 badtripI heart the East BayPremium
join:2004-03-20
Albany, CA | Metered billing > Flate rates and caps I can live with metered billing. As a matter of fact, I prefer metered billing as I believe that I would be able to save money on internet access if the rates are reasonable.
Flat rates with a cap are money grabs, however. One day I was bored and decided to see how Comcast's profit would scale with their proposed 250GB capped flat rate model. Well they never said what their flat rate would be but I'd bet the flat rate would be around the same price it is now.
»spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=···Xrn8MECw
Flat rate is $40/mo, $15 per 10GB over the 250GB cap, I assumed Comcast's cost is $0.16/GB (which I'm sure is generous). I'm a database app/tool programmer, not a financier so my calculations are utterly simplistic but it gives some "back of the napkin" insight on how profitable overage charges are. Even if Comcast charges $0.00 for the first 250GB, they get back into the black after an overage of only 25GB or 275GB downloaded in a month.
While I agree many individuals will not go over 250GB per month in the immediate future, I guarantee that 250GB will be a laughably small amount of data in the near future. This is especially true if we are talking about a "household" instead of an "individual". I believe Comcast is banking (literally) on that. |
|
 major marcoRes Firma Mitescere NescitPremium
join:2003-02-13
Stepford, CA | said by badtrip:While I agree many individuals will not go over 250GB per month in the immediate future, I guarantee that 250GB will be a laughably small amount of data in the near future. This is especially true if we are talking about a "household" instead of an "individual". I believe Comcast is banking (literally) on that. Which only goes to further underscore that capping/metering is nothing but a money grab. These cos. that are squawking the loudest about it like to trot out the 5/95% stat, but at the same time, aren't forthcoming with any legitimate usage stats. They'd rather just pull something out of their ass and use it to justify the money grab. But realistically, if their 5/95% stat is even a little bit accurate, then why not just bill the offensive 5% for their overages? I'll tell you why not...because it is a hell of a lot more lucrative to impose miserly caps and just bill everyone across the board for imagined overages. They're not kidding anyone with half a brain about this scam and neither are the many shills touting how wonderful capping/metering is.
--
The Toll
Tracking Lord Stanley
|
|
 KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
 ·AT&T DSL Service
| reply to badtrip
said by badtrip:I can live with metered billing. As a matter of fact, I prefer metered billing as I believe that I would be able to save money on internet access if the rates are reasonable. That is based on so many What's, If's, and but's, how can you say for sure?
What if your ISP decided 5GB up/down is "reasonable" for a month, and then everything over that is $2.00 a GB? $5.00 a GB? More? What if they decide that during "Peak" periods you need to pay a metered rate? Etc etc
Saying metered rates is ok assumes that the rate they charge is both fair and affordable. I've seen no signs that they are interested in either two of those concepts. What they are interested in is "Revenue and Profit" and "Shareholder value" and their focus on those two items doesn't leave me the warm fuzzies when it comes to "Fair and Affordable"....
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!) |
|
badtripI heart the East BayPremium
join:2004-03-20
Albany, CA
2 edits | said by KrK:Saying metered rates is ok assumes that the rate they charge is both fair and affordable. I've seen no signs that they are interested in either two of those concepts. What they are interested in is "Revenue and Profit" and "Shareholder value" and their focus on those two items doesn't leave me the warm fuzzies when it comes to "Fair and Affordable".... When I say "reasonable" I mean my definition of reasonable, not the cable co's. Of course if I thought that a companies rates were unreasonable, I would not do business with them.
Since I am not a Comcast cable tv subscriber I pay ~$70/mo for internet access. For the speed tier I subscribe to with no caps, I feel that my subscription price is not unreasonable. However, if caps with overages get implemented, I will have to re-evaluate whether or not I still think Comcast's subscription price is not unreasonable. If I come to the conclusion it has become unreasonable, then I will drop to a lower speed tier or find alternatives to Comcast. |
|
KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | Touche, and exactly right.
Problem comes when you have limited or few options.
(Such of lack of choices of provider, or worse, both cap and meter.... ) :/ |
|
