 saber11Check SixPremium
join:2000-06-09
Clayton, OH
2 edits | reply to saber11
Re: [TWC] Pricing model changing soon »Time Warner Cable Eyeing Overage Charges? |
|
|
|
BPremium,MVM
join:2000-10-28
3 edits | EDIT: Well hello to all the visitors from ArsTechnica, Slashdot, and the rest of the web! You might see that the leaked memo originally posted here is now missing above. We don't know why the original leaker sanitized it (I can guess), but it's worth noting that many "news" sites are linking here without giving ANY credit to DSL Reports / BroadBandReports, without crediting news guy Karl and his original (often plagiarized) article at »Time Warner Cable Eyeing Overage Charges? , without linking to the proper beginning of this thread at »[TWC] Pricing model changing soon , and/or without crediting the original leaker, whom I presume is now hiding under an assumed name in Guam. Now back to our originally scheduled thread in progress. 
said by saber11:NETWORK Project to plan integration of the Adelphia backbone into the TWC network, creating a nationwide TWC backbone. TWC will merge all IP based services (video, voice, data) onto a single common converged network platform. Oh, well THAT should be simple; they've got that Staples Easy Button, after all.
Thanks for the documentation. They're clearly insane. Anywhere there's reasonable competition, folks will flee. Then again, people really don't much care about this sort of thing, so I might have to take that back.
As to the "Speed Preview" that's going to be counterproductive. If anything, it will prove to most people why they should probably save money and LOWER their tier.
-- B
--
In a realm outside causality and function |
|
 tiger72SexaT duorPPremium
join:2001-03-28
Saint Louis, MO
kudos:1 | reply to saber11
well i'll be damned.
I have a feeling that this, like Ohio's caps, will be short lived. |
|
 kba4
join:2001-10-23
Canton, OH
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to saber11
said by saber11:...We will use the results of the trial to evaluate results for possible future nationwide rollouts. it's a trial, and they'll more than likely conclude from the inevitable negative response that this action will not be worthwhile at all. Personally, I'd rather have DSL running at 3-6Mbps/384-768Kbps direct than 15/768 shared+caps. |
|
Host:
Time Warner Intern..
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
4 edits | reply to saber11
Interesting!
It's been rumored that Comcast has tested a similar system but never launched it for fear of consumer backlash, and I'd assume the same thing would happen here.
Note, we posted a story about this on the front page at 3:30.
Looks like Ars Technica read it and reconstituted their own version at 4:15, their write-up getting the digg traffic and Slashdot traffic. |
|
 Matt3All noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | reply to saber11
said by saber11:The introduction of Consumption Based Billing will enable TWC to charge customer based upon usage, impacting only 5% of subscribers who utilize over half of the total network bandwidth. I'm curious what the average bandwidth usage of a single subscriber in that 5% would be ....
I agree with Karl and others though; I think this will fail for the most part. They may implement a lower speed tier with consumption based billing, but if they sledgehammer this across all residential customers, they'll just drive that 5% to the Business Class side and move the problem. Only this time, the problem could possibly impact big money ... |
|
Host:
Time Warner Intern..
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| I think these companies will ultimately convince the public that these pricing schemes are inevitable (look at all the FUD stories about a looming bandwidth crunch), and we'll start seeing overages for extreme-use customers.
Of course when you consider the countless grannies who only consume a tiny bit of bandwidth it all evens out in the end, but I think the investor pressure to always see quarterly gains will make overages happen eventually....
I still think it would be marketing suicide, but who knows. |
|
 hopeflickerCapitalism breeds greedPremium
join:2003-04-03
Long Beach, CA
kudos:1 | reply to saber11
Why are they so concerned with that 5% of heavy users? |
|
tiger72SexaT duorPPremium
join:2001-03-28
Saint Louis, MO
kudos:1 | said by hopeflicker:Why are they so concerned with that 5% of heavy users? "5% of subscribers who utilize over half of the total network bandwidth"
That 5% loses TW money, or they're at the least not profitable. |
|
hopeflickerCapitalism breeds greedPremium
join:2003-04-03
Long Beach, CA
kudos:1 | said by tiger72:said by hopeflicker:Why are they so concerned with that 5% of heavy users? "5% of subscribers who utilize over half of the total network bandwidth" That 5% loses TW money, or they're at the least not profitable. so if im reading this right, 5% of the users on their network use over half of the bandwidth? This is suspect to me.
--
Man created God in his image : intolerant, sexist, homophobic and violent. |
|
BPremium,MVM
join:2000-10-28 | Nope, that sounds about right.
And it's COMPLETELY typical on any computer network! (And probably any voice network for that matter.)
A competent and responsible network management understands, accepts, and deals with that, especially when those users are PAYING to be there. The management does NOT figure out new and exciting ways of showing that 5% the door.
Because guess what? After that top 5% leaves, there's STILL another level of 5 or 10 percent who represent the NEW "Top Talkers" on the network, and now THEY become the next target for execution.
How much utilization is little enough? Perhaps we should all just turn off our modems and send Time Warner checks every month anyway?
-- B
--
In a realm outside causality and function |
|
Matt3All noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | said by B:Perhaps we should all just turn off our modems and send Time Warner checks every month anyway? -- B Shhhhh! Don't give them any ideas. 
Or at least patent a very broad definition of the method for turning off a modem but collecting a check and then sue them when they implement it. |
|
 telcolackey5The Truth? You can't handle the truth
join:2007-04-06
Death Valley, CA | reply to Karl Bode
said by Karl Bode:Of course when you consider the countless grannies who only consume a tiny bit of bandwidth it all evens out in the end, but I think the investor pressure to always see quarterly gains will make overages happen eventually.... I still think it would be marketing suicide, but who knows. I agree with the marketing challenges, but disagree with the granny analysis. Many, many users (including myself) are Internet veterans and use broadband fairly heavily. However "heavy users" don't come close to the 300+G of the top 5%.
I bet that the majority of the BBR folks here are in the 40-60G / month range, but think they are going to be impacted by issues like this. In reality it is the multi-terabyte p2p DVD downloader that causes faster than normal network growth requirements and the push to usage tiers.
I'm not a granny, and don't like subsidizing your DVD library.
--
"Believe only half of what you see and nothing that you hear." - Dinah Craik |
|
 AMDUSERPremium
join:2003-05-28
Earth
kudos:1 | reply to kba4
As would I, if it meant that there would not be any overage charges.
AT&T dryloop dsl 6 meg is only $38.99, only a couple ($2 - 3) dollars more then the 7 Meg/512k service from TWC. |
|
BPremium,MVM
join:2000-10-28
1 edit | reply to telcolackey5
said by telcolackey5: impacted by issues like this. In reality it is the multi-terabyte p2p DVD downloader that causes faster than normal network growth requirements and the push to usage tiers. I'm not a granny, and don't like subsidizing your DVD library. I'm not a multi-terabyte P2P DVD Downloader, and I don't like having to check for permission with my ISP before using my Internet connection this week, should I decide to configure high quality videoconferencing to a sick relative, or host a LAN party, or transfer a bunch of video to friends and family, or legitimately BUY and download a bunch of HD quality movies, or... USE MY DAMNED CONNECTION.
There's no reason to "draw the line somewhere". We moderate users and grannies are more than plentiful enough to offset the network's top talkers. The ISPs are just being greedy.
Edit: typos
-- B
--
In a realm outside causality and function |
|
telcolackey5The Truth? You can't handle the truth
join:2007-04-06
Death Valley, CA | said by B:I'm not a multi-terabyte P2P DVD Downloader, and I don't like having to check for permission with my ISP before using my Internet connection this week As you shouldn't, but if you leave your HD Video conf running 7x24 you will have to pay for it like leaving your water running, all your lights on and your windows open in the winter.
--
"Believe only half of what you see and nothing that you hear." - Dinah Craik |
|
tiger72SexaT duorPPremium
join:2001-03-28
Saint Louis, MO
kudos:1 | said by telcolackey5:said by B:I'm not a multi-terabyte P2P DVD Downloader, and I don't like having to check for permission with my ISP before using my Internet connection this week As you shouldn't, but if you leave your HD Video conf running 7x24 you will have to pay for it like leaving your water running, all your lights on and your windows open in the winter. except that bandwidth doesn't expend resources. It's either a "use it or lose it" product - not a finite resource which can be saved and used elsewhere.
--
|- The LP »www.lp.org/issues/issues.shtml -|
|- Cato @ Liberty »www.cato-at-liberty.org -|
|- Ron Paul »www.ronpaul2008.com/ -| |
|
Host:
Time Warner Intern..
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| reply to telcolackey5
quote:
I bet that the majority of the BBR folks here are in the 40-60G / month range, but think they are going to be impacted by issues like this. In reality it is the multi-terabyte p2p DVD downloader that causes faster than normal network growth requirements and the push to usage tiers.
Investors who get a taste of per-byte billing will want more. It ramps up the revenue stream, and if they can sell it from the marketing side, it will expand.
And with systems like DirecTV's VOD system that uses your broadband connection to automatically download HD video, combined with the vast volume of on-line video that's emerging daily, the category "bandwidth hog" is going to ramp up very quickly.
I doubt this trial will have 400GB as its consumption ceiling, so I think this probably would impact many more consumers than just the 24/7 DVD p2p RIP junkies... |
|
telcolackey5The Truth? You can't handle the truth
join:2007-04-06
Death Valley, CA
1 edit | said by Karl Bode:And with systems like DirecTV's VOD system that uses your broadband connection to automatically download HD video, combined with the vast volume of on-line video that's emerging daily, the category "bandwidth hog" is going to ramp up very quickly. Perhaps, but as you add more electronics to your house, or christmas lights outside, doesn't your electrical bill go up? Maybe you go from 100amp service to 200amp service... maybe the electrical company needs to add more infrastructure...
said by tiger72:except that bandwidth doesn't expend resources. It's either a "use it or lose it" product - not a finite resource which can be saved and used elsewhere. Incorrect. Increase in bandwidth growth over and above normally yearly growth causes unexpected capital expense. This can either be shared among all users, light, moderate, heavy and terabyte dvd downloaders, or the costs are put where they belong.
--
"Believe only half of what you see and nothing that you hear." - Dinah Craik |
|
tiger72SexaT duorPPremium
join:2001-03-28
Saint Louis, MO
kudos:1 | reply to Karl Bode
said by Karl Bode: quote:
I bet that the majority of the BBR folks here are in the 40-60G / month range, but think they are going to be impacted by issues like this. In reality it is the multi-terabyte p2p DVD downloader that causes faster than normal network growth requirements and the push to usage tiers.
Investors who get a taste of per-byte billing will want more. It ramps up the revenue stream, and if they can sell it from the marketing side, it will expand. And with systems like DirecTV's VOD system that uses your broadband connection to automatically download HD video, combined with the vast volume of on-line video that's emerging daily, the category "bandwidth hog" is going to ramp up very quickly. People do not like seeing overages on their accounts. Americans in particular like to see "unlimited", and suddenly saying that we're going to have overages for a population which doesn't know the difference between a bit and a byte, or a megabyte and a gigabyte will NOT go well. It's one thing on cell phones when we have limited minute plans. Everyone knows what a minute is, and even then overages are frequently negotiated down. It costs lots of money to pay employees to waste time negotiating down costs so customers actually pay their bills.
Until everyone knows how much a gigabyte is, telling people that they have a cap of xGB/mo is a useless, costly waste of time. And for the educated users, it's twice as bad since most of us would contend (and waste service reps time arguing) that if they are going to charge us by-the-byte, then having speed caps is doubly bad as we don't want to be restricted on both counts.
--
|- The LP »www.lp.org/issues/issues.shtml -|
|- Cato @ Liberty »www.cato-at-liberty.org -|
|- Ron Paul »www.ronpaul2008.com/ -| |
|
