Re: We need caps again why? in

Re: We need caps again why? in http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r21228619 en Mon, 30 Nov 2009 11:55:51 EDT Mon, 30 Nov 2009 11:55:51 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21309636 pspcrazy : Dang that's not too bad imo, I've seen much higher costs for the same speeds your getting. If you live in San Fran you can get paxio for 300 or so 1GB up and down, from their own fiber ring. I wish I knew how they do it lol.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21309636 Wed, 22 Oct 2008 17:14:20 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21309628 pspcrazy : It doesn't help when their support can't help you for shit, and you have to wait 1 hour on line for them to help either. Mabye if they didn't make so much mistakes and have such slow reps it may have cut those costs down. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21309628 Wed, 22 Oct 2008 17:13:06 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21249977 K Patterson : Who supplies bandwidth for $4/meg, please?

Thanks,]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21249977 Sat, 11 Oct 2008 06:13:28 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21249639 UnKown : true that it does not apply to the lower end consumers, this whole debate is how we need caps. As an isp i can get bandwidth from a tier 1 provider for as little as 4 dollars a meg.

if you look at level 3 communications they have whole fiber rings laying in america that are not even live

"Level 3 owns a large amount of dark fiber. It occasionally leases this fiber out to other providers, companies, or organizations who wish to operate their own backbones between cities."

»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Level_3_Communications

thus there is no reason for caps. just corporate greed. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21249639 Sat, 11 Oct 2008 01:19:34 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21242884 K Patterson : Depreciation and amortization schedules for financial reporting are set by GAAP - bean counters. For tax purposes, they are set by the IRS. The depreciation allowed is treated as an expense and is deducted from income, reducing the taxes paid. The two get reconciled on financial statements by listing the tax savings on the larger deduction allowed by the IRS as "deferred federal taxes".

You don't get to choose your own equipment life. If it lasts longer than the depreciation schedule, there is no more expense to be deducted. If it lasts less, then you can deduct the remaining undepreciated value when you dispose of the equipment.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21242884 Thu, 09 Oct 2008 20:32:24 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21242841 funchords :

said by wierdo

:

There isn't a company in the world amortizing the cost of networking equipment over 30 years. That's a likely figure for property and plant, though.

When the term "plant" is used in this context, is that simply building (roof/floors/walls)? Would "vaults" be plant? Thanks.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More features, more fun, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21242841 Thu, 09 Oct 2008 20:26:28 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21242822 wierdo :

said by patcat88

:

Their Bay Networks equipment was amortized over 30 years and it must generate revenue for 30 years before being permitted to be removed.

There isn't a company in the world amortizing the cost of networking equipment over 30 years. That's a likely figure for property and plant, though.

5 years or less is more likely.

Also, it's nothing nefarious, it's just how you treat capital expenditures for accounting and tax purposes. Essentially you spend x dollars on a building, router, or whatever, and you get to write off the value over a certain number of years, so if you buy some industrial equipment expected to last 30 years, you get a yearly tax benefit of x/30. If you buy a router expected to last 5 years, you get x/5. (approximately, this is a general description, residual value complicates things somewhat)

Fiber construction cost is probably amortized over 30 years, but the electronics on it certainly aren't.
--
It's wierdo, not weirdo. Yes, I know that's not the 'proper' spelling of the similar english language word. ;)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21242822 Thu, 09 Oct 2008 20:22:54 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21241837 wifi4milez :

said by fcisler

:

Hahahah $400. Please provide me that service. You can't....when your buying several gigabits, then possibly.

The $2,000 we pay would most likely be $3,000+ to any other business. We are "local gubbament" and get significant discounts on it.

He has no idea what he is talking about. The $4 per gig only applies to carrier customers who order a full 10Gbps port on a 36 month term.

quote:
The move lowers Cogent's price for Ethernet-based Internet access to as low as $7 per megabit for enterprise customers and $4 per megabit for its highest-volume service provider customers, both prices requiring three-year contracts.

--
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,21241837 Thu, 09 Oct 2008 17:03:59 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21241758 fcisler : Hahahah $400. Please provide me that service. You can't....when your buying several gigabits, then possibly.

The $2,000 we pay would most likely be $3,000+ to any other business. We are "local gubbament" and get significant discounts on it.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21241758 Thu, 09 Oct 2008 16:51:47 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21240910 wifi4milez :

said by UnKown

:

here's something for you.

»www.cogentco.com/us/contact_sales.php

home of the 4 dollar megabit.

Cogents multinational, independent IP backbone is the perfect vehicle for metropolitan, national, and global point-to-point services. Available in speeds of 100 Mbps to full GigE, we help you build custom connections according to your specific configuration needs.

so a 100mbps conenction would cost you a little more than 400 dollars with equitment and taxes, much less than your famed 4000 dollars.

YAWN. Clearly you know nothing about the industry. Cogents $4 per megabit doesnt apply to 100Mbps connections. It was a good try though, so chin up little buddy!
--
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,21240910 Thu, 09 Oct 2008 14:31:28 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21240770 UnKown : here's something for you.

»www.cogentco.com/us/contact_sales.php

home of the 4 dollar megabit.

Cogents multinational, independent IP backbone is the perfect vehicle for metropolitan, national, and global point-to-point services. Available in speeds of 100 Mbps to full GigE, we help you build custom connections according to your specific configuration needs.

so a 100mbps conenction would cost you a little more than 400 dollars with equitment and taxes, much less than your famed 4000 dollars. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21240770 Thu, 09 Oct 2008 14:03:05 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21233339 wentlanc :

said by halfband

:

So you and your neighbors are not using any more bandwidth this year than last year? I know that mine has increased significantly due to video/streaming. For cable companies the issue is in the last mile until DOCSIS 3 gets rolled out. I am not sure why telco's seem to see the need promote caps.

Bandwidth costs / usage are not a linear function. It is a step function. You add capacity for a fixed cost, and you can use all the way up to that capacity for no additional charge. So not only are people using a bit more traffic, but the cable companies have been increasing speeds and adding customers. If bandwidth is really an issue, then don't oversell it so badly. This means managing congestion if a node is full, and splitting it to reduce the oversubscription rate. These costs should be covered by the additional subscribers that are being added. If the average usage goes up, then it's time to upgrade. But as the cable co's have stated, their mean usage is 3GB per month, so where's the big crunch?

cw]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21233339 Wed, 08 Oct 2008 08:27:06 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21233235 wentlanc : I like your lack of rebuttal about anything substantive that was stated here. It just goes to show that you really have no argument on anything that he is saying.

cw]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21233235 Wed, 08 Oct 2008 07:38:50 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21232889 Vchat20 : No, the difference is you end up paying per unit for your water akin to a pay-per-byte scenario that everyone is so against.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21232889 Wed, 08 Oct 2008 03:04:02 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21231623 openbox9 :

said by joako

:

But if I buy a port from a wholesale provider are you implying that it does not connect anywhere?

Of course the port connects somewhere. What did I write that led you to believe otherwise? Maybe the misunderstanding is due to the fact that I only implied "backbone" instead of stating such.

said by joako

:

That wholesale provider needs an infrastructure, which at least financially, will look very similar to what an ISP needs

For a backbone, yes...if the ISP owns their backbone.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21231623 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 21:43:32 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21231373 funchords : Just quit responding to him. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21231373 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 21:12:34 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21231187 anon : Try reading »www.dslprime.com maybe then the BS you always spout about can have some basis in reality...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21231187 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 20:49:32 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21231251 battleop : I've had a cap on my water usage for the last two years. There are caps on water usage through out the South Eastern US.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21231251 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 20:47:52 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21231227 joako :

said by openbox9

:

I responded by stating that bandwidth is relatively low cost and that the transport and support costs are really the factors driving ISP costs. I added that if costs for support and transit are included in the $10-14/Mbps cost estimates (which they aren't BTW), then Chiyo

's argument about the need for caps may be valid.

pspcrazy

added that the cables already exist and that support costs are a minor factor. pspcrazy

then attempted to restate that caps aren't needed.

I responded by stating that the cable doesn't exist and that transport and support costs are indeed key cost factors for ISPs.

But if I buy a port from a wholesale provider are you implying that it does not connect anywhere? That wholesale provider needs an infrastructure, which at least financially, will look very similar to what an ISP needs, there just isn't generally a last mile and where there is they are usually buying that from the ILEC and passing the costs along.

Also, all of this negates peering. If two ISPs pass an equal amount of traffic between each other they might enter into a peering agreement where the billed cost per Mbps is 0.
--
09:F9:11:02:9D:74:E3:5B:D8:41:56:C5:63:56:88:C0

]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21231227 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 20:43:41 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21231194 joako :

said by JasonOD :

Bandwidth is a very small item (and growing smaller) in the list of ISP expedetures. Hardware and human costs are the real costs. Caps in fact, are only thing that will keep ISP's ahead of the bandwidth demand growth curve. Without it, we'd all be faced with an overloaded infrastructure 24/7. Unless you want to lose your cheap internet.

The trend in wholesale prices going down also indicates all the associated costs are going down. Wholesale providers must incur those same costs as retail ISPs.
--
09:F9:11:02:9D:74:E3:5B:D8:41:56:C5:63:56:88:C0]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21231194 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 20:37:33 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21230565 wifi4milez :

said by kamm

:

The transport fee doesn't really exist when you are in the city

Thats very far from the truth, and quite an incorrect statement. A good wholesale rate on a metro GigE circuit is around $3000 per month, and thats generally only between POPs. Furthermore, even a cross connect (in building loop used in a data center or colo facility) will run you $1000 per month.
--
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,21230565 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 18:34:48 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21230536 DaMaGeINC : Copy movies. Get it right. Stealing DEPRIVES the owner of something. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21230536 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 18:29:40 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21230023 anon : Om malik isn't just another blogger. He is a well respected tech and telecommunications journalist.

He has at least one book published, has worked for forbes, been published at places like the wall street journal. His analysis is taken seriously by serious people.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21230023 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 18:03:31 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21230229 funchords :

said by patcat88

:

So if equipment is retired, your suddenly must write off the entire remaining value of the equipment in 1 shot, big drain on the finances, unless your can sell the equipment to cancel that out, which depends on a market for used carrier grade network hardware.

Yes, and a company is, of course, allowed to upgrade even if it can't sell the used equipment (unless the equipment is collateral on a loan). Usually, it will be replaced by something, so the balance sheet will have a new asset -- and since it is technology, that replacement may be less expensive than the remaining depreciation of the capital item (now residing in the dumpster) or worth more than that in additional income capability.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More features, more fun, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21230229 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 17:31:31 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21230197 axus : And even though we can't make more water, we do fine without caps on our water usage. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21230197 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 17:25:06 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21230147 funchords : Upon reflection, I do not wish to post. Take me back! (brain fart)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21230147 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 17:16:25 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21230065 patcat88 :

said by funchords

said by patcat88

:

Their Bay Networks equipment was amortized over 30 years and it must generate revenue for 30 years before being permitted to be removed.

Can you say more about this?

»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amortize

Its a financial/financing trick of some sort. I believe its loaning/financing equipment onto yourself (you remove the cost for the equipment each month rather than instantly, you can also finance it through outside parties, or your can finance your corporation's general activities (see commercial paper, etc)), or claiming the equipment is actually near liquid $ on the books, sort of like a car, and therefore no cost $ was actually spent to buy it.

There might be some tax tricks to this too, that you pay tax on the equipment only on the portion of the equipment you paid or wrote off that year.

Its something the bean counters invented, and bean counters aren't IT folks, so they get a loan/self finance/bond/etc to pay for the equipment for much longer than the real world life of the equipment, and fight tooth and nail when they are told this is an 386 and has to go by IT and that IT wants to buy new equipment. Usually execs will support the beancounters and stock holders on this one, not IT dept.

Then execs hire consultants to figure out how to not retire this equipment (and not screw up the books), and consultants recommend caps and throttling to keep the old equipment usable for much longer and not buy new routers, switches, and line cards every 2 years.

The phone company is famous for doing this. All the POTS switches are amortized to 20, 30, or 40 years. And thats sorta true, a POTS switch will last that long.

edit: I'm not sure if a market exists for used line cards, core routers, switches, HFC plant, telco switches. So if equipment is retired, your suddenly must write off the entire remaining value of the equipment in 1 shot, big drain on the finances, unless your can sell the equipment to cancel that out, which depends on a market for used carrier grade network hardware.

Another question is will the manufacturers (cisco, juniper, foundry, etc) offer replacement parts, or service contracts for non-orignal owners of the hardware? Financially they shouldn't since they are bastardizing themselves by supporting old equipment and not selling new equipment to pay off R&D on new equipment product lines. No carrier except the basement IT geek will then buy used carrier grade hardware (or they will steal from the dumpster at work :D), or maybe a 3rd world nation national telco for the president for life's villa.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21230065 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 17:00:38 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21230018 cornelius785 : oh hey! look! here is everybody's favorite anti-p2p troll at work!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21230018 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 16:53:45 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21229979 battleop : "The transport fee doesn't really exist when you are in the city"

It most certainly does. Fiber isn't free in the city. I am about 2 miles from where we get our feed from and it still costs us a decent amount for the transport.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21229979 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 16:47:21 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21229946 funchords :

said by patcat88

:

Their Bay Networks equipment was amortized over 30 years and it must generate revenue for 30 years before being permitted to be removed.

Can you say more about this? ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21229946 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 16:42:16 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21229931 Smith6612 : I don't see P2P lagging up my FPS games while I'm downloading large files on a 768kbps line now, do I? I honestly don't see FiOS slowing down in my area either. Many game download sites I use can max the 20Mbps connection right out. There's plenty of bandwidth and fiber out there waiting to be utilized on the backbones :P]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21229931 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 16:38:47 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21229917 jimbo2150 :

said by ninjatutle

:

Who the heck is gigom? Another blogger? And they got their data by surveying a small software co? :uhh:

Who the heck is the company? Someone who lies and makes up false data to appease their stockholders at the expense of the consumer?

I have seen many companies over the years lie or provide false data to shore up support for their ever-dwindling idea of fair use.

I don't trust the company itself anymore than you trust a random blogger to provide the information.
--

- "Techie" Jim]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21229917 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 16:34:54 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21229764 ninjatutle :

said by I pos rep

:

P2P has lead to much more innovation than the CEO wiping his massive checks with his ass.

Innovations? I guess finding better ways to steal movies is an innovation. But in the wrong direction. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21229764 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 16:06:23 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21229729 I pos rep :

said by Chiyo

:

So my argument has a point YAY! Why are companies capping their users when bandwidth as a whole which they say is very costly is DROPPING.

also good to hear for companies that have lines like DS3's and such.

Because those 25 million bonus checks are not enough. It is not like they are upgrading their network and they are certainly not hiring more competent and qualified employees.

Employee cost-down
Bandwidth cost-down
Infrastructure-0 as it is never being upgraded
CEO checks-Up 2500%

I think that it is obvious why there need to be higher prices and bandwidth caps. More profit for the CEO to shove up his ass and waste on nothing. It is called a monopoly. It can do whatever the hell it wants when not regulated. Duopolies are hardly more competition.

Find me suburb or major city with more than 3 providers for all customers and I will retract my statement. With HSI markets being heavy monopolies or duopolies in 95% of places you see:

-No price drop
-No service upgrades
-No innovation
-No incentives for companies who run the area to do anything except raise prices.

Comcast powerboost and speed increases are not upgrades when they cannot be used to their full potential. It is the same as selling me a car with 6000 more horsepower that can only do it for 5 secs. Hardly an upgrade, in fact, it is nothing more than an illusion.

Proof recently: »AT&T Kills Off $20 Unlimited Pre-Paid Data

They use false advertising and get away with it. When people use the advertised service the price either goes up or the service is discontinued.

Cable connections and other HSI was also advertised as unlimited. As soon as people started using it more than 3 hrs a month it all of sudden has problems. Other ignorant posters like ninjatutle who live below a rock just buy the corporate BS. Please, a unregulated monopoly is not going to be making massive profit? Seriously, get off your lazy asses and go take basic economics at a community college. Maybe you will learn that monopolies make good profit, more than enough to sign thousands of multi million dollar BONUS checks. This is not counting the massive salary. Damn I feel sorry they might have to spend another 5 million dollars on upgrading their infrastructure and a dang CEO might see a couple million drop on his check. Whatever will the poor baby do? :uhh:

Yeah, massive crisis is that people are now using the broadband technology more once they understand it more and the CEOs are crying their check got smaller by 3% so they need to cap to make that up. Ninjatutle and others will come in saying that P2P is killing broadband. LMFAO.

P2P has lead to much more innovation than the CEO wiping his massive checks with his ass.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21229729 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 15:56:14 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21229696 patcat88 :

said by halfband

said by pspcrazy

:

The cables are already set, and the support doesn't cost much per customer, so honestly they don't need caps. Caps are just another way of controlling their customer when the push there video services.

Their Bay Networks equipment was amortized over 30 years and it must generate revenue for 30 years before being permitted to be removed.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21229696 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 15:47:12 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21229624 fcisler : Uhhh not sure what your arguing with.

My response was to the previous poster who said "Yes, bandwidth is cheap - but it's the delivery that costs the money"

I was providing a real world example in agreement of that previous statement.

I never said we pay any other transport fee than the $2,500 from the city to us.... "you supposed" - you who? You don't know me or my job. I'm not supposed to do anything.

It would cost exponentially more expensive to move all of our webservers and DB's to a colo than host them on site...and due to what is on them, the legality is a very gray area. Besides, have you ever seen an EMC Symmetrix? 200A of power along with dual UPS redundancy, on site generator and backup generator is extremely expensive to replicate. Why move if we are invested in our location?

Yes...we do pay less. I still don't get any of your post?

I'm not sure what you were hinting at or expecting me to agree with?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21229624 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 15:30:19 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21229109 openbox9 : Read the thread. Since you are typically quick to jump to conclusions, call people names, and rant nonsense, I'll give you a quick run-down.

Chiyo

started the thread asking why caps are required if GigE ports and backbone bandwidth are declining in cost.

I responded by stating that bandwidth is relatively low cost and that the transport and support costs are really the factors driving ISP costs. I added that if costs for support and transit are included in the $10-14/Mbps cost estimates (which they aren't BTW), then Chiyo

's argument about the need for caps may be valid.

pspcrazy

added that the cables already exist and that support costs are a minor factor. pspcrazy

then attempted to restate that caps aren't needed.

I responded by stating that the cable doesn't exist and that transport and support costs are indeed key cost factors for ISPs.

Then you popped off in your typical fashion. So, that's the relation to capping.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21229109 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 14:09:24 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21229079 battleop : This is no different than water. The cost of the product it's self is very cheap. It's the cost of treating it and getting it to your house that cost a lot of money.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21229079 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 14:04:13 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21228979 kamm :

said by fcisler

:

Correct.

My job pays around $2,000 for 100mb from Savvis. We pay around $2,500 for the transit from NYC to us through a DWDM ring of a large "delivery company". If you live on LI, you most likely pay them for electricity and gas. Most people don't know that they actually have a huge and very well designed fiber network ;)

Yeah but you get an SLA-backed, top-tiered, dedicated, low-latency 100Mbit SYNC connection.

The transport fee doesn't really exist when you are in the city - you supposed to save it on your cheap rental fees.

If you calculate it you pay LESS than home users if you factor in your excellent upload, killer service level and the fact that it's not shared.
--
[BQUOTE=[user=bicker]]Waaaa waaaa waaaa. You just want what you want and don't care to factor in what is right or true. Your perspectives are un-American, and deserve far more ridicule than I'm prepared to pile on them.
[/BQUOTE]]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21228979 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 13:47:26 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21228931 kamm :

said by openbox9

:

Where is the cable from an exchange to my house. The closest "real" exchange to me is Atlanta, and I guarantee that transit costs from Atlanta to the Panhandle for 1 Gbps isn't cheap. Support doesn't cost much per customer? I'd wager that support costs are probably the largest expense that established ISPs have.

And this has WTF to do with capping?
You guys are pathetic - and BTW this is another BS spread by companies; I don't know anyone in my circles (6-8 ppl) who called their cable companies in the past year or so. Some of us actually NEVER called them since it's been installed.
--
[BQUOTE=[user=bicker]]Waaaa waaaa waaaa. You just want what you want and don't care to factor in what is right or true. Your perspectives are un-American, and deserve far more ridicule than I'm prepared to pile on them.
[/BQUOTE]]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21228931 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 13:40:18 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21228921 fcisler : Correct.

My job pays around $2,000 for 100mb from Savvis. We pay around $2,500 for the transit from NYC to us through a DWDM ring of a large "delivery company". If you live on LI, you most likely pay them for electricity and gas. Most people don't know that they actually have a huge and very well designed fiber network ;)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21228921 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 13:38:46 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21228893 kamm :

said by pspcrazy

And to make sure they don't have to invest billions into their fucked-up crappy old arcchitecture anytime soon in order to be able to compete ever-faster competing solutions like FIOS...
--
[BQUOTE=[user=bicker]]Waaaa waaaa waaaa. You just want what you want and don't care to factor in what is right or true. Your perspectives are un-American, and deserve far more ridicule than I'm prepared to pile on them.
[/BQUOTE]]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21228893 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 13:33:03 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21228888 nasadude : why don't you click the damn link and decide for yourself - that's why I put it there.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21228888 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 13:32:25 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21228884 kamm :

said by ninjatutle

:

Because P2P is eating up all of their bandwidth.

BS.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21228884 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 13:31:46 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21228865 KrK : $$$$]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21228865 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 13:28:23 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21228813 openbox9 : Where is the cable from an exchange to my house. The closest "real" exchange to me is Atlanta, and I guarantee that transit costs from Atlanta to the Panhandle for 1 Gbps isn't cheap. Support doesn't cost much per customer? I'd wager that support costs are probably the largest expense that established ISPs have.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21228813 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 13:18:38 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21228806 halfband :

said by pspcrazy

So you and your neighbors are not using any more bandwidth this year than last year? I know that mine has increased significantly due to video/streaming. For cable companies the issue is in the last mile until DOCSIS 3 gets rolled out. I am not sure why telco's seem to see the need promote caps.
--
Registered Bandwidth Offender #40812]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21228806 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 13:17:30 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21228790 ninjatutle : Who the heck is gigom? Another blogger? And they got their data by surveying a small software co? :uhh:]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21228790 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 13:14:18 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21228704 SLD : The P2P broken record spins again...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21228704 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 12:58:16 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21228697 nasadude :

said by ninjatutle

:

Because P2P is eating up all of their bandwidth. But still, I'd rather them can P2P and leave everyone uncapped.

BZZZZZZT! WRONG!

»gigaom.com/2008/04/22/shocking-n···d-usage/

quote:
The P2P stats are the ones that came as a complete surprise. Like you, I have read many reports that suggest P2P applications account for the majority of the traffic on high-speed networks. But McPherson’s data suggests otherwise:

* 20 percent of traffic is P2P applications
* During peak-load times, 70 percent of subscribers use http while 20 percent are using P2P
* Http still makes up the majority of the total traffic, of which 45 percent is traditional web content that includes text and images. Streaming video and audio content from services like YouTube accounts for nearly 50 percent of the http traffic. It shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone — streaming TV shows from Hulu and videos from YouTube have been on a major upswing, as noted by our colleagues over on NewTeeVee.

also, please note this article is from April, so P2P is probably has even less of a share now.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21228697 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 12:56:50 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21228684 pspcrazy : The cables are already set, and the support doesn't cost much per customer, so honestly they don't need caps. Caps are just another way of controlling their customer when the push there video services.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21228684 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 12:55:06 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21228643 openbox9 : You still need to pay for the transit and support. Bandwidth has always been relatively low cost. Once you figure out how to get a cable from that GigE port in the exchange to your house for $10-14/Mbps, then you can argue that ISP costs are dropping and therefore caps aren't required.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21228643 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 12:46:33 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21228619 anon : Bandwidth is a very small item (and growing smaller) in the list of ISP expedetures. Hardware and human costs are the real costs. Caps in fact, are only thing that will keep ISP's ahead of the bandwidth demand growth curve. Without it, we'd all be faced with an overloaded infrastructure 24/7. Unless you want to lose your cheap internet.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21228619 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 12:40:46 EDT Re: We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21228606 ninjatutle : Because P2P is eating up all of their bandwidth. But still, I'd rather them can P2P and leave everyone uncapped. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21228606 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 12:39:06 EDT We need caps again why? http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21228540 Chiyo : So my argument has a point YAY! Why are companies capping their users when bandwidth as a whole which they say is very costly is DROPPING.

also good to hear for companies that have lines like DS3's and such.
--
My Blog:
»abanzai.animeblogger.net/]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21228540 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 12:27:09 EDT