dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
3
share rss forum feed


TiredOfThis

@fda.gov
reply to Geot

Re: [Caps] Comcast New 300GB Monthly Limit And Overage Charges

said by Geot :

"XFINITY Internet customers’ median monthly data usage is 17 GB per month. "

It is worth distinguishing between "median" and "average". The low median suggests a large number of people doing nothing but reading email and some limited web-browsing.

The "average" data usage is probably *much* higher. It is interesting that Comcast doesn't care to provide that.

Like they say, there are "lies, damn lies, and statistics"...


Anyway, I see the 300Gb cap as *COMPLETELY* unacceptable. I'll switch to FIOS if the cap is imposed by Comcast. If FIOS too imposes a cap, we'll dump watching Netflix, etc., and probably "cable TV" too, out of spite. Broadcast TV is absolute GARBAGE anyway; over-the-air broadcast is fine, supplemented with Redbox rentals.

rody_44
Premium
join:2004-02-20
Quakertown, PA
Reviews:
·Comcast

If you switch to fios you get to deal with this copy and paste from the fios forum.

Yep--new installs, limited area, limited time.

I pay $120/mo for internet & TV bundle, of which $38 is internet.

Vz says if I go to internet only it'll be $104.95.

The only solution is to cancel Verizon entirely


FirebirdTN

join:2012-12-13
Brighton, TN
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to TiredOfThis

said by TiredOfThis :

we'll dump watching Netflix, etc.

Although I have no info to back me up on this....this quoted bit I'm convinced is the reason that most ISPs are moving towards caps/limits.

They are trying to save a dying business model.

Back on topic, I got to thinking about it, and I can understand both sides of the argument. It really isn't fair for a single person who uses very little to pay the same as a high BW consuming family.

BUT...in my test market it makes no sense. Whether you have the lowest speed tier, or the highest, we all have the same cap. The only thing the higher speed tier gains you is bragging rights, and the ability to hit the cap sooner.

-Alan

rody_44
Premium
join:2004-02-20
Quakertown, PA
Reviews:
·Comcast

4 edits

Tv as we know it is going to die, no doubt about that. But i really dont think the caps have anything to do with the video. The caps are simply a way of generating more revenue. As a lite user im sure im a majority of there customer base. Bottom line is im not willing to pay any more. I just cant justify paying more for the little i use it. That really only leaves the people left that use it more to raise additional revenue. It comes down to they are going to get it where they can. Thats the high users of the service. What i cant understand about this whole thing is im a heavy streaming user to the tune of no less than thirty hours a month and never even break 125 of the cap. The only thing i can think is its because i only stream sd and no hd even tho i have a hd tv. Things as simple as water is metered and since its metered people make decisions based on metering it. I have no problems basing the same principals to broadband and actually prefer it.

Hell probably hit upwards of 100 hours streaming some months. My highest month has never been more than around 150 of the cap. Anyone care to do the math and explain to me how streaming sd video is even going to get close to 300. Im a average lite user with subscriptions to netflix, amazon plus and just dropped hula. I also subscribe to pay tv. Sorry but in my eyes netflix , hula or Amazon are no substitute for pay tv. Just not enough local news and sports for me. Not to mention the most popular series take forever to reach them. Or if they do get there fast they want over a dollar a episode to watch. You might be able to convince me its a Netflix, Amazon killer. Since clearly if i give up high speed i give up them also. Than i just keep pay tv and use VOD. As it is tho everything stays as long as the price of my internet stays the same. If it goes up another 2 dollars anytime soon tho im out and i doubt im alone in that thinking.

Expand your moderator at work

FirebirdTN

join:2012-12-13
Brighton, TN
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to rody_44

Re: [Caps] Comcast New 300GB Monthly Limit And Overage Charges

said by rody_44:

Things as simple as water is metered and since its metered people make decisions based on metering it. I have no problems basing the same principals to broadband and actually prefer it

Funny you should mention that. In another thread, I said something along the lines of I believe eventually internet access is going to be truly metered, just like our other utilities. I was basically told that since public utilities are governed by regulations, and there is no mandate for ISP metering it wouldn't happen. Also, there was some discussion about data being pushed to you whether you requested it or not.

Okay, so there is some bugs to iron out, but I still believe once all this shakes out and streaming TV becomes the new "norm", that we will eventually get to a point of truly metered billing.

-Alan

FirebirdTN

join:2012-12-13
Brighton, TN
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Comcast

1 recommendation

reply to rody_44

said by rody_44:

Sorry but in my eyes netflix , hula or Amazon are no substitute for pay tv. Just not enough local news and sports for me.

Everyone has an opinion, but I disagree with that statement. I used to have satellite. After paying over $100 a month for "200 channels of nothing to watch" I ditched it in favor of Netflix, and haven't looked back, and don't regret it one bit. So I consider it a great alternative to *pay* TV.

As to locals and sports, I have an OTA antenna in the attic that feeds all TVs in the house for news/weather/etc. Of course OTA is free. So Netflix isn't a complete substitute for all our info we get via the boob tube, but I think it complements the 7 or 8 local channels we get quite nicely, and is a definite replacement for those other "pay tv" services.

I know we are derailing this thread, so as it applies to the topic at hand-The ISPs know this, which in my mind is one of the reasons for bringing about limits/overages/caps/whatever you want to call it.

-Alan

PS HD streaming will eat that bw quickly. Since you only stream SD [nothing wrong with that!], you will probably never get close to that 300 mark.


NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:11
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
reply to FirebirdTN

said by FirebirdTN:

Okay, so there is some bugs to iron out, but I still believe once all this shakes out and streaming TV becomes the new "norm", that we will eventually get to a point of truly metered billing.

I had that in 1984; only they were metering based on time, not volume of data. $9.95 per month for "up to" five hours, then $1.95 per minute for every minute past five hours.

Metered billing: I needed a real life, anyway. That will probably just widen the "Digital Divide".
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum

mike34
Premium
join:2004-07-17
Central City, PA

I loved the way Compuserve promoted that deal. $9.95 a month got you 5 'free' hours.

5 free hours for 9.95.

And forgive me, Norman, but I think the overage was 1.95/hr (not per minute).

Regardless it added up quickly.



NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:11
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC

said by mike34:

And forgive me, Norman, but I think the overage was 1.95/hr (not per minute).

You are right.

I had to access CompuServe through a local dial service number (Tymshare?) which added a per hour charge; or pay a toll charge to reach a direct CompuServe number. Either way, I was paying above the basic rate.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum

mike34
Premium
join:2004-07-17
Central City, PA

Might have been Tymnet. I didn't have a local access number either. Big upgrade for me was from 300 baud acoustic couplers to a Hayes Smartmodem 1200. Really smart. Knew a handful of commands which had to be typed in all caps, no lowercase. Cost a fortune.


rody_44
Premium
join:2004-02-20
Quakertown, PA
Reviews:
·Comcast

3 edits

1 recommendation

reply to FirebirdTN

I really think im the norm. Not here on dslr. While you disagree and i understand your position. It doesnt change my position. Look im perfectly capable of streaming hd but i stream sd because im simply not concerned if its hd or not. I dont know your position but i know mine. Your a cord cutter and i am not. Im at the end of the line as far as making changes. I want a capped internet service because im willing to deal with it and you dont want it. Again i really think my thinking covers the majority of comcasts customers thinking. Bottom line is i feel more comfortable knowing comcast charges customers that use high bandwidth more than i who use the bandwidth actually considering what metered bandwidth cost. Hitting you high use users tho is honestly making me feel all warm and cozy. Maybe i would feel different if sometime in my lifetime i actually use the 300 cap but since that probably wont happen i can only say how i feel. And that feeling is about god dam time. Im dam tired of these rate increases improving infrastructure when im fine with what i have. Let the dam users that use the bandwidth pay for it.



telcodad
Premium
join:2011-09-16
Lincroft, NJ
kudos:15
reply to FirebirdTN

said by FirebirdTN:

said by TiredOfThis :

we'll dump watching Netflix, etc.

Although I have no info to back me up on this....this quoted bit I'm convinced is the reason that most ISPs are moving towards caps/limits.

They are trying to save a dying business model.

Back on topic, I got to thinking about it, and I can understand both sides of the argument. It really isn't fair for a single person who uses very little to pay the same as a high BW consuming family.

BUT...in my test market it makes no sense. Whether you have the lowest speed tier, or the highest, we all have the same cap. The only thing the higher speed tier gains you is bragging rights, and the ability to hit the cap sooner.

-Alan

The GigaOM site has an article today about ISP data caps/allowances, with an updated comparison chart.

Quite a few ISPs now have tier-based caps, similar to what Comcast has in its Tucson market trial (»customer.comcast.com/help-and-su···s-tucson ):

Want to know if your ISP is capping data? Check our updated chart
By Stacey Higginbotham, GigaOM - November 15, 2013
»gigaom.com/2013/11/15/data-cap-2013/


Aozora

join:2008-11-28
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to rody_44

said by rody_44:

I really think im the norm. Not here on dslr. While you disagree and i understand your position. It doesnt change my position. Look im perfectly capable of streaming hd but i stream sd because im simply not concerned if its hd or not. I dont know your position but i know mine. Your a cord cutter and i am not. Im at the end of the line as far as making changes. I want a capped internet service because im willing to deal with it and you dont want it. Again i really think my thinking covers the majority of comcasts customers thinking. Bottom line is i feel more comfortable knowing comcast charges customers that use high bandwidth more than i who use the bandwidth actually considering what metered bandwidth cost. Hitting you high use users tho is honestly making me feel all warm and cozy. Maybe i would feel different if sometime in my lifetime i actually use the 300 cap but since that probably wont happen i can only say how i feel. And that feeling is about god dam time. Im dam tired of these rate increases improving infrastructure when im fine with what i have. Let the dam users that use the bandwidth pay for it.

The funny thing is TV rates keep increasing with decrease usage. Just letting you know your HSI rates will keep increasing regardless of caps or not. You got played hard it's funny. You bought into their bullshit so hard it's like you can't think.

Did they say your TV rates were going to decrease last year despite TV watching going down? LMFAO. I thought so. I just laughed so hard at your logic I have no clue how to convey that in my post.

I do know what Comcast is thinking and this song will help you realize what Comcast is thinking:

»www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTEfInwgxVs


They are laughing so hard to the bank.

rody_44
Premium
join:2004-02-20
Quakertown, PA
Reviews:
·Comcast

4 edits

Actually im happy with my tv rates. Internet was 32 a month ten years ago and now its 52. Thats what im unhappy about. If tv went up as much as internet in the last ten years we would be paying 250 a month for it. To be honest tho im on the 99 dollar triple play. I feel tv is a much better value than internet. Even at the 52 price point i might drop internet. Not video tho. 40 to 45 is really all i feel comfortable paying for internet. XFINITY Internet customers’ median monthly data usage is 17 GB per month. (found on there help forums) They are not going after me with average use that low. They are going after high use customers. I wont drop it for probably up to 54 or so and than they would be like a hot potato.



Johkal
Cool Cat
Premium,MVM
join:2002-11-13
Happy Valley
kudos:10
reply to Aozora

I'm sorry, but you make little sense.

Rody simply said: "Let the damn users that use the bandwidth pay for it."



NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:11
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC

said by Johkal:

I'm sorry, but you make little sense.

Rody simply said: "Let the damn users that use the bandwidth pay for it."

Then let's do away with flat rate billing. An initial $50 connect fee to set up the Internet; $10 per GB used thereafter.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum


Johkal
Cool Cat
Premium,MVM
join:2002-11-13
Happy Valley
kudos:10

Expand on what the $50 connect fee includes before the usage kicks in.



NetFixer
Freedom is NOT Free
Premium
join:2004-06-24
The Boro
Reviews:
·Cingular Wireless
·Comcast Business..
·Vonage

said by Johkal:

Expand on what the $50 connect fee includes before the usage kicks in.

It the install fee I paid to get my business class service connected is typical, it means that the installer will set the "modem" on your equipment shelf, connect a coax patch cable (that I supplied), ignore the out of spec signal levels, and quickly leave.
--
A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

When governments fear people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.


Johkal
Cool Cat
Premium,MVM
join:2002-11-13
Happy Valley
kudos:10

Still makes no sense. Who is referring to a business install fee? What? Huh?



NetFixer
Freedom is NOT Free
Premium
join:2004-06-24
The Boro
Reviews:
·Cingular Wireless
·Comcast Business..
·Vonage

said by Johkal:

Still makes no sense. Who is referring to a business install fee? What? Huh?

My assumption was that a "connect" fee would be essentially the same as an "install" fee since essentially an installer connects you to the Internet service.
--
A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

When governments fear people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.


NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:11
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
reply to Johkal

said by Johkal:

Expand on what the $50 connect fee includes before the usage kicks in.

It is a one time setup fee when an account is first opened; not a recurring fee.

BTW, I am not seriously proposing that. But it stands to bring in more revenue than the current flat rate billing because $10 per GB is $50 for every 0.1 GB moved (minimum; assumes you incur the charge on the first byte moved). Since the lowest usage will be on the order of 5 GB per month, the revenue stream is $50 per month, minimum.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum


Johkal
Cool Cat
Premium,MVM
join:2002-11-13
Happy Valley
kudos:10

I was just curious where you were going with that.


rody_44
Premium
join:2004-02-20
Quakertown, PA
reply to NormanS

Thats kind of the way most utilities are set up. Most have a minimum set up that you get charged even if you dont use it. I Think my electric company calls it a customer charge if i dont use over the minimum amount of electricity.



NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:11
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC

said by rody_44:

Thats kind of the way most utilities are set up. Most have a minimum set up that you get charged even if you dont use it. I Think my electric company calls it a customer charge if i dont use over the minimum amount of electricity.

Nevertheless, bits are not precious commodities like water and watts. The cost of production (watts), or processing (potable water) has not gone down over time, as has the cost of moving bits; if anything, those costs have risen.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum


tshirt
Premium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Comcast

The cost of the bits is quite small, but building the plant capacity is a huge expense.
so there is a base cost, before any traffic is moved, and the marketing works best when a chunk of traffic is wrapped into the base cost.
It's like leasing a car, the payment is the same each month if you drive 1 mile or 300, above 300 they charge more because you exceed the amount calculated in the lease cost.



NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:11
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC

said by tshirt:

The cost of the bits is quite small, but building the plant capacity is a huge expense.

Ah, I see. They rebuild the plant every year ...
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum


tshirt
Premium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Comcast

No, like the car it takes multiple years to payoff, and the longer the finace term the greater percentage goes to interest, in addition there are operating expenses, repairs, maintaince, upgrades (turbo charger so you can drive faster and maybe pass that 300 mile mark sooner) Like car salesman, they aren't going to stop you from adding on extras, which increase THEIR bottom line.



espaeth
Digital Plumber
Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2
reply to NormanS

said by NormanS:

said by tshirt:

The cost of the bits is quite small, but building the plant capacity is a huge expense.

Ah, I see. They rebuild the plant every year ...

They maintain the plant continuously.

It costs money to have a fleet of service vehicles, a staff of techs on payroll, a spare pool of equipment and materials to keep service operational, etc.

Capacity augmentation is also not a straight linear cost model. Capacity that is added as part of the standard planned technology refresh cycle is the most cost effective capacity that can be added to the system. Any capacity adds in the interim typically require non-strategic deployment of additional current-gen technology, usually at a significantly higher expense. That's what drives companies to try and force capacity growth to conform to planned upgrades as part of normal infrastructure refresh cycles.


NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:11
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC

said by espaeth:

They maintain the plant continuously.

It costs money to have a fleet of service vehicles, a staff of techs on payroll, a spare pool of equipment and materials to keep service operational, etc.

Maintenance is not more expensive for moving more bits. Whether a user moves 3 GB, 30 GB, or 300 GB, the cost of maintenance is the same.

Capacity augmentation is also not a straight linear cost model. Capacity that is added as part of the standard planned technology refresh cycle is the most cost effective capacity that can be added to the system. Any capacity adds in the interim typically require non-strategic deployment of additional current-gen technology, usually at a significantly higher expense. That's what drives companies to try and force capacity growth to conform to planned upgrades as part of normal infrastructure refresh cycles.

Okay, so it is about congested nodes after all? Even the Comcast admitted to doubters that it isn't?

U.S. corporations predicate pricing on the basis of, "What the traffic will bear". I have first hand experience of that from work in manufacturing, retail, and language study. Comcast isn't giving the store away with 33 1/3% price breaks through promotions.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum