Tell me more x
, there is a new speed test available. Give it a try, leave feedback!
dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer

Search Topic:
uniqs
281
share rss forum feed

elray

join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·EarthLink

Lies, Damned Lies, and Bloggers

Only in the mind of this forum did TWC "push low caps and high per byte overages in 2009". In fact, they did not state the plan's cost before they were slammed and silenced by so-called "consumer" advocates. They were going to offer a $15 tier.

They absolutely DO NOT want to charge overages. They want to capture the marginal customer who might choose to do without. If cable modem service is running $40/month, a solo subscriber might decide work, public WiFi and their "smart" phone plan are already enough access for their online needs.

Kamus

join:2011-01-27
El Paso, TX
said by elray:

They were going to offer a $15 tier.

Do you have sources to back this up? I don't remember reading this anywhere. Also, just how do you know that your 15 dollar tier wasn't going to have overages?

Besides, who cares about that? there's a reason they never did it, and it's not because of "consumer advocates".
If they really wanted to offer a $15 dollar tier nothing could have prevented them from doing so.

elray

join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·EarthLink

1 edit
said by Kamus:

said by elray:

They were going to offer a $15 tier.

Do you have sources to back this up? I don't remember reading this anywhere. Also, just how do you know that your 15 dollar tier wasn't going to have overages?

That's the point. You didn't read it, because TWC blew it, PR-wise. They didn't put the specifics on the table, before they were slammed by Karl and others. No one discussed the actual math - they just made it up.

You had to dial-down into TWC's corporate web site to find a slide of the proposal to get at the figures. Anti-corporate bloggers and journalists didn't bother, because they aren't willing to consider that most metered usage plans save money for at least 30% of subscribers.

Kamus

join:2011-01-27
El Paso, TX
said by elray:

Can Karl back up his statement?

Is that your final answer?

Kamus

join:2011-01-27
El Paso, TX
reply to elray
said by elray:

You had to dial-down into TWC's corporate web site to find a slide of the proposal to get at the figures. Anti-corporate bloggers and journalists didn't bother, because they aren't willing to consider that most metered usage plans save money for at least 30% of subscribers.

Can you please explain to me how you came up with this percentage?
Because I think you just made that number up on the spot. And again, you are ignoring the real issue here. If they really wanted to lower people's prices there's nothing preventing them from doing it.
And, just how the hell does introducing meter billing save anyone money?
If they really wanted to save them money there would be no overages to begin with, and they would make do with lower prices and speeds like it's always been done.

Dampier
Phillip M Dampier

join:2003-03-23
Rochester, NY
reply to elray
said by elray:

Only in the mind of this forum did TWC "push low caps and high per byte overages in 2009". In fact, they did not state the plan's cost before they were slammed and silenced by so-called "consumer" advocates. They were going to offer a $15 tier.

They absolutely DO NOT want to charge overages. They want to capture the marginal customer who might choose to do without. If cable modem service is running $40/month, a solo subscriber might decide work, public WiFi and their "smart" phone plan are already enough access for their online needs.

Nonsense. Unless you lived in one of the test cities were local company officials met with consumers, you don't have the first clue.

The original proposed plans included costs, caps, overlimit fees, and were later revised to be slightly more generous.

The best part about the Internet is that anyone, no matter how little informed, can say anything. The worst part is that the ordinary person has to figure out who made it up as they went along.
--
Phillip M. Dampier
Editor, Stop the Cap!
»stopthecap.com


NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:12
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
reply to elray
said by elray:

Anti-corporate bloggers and journalists didn't bother, because they aren't willing to consider that most metered usage plans save money for at least 30% of subscribers.

Eh? AT&T implemented a plan to cap data for their ADSL customers at 150 GB per month, and charge $10 for every 50 GB over. Phone company style, where the additional $10 is billed for 151 GB, or 199 GB. How will that save money for anybody?

That is the most common "cap and overage" plan I have seen.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum


skuv

@rr.com
reply to Kamus
said by Kamus:

And, just how the hell does introducing meter billing save anyone money?

You really can't come up with a scenario on your own?

If someone is paying $50 for service now, and uses 2GB per month. And there is a service that lets them pay $45 for 5GB per month, and they still use 2GB per month, THEY ARE SAVING MONEY.

Pretty simple math.

It works fine for the cell phone industry. I was paying $30 for "unlimited" data and only using around 250 - 300MB on 3G per month. Now I pay $15 for 2GB.

I'm saving money! SIMPLE MATH.

That's 2 scenarios for you. How the hell can anyone not come up with that much on their own?

Kamus

join:2011-01-27
El Paso, TX
said by skuv :

It works fine for the cell phone industry. I was paying $30 for "unlimited" data and only using around 250 - 300MB on 3G per month. Now I pay $15 for 2GB.

Good for you. Now, you do know why it's incredibly stupid to compare a cable connection capped to 5GB to a crappy 3g connection right?
You seem to think highly of your "simple math". But since i don't, let me remind you:

There is no technical reason behind a 5 GB cap on a land line. So the fact that that the cap is so low and there are huge overages fees makes it perfectly clear why this plan exists at all.
Using the connection even lightly when compared to today's average users will result on a higher monthly payment than their regular offerings.
So by all means, go test your "simple math" yourself and see how your wallet likes it. And please share your savings with us after a few months. Just make sure to bust out an excel sheet for us, because it would just suck if the math got too complicated for you all of a sudden.