dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
uniqs
11
RickStep
Premium Member
join:2002-11-25
Hamilton, ON

RickStep to XanderLo

Premium Member

to XanderLo

Re: Has DSL pair bonding arrived at Bell?

There are 2 issues that say that Bell will support pair bonding.

Issue one is that there are less and less customers using Bell wire pairs. This address at one time had 4 or 5 landlines and now has one. Our grandkids have moved in to attend McMaster University and the chances that they will ever get a landline are slim to none.

Issue two is that as Bell upgrades to FTTH on a city by city basis, there are going to be thousands of pedestals removed and tens/hundreds of thousands of line cards removed.

The equipment will fall into a few categories.
1. Oldest generation equipment - scrap all or save a few – the oldest equipment is scrap; same some for maintenance.
2. Next generation equipment - sort and scrap oldest versions – Keep the newest versions for servicing.
3. Current generation equipment - sort and modify to latest hardware version and upgrade firmware.
4. Current generation equipment - sort, upgrade firmware and retest (hardware up-to-date).

If the newest equipment is the Alcatel 7330, the removed equipment could be used for spare parts; used to replace older FTTN equipment or be used (when refurbished) as a new install in areas that do not have FTTN.

With the quantities of hardware Bell will be removing (along with others in North America), and the chances of reselling the equipment at zero and with spare cable pairs increasing in most neighbourhoods; pair bonding may be one of the smartest decisions that Bell has made or will make.

My address is still wired to the office at about 1.6 km (by road) and 400 metres from our cross connect box.

When Bell had an Internet service of 7Mbits and with a Siemens SpeedStream 6520, the modem reported an allowable speed of between 8.5Mbits & 9Mbits.

Bell has since cut the speed to 6Mbits and when (if) we renew when the contract which expires in October the speed will be cut to 5Mbits.

With Pair bonding, (whether FTTN or wired back to the CO), Bell could prevent the loss of many customers to other providers including me.

Rick
InvalidError
join:2008-02-03

InvalidError

Member

said by RickStep:

With Pair bonding, (whether FTTN or wired back to the CO), Bell could prevent the loss of many customers to other providers including me.

Except bonding almost doubles Bell's costs for providing service so retaining low-value subscribers via pair bonding may translate into a net loss, leaving Bell better off without those subscribers.
34764170 (banned)
join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

34764170 (banned)

Member

said by InvalidError:

said by RickStep:

With Pair bonding, (whether FTTN or wired back to the CO), Bell could prevent the loss of many customers to other providers including me.

Except bonding almost doubles Bell's costs for providing service so retaining low-value subscribers via pair bonding may translate into a net loss, leaving Bell better off without those subscribers.

The "low value" is Bell's fault. Pair bonding is a means of allowing a much higher value customer.
RickStep
Premium Member
join:2002-11-25
Hamilton, ON

2 edits

RickStep to InvalidError

Premium Member

to InvalidError
said by InvalidError:

Except bonding almost doubles Bell's costs for providing service so retaining low-value subscribers via pair bonding may translate into a net loss, leaving Bell better off without those subscribers.

Why exactly do you think that it would double Bell's cost?

When Bell's revenue goes to zero because of poor planning and stupidity and unused cable pairs increase which is happening in this neighbourhood; any revenue is a plus not double. The use of 2 line cards and 2 cable pairs does NOT cost Bell double. I keep getting two offers from Bell.
1. Get TV over the Internet - OPPS that was a mistake - get a great deal on satellite TV.
2. Get a second phone line for $9.95. So much for no spare pairs.

Something has been missed here and you pointed out the problem.

I am a low value customer that was created by Bell. We didn't want to be or need to be a low value customer; but when Bell caps your service prematurely; the only other options are the competition.

Most of the north side of our street have Internet with Cogeco. The south side has Fibe 25/10 and Fibe whatever with TV.

The problem is this:

1. Internet customers look at speed vs. bandwidth and take what they see as the best value whether they need it or not; or whether what is being sold to them is real.
2. The internet speed here currently is 6Mbits wired back to the CO and does the following:
2a Allows my wife to watch 4 simultaneous feeds from Big Brother.
2b And allows me to download gigabytes from Microsoft at the same time with only the very odd hiccup in the video stream.

The issue as we go forward is to future proof against a 12 month contract that may shoot us in the foot due to the increase in resolution in streaming video and a contract for a better price that is an albatross around our neck.

Our side of the street and all those customers including a new condo development in an old school (where our local councillor lives) are using Cogeco Internet because Bell has abandoned this old neighbourhood and now classes us as low paying customers.

Bell Canada has its collective head up its ass. Bell has created all of the issues that are chasing customers away. Bell; however; continues to paint us as abandoning Bell but gives us few options.

Please explain this!

The longest run of cable in the area is about 1.7km from the CO. 1.2km to the cross box and 500 metres to the end. The 6520 reported a usable speed of 8.5 - 9 Mbits at my location of 1.6km from the CO.

While Bell should be able to offer 5 Fibe packages (which it does on the south side of our street for its Fibe service; Bells solution for us has been to degrade the only package available here from 7/unlimited to 6/unlimited to 6/65 to 6/15 and soon to 5/15.

The old line cards that are still in Bells CO could set my speed at 9Mbits and Bell could charge the fee for the service up to 15/10. With pair bonding, which can take place solely with the router my address could get between 15 - 20Mbits. There are routers in the market place today that will integrate 2 Internet services into one. Again the cost to Bell Canada is not close to double when the service is heading to zero revenue.

Exactly what am I missing?

Rick
InvalidError
join:2008-02-03

InvalidError

Member

said by RickStep:

said by InvalidError:

Except bonding almost doubles Bell's costs for providing service so retaining low-value subscribers via pair bonding may translate into a net loss, leaving Bell better off without those subscribers.

Why exactly do you think that it would double Bell's cost?

Bonding uses twice as many DSLAM ports which means half as much revenue out of a given investment unless bonded services carry a substantial premium.

XanderLo
join:2002-06-19
Boucherville, QC

XanderLo

Member

said by InvalidError:

said by RickStep:

said by InvalidError:

Except bonding almost doubles Bell's costs for providing service so retaining low-value subscribers via pair bonding may translate into a net loss, leaving Bell better off without those subscribers.

Why exactly do you think that it would double Bell's cost?

Bonding uses twice as many DSLAM ports which means half as much revenue out of a given investment unless bonded services carry a substantial premium.

That's not a valid statement if those ports are to be unused otherwise.
InvalidError
join:2008-02-03

InvalidError

Member

said by XanderLo:

That's not a valid statement if those ports are to be unused otherwise.

That is assuming there are that many ports available.

Most VDSL2 DSLAMs come in 48 ports increments so with dual-link a DSLAM would end up feeding as few as 24 subscribers. Your statement is only true if there are fewer than 24 subscribers in your neighborhood, beyond that it depends on whether or not the number of people who might be interested in dual-link is lower than the number of spare ports residing on line cards that Bell is not planning to relocate elsewhere.

If Bell has to add line cards specifically to accommodate bonding, it becomes a money sink compared to areas where the same services can be delivered over a single pair.

XanderLo
join:2002-06-19
Boucherville, QC

XanderLo

Member

Yes, IF it can be delivered over a single pair. In my neighbourhood, no one can have Fibe TV and the tech told me not a single VDSL2 port is taken at the JWI; only ADSL2+ ones. Talk about a waste.
kovy7
join:2009-03-26

kovy7

Member

said by XanderLo:

Yes, IF it can be delivered over a single pair. In my neighbourhood, no one can have Fibe TV and the tech told me not a single VDSL2 port is taken at the JWI; only ADSL2+ ones. Talk about a waste.

No really since most ports are ADSL/ADSL2+/VDSL2 compatible... it's only the mode that changes.
34764170 (banned)
join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

34764170 (banned) to InvalidError

Member

to InvalidError
said by InvalidError:

Bonding uses twice as many DSLAM ports which means half as much revenue out of a given investment unless bonded services carry a substantial premium.

They have to deal with it otherwise lose the customers.
kovy7
join:2009-03-26

kovy7

Member

said by 34764170:

said by InvalidError:

Bonding uses twice as many DSLAM ports which means half as much revenue out of a given investment unless bonded services carry a substantial premium.

They have to deal with it otherwise lose the customers.

There's plenty of other ways to gain customers...

HiVolt
Premium Member
join:2000-12-28
Toronto, ON

HiVolt

Premium Member

said by kovy7:

There's plenty of other ways to gain customers...

Yeah, like actually offering good value & service in the products they sell without nickle & diming.

OMG GASP!!!
InvalidError
join:2008-02-03

InvalidError to 34764170

Member

to 34764170
said by 34764170:

They have to deal with it otherwise lose the customers.

If closing a deal with some subscribers costs you nearly twice as much as normal, you may not necessarily be interested in pursuing business with those higher-cost customers until you have exhausted all "normal cost" opportunities.
34764170 (banned)
join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

34764170 (banned) to kovy7

Member

to kovy7
said by kovy7:

There's plenty of other ways to gain customers...

They're going to have to deal with some / most of these problematic areas eventually anyway to remain competitive. Of course there is, but it requires network upgrades.
kovy7
join:2009-03-26

kovy7

Member

said by 34764170:

said by kovy7:

There's plenty of other ways to gain customers...

They're going to have to deal with some / most of these problematic areas eventually anyway to remain competitive. Of course there is, but it requires network upgrades.

Yes, they're already dealing with it with FTTH.

And not everyone need speed... some would love caps, lower price, better service... you know.
34764170 (banned)
join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

1 edit

34764170 (banned)

Member

said by kovy7:

Yes, they're already dealing with it with FTTH.

And not everyone need speed... some would love caps, lower price, better service... you know.

FTTH does not help with the many areas that will never see FTTH. So they'll need options on the FTTN side.

That's not really the point. They have to be able to offer FibeTV 25 or faster in a neighborhood. Remember their biggest product and what is driving their FTTN/FTTH network build out is FibeTV. FibeTV 25 leaves a lot to be desired for Internet speed so that's why they really need a 40 - 50Mbps tier on FTTN.
kovy7
join:2009-03-26

kovy7

Member

said by 34764170:

said by kovy7:

Yes, they're already dealing with it with FTTH.

And not everyone need speed... some would love caps, lower price, better service... you know.

FTTH does not help with the many areas that will never see FTTH. So they'll need options on the FTTN side.

That's not really the point. They have to be able to offer FibeTV 25 or faster in a neighborhood. Remember their biggest product and what is driving their FTTN/FTTH network build out is FibeTV. FibeTV 25 leaves a lot to be desired for Internet speed so that's why they really need a 40 - 50Mbps tier on FTTN.

Why would areas never see FTTH ?

Heck I have Sat, not going to change for FibeTV since Sat quality is better and I always get full speed of Internet.

Like I said, speed is not the only option for getting customers...

XanderLo
join:2002-06-19
Boucherville, QC

XanderLo

Member

said by kovy7:

said by 34764170:

said by kovy7:

Yes, they're already dealing with it with FTTH.

And not everyone need speed... some would love caps, lower price, better service... you know.

FTTH does not help with the many areas that will never see FTTH. So they'll need options on the FTTN side.

That's not really the point. They have to be able to offer FibeTV 25 or faster in a neighborhood. Remember their biggest product and what is driving their FTTN/FTTH network build out is FibeTV. FibeTV 25 leaves a lot to be desired for Internet speed so that's why they really need a 40 - 50Mbps tier on FTTN.

Why would areas never see FTTH ?

Heck I have Sat, not going to change for FibeTV since Sat quality is better and I always get full speed of Internet.

Like I said, speed is not the only option for getting customers...

FTTH is an extra-long-term solution for Bell, seeing how slow deployment is in general. Hell, I remember reading how VDSL was supposed to be widely deployed for 2006. Yes, that's 6 years ago. Haha.

However, I agree with you that speed is not the only option for getting customers. I'm satisfied with Bell Satellite TV and I pay 15$/month for it after the 10$ bundle credit. That's for HD + 1 free PVR 36/months + 2 theme packages (RDS/RIS/Canal Vie/etc).

I'm afraid Fibe TV might be worth it for FTTH customers only as they get MASSIVE rebates (and none for FTTN customers, go figure). The 10$/month for 6 months promo on web site might be misleading.

I was not aware that Bell Sat image quality was better than Fibe TV though...
kovy7
join:2009-03-26

kovy7

Member

said by XanderLo:

FTTH is an extra-long-term solution for Bell, seeing how slow deployment is in general. Hell, I remember reading how VDSL was supposed to be widely deployed for 2006. Yes, that's 6 years ago. Haha.

However, I agree with you that speed is not the only option for getting customers. I'm satisfied with Bell Satellite TV and I pay 15$/month for it after the 10$ bundle credit. That's for HD + 1 free PVR 36/months + 2 theme packages (RDS/RIS/Canal Vie/etc).

I'm afraid Fibe TV might be worth it for FTTH customers only as they get MASSIVE rebates (and none for FTTN customers, go figure). The 10$/month for 6 months promo on web site might be misleading.

I was not aware that Bell Sat image quality was better than Fibe TV though...

VDSL2 was very late... and once it started, it went very quickly. But things for FTTH are clearly going at a good pace.

Yeah quality wise, FibeTv was better... but since they upgraded the feed from 2hd/2sd to 3hd/1sd... quality went down.