|reply to karlmarx |
Re: Usage billing NOT just because of more revenue
I see both sides of this. I agree that once the network is built, it doesn't make any difference how much data you move. In fact, a network that is underutilized is worse than a network that is near capacity -- assuming greater utilization is because of an ever increasing number of customers willing to pay for network access. That said, from a customer experience perspective, it's important to manage the network properly to ensure that expectations are met. If someone tries to stream audio or video on their iPhone and it's always choppy, there will be the impression that the network stinks.
If the network is overburdened, you can only do two things: increase capacity and/or lower utilization. The customer education AT&T seems to be wanting is to lower utilization by having customers use less because to use more will cost them dearly.
Depending on how they do this, perhaps this isn't so bad. I typically use just shy of 1GB/month on my iPhone (at least according to AT&T's usage tracking). If they charge, say, $10/GB/month for that data, my bill will go down. Of course they won't do that. The current $30/month I pay will become a "network access fee" and then they'll add $10/GB/month. This effectively increases my bill by 33% and will probably cause me to be careful how much Internet access I use without a WiFi connection.
I must say that this thought process is consistent in every corner of corporate America. Today my company's CEO gave a nice speech at our Christmas Party. While he spent a little time discussing increasing sales by opening more stores, he spent the bulk of his time discussing how in these trying economic times we have to cut, cut, cut operating costs. He said we need to cut costs everywhere -- even if it means looking at the HQ coffee and janitorial expenses. Of course at the end of all this cost cutting talk, he mentioned that our company is healthy and is making strong profits. This is the same CEO who several years ago claimed that we will never SAVE our way to success. We must SELL our way to success.
I'm left with the thought that executives and investors need to be educated about how honest money is made. It isn't buy for a $1 today and sell for $5 tomorrow. Perhaps a 5% or 10% investment return should be considered acceptable rather than always expecting 25, 30 or even 50%. What's really funny is these same folks whine about how the government is a massive wealth redistribution scheme. Well, based on my personal experience with 401K plans over the past 15 years, whoever created these laws has enabled Wall Street to move massive quantities of wealth from the average corporate employee into their pockets the likes of which can only be compared to Usul's worm sign on Arrakis.
said by rradina:
What's really funny is these same folks whine about how the government is a massive wealth redistribution scheme. Well, based on my personal experience with 401K plans over the past 15 years, whoever created these laws has enabled Wall Street to move massive quantities of wealth from the average corporate employee into their pockets the likes of which can only be compared to Usul's worm sign on Arrakis.
I think this is by far the most important point you`ve made. Neocons want government intervention only when it helps them and their corporate partners make even more money.