Re: It all comes down to price.... in

Re: It all comes down to price.... in http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r20702542 en Sat, 05 Dec 2009 00:50:34 EDT Sat, 05 Dec 2009 00:50:34 EDT Re: It all comes down to price.... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20707594 wifi4milez :

said by Warez_Zealot

said by wifi4milez

:

While the majority of the people on this website would chose Verizon for the higher speeds, that is simply not the priority for the rest of the country. 9+ out of 10 people would chose a cheaper option (for instance a 768k connection) versus a 100Mbps connection. There is a reason the fastest growing tier for both cable operators and (DSL) telcos is the "light" tier (generally 768k). I would suspect that unless Verizon wanted to lose money on a rollout, ATT would likely win more customers in a greenfield area simply because they can offer cheaper service without losing (as much, if any) money. Uverse is far cheaper to deploy than FIOS, and that means cheaper prices for customers (unless VZ takes a loss per sub).

How do you know that? Why do ISP's always advertise speeds then? Me thinks you are trying to pass off your opinions as facts.

If you are asking me how I know what the fastest growing tier is, I suggest you do your own research if you dont believe me (its been mentioned/discussed multiple times). You can start right here on this very website in fact. If you are asking me how I know people prefer cheaper tiers, I suspect once you research what I just mentioned your answer will be fairly clear as well.
--
If history teaches us anything, it teaches that simple-minded appeasement or wishful thinking about our adversaries is folly.
-Ronald Reagan-
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20707594 Fri, 27 Jun 2008 11:52:47 EDT Re: It all comes down to price.... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20707163 CUBS_FAN :

said by XBL2009

:

Currently paying $14.99 for 3 megabits which is ok for the price but it's still to slow to upload at 512kbps.

Hell we all should be seeing 25mbps for $25 by now or better.

Where in Chicago can you get 3mb's for $14.99? Im paying like 5 times that right now for 6mb's with Comcast. I don't care about uploads, in the past year or so I was just upgraded to 1mb but for the longest I had 384k.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20707163 Fri, 27 Jun 2008 10:23:29 EDT Re: It all comes down to price.... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20705380 Warez_Zealot :

said by wifi4milez

How do you know that? Why do ISP's always advertise speeds then? Me thinks you are trying to pass off your opinions as facts.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20705380 Thu, 26 Jun 2008 22:27:26 EDT Re: It all comes down to price.... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20703548 Matt :

said by OSUGoose

:

No, i was refering to their popularity, not offering. Every at&t ad you see Talks about bundling home phone, internet and tv or wireless for 75 or 99/mo. Jo Consumer calls in to switch from cable, and says i want that 75 or 99 bundle deal, and i bet most reps dont say but thats for our cheepest dsl speed, for 5 or 10 bucks more a month you can double or tripple ur speed.

Same with Time Warner's $99 triple play or the 3 for $29 each promos they have going.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20703548 Thu, 26 Jun 2008 16:11:56 EDT Re: It all comes down to price.... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20702890 OSUGoose : No, i was refering to their popularity, not offering. Every at&t ad you see Talks about bundling home phone, internet and tv or wireless for 75 or 99/mo. Jo Consumer calls in to switch from cable, and says i want that 75 or 99 bundle deal, and i bet most reps dont say but thats for our cheepest dsl speed, for 5 or 10 bucks more a month you can double or tripple ur speed.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20702890 Thu, 26 Jun 2008 14:01:00 EDT Re: It all comes down to price.... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20702871 wifi4milez :

said by OSUGoose

:

You've seen uptake on the Basic DSL packages for one main reason. Thats the level of service AT&T pushes when they talk about bundling for 75 or 99.

No, the "light" tiers are offered as stand alone product by most providers. The only requirement most providers have with the light tiers is that you sign a 12 month (or greater) term to get them.
--
If history teaches us anything, it teaches that simple-minded appeasement or wishful thinking about our adversaries is folly.
-Ronald Reagan-
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20702871 Thu, 26 Jun 2008 13:56:29 EDT Re: It all comes down to price.... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20702753 OSUGoose : You've seen uptake on the Basic DSL packages for one main reason. Thats the level of service AT&T pushes when they talk about bundling for 75 or 99.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20702753 Thu, 26 Jun 2008 13:34:38 EDT Re: It all comes down to price.... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20702554 XBL2009 : Currently paying $14.99 for 3 megabits which is ok for the price but it's still to slow to upload at 512kbps.

Hell we all should be seeing 25mbps for $25 by now or better. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20702554 Thu, 26 Jun 2008 12:57:19 EDT Re: It all comes down to price.... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20702542 en102 : I'm all with the 'bottom line' approach, however, I've always seen 2 distinct arguments.

1. Bottom line pricing: I'll take a 3Mbps/512kbps for $25/month and be happy (for now). I'll save $25x12) = $300/year
2. Cheaper in bulk pricing: Some will say that 12-15Mbps for $50 is a better deal. Well, it is on a per Mbps rate. If you can justify the price, then maybe its worth it - I.e. online gamers, BT, etc.

I'm typically more of the option #1 approach, while I know most companies attempt to sell item #2 with packages.
--
Canada = Hollywood North]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20702542 Thu, 26 Jun 2008 12:54:38 EDT Re: It all comes down to price.... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20702471 Matt : One problem with your line of thinking is that AT&T is running fiber to almost all new greenfield deployments, just limiting it to U-Verse speeds.

So their cost to greenfield deployments may actually be HIGHER per sub than Verizon since Verizon has likely negotiated better contracts with their suppliers and contractors.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20702471 Thu, 26 Jun 2008 12:42:26 EDT Re: It all comes down to price.... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20702448 EngineerDave : I agree. The typical DSLR reader represents a very small portion of the market. I would think if Verizon crossed the line that AT&T would do the same in those markets. Since U-Verse is IP based it doesn't have to be constrained to copper plant. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20702448 Thu, 26 Jun 2008 12:39:07 EDT It all comes down to price.... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20702391 wifi4milez : While the majority of the people on this website would chose Verizon for the higher speeds, that is simply not the priority for the rest of the country. 9+ out of 10 people would chose a cheaper option (for instance a 768k connection) versus a 100Mbps connection. There is a reason the fastest growing tier for both cable operators and (DSL) telcos is the "light" tier (generally 768k). I would suspect that unless Verizon wanted to lose money on a rollout, ATT would likely win more customers in a greenfield area simply because they can offer cheaper service without losing (as much, if any) money. Uverse is far cheaper to deploy than FIOS, and that means cheaper prices for customers (unless VZ takes a loss per sub).
--
If history teaches us anything, it teaches that simple-minded appeasement or wishful thinking about our adversaries is folly.
-Ronald Reagan-
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20702391 Thu, 26 Jun 2008 12:27:16 EDT