dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
uniqs
19
BHNtechXpert
The One & Only
Premium Member
join:2006-02-16
Saint Petersburg, FL

BHNtechXpert to rebus9

Premium Member

to rebus9

Re: Brighthouse Tampa Bay Rate Increase (March 2011)

Howdy Rebus...

I totally understand where you are coming from but you make the common mistake that most others do when it comes to cost. Cost isn't just one thing. It's a combination of many things and it isn't as easy as just lumping all the costs on one product...it can't be done like that. Instead the provider spreads the increases in costs to conduct business across all relevant products. Some products will see no increases or decreases while others may see modest increases or decreases.

In case nobody noticed fuel prices have skyrocketed lately and this being a travel intensive business well...pretty obvious on this one. Let's not forget the costs of programming and license agreements, maintenance of existing infrastructure and re-investment in new technology and of course there's labor.

It's also no secret that the costs to maintain an employee with benefits has skyrocketed (much in part to our (cough) wonderful new health care system). Support and customer services are also very expensive and the demand on these services increases exponentially as the technology advances (it's supposed to work the other way but that hasn't happened). Customers expect to have a live and friendly voice to assist them 24 hours a day...it's not cheap to offer such services.

While there are certainly cheaper alternatives to some services you will be making a sacrfice somewhere. It might be in service quality, customer service, billing...something will suffer because you can only cut costs so much before it impacts the customer experience.

As you mention VoIP services...oh yea there are cheaper solutions out there. They come and go about every 6 to 18 months and many leave a wide path of destruction behind them. Most of these "cheaper" ventures are nothing more than resellers of service and when it comes down to real issue resolution it's non existent. Been there...done that...it's one area of telecommunications where you need to be very careful especially if you own a business. A disconnected phone line even for a few minutes can cripple a business long term. But you already know all of this.

Rebus I guess my next question is do you own a business or have you owned a business within the last five years or so? If so then you know the costs of conducting any business are insane right now....cable is no different.

rebus9
join:2002-03-26
Tampa Bay

rebus9

Member

said by BHNtechXpert:

Howdy Rebus...

Howdy geek.
said by BHNtechXpert:

Rebus I guess my next question is do you own a business or have you owned a business within the last five years or so?

Yes I do, very much so. My costs of datacenter colocation plus the SPLA fees to Microsoft, by themselves, add up to several mutliples of the salary many people earn in a year.

But there is one group of CapEx and OpEx that has continued declining-- the cost of my transit circuits ("bandwidth" for those who don't speak the lingo) and the cost of equipment to terminate those circuits. Ten years ago our bill for a single Fast-E (100 mbps) transit pipe was $17,000 on a 3 year term, and that was considered an excellent deal. Today a full Gig-E is under $12,000 for a really good carrier, and budget carriers are less than half of that even. So my transit costs (per megabit) have decreased by more than a full order of magnitude.(**)

Equipment costs have roughly followed suit-- faster interfaces for about the same money.

Server costs have also declined, relatively speaking. Our average per-server expenditure is about the same but we get SUBSTANTIALLY more processing power and storage capacity for the same dollars spent: 16 cores (4 cpu x 4 cores) and 64 GB RAM, for about the same price as 2 cores (2 cpu x 1 core) with 2 GB RAM in the past. We spend less for a Seagate Cheetah 600GB SAS 15k RPM disk today than we did for a 72 GB 10k RPM SCSI. Virtualization has further multipled our savings.

Power (per amp) costs have increased, but not dramatically. Employees cost more, but the savings mentioned above have roughly balanced it out.

Telephone service-- definitely cheaper today, and considering the nature of services we purchase from (big carriers), we're playing in a league that doesn't mess around with sketchy VoIP providers. I'm willing to bet you a Big Mac with large fries, that BHN's cost of providing dialtone to a residence is lower today than in 2005.

Bottom line is, my company has not issued a price increase any time during this 10 year period I've been discussing, because we haven't needed to. At the same time, our clients have actually benefitted from higher levels of system peformance and storage capacity.

Note that I've focused on transit and equipment costs for sake of this discussion, because I'm focused mainly on the Road Runner price increase. I understand TV/programming costs are going up, but that shouldn't affect the internet side of BHN's business. If BHN wants to subsidize their escalating TV/programming costs by sticking it to their Road Runner subscribers, that's their choice, but I find it a distasteful one.

(**) For those who don't know what an order of magnitude is, it's a multiple of 10. One order of magnitude is 10x. Two orders is 100x. And so on. So if something drops by an order of magnitude, its resultant value is 1/10th the initial value.
BHNtechXpert
The One & Only
Premium Member
join:2006-02-16
Saint Petersburg, FL

4 edits

BHNtechXpert

Premium Member

I wasn't speaking in BHN specifics here but in general terms meaning all providers. I get the feeling you want to isolate out just the internet costs and it doesn't work that way in any business.
Also I think you mis-understood my exponential statement. I was referring to support costs meaning costs associated with customer support of new products and technology. The natural assumption is that new products are fundamentally easier to operate than previous generations of the same. Not the case.

Look at HDTV's. While the technology has improved greatly so has the complexity of the average television. Most people are clueless as to the majority of settings on their HDTV's but often feel the need to go in and mess with them. When their TV goes wonky because of it who do they call? Their provider?
Nick123456
join:2009-12-27
Satellite Beach, FL

Nick123456 to rebus9

Member

to rebus9
12K for a Gige, Even from the big guys thats expensive.
You can talk many carriers into less then $4.00 per Mb/s range.
And the cheap guys will enter even under a dollar.

And I'm willing to bet a Big Mac with Large Fries, That it costs BHN less money then that very same Big Mac and Large Fries to deliver VOIP per line. VOIP really, really is Dirt Cheap.
BHNtechXpert
The One & Only
Premium Member
join:2006-02-16
Saint Petersburg, FL

BHNtechXpert

Premium Member

said by Nick123456:

12K for a Gige, Even from the big guys thats expensive.
You can talk many carriers into less then $4.00 per Mb/s range.
And the cheap guys will enter even under a dollar.

And I'm willing to bet a Big Mac with Large Fries, That it costs BHN less money then that very same Big Mac and Large Fries to deliver VOIP per line. VOIP really, really is Dirt Cheap.

Grrr why you guys bettin forbidden friut food. Can't we just make it some carrots or something

rebus9
join:2002-03-26
Tampa Bay

rebus9 to Nick123456

Member

to Nick123456
said by Nick123456:

12K for a Gige, Even from the big guys thats expensive.
You can talk many carriers into less then $4.00 per Mb/s range.
And the cheap guys will enter even under a dollar.

That's why I said "a really good carrier". It's hard to drive skinny deals out of Verizon (701), AT&T (7018), TWTC (4323), Sprint (1239) and some others we all know and love/hate. Cogent at $4 is a no-brainer, as is $1 for Hurricane. Some resellers like Bandcon will get you well down into single-digit pricing on a decent commit.

I still have vivid memories of $40,000 DS-3's and $2500 T-1's.
Nick123456
join:2009-12-27
Satellite Beach, FL

Nick123456

Member

LOL, I had ATT quote me 10K for 50mb/s on-net Ethernet Handoff, I laughed at the lady.
TWTC you can talk down pretty good, The rest though i don't know.
Cogent goes way under 4 and HE i've never dealt with, But I hear they go dirt cheap.

Now that I've steered this completely off the BHN rate raise topic. I do agree that they should pass cost down the line in the area it originates.
BHNtechXpert
The One & Only
Premium Member
join:2006-02-16
Saint Petersburg, FL

2 edits

BHNtechXpert

Premium Member

said by Nick123456:

LOL, I had ATT quote me 10K for 50mb/s on-net Ethernet Handoff, I laughed at the lady.
TWTC you can talk down pretty good, The rest though i don't know.
Cogent goes way under 4 and HE i've never dealt with, But I hear they go dirt cheap.

Now that I've steered this completely off the BHN rate raise topic. I do agree that they should pass cost down the line in the area it originates.

Look up Nick. Rebus took part of my post out of context in error. I clarified it after the fact. I wasn't being internet specific..apparently he was.

But since you brought it up. Lets go ahead and start passing these costs down just like you say so...

Next time you have a tech out for any reason you will pay the cost to the company for that tech including equipment costs. Now of course you will you have to pay the tech before he leaves.

Now keep in mind costs encompasses all costs for that visit including associated paperwork, processing, labor, parts, benefits, liability insurance...etc.

So Nick before tech Randy can leave today for that modem install you will need to cut him a check for $155.00 plus tax at 8% or $167.40.

Alrighty then two days later your kid is out edging the walkway and slices your cable but because of where it's located the entire run will need to be replaced. Ohh this is bad...cost to the company on this one was $195.00 plus eh $19.00 in parts oh but they have to bring the driveway bore guy back for another $85.00 so this time before the tech Bruce leaves you get to pay $322.92 including any associated taxes.

90 days later you kid complains of slow browsing bla bla bla and you call in for support. Tech can't find anything wrong over the phone but you insist on having someone out to check anyway.

Two days later PC tech Larry comes out and determines your kid has been surfing adult sites and got himself infected with a nasty virus. Tech says no problem...I can't fix this for you as we are not responsible for such things however I do have a bill here for you today. Please pay $125.00 before I leave. Thank you!

Total paid by you year to date (90 days) was $615.32 Nick under your plan of passing it down.

------

Nick you are looking at the life of just one customer over just 90 days as it applies to costs to your provider. BHN like many providers does not charge for MOST installs, service calls, pc tech calls and calls to replace the battery in your remote control etc etc etc. You get the idea right? (and this was only from the service call perspective...we didn't even touch the other stuff)

Now which plan do you really want? All inclusive or pay as you go?
Nick123456
join:2009-12-27
Satellite Beach, FL

Nick123456

Member

I understand completely ispgeek, I understand there are many costs. I'm not saying literally pass the charges down. But keep them in the same category.
BHNtechXpert
The One & Only
Premium Member
join:2006-02-16
Saint Petersburg, FL

1 edit

BHNtechXpert

Premium Member

Nobody said they wern't in the same category. Rebus was being internet specific, I wasn't. So I guess thats my fault for assuming he realized it wasn't just internet that increased in cost. I was responding to the increase generally speaking. Sorry if I left any confusion there.

The only way your model works is if they pass the costs all the way down and everyone pays their fair share. Sorry man but thats just the reality that we live in.

rebus9
join:2002-03-26
Tampa Bay

4 edits

rebus9

Member

said by BHNtechXpert:

Rebus was being internet specific, I wasn't. So I guess thats my fault for assuming he realized it wasn't just internet that increased in cost.....

The only way your model works is if they pass the costs all the way down and everyone pays their fair share. Sorry man but thats just the reality that we live in.

Have no fear, I know the rate increase affects all services. Now in a friendly and good-natured turnabout, let's look at your argument from a slightly different perspective.

First, let me preface this by reiterating that equipment costs for BHN have gone down. Modems are dirt cheap now. So is fiber. And the SFPs. And that nicely equipped six-figure Juniper M-series router will route tens of Gigabits/sec more than the last six-figure router they bought.

Their transit costs have decreased by virtue of (a) more favorable pricing with Level3, and (b) use of the T-bone network.

Now, to the meat of the subject. Let's pull the TV service out of it for a moment and focus on internet operations. Consider the typical NSP that is NOT a content provider. Cogent. Hurricane Electric. InterNAP. Level3. TWTC. Savvis. UUnet (a/k/a VZB). These companies shuttle bits locally, regionally, nationally, globally. And they do so in an environment such that their fees have been declining steadily. The price reductions are real, justifyable, necessary. How is it they can drop prices, while BHN needs to raise them for basically the same service-- carrying data packets?

The difference between BHN and, say, Level3 or Global Crossing, is BHN has significantly fewer competitors in the neighborhoods they serve. At the datacenter, I can exchange traffic with just about any NSP in the country. If I can't pick them up directly in Tampa, I can backhaul (L2 transport is cheap) to NoTA or Telemark in Miami, or 55/56 Marietta in Atlanta. Just about every carrier that matters has a POP in Miami or Atlanta. So guess what... they have to compete for my business, and if I don't like what I get, I turn down my BGP session and drop my cross-connect with them at the end of the term, and XC with another provider.

BHN on the other hand, has me as a (relatively) captive audience. Their sole competitors are Verizon DSL or FIOS, and a few miscellaneous DSL providers riding VZ dry loops that are becoming less relevant every day. They know they can raise rates with far less chance of losing me as a customer, than they could if.... say for example... I was picking up a Gig-E from them at 400 N Tampa St. (For those who don't know, you can buy commercial transit with a full BGP table from BHN just like you can from the carriers you know-- Level3, AT&T, InterNAP, Sprint, Cogent, et al.) Now to add another twist, BHN's prices for "enterprise-class" internet service have come DOWN, while prices for their "consumer" grade internet service are going UP. Sound contradictory? Just consider where the "real competition" exists. Hint: in the datacenter, not the residential subdivision. I'll let the reader draw his own conclusions.

When it comes down to it, what percentage of customers require truck rolls each month for repair to internet service? That's already priced into the service. I agree that employee costs, benefits, fuel, etc., have gone up-- but I'm hoping you'll admit the backend costs (transit per Mbps, equipment at the POPs, premises, and in between) to carry the bits have gone down. It costs BHN a lot less today to carry a Gbps of customer traffic than it did 5 years ago.

Geek, you and I have a friendly relationship on these forums and I'm sure it will remain so.... whether we agree, or agree to disagree. Tone is sometimes hard to discern from the written word, so rest assured I'm typing this with no malice... just somewhat of a bad taste in my mouth from BHN's decision to include internet (and phone) in their latest money-grab. If TV/programming costs go up, pass them on to video consumers. That's fair. But if your voice and data costs go down or even remain level, DON'T increase rates on them to subsidize the latest cash-grab from ESPN, Fox News, or whomever.

That's the foundation of my argument-- tying price increases to the actual services where BHN's costs have actually increased. Don't subsidize Service A by raising rates on Service B or C.
BHNtechXpert
The One & Only
Premium Member
join:2006-02-16
Saint Petersburg, FL

4 edits

BHNtechXpert

Premium Member

As always I enjoy a lively and respectful conversation with you Rebus. You're the only one I know besides myself that can sit down and write a book for a forum post :) so here goes and I'll try to go down your very good list.


First, let me preface this by reiterating that equipment costs for BHN have gone down. Modems are dirt cheap now. So is fiber. And the SFPs. And that nicely equipped six-figure Juniper M-series router will route tens of Gigabits/sec more than the last six-figure router they bought.

Their transit costs have decreased by virtue of (a) more favorable pricing with Level3, and (b) use of the T-bone network.

Now, to the meat of the subject. Let's pull the TV service out of it for a moment and focus on internet operations. Consider the typical NSP-- take your pick-- that isn't also a content provider, other than offering CDN services. Cogent. Hurricane Electric. InterNAP. Level3. TWTC. Savvis. UUnet (a/k/a VZB). These companies shuttle bits locally, regionally, nationally, globally. And they do so in an environment such that their fees have been declining steadily. Some would argue they've gone too low. But nonetheless, the decline is real, justifyable, necessary. How is it they can drop prices, while BHN needs to raise them?


I will generally concede that fees for said services have come down significantly. How that applies to BHN or any other carrier for that matter I can't say. I don't know.

You ask how BHN or any other provider needs to raise them but you leave out the rest of the equation. It's not just about transport costs. Yea they probably have gone down (one would hope) but other costs have gone up and while some of the savings offset costs there still is that carryover that we must agree exists and needs to be paid for. Providers are businesses and as such they are in business to make money.

In a Star Trek world money is meaningless as everyone has everything they need or want provided. This is not the society we live in and as such our economy is driven by business. Businesses that don't make a profit don't remain in business very long. I don't think that you nor I are in a position to question what is a fair and equitable profit for a specific provider. I can't do that because I come from a business owner background and I sure as hell wouldn't sit around and let others dictate what my profits would be. Not gonna do it.


The difference between BHN and, say, Level3 or Global Crossing, is BHN has significantly fewer competitors in the neighborhoods they service. At the datacenter, I can exchange traffic with just about any NSP in the country. If I can't pick them up directly in Tampa, I can backhaul (L2 transport is cheap) to NoTA or Telemark in Miami, or 55/56 Marietta in Atlanta. Just about every carrier that matters has a POP in Miami or Atlanta. So guess what... they have to compete for my business, and if I don't like what I get, I turn down my BGP session and drop my cross-connect with them at the end of the term, and XC with another provider.

BHN on the other hand, has me as a (relatively) captive audience. Their sole competitors are Verizon DSL or FIOS, and a few miscellaneous DSL providers riding VZ dry loops that are becoming less relevant every day. They know they can raise rates with far less chance of losing me as a customer, than they could if.... say for example... I was picking up a Gig-E from them at 400 N Tampa St. (For those who don't know, you can buy commercial transit with a full BGP table from BHN just like you can from the carriers you know-- Level3, AT&T, InterNAP, Sprint, Cogent, et al.) Now to add another twist, BHN's prices for this enterprise/datacenter-class service have come DOWN in recent years, while prices for their "consumer" grade internet service have gone up. Go figure.


I'm not a great follower of the competition is king mantra that permeates certain halls of DSLR. This applies especially in the Florida market because there is plenty of competition in most areas and prices continue to rise across the spectrum of providers (hell Verizon raised their core prices 5 times in less than two years here).

What does that tell you? Well...either they are all in collusion with each other and involved in the grandest price fixing scheme of the century (and an ice cube has a better chance of surviving in hell than that happening) OR costs of doing business have increased at ever increasing levels for all providers AND the market appears capable of bearing the additional costs.

Notice I just said something key here...the market seems capable of bearing the additional costs. I'm a firm believer in market driven economics. The consumer in time will dictate prices and so far this has held more weight than anything the guys chanting competition is king have managed to produce. Prices will get to a tipping point where the consumer will say enough. I can't afford this and will either drop the product altogether or subscribe only to the lowest price tiers regardless of product or provider. This will force all involved (programmers, providers etc) to sit down and get realistic about their expectations. This hasn't happened yet but it's coming...can't tell ya when...but it's coming. The alternative which is lose lose for everyone is government involvement and we sooo do not want to go there now do we.

One thing you must consider. Generally speaking the cost of internet in our area is lower than most parts of the country and the offerings are far superior to say the least. So for us to complain too loudly about things might be akin to shooting ourselves in the ass. We're pretty damned fortunate compared to many parts of the country. I have relatives in California who would kill to have the speeds and prices we do right here. Right now they're stuck on DSL because the local cable provider who does have a monoply and happens to be Comcast charges almost 4 times what the local telco does.

Contrary to myth BHN is not a monoply here there are options in every market. Now you may not like those options but they are options and we have to agree this is fact...not fiction. That said ...prices haven't come down now have they. So much for that competition is king mantra.....pooof...gone :)


When it comes down to it, what percentage of customers require truck rolls each month for repair to internet service? That's already priced into the service. I agree that employee costs, benefits, fuel, etc., have gone up-- but I'm hoping you'll admit the backend costs (transit per Mbps, equipment at the POPs, premises, and in between) to carry the bits have gone down. It costs BHN a lot less today to carry a Gbps of customer traffic today than it did 5 years ago.


You're making assumptions I can't make. I don't know. I'm coming from the perspective of any business owner. I happen to know certain costs because I ask AND from a previous business of my own I have a firm understanding of what it costs to send a tech to your home. Backend costs have come down but to what degree for BHN or ANY provider I can't tell you and I don't think its realistic for us to pass judgement when we don't have all the facts.


Geek, you and I have a friendly relationship on these forums and I'm sure it will remain so.... whether we agree, or agree to disagree. Tone is sometimes hard to discern from the written word, so rest assured I'm typing this with no malice... just somewhat of a bad taste in my mouth from BHN's decision to include internet (and phone) in their latest money-grab. If TV/programming costs go up, pass them on to video consumers. That's fair. But if your voice and data costs go down or even remain level, DON'T increase rates on them to subsidize the latest cash-grab from ESPN, Fox News, or whomever.


I think you are still holding on to my previous response to you that I posted a clarification to. When I answered your post I was speaking generally not specific to any provider actually because every single one of them raised rates this year in case you didn't notice. I can't tell you if they (BHN) actually spread the operating cost increase cost across all operating units because I just don't know the answer. I will point this out though. In case you hadn't noticed BHN core internet service rates had not increased in many years and considering that one thing alone...it was due.

As for the last sentence there. Speaking hypthetically what would you do in a situation like that. You are obviously aware of the cash grab al a networks this year. If you were faced with the same situation of being forced to raise video product pricing to the point that it literally priced people out of being able to afford cable (in other words breached the market willingness or capability to pay) what would you do?

(Keep in mind that you still have to make a profit and remain viable...no cheating here)

1). Raise the video prices and take your chances on losing subscribers at least in the short term until the competition re-trans agreements come due and they are faced with the very same situation and hope your customer would come back to you realizing that all things considered you were a better provider.

2). Tell the networks to stuff it where the sun doesn't shine and let them go dark facing the wrath of angry consumers who don't care and don't want to know that what you did was in the best interest of all and would jump ship in a heartbeat if you dared let this happen.

3). Spread the increased costs over your other operating units in an effort to soften the blow to consumers in the hopes that some sanity will prevail in retrans pricing sometime in the near future.

How would you handle this oh wise Rebus because I know one thing...I don't have an answer. I could follow my gut and that would be option 3.

As always sir I enjoy your lively and spirited debates and I do understand how you feel please don't mistake my intentions here. I'm a consumer and right now everything I buy or need is going up in price and it sucks. Right now I'm making buying decisions based on what I need vss what I just want to have.

I suspect we all are in the same position...whether we're talking about individuals or businesses
willzzz
join:2007-05-23
NY

willzzz

Member

BHN is probably happy to have my family as a good customer because our house's loop length for AT&T U-verse is simply too long for their VDSL2 (People across the street can get U-verse). Also AT&T's ADSL2+ CO based IP-DSLAM doesn't reach me because apparently I'm 19k from their CO. I'm not kidding, this is in a nice suburb and apparently AT&T took the wise decision to instead of build a NEW CO, they took their existing CO in the city south of US and used that instead. So certain city blocks like mine, their ONLY option for broadband is BHN unless you count capped Verizon LTE or other forms of 3G.
Nick123456
join:2009-12-27
Satellite Beach, FL

Nick123456

Member

Interesting, Here in FL they have the ADSL2+ DSLAM's outside the CO, Sure some are in the CO. But you can see the lawn fridges around here literally labeled "DSLAM". This is also where they have been loading up the VRAD's for U-Verse.

rebus9
join:2002-03-26
Tampa Bay

rebus9 to BHNtechXpert

Member

to BHNtechXpert
said by BHNtechXpert:

As always I enjoy a lively and respectful conversation with you Rebus.

Makes life interesting, even if we don't always agree.
said by BHNtechXpert:

I'm not a great follower of the competition is king mantra that permeates certain halls of DSLR.

I am... BUT there has to be true competition. A duopoly is not competition. The presence of Knology, for example, doesn't really count because their reach is limited. In my 'hood the only players are VZ and BHN, again with the exception of a few dry-loop DSL providers limping along at 2002 speeds. Clear Wi-Max has the potential to make things interesting in a year or two, IF they manage not to shoot themselves in both feet. I'm hopeful, but not quite holding my breath yet.
said by BHNtechXpert:

(hell Verizon raised their core prices 5 times in less than two years here).

I have no hard data to back it up, but my gut tells me it was because they could. Hook users, cheap. Generate buzz. And once everyone's addicted to (a rather outstanding product), raise prices knowing there's nobody else in town that can get near some of the things FIOS does. I'll be honest, now that I've lived with uploads that peak out around 31 Mbps (we both know I telecommute and have legit reasons for doing multi-GB uploads) there's no way I could live without them. If FIOS doubled in price, I'd still keep it even though I'd scream and cuss every time the bill came due.
said by BHNtechXpert:

either they are all in collusion with each other and involved in the grandest price fixing scheme of the century (..snip..) OR costs of doing business have increased (..snip..) AND the market appears capable of bearing the additional costs.

BINGO.... the market will bear the costs. In the 21st century, the internet is almost as important as electricity itself. If Progress Energy raised rates to 25-cents per kWh, we wouldn't shut off service; we'd just have to make some adjustments in other spending.

BHN and VZ know that most people would give up a LOT of things before disconnecting from the 'net. Just consider the millions of collective shrieks and mass panic when Facebook has an outage. Raise the price-- people will still pay.

It's similar to $4 gasoline-- we try to conserve, but can't go cold turkey. Or cigarettes. When I was a kid, they were 50-cents a pack. Today, what are they?... something like $4 a pack? And people keep smoking.
said by BHNtechXpert:

I'm a firm believer in market driven economics. The consumer in time will dictate prices and so far this has held more weight than anything the guys chanting competition is king have managed to produce.

Mmmmm.... let's agree to disagree, over shades of difference. That assumes consumers have an alternative, in order to force the provider's hand. What's my choice if I decide to vote with my wallet? Drop VZ and BHN? Then what? What other viable choice is there at this very moment? None really.
said by BHNtechXpert:

The alternative which is lose lose for everyone is government involvement and we sooo do not want to go there now do we.

I'm a Libertarian-leaning registered Republican who loves certain parts of the Tea Party platform.... so that should make it clear how I feel about government. But I will say that in the complete absense of corporate conscience, there are some instances when gov't regulation is necessary. Think open access to copper for competing DSL in the 90's-- and the highly positive effect that had for consumer choice.

And I don't know how old you are, but if you're a little grey on top like me, you'll remember what happened when Jimmy Carter deregulated the oil industry in the late 70s. I vividly remember gasoline jumping from 69.9c to 87.9c literally overnight the day the new rules took effect. Then the windfall profits tax went away. And all these years later, what do we have? Oil companies setting record profit levels in the midst of the worst rececession in 80 years. Not records for the company itself-- records for the highest profits, of any company, in the history of the world.

Certain industries which are so critical to our society-- and which have failed, in the absense of regulation, to act in good faith-- unfortunately need to be more closely regulated. (insurance, utilities, energy....)
said by BHNtechXpert:

I have relatives in California who would kill to have the speeds and prices we do right here. Right now they're stuck on DSL because the local cable provider who does have a monoply and happens to be Comcast charges almost 4 times what the local telco does.

Because they can. See my point?
said by BHNtechXpert:

Contrary to myth BHN is not a monoply here there are options in every market. Now you may not like those options but they are options and we have to agree this is fact...not fiction. That said ...prices haven't come down now have they. So much for that competition is king mantra.....pooof...gone

But look what happened when Wilson, NC, and Lafayette, LA, (and others) plumbed themselves with community fiber. The local cable operators had no choice but to get more competitive. I do realize muni-fiber operators (like GreenlightNC) are not in business to deliver profits to shareholders, but it goes to show that IF a provider can charge "that much less" and cover all costs, then whatever the cableco charges on top of that is tasty profit. A sensible portion of gravy on supper tastes pretty good. Too much gravy, and it becomes quite distasteful.
said by BHNtechXpert:

You're making assumptions I can't make. I don't know. I'm coming from the perspective of any business owner. (..snip..) Backend costs have come down but to what degree for BHN or ANY provider I can't tell you and I don't think its realistic for us to pass judgement when we don't have all the facts.

I'm more sensitive to the issue, because my dayjob has me dealing with (among other things) transit purchases and the chain of costs-- CapEx, OpEx-- incurred to offer network (cloud) based services. And my hard costs to deliver the "same" services have not, in aggregate, increased in the past 10 years. Therefore we have not increased our prices. We've grown our profits by increasing our service offerings and the size of our customer base.
said by BHNtechXpert:

As for the last sentence there. Speaking hypthetically what would you do in a situation like that. (..snip..) If you were faced with the same situation of being forced to raise video product pricing to the point that it literally priced people out of being able to afford cable (in other words breached the market willingness or capability to pay) what would you do?

1). Raise the video prices and take your chances on losing subscribers at least in the short term until the competition re-trans agreements come due and they are faced with the very same situation (..snip..)

2). Tell the networks to stuff it where the sun doesn't shine and let them go dark facing the wrath of angry consumers who don't care and don't want to know that what you did was in the best interest of all and would jump ship in a heartbeat if you dared let this happen.

3). Spread the increased costs over your other operating units in an effort to soften the blow to consumers in the hopes that some sanity will prevail in retrans pricing sometime in the near future.

That's a good question, and I don't have an answer right now. I do know that softening the blow with option (3) means no steep video price increases, so consumers don't get as angry, there won't be a major outcry, networks will never get the message and retrans costs will only go up. Remember the adage about putting a frog in water and turning up the heat SLOWLY until he unwittingly cooks to death? IMO, consumers need to see exactly WHAT is driving these increases. Don't shield them from the truth by asking (internet-only customers like me) to subsidize the cost of Joe Sixpack's ESPN subscription. This is like adding to the national debt to delay cutting services. If you don't make the tough unpopular decisions NOW, it will only get worse.

So it would be either (1) or (2). My gut tells me that (1) is the best option as long as you make the effort to be transparent with consumers. If Network X raises rates $3.15 per subscriber, make it VERY clear-- in bold print on Page 1 of the monthly billing statement-- that the $3.15 increase is due to a Network X. That brings 2 advantages. First, you focus the wrath of the customers where it belongs-- Network X. Second, other operators will follow suit. When VZ sees BHN is doing it, they'll do it too. Monkey see, monkey do. And this will serve to reinforce the first benefit-- collective rage against Network X. I'll let you fill in the blanks on what happens next.
said by BHNtechXpert:

As always sir I enjoy your lively and spirited debates


Ditto.
frugalfreake
join:2011-03-16

frugalfreake to BHNtechXpert

Member

to BHNtechXpert
The consumers didn't choose to intiate phone services with low demand and higher than comparable VOIP prices. Brighthouse did that. Consumers Didn't want locked down franchises that would later control the internet pipes, Brighthouse did that. Consumers have begged Cable companies to end the overhead operating costs for channels that are NOT wanted. We want À la carte services but will not get. I currently pay $18 for BASIC channels that I can get OTA Free. WHY? because there are no comparable competition to get services from in my area because of franchising. It takes 12 hours sometimes to get an email from trusted sites like groupon.com or slickdeals.com because of the email policies are over restricted and doesn't distinguish on demand notifications, It's just based unfairly on message numbers per/, so if I get several messages from fatwallet in a day upon my requests, GOSH it must be spam. Has roadrunner never heard of email notification services?

Brighthouse is better in some ways, but prices are NOT one of them. In my area the promotions are non existant compared to other networks that I've seen people report on.
BHNtechXpert
The One & Only
Premium Member
join:2006-02-16
Saint Petersburg, FL

3 edits

BHNtechXpert

Premium Member

said by frugalfreake:

The consumers didn't choose to intiate phone services with low demand and higher than comparable VOIP prices. Brighthouse did that. Consumers Didn't want locked down franchises that would later control the internet pipes, Brighthouse did that. Consumers have begged Cable companies to end the overhead operating costs for channels that are NOT wanted. We want À la carte services but will not get. I currently pay $18 for BASIC channels that I can get OTA Free. WHY? because there are no comparable competition to get services from in my area because of franchising. It takes 12 hours sometimes to get an email from trusted sites like groupon.com or slickdeals.com because of the email policies are over restricted and doesn't distinguish on demand notifications, It's just based unfairly on message numbers per/, so if I get several messages from fatwallet in a day upon my requests, GOSH it must be spam. Has roadrunner never heard of email notification services?

Brighthouse is better in some ways, but prices are NOT one of them. In my area the promotions are non existant compared to other networks that I've seen people report on.

Hmmm...first of all the phone service as provided by BHN is not traditional voip as you know it. Nothing leaves the BHN network before going to POTS unlike Vonage where you are totally reliant not only on your own provider but every stinkin network in between. Magicjack for all intents doesn't count as anything (but a joke).

Okay so lets look at pricing. You are saying that you can get VoIP phone service for less than BHN's. Really now...because the lowest similar priced product is Vonage and you still have to provide some form of broadband service...so thats $24.95 (Vonage) + a minimum of $29 give or take for your internet or for a total of $53.95 actual cost just for the other guys.

Now lets assume you already have broadband through BHN and since you have cable of some type...depending on which services you have your phone actually costs you $24.00 actually less than the other guys and your calls never traverse the internet...unlike Vonage or any other 3rd party VoIP product.

What is with the "Bright House Did That" stuff?...if you have a beef this wasn't the thread for that and I'm not quite sure where you are coming from with the Bright House is at the root of all your assumed evils stuff. Exactly what is your point? You seem to have several broadly worded complaints that are industry issues more than Bright House specific issues. Maybe take a little time to actually learn about the issues we've discussed at great length in this thread before posting like that. Only a suggestion.


It takes 12 hours sometimes to get an email from trusted sites like groupon.com or slickdeals.com because of the email policies are over restricted and doesn't distinguish on demand notifications, It's just based unfairly on message numbers per/, so if I get several messages from fatwallet in a day upon my requests, GOSH it must be spam. Has roadrunner never heard of email notification services?


With all due respect that's nonsense... roadrunner email servers do not hold back email from or to you. If you have problems receiving timely email did it occur to you that the problem might actually be with the sender? I'm not sure where you heard that from but it's false....sorry.


I currently pay $18 for BASIC channels that I can get OTA Free. WHY?


If you can then why aren't you? Seems kind of odd that you would pay for something you can get for nothing now doesn't it. Those channels aren't free to Bright House but they should provide them to you for free if they are the delivery agent? Makes no sense...
frugalfreake
join:2011-03-16

1 edit

frugalfreake

Member

deleted

Beachie
Where is Shelly Miscavige?
join:2001-07-12
Saint Petersburg, FL

Beachie

Member

Could you please post a header for an email in question? Please edit out your email address and IP for security reasons. I'd like to see that info and also when you received it as compared to time sent.
frugalfreake
join:2011-03-16

1 edit

frugalfreake

Member

I no longer have the email, but it was for Fatwallet.com and it was a topic alert or Private message notification. when someone posts a new thread with words that you have indicated it sends you an indicator of it in your email, same goes when you recieve new website pm. I remember that it was close to 8 -12 hours from timestamp in my gmail row view and timestamp in the header of actual email when it was sent.

I don't have it any more, I searched my gmail trash, but it is older than 30 days.

my conversation about it
»www.fatwallet.com/forums ··· =1055885

Beachie
Where is Shelly Miscavige?
join:2001-07-12
Saint Petersburg, FL

Beachie

Member

said by frugalfreake:

I no longer have the email, but it was for Fatwallet.com and it was a topic alert or Private message notification. when someone posts a new thread with words that you have indicated it sends you an indicator of it in your email, same goes when you recieve new website pm. I remember that it was close to 8 -12 hours from timestamp in my gmail row view and timestamp in the header of actual email when it was sent.

I don't have it any more, I searched my gmail trash, but it is older than 30 days.

my conversation about it
»www.fatwallet.com/forums ··· =1055885

Are we talking about Gmail or Bright House email?
frugalfreake
join:2011-03-16

frugalfreake

Member

talking about my roadrunner mail, it had been my roadrunner email registered at fatwallet when I noticed the delay. I changed it To gmail directly at fatwallet after noticing the delay. I have my roadrunner email settings to foward to gmail.
BHNtechXpert
The One & Only
Premium Member
join:2006-02-16
Saint Petersburg, FL

4 edits

BHNtechXpert

Premium Member

said by frugalfreake:

talking about my roadrunner mail, it had been my roadrunner email registered at fatwallet when I noticed the delay. I changed it To gmail directly at fatwallet after noticing the delay. I have my roadrunner email settings to foward to gmail.

Your BHN provided internet and email comes from the RR network. It is the same. I only used Bright House to make sure that there was no confusion.

So what you are saying is you don't use an email client. You use webmail (which still runs on the same servers as your pop3 email does btw). And to further obfuscate the issue you are forwarding your RR email (via a setting in the RR webmail btw) to gmail AND the issue you are describing is over 30 days old and you have no other emails since to substantiate your claim AND somehow you have come to the conclusion that it's RR's at fault even though they aren't the final leg in this delivery method.... gmail is.

Okayyyy....yea...right... bottom line your issue does not reside with RR or Bright House for that matter. That issue is dead at this point as proven above.

Since you get your mail actually through gmail I suggest you contact them for assistance. And please...your email issue has nothing to do with the original OP's thread. If you need help with this create a new thread (preferrably on a gmail help site somewhere since it's probably an issue there anyway but if you insist here in another thread is good too) and not use this thread....thanks to this hijack the original message in this thread is hopelessly lost. Sorry Rebus!
frugalfreake
join:2011-03-16

1 edit

frugalfreake

Member

deleted.
BHNtechXpert
The One & Only
Premium Member
join:2006-02-16
Saint Petersburg, FL

BHNtechXpert

Premium Member

said by frugalfreake:

»img545.imageshack.us/img ··· sted.gif
message posted (notice time)
»img859.imageshack.us/img ··· nbox.gif
My ISP Inbox(notice time)

I will also do this same test and post with my topic alert going directly to my gmail not using RR mailbox.

Alright then... your issue is with receiving fat wallet forums replies not with groupon afterall. No problem then...I'll be back in 10 minutes but in the meantime could you please stop posting in this thread and create a NEW one here with your issue? This issue has nothing to do with Rebus's original post.
BHNtechXpert

1 edit

BHNtechXpert to frugalfreake

Premium Member

to frugalfreake
Click for full size
Alrighty then. This myth is BUSTED! The picture above is my original post and a reply. In this thread »www.fatwallet.com/forums ··· t=1#last

Now here are the headers to the email response I received just seconds later...

From - Sat Mar 19 21:22:15 2011
X-Account-Key: account12
X-UIDL:
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-Mozilla-Keys:
Return-Path:
Received: from hrndva-mxlb.mail.rr.com ([10.128.255.90])
by hrndva-imta03.mail.rr.com with ESMTP
id
for ;
Sun, 20 Mar 2011 01:19:04 +0000
Return-Path:
X-Cloudmark-Score: 0
X-RR-Connecting-IP: 69.160.146.194
X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=vkjD/2dj3PVTARLaNWYJ2WqhMo+Zx6OzqsClHEixmZ0= c=1 sm=0 a=RTfGeD8aAyMA:10 a=qNU57kVemHYA:10 a=uwPVtoZoKAS1/+THxx/RbQ==:17 a=pKG-NIMBAAAA:8 a=G4CW-iCVnJCjivx1XMcA:9 a=gL-cWYvAuEMqpaGtm10A:7 a=87vcKSpV-AZsBc2fju5y2AnrnLsA:4 a=wWnIKi-h4m4A:10 a=YFj7iTo3-c4A:10 a=gGbC9dGVJu8A:10 a=9RWBf1f3JwGIP-Y5:21 a=Wjxhd7kAuZ0mSeGp:21 a=vggBfdFIAAAA:8 a=3j4BkbkPAAAA:8 a=KE2Hxcr99YESrspFWroA:9 a=-cnprbuqjC7ZlM_tCC8A:7 a=M4izkGak4MRYtZpeDhKK1dSMq6oA:4 a=KIWu9-t1SkkA:10 a=xzvbX3bEwfMA:10 a=lb1W7SvDyZ8A:10 a=f5Ho_QGLaJgA:10 a=ZmXBIScVJYcA:10 a=UcKjxUrJb2VPoWiW:21 a=s7akFgNmjld_Iv3z:21 a=uwPVtoZoKAS1/+THxx/RbQ==:117
Received: from [69.160.146.194] ([69.160.146.194:44445] helo=web79.fatwallet.com)
by hrndva-iedge09.mail.rr.com (envelope-from )
(ecelerity 2.2.3.46 r()) with ESMTP
id 41/F2-03164-806558D4; Sun, 20 Mar 2011 01:19:04 +0000
Received: by web79.fatwallet.com (Postfix, from userid 33)
id 4698BBC67C5; Sat, 19 Mar 2011 20:19:01 -0500 (CDT)
To: ispgeeksupport@tampabay.rr.com
Subject: Hitachi Deskstar 2 TB 3.5-Inch $69.99 @Amazon
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 33:class.phpmailer.php
Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2011 20:19:01 -0500
From: FatWallet Topic Subscription
Reply-to: do_not_reply@fatwallet.com
Message-ID:
X-Priority: 3
X-Mailer: PHP
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="b1_0fe49e4cb82b962f5b716e2138b1ee14"

--b1_0fe49e4cb82b962f5b716e2138b1ee14
Content-Type: text/plain; charset = "iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

RyogaHibiki has posted a reply to the topic entitled 'Hitachi Deskstar 2 TB 3.5-Inch $69.99 @Amazon'.

------------------------------

The only thing odd about FatWallet forums is they never adjusted for daylight savings time (which is common for forums...hell even I forgot to make the change on my site). My original post was at 8:44pm, the reply was at 9:16pm and it was received at 9:19pm.

Received: by web79.fatwallet.com (Postfix, from userid 33)
id 4698BBC67C5; Sat, 19 Mar 2011 20:19:01 -0500 (CDT)
To: ispgeeksupport@tampabay.rr.com

Whoever set these forums up however has their server setup for GMT +0000 as shown below:

Return-Path:
Received: from hrndva-mxlb.mail.rr.com ([10.128.255.90])
by hrndva-imta03.mail.rr.com with ESMTP
id
for ;
Sun, 20 Mar 2011 01:19:04 +0000

Slightly odd...but everyone runs their servers differently.

Now back to you Frugal freak. What you are doing with the forwarding really isn't a good idea. Since you are already forwarding to gmail why not just change your email address in Fatwallet to go directly to gmail anyway. Your process for getting your mail is um....odd. Take the extra servers out of it and do the world a favor by cutting down on excess bandwidth use going from one server to another to another.

rebus9
join:2002-03-26
Tampa Bay

rebus9 to frugalfreake

Member

to frugalfreake
said by frugalfreake:

I have my roadrunner email settings to foward to gmail.

I'll put on my $DAYJOB hat for a moment and jump onto this dogpile. Speaking from the viewpoint of a corporate/enterprise-level service provider whose network sends a lot of traffic to Gmail, the fact you forward your RR email to Gmail has frequent potential to worsen the delay. Sometimes a few moments, other times hours.

I've seen Gmail-bound messages sit in an outbound spool for up to an hour (several hours in the most extreme cases) with a string of 4xx status codes (deferrals). Even though Yahoo wins the "hellish delivery nightmare" award hands down by an order of magnitude, there are plenty of deliverability problems to Gmail.

Just because it doesn't land in your Gmail box for a few hours doesn't mean it was RR's fault. Quite the opposite, I cannot remember the last time we saw any mail delivery problems or delays to any of the Road Runner franchises (BHN or TWC).
frugalfreake
join:2011-03-16

frugalfreake

Member

Because roadrunner mail has a awful interface IMO. You have to log in each time if you haven't been on lately and there is no batch delete. It is much quicker and easier to use gmail. I still use my RR.com email address for certain sent mail, but reading and deleting saving, flagging is just so much simplier with my labels in gmail. Gmail has heck of alot storage space too.
frugalfreake

1 edit

frugalfreake to BHNtechXpert

Member

to BHNtechXpert
And I'm telling you what I experienced. It does not matter you can't replicate my issues or what your opinion is. I know what I saw and your campaign to disprove me seems just a little over obsessive to me. I just happened to post a thread 2 months earlier just to come here and pick a fight with you almighty master of your companies.

Geeeze, do you always handle your clients with such disregard?

I am through with this issue here as a answer is doubtful. I have better things to do. You can believe me or not, no skin off my back.
frugalfreake

frugalfreake to rebus9

Member

to rebus9
I appreciate the response rebus. Your manner of assistance is appreciated.