dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
2
share rss forum feed


mod_wastrel
iamwhatiam

join:2008-03-28
kudos:1
reply to Jodokast96

Re: Very nice...

It's not that rare from what I've heard (the trying to get it but can't part); the "I've got dial-up and don't want to spend $30 or more on Internet access" customer isn't rare at all. She's looked at Comcast: the economy "double-play" ($50)--still more than she wants to spend. In time, maybe; but she's been stuck like this for close to 2 years. As it is, Verizon is not selling subscriptions to people who just aren't interested in what they do offer, and there are a lot more of them than there are of those who are interested in 20/20 or even 10/2. Internet access just isn't that important to a LARGE segment of the population--$20 or less is all they care about. Too many people who spend their time living and breathing broadband just don't get that; I work in IT, and I run into it all the time. But then I've always been willing to spend whatever it costs to get broadband--it saved me time (and, time is money).



floridaguy

@cox.net

I respect what you are trying to convey..... but unless you have some statistics to back it up I'd have to say Verizon has properly invested a tad more time and money into their market analysis.



mod_wastrel
iamwhatiam

join:2008-03-28
kudos:1

I think Verizon's market analysis told them they'd have a few takers for their $15 DSL. Instead, they got a flood of new subscribers--too many for them to even handle adequately. I think their only analysis for FiOS subscriptions is a cost/benefit analysis: they figure right now that the only acceptable return on investment for each subscriber is at least $40. The thing is, they also say they're going to drop support for copper, leaving only FiOS connections even if all you have is phone service (though they don't really say when they'll reach this stage). At this point, $15 vs. $0 might sound like a good return on investment--something is better than nothing. What they're betting is that the triple-play (or at least the double-play) will bring in everyone eventually. I think it's a mistake--a financial mistake--to ignore a large portion of your potential subscriber base in the hopes of forcing a larger return. Nobody who really wants broadband is going to go for a 768/128 connection; nobody who doesn't really care about the speed of their Internet connection versus the money in their pocket is going to go for $40 Internet, or even $30--most people's lives do not revolve around Internet access; and a lot of people are satisfied with OTA TV and a trip to the video store, or Netflix. Having no economy tier is losing Verizon potential subscribers and potential revenue. The first rule of marketing is still "make 'em a customer first, then sell 'em more stuff".