dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
6
share rss forum feed


r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX
Reviews:
·row44
reply to FFH5

Re: A UBB plan can be designed to be revenue neutral

You cant be this stupid???

Sorry, but everyone uses the internet for different things and more or less than others. To come up with a current revenue neutral per byte billing makes no sense and then we all get screwed as we use the internet more.

Also the costs of the network have almost nothing to do with usage, they are fixed costs based on the equipment and physical line to your house. If you use your connection to download 500GB in a month your connection still cost the same as someone that downloaded 50GB a month.

You should not get unfair discounts for using your connection less when costs are the same.
--
...brought to you by Carl's Jr.


Thaler
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA
kudos:3
said by r81984:

You should not get unfair discounts for using your connection less when costs are the same.

There is a per-connection cost for internet, that is true. However, to say that a bandwidth hog doesn't cost the ISP more in costs compared to a one-a-day email checker is silly.

A fair UBB would be one where light users would actually see a real reduction on bills. All the ones currently proposed though offer no such thing - the best users can do is break even with their current overpriced connection.


r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX
Reviews:
·row44
Your usage is insignificant to the costs of your connection.
If you call tech support once you already cost more than someone maxing their connection out.
Light users should not have a reducting in bills as then everyone else would be subsidizing their physical connection and equipment.

An ISP limits usage with speed tiers, not caps.
If you want more speed then you have to pay more for faster equipment so when you use your faster speed it is all paid for.

I have had ATT since 2000. Now ATT has been sending me emails saying I have gone over their caps. WTF?
I could download more in 2000 than I can now.
I wil not change my internet usage for phony caps, but I expect to be without internet soon as ATT will probably refuse to accept my monthly payments for using my connection like it was the year 2000.

Usage Based Billing and Caps makes no sense for an ISP as costs are not based on usage. There is no such thing as a fair UBB for internet.
--
...brought to you by Carl's Jr.


Thaler
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA
kudos:3
said by r81984:

Your usage is insignificant to the costs of your connection.
If you call tech support once you already cost more than someone maxing their connection out.
Light users should not have a reducting in bills as then everyone else would be subsidizing their physical connection and equipment.

Source?

The cost to move residential data is much smaller than most UBB plans lead to believe...but there are costs involved. This is the first I've heard that there is zero cost to move them, regardless of moving 1 MB or 1 TB.


r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX
Reviews:
·row44
Insignificant != 0
But your usage really does not matter as you have to pay 100% cost + their margin for your physical line, the port it is connected two and partial cost of each drop and port down the line. If you do not use your connection much all of that costs the same.
ISPs would never sell you a connection at a loss. Tier 1 ISPs like ATT have no extra costs over their network since they are not being ripped off by reselling internet. Their physical equipment is the internet.

An ISP will always charge you a flat fee to cover all the network costs and their profit margin desired. Then they will use UBB as a way to rip off the minority of internet subcribers and will get away with it as long as they are a monopoly or the 1 competing company does UBB also.

The sad part is people need the internet so they are forced to get it regardless if they are against the caps.
The only solution is real network neutrality laws that will forces ISPs to offer an unrestricted (including uncapped) internet. You should always get the same internet regardless of the ISP you choose.

We have had uncapped internet in the country from 1995 to 2011 and ISPs were greatly profitable. UBB is just a way to block internet tv/video competition with tv service or to steal some extra money from those that use their connection more.
There will be a day when the FCC will breakup all ISP/TV companies into two separate companies. We will get internet by dummy pipe providers and then we will able to order TV from 1 of various cable companies online.
--
...brought to you by Carl's Jr.


Thaler
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA
kudos:3
So, no source to the "insignificant" costs involved, okay.

sonicmerlin

join:2009-05-24
Cleveland, OH
kudos:1

1 edit


Thaler
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA
kudos:3

1 edit

I'm not the one claiming that bandwidth costs are insignificant. I just want to know where they got their source for the information so that it's not just one person's hearsay.

And from the sources quoted there, bandwidth costs aren't free, but they are cheap - ranging form $0.05 per GB to $1 per MB (seems a bit high), depending on the customer/client involved. That's still a range of $50-$1000+ per TB.

So, even from those sources, a heavy-use broadband customer has a more-than-significant broadband cost as compared to a light-use customer.

Thanks for the clarification.


r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX
Reviews:
·row44

2 edits
reply to Thaler
said by Thaler:

So, no source to the "insignificant" costs involved, okay.

Do you not understand what it cost to build a network and how a network works?? Silly you.
Costs are based on your physical connection not usage so it makes no sense to charge by usage.
--
...brought to you by Carl's Jr.


Thaler
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA
kudos:3
Pretty sure the costs/operation involved in running a major DSL/Cable ISP are a lot different than the CAT5 network you've got in your house. If you wish to prove otherwise, again, please state some sources.


r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX
Reviews:
·row44
If you know how a network works then it is common sense knowledge. Plus the huge profits ISPs had from 1995 to 2011 shows you how usage does not matter in their costs.
Usage Base Billing is 100% only to prevent internet competition with TV services, I thought this was also common knowledge by now.

Please stop playing dumb. It does not make you look intelligent.

said by »www.pcpro.co.uk/news/broadband/3···-of-data :
"Traffic-related costs are a small percentage of the total connectivity revenue, and despite traffic growth, this percentage is expected to stay constant or decline," claims the report, written by telecoms experts Plum Consulting.
Even when experts talk about the cost per GB all they are doing is taking the fixed costs of the network and dividing it by the bandwidth of the network.
You cannot build a network by paying by the byte as costs are not based on usage.

The only ISPs that could argue usage based biling are the ones that are "internet resellers" where they are forced to unfairly pay for usage to their backbone providers and then must pass on BS usage costs to their customers when they resell internet access. Tier 1 ISPs like ATT have absolutely no justification for UBB as their equipment is the internet.
--
...brought to you by Carl's Jr.


Thaler
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA
kudos:3
said by r81984:

If you know how a network works then it is common sense knowledge.

So you believe a cable/DSL ISP operates exactly like the CAT5 & WiFi network running at my house. Neat.

said by r81984:

Plus the huge profits ISPs had from 1995 to 2011 shows you how usage does not matter in their costs.

Profit != Decreasing Costs

These companies have been asking for more money & providing less service. Simply being profitable doesn't explain/prove your point at all.

said by r81984:

Usage Base Billing is 100% only to prevent internet competition with TV services, I thought this was also common knowledge by now.

It is. What I'm looking for is your source that heavy data users are no different (or negligibly so) from their light data use counterparts.

said by r81984:

Even when experts talk about the cost per GB all they are doing is taking the fixed costs of the network and dividing it by the bandwidth of the network.

Every "expert" source I've seen writes off these costs as "small" or "negligible"...but provides no actual numbers as to compare scales. One person's "small" is another person's "significant". The sources I've seen in this thread actually provide numbers to the reader indicate that a heavy user's costs to the ISP are noticeable (at least to me) compared to a light user.


r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX
Reviews:
·row44
There is no source that says someone who uses their connection more costs an ISP more money.
ISP use caps only to prevent internet video competition.

If you use your 20mbps connection less, your connection does not magically get cheaper. It cost the same as someone who uses their same tiered connection more.
If you pay less because you use your connection less than everyone else will have to subsidize your connection which is not fair.

You should really do some reading on how networks work.
FYI, the way an ISP works is the same as if you ran a CAT5 network in your house. They use tranceivers, switches, routers. The only difference is their network is much larger and uses different equipment and protocols for very long runs. They have to balance their network just like if you built your own network in your house, office building, or across your town.

If their network can only handle 6 mbps per subscriber and they lie and sell 20 mbps then they screwed up. In cases like that they need to be selling 6 mbps with up to 20 mbps speed boost at non peak times. Caps will not fix them offering too fast speeds that they know their network can't handle.

You really need to stop playing the stupid troll game.
--
...brought to you by Carl's Jr.


Thaler
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA
kudos:3
I'm just trying to clarify your position by reading whatever documentation you have that explains your position. However, the more we discuss, the more your "facts" seem to be a matter of your own opinion.


r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX
Reviews:
·row44
I am simply talking facts. Monthly usage is insignificant for your costs.
All that matters is what tier of speeds they give you and what equipment they need to buy and operator to support it.

They take those costs and divide them by the # of years they want to have a return on investment. Your usage is insignificant compared to what everything costs to give you your connection. If you never use your connection it still costs the same as someone downloading 500GB a month.
If usage really mattered at the backbone, then you would see companies not counting in-network usage against you and only external internet traffic against you. ATT even counts modem to CO overhead against you which makes no sense. Usage is irrelevant and only capped to prevent internet video competition.

If you take the time to understand how a network works then you will understand this.
--
...brought to you by Carl's Jr.