BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
1 edit | Wait until they institute caps
then "only" getting 46,000 new customers will seem like a lot. |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
 ·Comcast
 ·Qwest.net
 ·magicjack.com
 ·BeeCreek Communica..
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| Well, if the competition has caps it wn't matter. However if the competition doesn't (hint: VZ FiOS overbuilds) then AT&T simply won't intro caps in the area due to the risk of losing all customers.
Looks like AT&T needs to plaster $9.95 (w\POTS, as dialup requires POTS, but cheap POTS) 768/128 DSL ads everywhere, then upsell to their higher tiers. I'm not talking about a 6 Mbit down, 768k up tier. I'm talking U-Verse, or ADSL2+ where U-Verse doesn't wanna go. When I say U-Verse or ADSL2+ I'm talking speeds of 10 Mbit or higher, with uploads of 1 Mbit or higher. At that point tey're competitive with cable.
Oh, and if they match their landline prices with cable VoIP, then the POTS bleed would probably stop. C'mon, $40 isn't so hard to match...
Then again, I have no love for AT&T. U-Verse is crap, and their FTTP stuff being capped at 10/1.5 is just plain lame. Grr. |
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| Well in my area I have at&t and Charter. Charter has only minimumly tlak abut looking into caps perhaps sometime in the future. So they both might have caps but at&t will have them first and thus drive customers to Charter. Also if both have caps and both have very low caps then I will simply quit most of my internet usage and get the very cheapest package I can get and only use it for e-mail, online bill paying etc. I'm sure I won't be the only one doing this or dumping internet completely. |
|
justbits
More fiber than ATT can handle
Premium
join:2003-01-08
Chicago, IL
·AT&T Midwest
| reply to iansltx
For the large portion of customers who can't get speeds faster than 3Mbps, ADSL2+ wont help until AT+T does some serious line conditioning or they start building out more RTs. And if they're busying building out RTs, it's more likely that you'll get a U-verse VRAD with VDSL instead. |
|
Cuda
@sbcglobal.net | reply to iansltx
"Uverse is crap!"
Better then any Comcrap or Wow I've ever had. Works perfectly ALL THE TIME. |
|
jimk
Premium
join:2006-04-15
Raleigh, NC
·AT&T Southeast
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to BF69
As others have said, if they have usage caps as well as the competition, there won't be much of a difference other than ordinary customer churn.
However, this is all the reason for AT&T (and other phone carriers) to offer truly unlimited service, or at least set the caps substantially higher than any of the cable companies (i.e. 500+ GB). They need to distinguish themselves from the cable companies somehow, especially as they start to compete with them on television offerings.
People will be willing to take a slight speed hit to avoid worrying about caps. This should be easier for the DSL carriers since they don't have the same sharing concerns that cable companies have. (Yes, I know it is shared at some point... but the nature of the network setup makes this less of a problem for the DSL carriers)
At least they finally offer DSL without home phone service. I would have been a DSL customer a while back, but the $20+ for a basic phone line which I would never use just didn't make sense. It may be less profit for them per line, but it is some profit where they were getting none before. |
|
