..." |
|
plat2on1
join:2002-08-21
Hopewell Junction, NY
clubs:
| reply to fiberguy
said by fiberguy  :said by plat2on1 :no i understand quite well what you are saying, but i'm sure you are in the tiny minority in your opinion. maybe if it was in the range of $5 i would agree it is a discount, but at $15 in my opinion they are using their HSI as retention tool for cable tv. That is is one messed up, large reaching, point of view.. but I defend your right, even if it's wrong. you may think its wrong but i guaranty you i'm in the majority on this one. |
|
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
1 edit | reply to plat2on1
said by plat2on1 :no i understand quite well what you are saying, but i'm sure you are in the tiny minority in your opinion. maybe if it was in the range of $5 i would agree it is a discount, but at $15 in my opinion they are using their HSI as retention tool for cable tv. That is is one messed up, large reaching, point of view.. but I defend your right, even if it's wrong.
Anyone that believes that HSI is cheap, like what some telco cos try to sell it for is simply misguided. About a year or so ago when the new $14 DSL deals started popping up, the first thing that I and a small group predicted was that this was a loss leader and would hurt the company. Guess what? It isn't doing them ANY good to sell that product at that price.
(Not to mention, they sell HSI at twice the price of Caller ID - what does THAT say?)
When the $14 DSL product came out, that's when SBC started spouting up that "We're going to charge google for using our pipes" and so on.. the whole cry foul began. Next, you get U-Verse (yes, it was in the works, but $14 DSL doesn't put much money back into the coffers for re-investment now does it?)
If phone would be honest with themselves, they'd stop selling DSL for such a loss and put a real price of about $40 on their product, take that money and reinvest into their network, but they won't.. they're not used to that model as they've often waited for the government to tack on what I call the "YOU (the customer) build out system" fees.
What does this to to the consumer? "OH! HSI Shouldn't cost that much!! Look at the price of DSL!!"
The difference between phone and cable is vast in one sense. Phone built their networks and got a lot of subz from the consumer. Cable built it's network from their own profits. Telephone had a steady solid build/growth while cable, a private industry, experienced real growing pains. Phone has pretty much been a one trick consumer pony for much of its existence while cable has reinvented itself and rebuilt itself a few times since about 40 years.
No one HERE seems to enjoy the fact that cable has been rebuilding and expanding while phone has continued to rape. I will give phone the credit that you pick up a phone, you get a dial tone, but it came with Ernestien Thomlin on the other end of the operator call. (snort snort) Cable hasn't been perfect for everyone either, but to this day, if I had to put my money between the two, it would be with cable.
At least cable is honest about the price they charge for the HSI service while phone dupes its customers with these low prices and then finds every way they can to figure out how to cut off content providers like google and amazon because "they don't pay their fair share" on the internet. Every time that argument comes up, many people here jump on cable but often forget it's phone who's making the cry.
All of this just goes to show how people don't really look into the real workings, financially, what they are really getting for $14.00 per month, which only short-sells their own future.
--
"Complaining is the least path of resistance for the self-serving, the lazy, and I’m told it’s a woman’s prerogative..." |
|
plat2on1
join:2002-08-21
Hopewell Junction, NY
clubs:
1 edit | reply to fiberguy
no i understand quite well what you are saying, but i'm sure you are in the tiny minority in your opinion.
maybe if it was in the range of $5 i would agree it is a discount, but at $15 in my opinion they are using their HSI as retention tool for cable tv. |
|
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
1 edit | reply to plat2on1
I guess you didn't read what I said... oh well.
HSI is priced at $57.00 per month for 6/384 here. Further, it says "Video Customers save $15.00).. pessimists love to look at it the way they want to see it.
So, I suppose when you local supermarket is running that Thanksgiving special where you get a free turkey with $25.00 purchase, and you don't buy the $25.00 worth of food, the cost of the turkey is the unbundling fee?
The price is $57.00.. NOT $42.00. You get a DISCOUNT for bundling... but, continue to see it how you want.
--
"Complaining is the least path of resistance for the self-serving, the lazy, and I’m told it’s a woman’s prerogative..." |
|
plat2on1
join:2002-08-21
Hopewell Junction, NY
clubs: | reply to fiberguy
cable isn't innocent here...comcast's $17/month unbundling fee costs more than my landline does! |
|
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| reply to Nightfall
6 of 1, half dozen of the other.. Some say charing more for their service with out the CORE BUSINESS product, but many, outside of BBR, will say it's a discount since HSI service is the higher price. But, I know that people like to view the lowest price (no matter what you have to do to get it) as the actual price.
At least with cable, you can get "naked" service... to date, the ONLY real company that offers naked DSL is Qwest. Like them or hate them, Qwest has always provided a rock solid DSL service with out any of the bullSh*t troubles, hassle, port blocking, stipulations, and they also did away with contracts.
So.. where is Verizon and AT&T on this one?? playing games.. that's where.
TRIAL of naked DSL?? For what reason... technical reasons?? Qwest already did their trial.. they want to see how this will harm them IF they go stand-alone DSL.
Again, like or hate cable, they are not using HSI as a retention tool like AT&T and VZ is doing... those two phone providers see their DSL as a way to keep a customer on their phone service and away from cable.. that's all.
--
"Complaining is the least path of resistance for the self-serving, the lazy, and I’m told it’s a woman’s prerogative..." |
|
Nightfall
My Goal Is To Deny Yours
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI
 ·Site5.com
 ·AT&T Midwest
 ·Comcast
| reply to T1 Rocky
said by T1 Rocky :This absolutely pisses me off. AT&T is doing a "trial" of naked dsl? WTF does that mean? They have always said that they were unable to do dsl if there was not a phone line. What does one have to do with the other? There is copper to 99% of the houses in America!! This is FORCED bundling!!!! Its unethical and unnecessary. So now we are suppose to be happy becase they are considering naked dsl where they see it will be profitable? Where is the PUC on this? I hope the cable companies beat the hell out of both of the telcos. And naked dsl has always been a really sore spot with me. It's forced bundling to make sure that the telcos dont lose as much market shre to cell phones and VOIP and it benefits noone but the telcos so that they can kick more money into the lobbyists and attack vertical markets rather than improving the telecom infastructure. On the flip side you have cable companies either charging more for their service if you don't have basic cable OR they say they won't add cable internet if you don't already have cable. Seems that both broadband providers are doing their best to fleece consumers. I suppose if you just want to use a cell phone and if you have satellite TV, then you are going to be paying more for broadband one way or the other. |
|
T1 Rocky
join:2002-11-15
Dallas, TX
·Time Warner Cable
| reply to jgkolt
This absolutely pisses me off. AT&T is doing a "trial" of naked dsl? WTF does that mean? They have always said that they were unable to do dsl if there was not a phone line. What does one have to do with the other? There is copper to 99% of the houses in America!! This is FORCED bundling!!!! Its unethical and unnecessary.
So now we are suppose to be happy becase they are considering naked dsl where they see it will be profitable? Where is the PUC on this?
I hope the cable companies beat the hell out of both of the telcos. And naked dsl has always been a really sore spot with me. It's forced bundling to make sure that the telcos dont lose as much market shre to cell phones and VOIP and it benefits noone but the telcos so that they can kick more money into the lobbyists and attack vertical markets rather than improving the telecom infastructure. |
|
