dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
2859
share rss forum feed

the cerberus

join:2007-10-16
Richmond Hill, ON

2 edits

ATTN TSI, Please raise the cap to 400GB for higher speed tiers

It seems like so long ago the cap was 200GB, and a 5mbps connection was the best you could get.

When it was raised to 300GB initially I could never hit it, but now, years later, and 50mbps, 300GB is very tight.

Marc, any chance of raising the cap to 400GB for higher speed tiers (25mbps+)??
as 300GB is now way too low for these tiers.

PLEASE AND THANKS. I AM COMPLETELY SERIOUS.


TSI Andre
Got TekSavvy?
Premium,VIP
join:2008-06-03
Chatham, ON
kudos:24
If I am not mistaken, most people use way under 300Gb and the average of "average users" is slightly less than 300Gb.

For those that go over, we have Unlimited or ZTC:)

the cerberus

join:2007-10-16
Richmond Hill, ON

3 edits
Ok, youve entirely missed the point of my post. Thanks.

Look back a few years ago at why R0cky gave us 200GB to use on a crappy 5mbps connection.....

The mentality is gone.

The cap was 200GB BECAUSE the average user used far less, and a SMALL amount of users were up at this level of usage, R0cky called these people "the future".

Guess what? Were in that future, but the LIMIT NEVER ROSE.

And I'm not the least bit interested in slowing down my connection/ZTC/ AKA the disgusting act of throttling myself.

Not sure where that came from, but throttling was never OK with TSI users before.
Expand your moderator at work


TSI Andre
Got TekSavvy?
Premium,VIP
join:2008-06-03
Chatham, ON
kudos:24
reply to the cerberus

Re: ATTN TSI, Please raise the cap to 400GB for higher speed tiers

I know what you are saying but you are insinuating that because today's usage has netflix and such, and that speeds are higher, that mostly everyone goes over 300 and that merits a change to 400. We base our packages based on average usage which allows us to keep our pricing lower.

You are essentially insinuating that because speeds are higher these days and/or that because there is more day-to-day things that require internet that this type of change requires changes in our offerings. At least this is what I read in your posts.

Also, when Rocky was at the helm of this company and today are two extremely different times for Canadians and ISPs so things don't always trend smoothly. Example: "throttling was never OK with TSI users before". Well, we have many users that enjoy this no-cost add-on as it provides free flexibility and peace of mind.

Anywho... Not trying to argue with you. Marc reads these forums all the time so I am sure he will see your suggestion to change the limits and all.

Cheers,

Andre
--
TSI Andre
Director of Online & Operations Intelligence

TekSavvy Website | Follow Me on Twitter (@AndreCleroux)

the cerberus

join:2007-10-16
Richmond Hill, ON
said by TSI Andre:

We base our packages based on average usage which allows us to keep our pricing lower.

That mentality is what is different. R0cky always based his usage cap on the SMALL amount of users at the higher usage level which he referred to (and rightly so) as "the future".

The future keeps coming, higher bandwidth services are used more and more every day and now speeds are higher to get to that cap faster.

Its gotten to the point where you are announcing 150/15 with the same damn 300GB cap, and Rogers has outpaced you.
You look like rogers did now. They used to have that same damn 60GB cap on everything.
Its quite scary actually.

The Mongoose

join:2010-01-05
Toronto, ON

1 recommendation

Rocky didn't have to deal with CBB.

For better or for worse, if we want more cap we have to pay for it, either with straight dollars or lowered speeds via ZTC.

the cerberus

join:2007-10-16
Richmond Hill, ON
said by The Mongoose:

Rocky didn't have to deal with CBB.

For better or for worse, if we want more cap we have to pay for it, either with straight dollars or lowered speeds via ZTC.

Rogers is offerring 150/15 for $86 with a 350GB cap, TSI is offerring 150/15 for $89 with a 300GB cap.

something very wrong is going on here....


TSI Andre
Got TekSavvy?
Premium,VIP
join:2008-06-03
Chatham, ON
kudos:24
Removed my response.

The Mongoose See Profile is explaining things rather well

The Mongoose

join:2010-01-05
Toronto, ON
reply to the cerberus
said by the cerberus:

Rogers is offerring 150/15 for $86 with a 350GB cap, TSI is offerring 150/15 for $89 with a 300GB cap.

something very wrong is going on here....

True. The CRTC is screwing TekSavvy with crazy CBB charges because Rogers is lying about their own costs.

Meanwhile that Rogers price will go up every year, and TekSavvy gives you far more than 300GB if you take advantage of the 2-8 AM window. TekSavvy is still the better deal, but not by nearly as much as it should be. Only the CRTC can address that.

All that being said, Start will do 400GB for $90/month, but without the unlimited window AFAIK. Better for some, not as good for others.

graniterock
Premium
join:2003-03-14
London, ON
Reviews:
·WIND Mobile
·TekSavvy Cable
reply to the cerberus
said by the cerberus:

Guess what? Were in that future, but the LIMIT NEVER ROSE.

Good news: The future is now!

Bad news: Incumbents charge TSI an arm and a leg for peak time usage.

The really bad news: Caps are the most wide spread solution to this problem even if they are a blunt weapon in this regard.

I actually felt at the time that raising the cap was a bit of a middle finger to the incumbents, not necessarily a trend of future increases. 300 GB can be restrictive, especially those that have cut the chord in favour of streaming options.

ZTC isn't for everyone. I could see multi-user households with busy peak time usage finding ZTC unhelpful. I like ZTC only because it's mostly just me using the net after 8. I'm just sure to run my game updates at 7 if needed (if my computer has been off all day. Automated updates are restricted to outside the peak time so likely I've already nabbed them). I would not be OK with mandatory throttle. Disgusting was the throttling of connections by other providers who did so without permission nor clear explanation. ZTC is give and take. TSI takes our speeds and gives unlimited data. It seems fair to me.

Andre: If the average of average user's usage is just below 300 GB, what percentage of them are having to pay overages? How well has ZTC been embraced by this? I'd be curious to know the median vs average usuage. But if my assumptions are right (I could be wrong) about the average being just below 300, that shows a definite dampening effect by the current overages.

Interesting thing about my usage. Before ZTC I was about a 275 GB user. In May I was a whopping 400 GB peak + 133 GB off. April I was 350 GB peak + 180 GB off. Month to date 125 / 30 which if doubled as we are about half way through the month is somewhat less than the other two months which I attribute to wife not being at home during the day as much. I feel the biggest contributions to my increased usage on ZTC are:

1) No longer afraid to download games and patches I may not quite be ready to use. (One of those months involved a hard drive crash and restoring of games).

2) Not afraid of streaming too much video.

the cerberus

join:2007-10-16
Richmond Hill, ON

4 edits
Alternatively, how about 100GB blocks? it may pay off for TSI if users purchase more than they need....

Seriously though, media is only getting bigger, and its quickly stopping being produced in physical form...
AAA Games are 6-60GBs, netflix keeps increasing its bitrate and quality, and youtube and its users keep upping the resolution as well....
nevermind vmedia/iptv thats trying to take off (TSI once wanted a part of that too....)
Then there's live streaming soccer/every major sporting event now as well from rogers/cbc/etc and wwe network and ufc fight pass. So many services just eating bandwidth nowadays.
When that 300GB cap was created, none of that existed!!
R0cky really was thinking of the future IMO...


The Flash
Go Leafs Go
Premium
join:2002-10-17
Toronto, ON
kudos:1
reply to the cerberus
I am sure if it made financial sense, TSI would offer only unlimited plans but the incumbents are really holding back Internet as a whole in Canada.

InvalidError

join:2008-02-03
kudos:5
reply to the cerberus
said by the cerberus:

R0cky always based his usage cap on the SMALL amount of users at the higher usage level which he referred to (and rightly so) as "the future".

In Rocky's day, Bell charged $1700/Gbps for interconnect and ~$300/Gbps for Ethernet transport services for ~$2000/Gbps. Today, TSI pays around $11 000/Gbps for their Bell interconnects and up to $26 000/Gbps for cableco interconnects.

So, TSI's incumbent interconnect capacity costs have become 5-10X as much what they used to be. They cannot afford to increase caps just for the heck of it; they have to carefully weigh their options.

Same goes for all other IISPs.

Sunfox

join:2003-12-14
Markham, ON
When Rogers can offer unlimited 250/20 for $125/month, you know something's screwed up on what they're charging TSI. As a moderately heavy user, I'd be tempted to get that just to spite Rogers!

InvalidError

join:2008-02-03
kudos:5

1 edit
said by Sunfox:

When Rogers can offer unlimited 250/20 for $125/month, you know something's screwed up on what they're charging TSI.

Before saying that, you would need to know how much the average Rogers 250/20 unlimited subscriber actually uses. At $125/month, there might be many Rogers subscribers who get it just because they can and like to have their downloads done yesterday but do not necessarily need unlimited at all much like how the bulk of TSI's unlimited subscribers a few years ago were not even breaking 100GB/month when the cap on regular accounts was 200-300GB/month.

Edit: and you would also need to know how much of whatever those 250/20 accounts do actually happens at times that actually matter within Rogers' network.

BrianON

join:2011-09-30
Ottawa, ON
reply to the cerberus
Schedule downloads between 2AM and 8AM. Even a 6Mbps/256Kbps cable user can squeeze in an extra 450GB/month in addition to the 300GB cap.


Cloneman

join:2002-08-29
Montreal
kudos:4
reply to the cerberus
A more realistic option is to offer wider off-peak time for more money. Maybe 1AM to to 2PM.

Peak bandwidth costs Teksavvy too much money as others have said
Expand your moderator at work

Rastan

join:2007-04-25
Canada
reply to Cloneman

Re: ATTN TSI, Please raise the cap to 400GB for higher speed tiers

I agree but I doubt Teksavvy would stretch the off peak hours by more than 3-5 hours. Perhaps 12am to 10am would work.


oceros

join:2013-07-20
St Thomas, ON
Reviews:
·Rogers Hi-Speed
reply to the cerberus
The OP is not wrong, just ignorant of CBB and the push for changes already happening from TPIA's.

If 300gb is so tight for you, you're probably costing the ISP 10x more than you pay them per month. The costs are just silly. When it changes, I'm sure usage limits will get looked at. With all the TPIA's out there, we're going to get the best packages a business can offer - from one TPIA or another. The problem right now is the costs.

InvalidError

join:2008-02-03
kudos:5
said by oceros:

If 300gb is so tight for you, you're probably costing the ISP 10x more than you pay them per month.

For 300GB to cost this much, someone would have to consistently pull high bandwidth nearly every day of the month during instantaneous capacity peaks in such a way that TSI would need to upgrade primarily because of them.

This is extremely unlikely to happen on a remotely significant scale with 300GB (or lower) accounts unless there was a large group of subscribers on high-speed tiers coordinating their downloads, speedtests and other usage to generate such instantaneous peaks.

Without concerted effort, most of 300GB subs' usage will miss the instantaneous peaks that determine how much capacity ISPs need if they want to avoid significant congestion. This (along with most 300GB subscribers not using anywhere near 300GB in the first place) is exactly what makes 300GB at reasonably low rates despite ridiculously high CBB rates possible.


Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:23
reply to the cerberus
Even without using ZTC, I've managed to consume well over a thousand gigs a month while still technically staying under my 300GB cap. I recall hitting over 1200GB one month, but still staying under my 300GB cap.

How? Upload is unlimited, and I shift non-time-sensitive downloads to the off-peak unlimited window.

The CBB rates are totally insane, and I do hope the CRTC will finally realize that they've set them to about ten times higher than is reasonable, but until then, the measures that indie ISPs are using to lessen the pain are helping.
--
Latest version of CapSavvy systray usage checker: »CapSavvy v4.3 released!

Sunfox

join:2003-12-14
Markham, ON
reply to InvalidError
said by InvalidError:

said by Sunfox:

When Rogers can offer unlimited 250/20 for $125/month, you know something's screwed up on what they're charging TSI.

Before saying that, you would need to know how much the average Rogers 250/20 unlimited subscriber actually uses. At $125/month, there might be many Rogers subscribers who get it just because they can and like to have their downloads done yesterday but do not necessarily need unlimited at all much like how the bulk of TSI's unlimited subscribers a few years ago were not even breaking 100GB/month when the cap on regular accounts was 200-300GB/month.

Edit: and you would also need to know how much of whatever those 250/20 accounts do actually happens at times that actually matter within Rogers' network.

Well, if someone didn't actually need unlimited, you'd figure they'd go for 500gb for $100 or 700gb for $115, before shelling out $125 for unlimited. Plus, as far as I know you'd get 200gb on top of those limited options (giving you 700gb and 900gb) in a 3-product bundle.

I'm paying about $124 between my redundant Bell DSL & TSI cable packages... unlimited prices like Rogers is offering, and that's without any discounts or retention deals, kinda makes me consider consolidating everything into one insane package... if only to up the average usage because I'd actually make use of it!


oceros

join:2013-07-20
St Thomas, ON
Reviews:
·Rogers Hi-Speed
reply to InvalidError
The way I read things, (granted with a bunch of between the lines assumptions) the OP is likely directly impacting peak usage. Calling peak usage evening usage.

Not that there is anything wrong with that. One buys internet to make use of it.

10x is arguably inflated, and some users subsidize others blah blah blah. The end result is, CBB is borked. Usage trends and cord cutting is only going up, and up, and up.


sbrook
Premium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
Ottawa
kudos:13
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·WIND Mobile

2 recommendations

The other thing to remember is Rogers new prices were set AFTER they set the TPIA pricing ... and they are being agressive to try to get rid of the thorns in their side like TekSavvy and Start. They've learned that if they price too agressively they'll be charged with anti-competitive behaviour ... but they make it low enough AFTER they set the higher prices for the TPIAs to get a lot of people who bailed on Rogers thinking as you are now cerebrus ...

They are doing what happened to Wardair ... pricing TPIAs out of the business in a way to fly as close to under the radar of the CRTC as they can. So, with their prices set to TPIAs there's no way the TPIAs can give much more.


Mashiki
Balking The Enemy's Plans

join:2002-02-04
Woodstock, ON
kudos:1
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·Rogers Hi-Speed
·Bright House
reply to the cerberus
said by the cerberus:

Alternatively, how about 100GB blocks? it may pay off for TSI if users purchase more than they need.

If they didn't have ZTC, I'd be interested in buying them. But with it, there's no point in my book since the time where it would effect me, I'm not using the internet anyway.

InvalidError

join:2008-02-03
kudos:5
reply to oceros
said by oceros:

The way I read things, (granted with a bunch of between the lines assumptions) the OP is likely directly impacting peak usage. Calling peak usage evening usage.

Even if you call it "evening usage," there are still 18h/day where usage is metered and out of that 18h/day, there might be something like 10 minutes total where links are near their daily peak and out of a whole month, there might be only 4-5 days that hit the monthly peak on which ISPs get billed.

Unless they happened to floor their connection during those ~40 minutes per month where the network is at its absolute peak load (that would be about 40GB/month for someone on a 120Mbps plan), their connection did not contribute (disproportionately) to costs.

There is a simple way to fix that: change CBB from straight pre-paid to commit+95th. (Pre-pay for X Gbps you know you are almost guaranteed to need on an on-going basis and then pay a premium for 95th on anything beyond that.)