TSI Marc Premium Member join:2006-06-23 Chatham, ON |
to Davesnothere
Re: Usage - overages |
|
|
to TSI Marc
I don't think this is a good idea and I'll explain why;
1) Too complicated. I even had to sit down and look at the numbers....Now imagine your techs trying to explain to people over the phone when they have questions about their bill (how the overage charges were calculated or why they got their package changed on them). That would be a nightmare for CSRs....
2) I would literally rather pay $x.xx/GB overage instead having my plan bumped up automatically without my consent. This especially doesn't work on certain speed tiers like the one I'm looking to get (45/4) as the 300GB capped on and the unlimited are literally double in price ($50 vs $100). I'd hate to call in every time I got over 1 month to go back to 300GB from unlimited. That is a hassle.
3) Any reasons you didn't want to do $x.xx/GB overages? Even with no maximum cap (or a cap of the difference between your current one and the real one you should have gotten based on your current months usage), I think it is the better idea. If anything, it could let people create custom packages such as 400GB on Rogers 45/4 without paying $100 for the unlimited. 50c per GB with no limit of overages is a bit steep so why not something like 40c? The math here could be worked out based on the price differences of the packages and could vary per speeds. |
|
TSI Marc Premium Member join:2006-06-23 Chatham, ON |
TSI Marc
Premium Member
2013-Mar-9 2:50 pm
2 - there's no automatic bumping.. that was somebody else's idea. (i even think that may be against the law - unless you agree to it ahead of time of course) |
|
|
said by d4m1r:I don't think this is a good idea and I'll explain why;
1) Too complicated. I even had to sit down and look at the numbers....Now imagine your techs trying to explain to people over the phone when they have questions about their bill (how the overage charges were calculated or why they got their package changed on them). That would be a nightmare for CSRs....
2) I would literally rather pay $x.xx/GB overage instead having my plan bumped up automatically without my consent. This especially doesn't work on certain speed tiers like the one I'm looking to get (45/4) as the 300GB capped on and the unlimited are literally double in price ($50 vs $100). I'd hate to call in every time I got over 1 month to go back to 300GB from unlimited. That is a hassle.
3) Any reasons you didn't want to do $x.xx/GB overages? Even with no maximum cap (or a cap of the difference between your current one and the real one you should have gotten based on your current months usage), I think it is the better idea. If anything, it could let people create custom packages such as 400GB on Rogers 45/4 without paying $100 for the unlimited. 50c per GB with no limit of overages is a bit steep so why not something like 40c? The math here could be worked out based on the price differences of the packages and could vary per speeds. I guess it sums up my concerns and stuff.. said by TSI Marc:2 - there's no automatic bumping.. that was somebody else's idea. (i even think that may be against the law - unless you agree to it ahead of time of course) Put it within your terms of service agreement. No one reads them anyways Look at how Blizzard does it. I don't own my SC2 and Diablo accounts. Blizzard does. All I got from Blizzard is that I'm paying say $50 so I can rent a SC2 and Diablo account from them. They can revoke my access at any time. |
|
TSI Marc Premium Member join:2006-06-23 Chatham, ON |
TSI Marc
Premium Member
2013-Mar-9 3:13 pm
let me put it on paper a bit more. working on it now. |
|
DavesnothereChange is NOT Necessarily Progress Premium Member join:2009-06-15 Canada |
to d4m1r
said by d4m1r:....3) Any reasons you didn't want to do $x.xx/GB overages? Even with no maximum cap (or a cap of the difference between your current one and the real one you should have gotten based on your current months usage), I think it is the better idea.... Charging a fair and reasonable UBB per GB for excess usage could work, but the way things are right now, with each incumbent charging the Indie ISPs such different CBB rates (AND sometimes also very different basic access per customer rates), the UBB per GB rate for customers fed thru Rogers would need to be VERY different than for the one fed thru Cogeco, for example, and the end customers of IISPs would have to be able to wrap their minds around that particular concept somehow. After that, there would be the question of whether customers on faster packages ought to pay a different UBB rate than than those on slower packages, even if both were fed thru Rogers, for example. Finally, would there be a max excess charge ? , and if yes, how to figure out what that would be - different for each speed ? , and for each incumbent's involvement ? |
|
|
to d4m1r
said by d4m1r:I don't think this is a good idea and I'll explain why; Yes, Marc's original wording was very confusing. Here's my simplified version: » Re: Usage - overages |
|
|
to TSI Marc
Yanno, the ability to buy say 100GB blocks might be swell too. Didn't we used to have such a thing here...??? |
|
DavesnothereChange is NOT Necessarily Progress Premium Member join:2009-06-15 Canada |
said by Rickkins:Yanno, the ability to buy say 100GB blocks might be swell too. Didn't we used to have such a thing here...??? When I joined TSI for DSL (in 2008, IIRC), my cap was 200 GB, and a 100GB block was an extra $10 But I think that 'permanent' unlimited was the same amount extra at the time. |
|
TSI Marc Premium Member join:2006-06-23 Chatham, ON |
TSI Marc
Premium Member
2013-Mar-9 4:05 pm
yeah.. we did have the block thing for a while.. that's why I dont like it. hehe |
|
|
to InvalidError
said by InvalidError:said by d4m1r:I don't think this is a good idea and I'll explain why; Yes, Marc's original wording was very confusing. Here's my simplified version: » Re: Usage - overages Yah I saw that but you have to keep in mind, us "advanced" users are a very small minority. My sympathy goes out to the TSI CSRs is Marc goes ahead with this plan...Its going to be a PR nightmare as most TSI subscribers won't understand it... @Dave, of course, that is what was implied....A different per GB overage price per network and then per speed tier. Not sure if Marc has already thought of this but if he did the math, I think it could be made attractive and be a lot simpler to implement and teach people about. |
|
|
TypeS join:2012-12-17 London, ON |
to TSI Marc
It's a bit too early to be saying it will all be to complicated to explain to customers. Marc is posing this thread to get feedback. He, and TSI, are coming up with all final details of everything once all the new pricing and APOI go live (APOI being on a later timeline than DSL/West Canada/Cogeco Pricing). Once they come up with final procedure for overages, they just need to hand it to someone creative in marketing to come with simpler terms and analogies to explain everything. with the bottom line being they're doing everything to can to make sure overage charges happen never to little as possible. |
|
|
to TSI Marc
said by TSI Marc:yeah.. we did have the block thing for a while.. that's why I dont like it. hehe But it make things easier for a good number users... |
|
TSI Marc Premium Member join:2006-06-23 Chatham, ON |
TSI Marc
Premium Member
2013-Mar-9 4:52 pm
|
|
GuspazGuspaz MVM join:2001-11-05 Montreal, QC 3 edits |
to TSI Marc
I shouldn't need a spreadsheet or a fancy calculator to figure out my bill... KISS. I'd propose, for any plan
Per GB overage: $0.25 Max bill: unlimited+$10
Obviously modify those numbers to where it needs to be, but all this talk of small penalties versus medium penalties versus max penalties versus the min(average,current) is crazy complicated. People want to know two things. How much a gig extra do I have to pay, and what's the worst case (max). Anything more complicated than that will make the price of their bill a mystery when they're over their limit but less than the max. |
|
Guspaz |
to TSI Marc
This approach goes easy on people who go a bit over, prevents bill shock if they go way over, is easy to understand, and still encourages users to try to pick the best plan before hand to save money. |
|
DavesnothereChange is NOT Necessarily Progress Premium Member join:2009-06-15 Canada |
to Guspaz
said by Guspaz:I shouldn't need a spreadsheet or a fancy calculator to figure out my bill...
KISS.
I'd propose, for any plan :
Per GB overage: $0.25 Max bill: unlimited+$10
Obviously modify those numbers to where it needs to be....
....People want to know two things :
(1) How much a gig extra do I have to pay, and (2) What's the worst case (max).... When I put on my businessperson hat or my geek hat, I envision ideas like most of the other posts here today (including some of my own earlier ones), but when I don my John Q. Public chapeau, I see exactly what Guspaz just posted. How CAN that be ??? Hmmmm.... |
|
|
to d4m1r
said by d4m1r:Its going to be a PR nightmare as most TSI subscribers won't understand it... What is so hard to understand about: "The most you are going to pay for going over your cap is $20 (or whatever else TSI settles on) more than you would pay for going with our Unlimited plan for the same speed." That's probably the only part of the whole overage thing most people are really going to be worried about: how much extra can going over cost? As long as this very simple part is made clear, the remaining technicalities do not matter half as much. |
|
|
OverageFee to TSI Marc
Anon
2013-Mar-9 5:57 pm
to TSI Marc
This is the old overage fee. It's simple and easy to understand. quote: Overage on all packages that are not unlimited will be charged at $0.50/GB to a maximum of $25/month.
If you want to introduce the new max overage charge from unlimited + $20. It's fine but it not simple enough. Why don't use the existing overage charge. I see from TekSavvy price. The different between 75GB and unlimited for DSL and Cable is a bit below or above $20. Why don't just choose $20 + another $20 = $40 for max overage fee... As a new rate, ISPs will pay cheaper price for DSL compare to Cable. I also see you want to lower the overage fee charge from $0.50/GB to $0.25/GB from you example of calculation. You can charge DSL overage fee $0.25/GB max $40 and Cable $0.30/GB max $40. This will simple enough. Or you can charge Cable $0.25/GB max $45. I think either way, you won't loosing money because it will average out either way but it will be simple for customers... |
|
|
to TSI Marc
Why not just if you wish to be forgiving for lower gig amounts Charge a Discounted per gb/ amount for the first 25 Gig over like say 10 Cents. After the first 25 Gig charge a higher number so
300 gig Included 10/cents per gig up to 325 25 cents/per gig 326 and up. etc.. with a Max Overage of X dollars.
Thus forgiving minor overages with Small Charges and Punishing larger ones. Also Using percentages prolly not much use 25% over 75 gig or 300 gig is going to be different so your usage fees will vary based on package creating more headaches etc.. |
|
TwiztedZeroNine Zero Burp Nine Six Premium Member join:2011-03-31 Toronto, ON |
to TSI Marc
Ow my brain! So I guess I can start preemptively waving bye bye to the concept of " peace of mind", on all the limited plans. Using the internet on eggshells not so fun eh? I guess I'll leave y'all to figure this out some more and check back later on and see how these overages calculations evolved for better or worse. "150/10 Limited - For the Daring user that likes to do mental gymnastics & plays with fire." (You know you can blow through your cap in like 5 hours amirite?). (subconsciously stabs CRTC). |
|
TypeS join:2012-12-17 London, ON |
to TSI Marc
The issue TSI is facing though is Rogers capacity rates on APOI are really high, if someone goes over, they need to break even on every GB the person goes over. They're probably already assuming they will lose money on people who will use just under the 300GB, and people who really use their unlimited, even with the high rates they're at, I'm sure there some users out there that pull x TB a month.
The current 0.50/GB with $25 cap probably isn't enough after they start getting their bills on APOI capacity. Unless a lot people switch to using their internet on off peak hours, which is only a dream. Put aside that most people work day jobs and are sleep well before 2am-8am window, services like NetFlix will guarantee a growing trend of heavy usage during the most expensive peak hours. |
|
|
said by TypeS:The current 0.50/GB with $25 cap probably isn't enough after they start getting their bills on APOI capacity. It should be enough. 1Mbps = 300GB/month or $0.10/GB at 30k$/Mbps (rounded up the Videotron/Rogers rate for convenience) If average aggregated interconnect utilization is 33% of paid capacity, that brings the cost up to $0.33/GB. But that $0.33/GB does not account for the part of transit costs already covered by everyone's monthly fee. Once you factor that back in, the cost for usage beyond the baseline built into pricing might be closer to $0.20/GB for Rogers/Videotron. For Bell whose CBB rate is half Rogers/Videotron's, that cost is likely under $0.15/GB. |
|
DavesnothereChange is NOT Necessarily Progress Premium Member join:2009-06-15 Canada 1 edit |
to TypeS
said by TypeS:The issue TSI is facing though is Rogers GOUGEco capacity rates on APOI are really high.... Fixed it for ya. Rogers CBB rates (~$1400/100Mb) are a walk in the park, compared to Cogeco's (~$2500/100Mb), IIRC. IE, please would you be so kind as to post a summary of the main CBB rates for ON & QC, ordered from low to high, or vice versa ? |
|
TypeS join:2012-12-17 London, ON |
TypeS
Member
2013-Mar-9 6:44 pm
While I'll agree Cogeco's rates are simply on another plateau, Roger's rates are not cheap by any means either. rocca has already testified to that, hence that not so attractive caps and lack of unlimited compared to TSI's current No-Agg offerings. |
|
DavesnothereChange is NOT Necessarily Progress Premium Member join:2009-06-15 Canada |
And nearly EVERYONE's Bell (xDSL) offerings. BTW, that's as close to praise for Bell as you'll notice ME state publicly. |
|
TSI Marc Premium Member join:2006-06-23 Chatham, ON |
TSI Marc
Premium Member
2013-Mar-9 6:58 pm
Maybe it's more about the cap. Looking at just doing a straight per gig rate of $0.5/GB.... seems, looking at my carts.. it really amounts to the cap changing depending on the speed and unlimted rate.
i.e. the higher the CBB.. the higher the cap and the higher the per gig rate.
I think by changing the two. I can achieve close to the same thing as my chart. |
|
DavesnothereChange is NOT Necessarily Progress Premium Member join:2009-06-15 Canada 1 edit |
Did you not mean to say "The higher the CBB, the LOWER the cap and the higher the per gig rate" ? |
|
TSI Marc Premium Member join:2006-06-23 Chatham, ON |
TSI Marc
Premium Member
2013-Mar-9 7:22 pm
said by Davesnothere: Did you not mean to say "The higher the CBB, the LOWER the cap and the higher the per gig rate" ? no. higher cap. because if you look at the higher CBB rates. what happens is that with the higher speeds.. the potential to cost money goes through the roof. so the cap needs to go up to match the liability if you will. and the per gig rate.. needs to climb fast enough to hit the cap before it kills us on CBB. that's how the different tiers are setup.. so to mimic this with usage overages.. you have to do that same sort of thing. I dunno. I need a drink. oh wait. I have one. |
|
DavesnothereChange is NOT Necessarily Progress Premium Member join:2009-06-15 Canada |
said by TSI Marc:no. higher cap. because if you look at the higher CBB rates. what happens is that with the higher speeds.. the potential to cost money goes through the roof. so the cap needs to go up to match the liability if you will.
and the per gig rate.. needs to climb fast enough to hit the cap before it kills us on CBB.
that's how the different tiers are setup.. so to mimic this with usage overages.. you have to do that same sort of thing.
I dunno. I need a drink. oh wait. I have one. I was gonna ask about that last part next. OK, do you mean the BASE GB cap, or the OVERAGE $$ cap ? Let me re-read and see whether I get it now. No, NOT the drink, the math ! |
|