dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
760
share rss forum feed

Crusty

join:2008-11-11
Sanger, TX
Reviews:
·Embarq Now Centu..
·CenturyLink
reply to elray

Re: Bell System

said by elray:

Where FiOS is available, >70% of the people vote with their wallets and choose not to buy it. Google will have similar to worse results if they don't offer a more cost-effective product for the consumer.

One time install fee of $300 paid out evenly over 12 months for FREE 5MB symmetrical connection isn't a "more cost-effective product for the consumer"???????

I'd gladly take that over my crappy DSL service anyday. Heck, I'd be MORE than willing to take the $70 or even the $120 package being offered. That would save me $100 a month.

elray

join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·EarthLink
reply to 34764170
said by 34764170:

It's not that they're not willing to pay. They're not willing to pay for shitty overpriced service which is so typical of North American providers. On top of that North American companies do not understand the concept of customer loyalty. You deliver a good service and treat the customer properly and they'll be with you for a long time. You treat them like crap and nickel and dime them and is it any wonder that people are jumping ship for other providers on a fairly regular basis?

With a post like this it just shows ignorance, but is so typical.

Yes, they are unwilling to pay. Nationwide survey data bears this out.

Broadband is not overpriced. The average household pays $47/month.

North American providers DO understand customer loyalty. Not all of them, and not all the time - management does change, but they understand. Verizon has done very well 9 out of the last 10 years, and Time Warner has been well-behaved for the last four in our neck of the woods, as has Cox and Charter. Comcast, AT&T and Frontier ... they're still learning.


alchav

join:2002-05-17
Saint George, UT
Reviews:
·ooma

1 recommendation

reply to IowaCowboy
said by IowaCowboy:

AT&T/Bell System wired the nation for telephone, so it is possible for Google to wire the nation for Internet.

I am sure if Bell Labs was still around, they'd figure out a way to deliver 1 GBPS over a copper telephone line. I was not around during the monopoly years (I was 2 months old when they broke up the phone company) but it seems the incumbent ISPs are behaving like the old AT&T/Bell System in terms of control. The Bell divestiture lead to the dirt cheap telephone service we have today and breaking up big cable companies would do the same for broadband.

IowaCowboy you are correct, AT&T Bell System did wire the Nation but it took many decades. Like Fiber now, Copper was King back then and it lasted a long time mainly for Telephone. Then Data Circuits came in, and Bell Labs figured out how to run DSL over these Copper Lines and The Internet was born. Bell Labs is still around, and still trying to squeeze Copper. What do you think AT&T U-Verse uses, but the Bandwidth is limited. Fiber is the Future, but wiring The Nation will be very costly. Google has scratched the surface, but really does not have a Plan. Verizon tried it, but found out people are not willing to pay, so they had to modify their Build Out. Bottom line there has to be a Plan to Wire The Nation.


IowaCowboy
Iowa native
Premium
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Verizon Broadban..
·Comcast

1 edit
said by alchav:

said by IowaCowboy:

AT&T/Bell System wired the nation for telephone, so it is possible for Google to wire the nation for Internet.

I am sure if Bell Labs was still around, they'd figure out a way to deliver 1 GBPS over a copper telephone line. I was not around during the monopoly years (I was 2 months old when they broke up the phone company) but it seems the incumbent ISPs are behaving like the old AT&T/Bell System in terms of control. The Bell divestiture lead to the dirt cheap telephone service we have today and breaking up big cable companies would do the same for broadband.

IowaCowboy you are correct, AT&T Bell System did wire the Nation but it took many decades. Like Fiber now, Copper was King back then and it lasted a long time mainly for Telephone. Then Data Circuits came in, and Bell Labs figured out how to run DSL over these Copper Lines and The Internet was born. Bell Labs is still around, and still trying to squeeze Copper. What do you think AT&T U-Verse uses, but the Bandwidth is limited. Fiber is the Future, but wiring The Nation will be very costly. Google has scratched the surface, but really does not have a Plan. Verizon tried it, but found out people are not willing to pay, so they had to modify their Build Out. Bottom line there has to be a Plan to Wire The Nation.

Another thing that has 100 percent national coverage is electricity. They developed ways to electrify rural areas and under served areas. Maybe new technology will come out to serve the broadband needs of rural areas. One technique that they used with electricity is single wire earth return to wire rural areas for electricity. They also established non-profit rural electric cooperatives. Many areas did not get electricity until the 1930's and 1940's. Telephone was not brought to rural areas until the 1950's or so. Many of the New Deal programs provided for rural electrification and telephone.

34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON
reply to elray
said by elray:

Yes, they are unwilling to pay. Nationwide survey data bears this out.

Broadband is not overpriced. The average household pays $47/month.

You know what I meant but you keep talking and make yourself look like a fool.


drew
Radiant
Premium
join:2002-07-10
Port Orchard, WA
kudos:6
reply to bbeesley
said by bbeesley:

there is little to nothing preventing anyone from launching their own broadband ISP....other than the willingness to take on risk

Cost is a big thing here. You either have to have the money to burn or have investors willing to burn their money for you. Then with investors, they want a return on that money...

A small, rural WISP works for a small community that is completely unserviced by other providers. And as your example shows, it was somebodies side job, not a full-time job and business that was hoping to grow into more.
--
flickr | 'Cause I've been waiting, all my life just waiting
For you to shine, shine your light on me


bbeesley
VIP
join:2003-08-07
Richardson, TX
kudos:5
said by drew:

A small, rural WISP works for a small community that is completely unserviced by other providers. And as your example shows, it was somebodies side job, not a full-time job and business that was hoping to grow into more.

Apple, Microsoft, Facebook, Google, and a plethora of others were once somebody's side job.

You don't have to start big and borrow money, you can start small with a good idea and build it.


drew
Radiant
Premium
join:2002-07-10
Port Orchard, WA
kudos:6
My wife and I are pretty comfortable but we couldn't stand a WISP up with our savings without opening ourselves up to major risk if something were to happen to either one of us (such as the loss of a job.)

I think you underestimate the amount of money something like this takes.
--
flickr | 'Cause I've been waiting, all my life just waiting
For you to shine, shine your light on me

prairiesky

join:2008-12-08
canada
kudos:2
said by drew:

My wife and I are pretty comfortable but we couldn't stand a WISP up with our savings without opening ourselves up to major risk if something were to happen to either one of us (such as the loss of a job.)

I think you underestimate the amount of money something like this takes.

Starting a wisp can be VERY reasonable, there are many people on this site that have done it with under $1000 to their name. Everyone hopes their buisness will grow into more and grow bigger. The problem is, there's just not enough money in it. The guys that make an OK living for themselves, have hundreds of customers and are run ragged. The ones that stay small and maintain their networks make enough to make a decent side wage, but still need a 9-5 to support their families.


bbeesley
VIP
join:2003-08-07
Richardson, TX
kudos:5
reply to drew
said by drew:

I think you underestimate the amount of money something like this takes.

I worked as a Director at a major cable company for 13 years, prior to that I worked operations at the largest dialup ISP in Oklahoma.

Got a really good idea how much.....could do it for mid-five figures on a small scale.

elray

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

1 recommendation

reply to 34764170
said by 34764170:

said by elray:

Yes, they are unwilling to pay. Nationwide survey data bears this out.

Broadband is not overpriced. The average household pays $47/month.

You know what I meant but you keep talking and make yourself look like a fool.

I prefer fact over rhetoric.

If we are to achieve results that benefit us all, we have to be able to discuss in clear terms, not lob hyperbole. I hold most of the industry in just as much contempt as Karl does, but it is patently unfair to do so without acknowledging them when they deliver a decent product.

When we examine why some households or individuals choose to not buy a service, there usually is hard data available.


drew
Radiant
Premium
join:2002-07-10
Port Orchard, WA
kudos:6
reply to bbeesley
said by bbeesley:

You don't have to start big and borrow money, you can start small with a good idea and build it.

said by bbeesley:

Got a really good idea how much.....could do it for mid-five figures on a small scale.

Does not compute.
--
flickr | 'Cause I've been waiting, all my life just waiting
For you to shine, shine your light on me

TheRogueX

join:2003-03-26
Springfield, MO
reply to elray
Compare broadband prices in the US to broadband prices in some other countries, and it is extremely overpriced.

TheRogueX

join:2003-03-26
Springfield, MO
reply to sonicmerlin
It's only an 'impossibly long' RoI period because investors in the US are myopic and think anything more than 90 days is too long to wait on it.

prairiesky

join:2008-12-08
canada
kudos:2

2 recommendations

said by TheRogueX:

It's only an 'impossibly long' RoI period because investors in the US are myopic and think anything more than 90 days is too long to wait on it.

For an investor its about risk. Theyre risking their money over a long term for the hope that they make money. If you had a million bucks to invest and had to choose between 2 companies. One that would return your money over 3 years and another that would return it over 10. Which would you choose. The effects of competition dont just affect the consumer market, they affect the business markets aswell. If the big companies want investors they have to supply an ROI that competes with others.