 BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | reply to baineschile
Re: metered billing means said by baineschile:Way off Karl. A 40 Gig cap does not affect ALL households; as most internet users still are way under that threshold. A) Doesn't affect them NOW. Usage per household is growing exponentially. Within a few years 40 GB will be nothing for most.
B) TW caps were as low as 5 GB and that DOES affect most households.
Until Broadband becomes a utility, we have to deal with a competitive, capitalistic market; which means that if a company want to do caps and overages, thats what we will have to deal with (or go to a different company) That would be nice if there was an actual free market. There isn't and if you think there is you're deluded. Just because I own the only gas station around for miles doesn't mean I can legally charge $100 a gallon for gas.
Also, your claim that it was to deter internet video; if that was the case, why would FiOs even bother having TV service if broadband and IPTV is the future? I will give you that no company has supported data that shows they SHOULD have caps; but that doesnt mean the sole reason is to deter competition.
Sure it does. Say if I decide to cut my cable and go with watch all TV thru Hulu and other legal internet sources. Now say I want to watch them in HD. The average person watches 151 hours of TV a month. 151 hours at 2 Mbps stream is 130 GB a month and that's if you're a 1 person household and don't have any other internet useage( which is doubtful ). Now you have a 40 GB cap so you are 90 GB over which TW will charge you $90. Well that's more expensive than cable. So the incentive to cut cable is now gone. If that isn't deterring internet video I'm not sure what is. |
2 edits | Ya, like my MLB.tv. Which i watch alot of different games legally.
The best part is that we talk about it likes it costs them alot for bandwidth. There marketing budgets are more than there bandwidth costs. |
