dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
16
share rss forum feed

en102
Canadian, eh?

join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA

Re: Usage billing NOT just because of more revenue

The sad part, is that until there is a 'lower tier', there is no incentive to have users consume less.

I'd take a 500MB or 1GB or even PPU plan on an iPhone, however, AT&T offers only buffet style all you can eat, and forces a 2 year commitment on it.

I would be happy if they offered:
1. PPU or WiFi only (free?)
2. 500MB for $15/month
3. 5GB for $25/month
4. 10GB for $35/month
5. 50GB for $50/month

While I do expect at some point a consumption based billing, until they make the base amount less than the current (they WILL be offering less, after all), there's little incentive from a customer base.
--
Canada = Hollywood North

FFH5
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5

Re: Usage billing NOT just because of more revenue

said by en102:

The sad part, is that until there is a 'lower tier', there is no incentive to have users consume less.

That is implied in moving to a usage based plan. You pay less if you consume less.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page


Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02
kudos:39

4 recommendations

Re: Usage billing NOT just because of more revenue

You pay less if you consume less.
So wait, who's repeating things in a strange effort to magically make them true again?

en102
Canadian, eh?

join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA

Re: Usage billing NOT just because of more revenue

LOL - its a general rule of business.
I think its more of 'you pay less/item if you consume less'. Your total bottom line will not be lowered.

If this was the case, I'd have an iPhone on pay per use billing running WiFi 99% of the time, saving +$300/year.
--
Canada = Hollywood North

en102
Canadian, eh?

join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
Well, in theory, it should. I'd suspect, like many things the bottom line won't be any less.. they'll just throw in a few items to appease us.
I.e. the $30 will still be the cheapest data available, however, with 5GB cap, but we'll toss in 200 free txt messages/month.
--
Canada = Hollywood North
clickie8

join:2005-05-22
Monroe, MI

1 recommendation

said by FFH5 See Profile
That is implied in moving to a usage based plan. You pay less if you consume less.
[/BQUOTE :


But that's not the way it's going to work. AT&T is not about to see a large percentage of its customer base *decrease* the amount of money they spend per month. Wall Street would have the executives responsible for that move hung from the nearest tower.

AT&T is going to require a fixed monthly cost and bandwidth tiers that at a minimum, bring the cost right back to $30. Go over your bandwidth allotment, and you'll pay dearly unless you move up to a higher tier. Just like the obtuse minute pricing plans cellular companies have for voice.

As far as all the bickering back and forth about what it costs to move data, it's a different world on RF links. Certainly there are finite amounts of data that you can move over any transport, but RF is severely constrained because there's only so much spectrum. For terrestrial links, you can always add more fiber. Over the air, you can't add any more.

Given the very finite resource, it will naturally cost more to move data there. As more people use smartphones, the market will reflect that. How much is debatable, though. I certainly have no problem paying a buck a day for having the internet in my pocket. But move much more beyond that, and I can start doing without it rather quickly.
clickie8

join:2005-05-22
Monroe, MI

Re: Usage billing NOT just because of more revenue

Crap! Sorry about the blown quote...