WHT
join:2010-03-26
Rosston, TX
kudos:5 | What If I Charged You Extra to Download Movies? We are a WISP - Wireless ISP.
What we see happening is the consumer thinks they can drop their $200 per month satellite or cable service and replace it with a $30 per month internet account (and expect the same level of service).
We're looking at rolling new pricing tiers.
Basic - Lowest cost. 2 Mbps speed (256 guaranteed). 600 MB daily limit. Will not be able to download a movie.
Basic Plus - About $20 more per month. 2 Mbps speed (256 guaranteed). 1,200 MB daily limit. Good for one movie per night and extended internet usage.
Entertainment Basic - About $90 per month. 3,200 MB daily limit. Good for a few movies per night and several hours of watching TV programs.
Once you exceed your limit, you are throttled to 256 Kbps for the rest of the billing period - Fast enough for basic internet usage. Since we're not charging for overages, this is not a "monetizing" model. |
|
 BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | said by WHT:We are a WISP - Wireless ISP.
What we see happening is the consumer thinks they can drop their $200 per month satellite or cable service and replace it with a $30 per month internet account (and expect the same level of service).
We're looking at rolling new pricing tiers.
Basic - Lowest cost. 2 Mbps speed (256 guaranteed). 600 MB daily limit. Will not be able to download a movie.
Basic Plus - About $20 more per month. 2 Mbps speed (256 guaranteed). 1,200 MB daily limit. Good for one movie per night and extended internet usage.
Entertainment Basic - About $90 per month. 3,200 MB daily limit. Good for a few movies per night and several hours of watching TV programs.
Once you exceed your limit, you are throttled to 256 Kbps for the rest of the billing period - Fast enough for basic internet usage. Since we're not charging for overages, this is not a "monetizing" model.
That's a joke. Also 3200 MB is not good for "a few movies" AND "hours of tv" One HD movie streamed would put you over the cap. |
|
|
|
| said by BF69:That's a joke.
Said like someone who has no idea what it means to run a WISP. |
|
WHT
join:2010-03-26
Rosston, TX
kudos:5 | reply to BF69
said by BF69:said by WHT:Entertainment Basic - About $90 per month. 3,200 MB daily limit. Good for a few movies per night and several hours of watching TV programs.
That's a joke. Also 3200 MB is not good for "a few movies" AND "hours of tv" One HD movie streamed would put you over the cap. A Netflicks VP estimated a download was 1.2 GB, so 3,200 MB per night would two movies (which still qualifies as "several"). A HD movie can be as large as 4 GB plus...looks like some people will have to choose - low definition or upgrade to a higher download tier. |
|
WHT
join:2010-03-26
Rosston, TX
kudos:5 | reply to BF69
said by BF69:That's a joke. Also 3200 MB is not good for "a few movies" AND "hours of tv" One HD movie streamed would put you over the cap.
A I posted in another topic thread....
said by WHT:
IT-IS-NOT-THE-COST-OF-UPSTREAM-BANDWIDTH. It the cost of delivering it the last mile or two, or ten.
WISP - The "W" stands for "wireless". A tower site may have four access points, and each access point can support around 30 users. So at tops, a site can support 120 users. Now it may cost us $30,000 to stack a tower. That's $30,000 for 120 users. Do you have any idea that the ROI time period could be?
said by WHT:
The consumer thinks they can drop their $200 per month satellite or cable service and replace it with a $30 per month internet account (and expect the same level of service).
|
|
borka
join:2003-04-01
Brooklyn, NY | reply to WHT
said by WHT:Once you exceed your limit, you are throttled to 256 Kbps for the rest of the billing period - Fast enough for basic internet usage. Since we're not charging for overages, this is not a "monetizing" model.
Let me guess, you run this wisp in an extremely rural area, where DSL nor cable is available, so for %99 of your customers its either dialup, satelite or you? correct?
What happens if I want to download a game from STEAM? games are usually around 4.5GB...
what happens if i have 4 computers at home, and i run updates on all of them, bringing me over your 600MB DAILY limit. and what if this happens on my FIRST day of my billing cycle? I will now be stuck to 256k for 29 more days???? all for using 700mb in one day??
This is the worst data allowance that i have EVER heard of.
You do realize that once your customers have ANY other choice, you will be out of business fairly quick. |
|
| reply to WHT
256 kbps is a joke! It's NOT 2001! |
|
WHT
join:2010-03-26
Rosston, TX
kudos:5 | reply to borka
said by borka:Let me guess, you run this wisp in an extremely rural area, where DSL nor cable is available, so for %99 of your customers its either dialup, satelite or you? correct? Correct, or some other WISP.
said by borka:What happens if I want to download a game from STEAM? games are usually around 4.5GB... The download isn't completed then.
said by borka:what happens if i have 4 computers at home, and i run updates on all of them, bringing me over your 600MB DAILY limit. and what if this happens on my FIRST day of my billing cycle? I will now be stuck to 256k for 29 more days???? all for using 700mb in one day?? Then I guess you're in the same situation of anyone that has a satellite connection of 200 MB per day. You can pay me for a higher monthly data allowance or take your computers into a computer shop and pay them.
If you go over your daily limit, you are only rate limited until the next day, not until the end of the month.
said by borka:This is the worst data allowance that i have EVER heard of. Then you haven't heard of Hughesnet's 200 MB limit, or their 500 MB limit with their $349 per month plan.
said by borka:You do realize that once your customers have ANY other choice, you will be out of business fairly quick.
That's fine with me. 90% of my subs can live with my rates. if they can't, then I'll be glad to let my competition loose money on them.
said by RJARRRPCGP:256 kbps is a joke! It's NOT 2001!
You misread what I said. 256K is the guaranteed rate, but typically closer to 2 Mbps. Wireless last mile delivery is a shared resource, its not like a committed DSL or cable internet service.
If anyone really needs a guaranteed 1.5/1.5 Mbps connection, we can assist them in getting a T1 line installed and they will enter into a contract with the T1 provider for $600 to $900 per month. |
|
| reply to jim_p_price7
And also said by someone who is unwisely a Rays fan. |
|
 JKM
join:2009-06-08
Seymour, MO | reply to WHT
Consumers seem to think they are entitled to unlimited everything for almost nothing. As a small Wireless ISP, I can tell you that the Internet capacity is nowhere near ready for unlimited streaming content. Netflix has a business model that can't be supported with the present Internet infrastructure, period. We are only starting to see the problem.
The Internet is a shared resource. At the present time it is estimated that Netflix is 20% of the total traffic. I suspect it will be half the traffic in a few years. Think about that......this means over a few years it has doubled the traffic. This means one content provider will have as much traffic as all the rest of the millions of content providers. Will all the level one providers, ISPs and content providers sit still for this while Netflix makes millions for an under-priced content that breaks the Internet for the rest of us and pays nothing for the transportation of their product, I doubt it.
Here is an article I wrote about the specific of a wireless network:
For years contention based ISP business models have made Internet service affordable to consumers. This business model is in grave danger due to the increasing amount of streaming content becoming available. The consumer thinks they can acquire a dedicated service for a contention-based price. We must work to educate them.
I believe the average consumer does not understand the cost of Internet products very well, if at all. The cost from least to most is content, bandwidth and transportation. In my area 60 - 70% of bandwidth cost is transportation. Then it must be transported from the providers PoP to my network and across a couple more links to the AP. In my opinion all of this is still not the real problem.
The one hurdle that is the hardest to overcome is last-mile network capacity. This can only be overcome with technology. Technology like most things in life is a trade-off. We can have somewhat better technology for much more money and much less range. What this means is we can have the capacity to stream video to many but it will raise the price of the Internet service for all on the network. It would easily double the cost of the network in last-mile hardware costs alone. Now factor in the bandwidth. If one-third of the customers on the network stream video, the demand for bandwidth will increase to 360% of normal. This does not account for the fact that with 33% of us watching streaming TV on a 1.5 Mbps connection during prime time we will exceed the capacity of the Access point by 3.6 times. Another drawback to technology that supports more bandwidth is that range will be greatly decreased and coverage to as much as half the customers in our area will most likely be lost. I made these calculations based on an access point serving 100 users. But just 10 customers streaming TV on a 1.5 Mbps connection during prime time can use all the capacity of that access point. This means that the ISP could need as much as ten times the equipment to keep up with demand. This will exceed the load capacity of the tower, not to mention the lack of spectrum to accommodate that many APs. So now I hope you are starting to see the value of your present TV service. It is transportation not content that makes your cable or satellite TV cost so much. I can't see a way to design a wireless network that will support 30% - 50% of it's customers watching streaming HDTV, even one channel per household during three hours of prime time viewing, and be affordable enough to remain in business. I know in our household, various family members watch two or three different channels at once.
In addition please check the following links to start to understand the magnitude of the streaming content dilemma:
»www.businessweek.com/magazine/co···7708.htm
»gigaom.com/2010/12/01/fcc-opens-···-access/
»Level3 Accuses Comcast Of Net Neutrality Violation
This is a real problem that few understand. I know many will think this is a lie from an ISP to control traffic. Seriously, I started a WISP to provide service to rural Americans with few if any other options. In my service area about 35% of us do not have access to anything but dial-up, satellite and if we are lucky wireless. Now I have to watch the Digital Divide grow because I can’t acquire affordable technology to provide streaming content to my customers.
As more consumers use a streaming content, the quality of everybody’s Internet experience will decline at an amazing rate. Fiber is the only answer, but I honestly do not think we can expect it in many rural areas for at least fifty years. I will continue to pay $80.00 per month for my satellite TV. As the owner of my network I cannot transport the content for what the satellite provider can. In addition, it would be selfish of me to monopolize the shared resources of the network.
Hopefully when you see the contrast of what a large percent of Americans have for Internet service you will appreciate your situation more. And yes, the rural/wireless situation is unique. However all that uniqueness does is make the real problem easier to understand. The Internet is not ready for full-blown streaming content. Another competitor will make things even worse and that is bound to happen. Wait and see.
--
Begin with the end in mind! |
|
WHT
join:2010-03-26
Rosston, TX
kudos:5 | reply to WHT
Well, I bounced this idea off some of my subscribers and they said the potential of getting FAPed (what the HughesNet people say when they went over their daily FAP - Fair Access Policy - limit and got their speed throttled) was not something they would NOT like to see.
However they said a metered plan would be acceptable as it would not really affect them and it would keep excessive users at bay.
Considering 80-90% of our subs use less than 10 GB per month...
One of our original tiers:
Residential: $35 @ 2 Mbps, 30 GB per month
New Proposed DAILY cap tier:
Basic: $55 @ 2 Mbps, 18 GB limit at 600 MB per day
New Proposed METERED cost for 10 GB of usage:
Basic: - $25 @ 2 Mbps connection fee plus $.50 per GB
Guess what? The monthly cost to the typical subscribe is still $35 per month!
Now what if you used 200 GB per month (about what 20 typical subscribers use). You'd be paying $125 per month.
If you, your wife, and two kids all start downloading movies or watch TV programs all evening, that's going to suck up every bit of data that AP could transmit. The other 19 subscribers on that AP are going to get real crappy service and cancel. I've just lost $700 to earn your measly $125. |
|
