Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
 ·Colbanet
| Not so fast
Competition does nothing to prevent P2P throttling. In fact, it ENCOURAGES it.
Just think. In Canada, we have tons of competition. Bell Canada, the DSL incumbent, now throttles P2P down to 30KB/s. This annoys people who use filesharing. Those people then jump ship to other ISPs who provide better service at lower prices.
Great for those customers, right? They've got choice.
Only problem is that this scenario encourages Bell to throttle! They annoy all the people who use filesharing, and they leave (Bell still gets a $20/line cut for access to their lines from the other ISPs, so it's win-win). Bell gets to retain only the low-usage people who surf the web and check their e-mail.
So in our market up here, the ample competition is the REASON why P2P throttling is happening. It's an easy way to convince your least profitable customers to go elsewhere, while still making money off them. |
|
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | Are there no DSL competitors to Bell ?
Here there are some competitors the AT&T that resell DSL, and do not block/filter, or even care if you run servers off the line.
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
·Colbanet
| Yes, there are MANY DSL competitors to Bell, that's the problem. I'm a customer of just such a competitor.
The thing is, because of the competition, it's in Bell's best interest to drive away all their high-usage customers (let the resellers deal with them, Bell gets the $20/line cut and doesn't have to handle the expensive bandwidth load) and let the competitors handle them.
The downside here is, of course, that all of the competitors have far higher per-user bandwidth usage than Bell; all the high-usage users left bell for the competition. As a result, prices on unlimited service goes up. |
|
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | Here its a little different..
DSL resellers have less restrictions than AT&T, no caps, no filters, no bloated portals, and are more of a 'no frills' style ISP, which is fine in my books.
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
·Colbanet
| It's the same here, for the most part, which is why the competitors are so popular. Although capping is the norm in Canada. Everybody does it except for a few of the resellers, and they often give you the choice. My ISP lets me choose between $29.95 per month for 5mbit down 800kbit up with a 200GB cap, or $39.95/mth for the same service with no cap. It's a value-judgement thing at that point. You need to be using 300GB/mth or more before getting the unlimited service makes sense, as my ISP charges $10 for 100GB of bandwidth.
Anyhow, point is, it's in the best interest of the big guys to unload all their least profitable companies and let the competitors/resellers take that burden. |
|
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | That still isn't a 'bad' deal, as long as its not a forced bundle (i.e. required phone or cable service).
3Mbps = $30 ($35 w/o contract)
6Mbps = $40
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
·Colbanet
| It's not a forced bundle, although since I have a dry-loop, I'm required to pay a $7.25/mth dry loop fee (Government-set, Bell charges it to my ISP).
Luckily, I got a group rate with my ISP, so I'm getting 5/800 with a 200GB cap for $34.20 before tax.
Eventually, that should go up for free to 7/1 (closer to 1.1 up, really) when Bell gets around to letting wholesalers twiddle the "ADSL2+" bit on the DSLAMs :P |
|
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
 ·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME
| Resellers do not have access to dry loop on AT&T 
AT&T wants users off 'DSL' to get them on VDSL (no resellers allowed yet) which has forced bundle of TV service.
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
·Colbanet
| See, that's why deregulation is bad. The CRTC is forcing Bell to do all this. The fact that it's in Bell's best interests is beside the fact, businesses tend not to like their business model to be shook up, even if they'd make more money. Witness the RIAA/MPAA :P
I'd be up for bundled VDSL/IPTV if the price was right (from my current ISP, not Bell)... I can't get satellite, and digital cable is still expensive ($42/mth for basic service plus 20 channels of my choice and HD), not to mention the expensive decoder boxes. IPTV would let me use my XBOX 360 as the receiver. |
|
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME
| I agree on the deregulation - there's not enough 'REAL' competition and volume.
Digital cable here doesn't start until you're at +$50/month.
Currently, all these deregulated US companies want to have their cake and eat it too.
In the L.A. area where I live (used to live in Canada), the consumer gets screwed either way:
Deregulation = semi decent prices, but nickel and diming off of everything, and constant rate increases. Companies will only offer 'decent' rates if you bundle everything, and take moderate packages
Regulation = high(er) prices, but consistant services
Eg. AT&T wants $84/month for TV and 1.5Mbps Internet and that's not including HD, installation, taxes, fees, surcharges, etc.
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA
 ·Verizon FIOS
| reply to Guspaz
Sounds like it's working exactly like it should. Bell has decided they don't want to serve high bandwidth customers, so its competitors get all those customers. That's how it works. Of course as more and more people migrate to the high bandwidth customer area, Bell might have to change their strategy and compete against entrenched competitors. |
|
