dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
8
share rss forum feed

Chubbysumo

join:2009-12-01
Superior, WI
Reviews:
·Charter
reply to Crookshanks

Re: Time-Warner for the Win!

said by Crookshanks:

Economy of scale is one reason, it costs the same to maintain your connection to the network regardless of how many services you have, so single service customers have a lower ROI than bundled ones. Of course, "because we can" is the other reason.

It costs the same regardless of how many services you have, and most of the time, the infrastructure is long since paid for. Its more of a "because we can" than anything else, since very few places need to have their drops replaced every year, and even at that, outdoor(quad shielded) rated RG4 is about $2.00 per foot retail, and im sure TWC does not pay retail prices for their 500 foot rolls of RG4 and RG6.

said by Crookshanks:

Where do you live that "abysmal" DSL speeds are being sold for $40/mo? Most of the people who have what I would consider "abysmal" (<=1.5mbit/s) connections are in the $20 to $30 range, with both Frontier and Verizon. I have no direct experience with AT&T (thank god), so perhaps they are the provider you're referring to?

My grandmother lives 20 minutes outside of a major town(superior) and she has to pay $35 per month for Centurylinks 3mbps/768k DSL plan, and she hardly ever gets more than 1.5 down and 500k up. Anyone in the country, away from a city, can tell you how ISPs take advantage of their customers because they can, and have no alternative except satellite, which is even worse.

said by Crookshanks:

You're in the minority. Most people will not pay $90/mo for internet service. Hell, I couldn't afford it even if I was willing to pay for it.

I know plenty of families that would be happy to pay more for more or better services. it sounds backwards, but many times you see low income households(ones that are on welfare and food support) with high internet speeds and larger TV packages. I know this from personal experience, but maybe you do not. Low income households seem to have everything they want, and have highly misplaced priorities as to where their money should be going. Also, im just curious what you do pay for your internet services per month, or maybe your phone? You probably waste money every month like the rest of us. I know me and my wife eat out too much, which costs us about $300 a month more than it should cost for food. Im sure there are places you could easily trim back to get faster service if you wanted to bad enough. the problem is that people are creatures of habit, and you are too. Everyone has a wasteful "expense" somewhere, and is unlikely to change that.

said by Crookshanks:

It's a no brainer if you live in KC. Alas, this is just a play thing for Google, and nobody outside of KC is ever going to see it. Google is not going to get into the last mile business nationwide.

I hope the one thing that comes out of this "experiment" is that people see how much other ISPs are grossly overcharging them, and that there is some call for government action and regulation on the subject. If anything, i would like to see many more FTTH community initiative spring up and grab the market because they see the success of this project and others like it. Alas, those projects must deal with anti-competitive laws that were written by the incumbent providers to protect their business models, and those laws need to seen and challenged as such.

said by Crookshanks:

Even if they did, I'd start to worry about anti-trust implications, because that kind of vertical integration ought to scare the hell out of anybody. Of course, so should Comcast and NBC, and nobody said anything about that...

I doubt any other provider would raise anything related to vertical integration or any kind of other anti-trust claims against google, because google would likely fire right back at how much the Comcast/NBC/universal merger is working so hard and prices are dropping so much as it was promised they would.

I don't believe Content creation, content ownership, and content transmission and dissemination should ever be under a single roof of ownership, because its very easy to exploit in anti-competitive ways, and I believe that the comcast/NBCU merger will become the poster child of a massive anti-trust investigation in the next 10 years(and probably breakup).

Edit: fixed formatting.