dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
16
share rss forum feed


tshirt
Premium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to funchords

Re: My initial thoughts --

said by funchords:

OVERALL, it's a big huge step in the right direction.

A "static" 250GB cap sounds like the right number for the beginning of 2007. This amount represents top half percent that got "the call" for hitting the invisicap early last year.
Since the bandwidth appetite grows 140% a year (which is about right), this year's cap probably should be around 350 GB. So Comcast should continue to update that number every 3-6 months or so to avoid throttling progress.

A measurement tool is ALMOST mandatory, but it's extremely difficult!
As for the overage penalty ($15 per 10 GB), this sounds like a weaker part of the plan. It requires tighter, more-accurate metering to administer. If I were Comcast, I'd probably go for something like $25 per 100GB. Just my opinion,

Robb Topolski
While the cap will need to move up over time, I don't think "chasing" the 99.5th percentile will work to set the number, they already can boot the top .5%, if they choose too.
Users are free to pay more if they want more.
Yes $1.50 is fairly punitive, but those users that exceed that amount aren't really their target market
To say the $1.50 per gig is excessive is quite true as it's not just bandwidth costs, but plant upgrades beyond what the normal tier allows for.
The $25 per 100GB might work in a system where there was no monthly charge, all fees based on usage.
The "granny" type would only pat $25/mo (easily staying below 100G), the mid-level people would end up at $50-75, and at the top end you could buy all you could afford.
It might not be viable with out a base tier, and there would surely be arugments by those that went 10Megs in to the next 100 gigs.


funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:6
said by tshirt:

they already can boot the top .5%, if they choose too.
I think you can take this as a sign that Comcast thinks they probably cannot just boot people as they have before. It's likely that they are expecting a ruling that says that they have to provide evidence that a user was actually, demonstrably negatively impacting the network to enforce their TOS.

said by tshirt:

Users are free to pay more if they want more.
Not for the past couple of years. Comcast no longer offers an upsell as an alternative to getting kicked off of their network for a year.

said by tshirt:

Yes $1.50 is fairly punitive, but those users that exceed that amount aren't really their target market
Agreed. This part of the plan can stand some additional improvement, but as it is it is not a show-stopper. As with anything new, you should not wait until you're sure that everything is perfect before you start rolling it out -- otherwise, you'll never roll anything out.

said by tshirt:

To say the $1.50 per gig is excessive is quite true as it's not just bandwidth costs, but plant upgrades beyond what the normal tier allows for.

The $25 per 100GB might work in a system where there was no monthly charge, all fees based on usage.
The "granny" type would only pat $25/mo (easily staying below 100G), the mid-level people would end up at $50-75, and at the top end you could buy all you could afford.
It might not be viable with out a base tier, and there would surely be arugments by those that went 10Megs in to the next 100 gigs.
I think we're both recognizing that there is a whole other option here for Comcast, but one that is dramatically different from this plan. Perhaps even one they considered and vetoed due to competitive positioning.

I'm avoiding "going there" right now because I want to keep this topic about this plan.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
HTTP is the new Bandwidth Hog...


tshirt
Premium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Comcast
said by funchords:



I'm avoiding "going there" right now because I want to keep this topic about this plan.
I agree, and the striaght bandwidth plan I suggested isn't far off in price from this plan, but it does assure them a base income/per sub.
I'm sure the exact numbers/limits will be adjusted depending on the test and early launch results.