dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
33490
« Will IPv6 addresses still be Dynamic?Telus usage display »
prev · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 ... 15 · 16 · 17 · next
pb2k
join:2005-05-30
Calgary, AB

pb2k to W16

Member

to W16

Re: March 2015 - Telus introducing Usage-based Billing Charges

said by W16:

No need for regrets . There are bigger issues here than providing a certain level of capacity at all times vs peak times, etc. I readily admit that these are answers needed from those more educated than I (again, most of your technical questions have been answered in full by highly intelligent people in the Teksavvy side of DSL Reports).

However, this line of discussion, although interesting, diverts from the original issue. Which was most likely your intention.

Here's my position. Telus is now charging for total gigs downloaded per month, not because of the five percent of consumers utilizing the Internet to it's fullest, but because Telus is generating additional revenue from essentially nothing. This is great for Telus and it's shareholders, but it is not so great for regular Canadians and innovation within Canada. I concede that depending on which side you're on, Telus/shareholders or every other Canadian, your viewpoint will shift accordingly.

No, the issue is exactly that. More and more people are getting off work or school, coming home, having dinner and then sitting down to watch Netflix/youtube/etc and creating a peak usage spike. This is exactly why teksavvy allows unlimited downloads between 2-8am (Something Telus should have offered, IMO, but I can understand why they didn't).

At the very least, this should educate otherwise clueless end users to make them think about the effect of leaving bit-torrent running all day or blindly selecting 4k/1080p streaming options.

With regards to lining the pockets of shareholders; who do you think they borrowed those 10s of billions from to build out the VDSL2/TTV/HSPA/LTE/GPON networks in the past 10 years? If Telus doesn't show their investors a return, do you think they're going to get dime 1 to build out a 5G network, continue the GPON rollout, or upgrade other infrastructure? Nope.
W16
join:2006-08-25
Colborne, ON

W16

Member

Shareholders trump everything, and the mighty dollar marches on to the catchy tune of greed. I get your position, I really do. I just can't agree with it.

All snarkiness aside, great discussion. Thank you.
pb2k
join:2005-05-30
Calgary, AB

1 recommendation

pb2k to MerinX

Member

to MerinX
said by MerinX:

I have yet to see how Telus or Shaw or any ISP can justify a 10 dollar cost for 50 gigabytes which cost them pennies.

What orifice are you pulling these numbers out of? You can't just uncouple the cost of building out billions worth of infrastructure and declare that the only cost is maintenance and power.
EdmundGerber
join:2010-01-04

EdmundGerber

Member

said by pb2k:

said by MerinX:

I have yet to see how Telus or Shaw or any ISP can justify a 10 dollar cost for 50 gigabytes which cost them pennies.

What orifice are you pulling these numbers out of? You can't just uncouple the cost of building out billions worth of infrastructure and declare that the only cost is maintenance and power.

Speaking of orifices - that's a mighty pull of your own. Care to show your own work???
pb2k
join:2005-05-30
Calgary, AB

pb2k

Member

Taken from various news releases over the past few years

»about.telus.com/communit ··· releases

"Consolidated capital expenditures in 2015, excluding spectrum licences, are targeted to be similar to 2014."

"Consolidated capital expenditures in 2014 are targeted to increase modestly to approximately $2.2 billion, excluding the purchase of spectrum licences"

"Consolidated capital expenditures in 2013 are targeted to remain at approximately $1.95 billion, which excludes purchases of spectrum, including the cost for 700MHz spectrum from a planned national auction in the second half of 2013."

"Vancouver, B.C. – TELUS will invest $3 billion in advanced technology and state-of-the-art facilities over the next three years in British Columbia.

This significant investment builds on the more than $26 billion the company has invested in technology and operations in the province since 2000"

I would go on, but the news section of the site is dog slow at the moment.

edit:

"Edmonton and Calgary, AB – TELUS is investing $650 million across Alberta this year to further expand and enhance its wireless and wireline networks. This year's network investment builds upon the $23 billion TELUS has invested in its operations and technology in the province in the last 10 years"
alphaz18
join:2005-02-26
CANADA

alphaz18

Member

I'm glad someone understands economics and reality.. Everyone seems to think they are entitled to free everything. Cut Canadian services for cheap American companies that directly hurt Canadian companies then complain when the Canadian companies try to lose less money in any way they can... Not to say I'm happy about ubb as I'm on TELUS. But I absolutely agree and understand why they need to do something.

bbbc
join:2001-10-02
NorthAmerica

4 edits

bbbc to Karthanon

Member

to Karthanon
said by alphaz18 :

I'm glad someone understands economics and reality.

I understand reality, just not the one you guys opt to believe. My tummy is upset from your nonsense.

I'm lost about economics here, but I'm sure the Telus cheerleaders can continue to lie clue us in. Every major business has to reinvest, so your UBB defense is BS. I guess Telus (with those quoted numbers) is making a super-duper Internet unlike everyone else. Good luck on the rural folks seeing any wired broadband upgrades.
pb2k
join:2005-05-30
Calgary, AB

pb2k

Member

said by bbbc:

said by alphaz18 :

I'm glad someone understands economics and reality.

I understand reality, just not the one you guys opt to believe. My tummy is upset from your nonsense.

I'm lost about economics here, but I'm sure the Telus cheerleaders can continue to lie clue us in. Every major business has to reinvest, so your UBB defense is BS. I guess Telus with these quoted numbers is making a super-duper Internet unlike everyone else. Good luck on the rural folks seeing any wired broadband upgrades worth a sh*t.

You're admitting to ignorance while calling me a liar all in the same sentence?
W16
join:2006-08-25
Colborne, ON

1 recommendation

W16 to bbbc

Member

to bbbc
said by bbbc:

My tummy is upset from your nonsense.

I think it is clear that pb2k and alphaz18 have an agenda that differs greatly from the rest of us users. Their argument that siphoning money from customers in an environment bereft of competition is not only OK but necessary. The rest of us understand that paying more for less is simply not OK.
pb2k
join:2005-05-30
Calgary, AB

pb2k

Member

said by W16:

said by bbbc:

My tummy is upset from your nonsense.

I think it is clear that pb2k and alphaz18 have an agenda that differs greatly from the rest of us users. Their argument that siphoning money from customers in an environment bereft of competition is not only OK but necessary. The rest of us understand that paying more for less is simply not OK.

I think you misunderstand. I don't own any Telus stock, but I worked (past tense) for them (employee and contractor) for just under 4 years total, during the build-out of the 7330(VDSL2) & HSPA+ networks and also during the TTV Mediaroom transition.

I'm a network professional by trade, most of the people whining in this thread probably wouldn't recognize a DSLAM if it fell on their head (Especially a 7302, that would probably crush their skull).
W16
join:2006-08-25
Colborne, ON

W16

Member

That's awesome. It's great to have people who have hands on experience with our current telecoms to provide insightful information. I appreciate you offering your insight and opinions...mostly because they are different from the rest of us. It helps keep us out of the echo chamber.

However, my position still stands. Paying for the Internet monthly, and then paying more if you dare use it, sucks.
AJ102
join:2005-03-22
Vancouver, BC

AJ102 to MerinX

Member

to MerinX
said by MerinX:

I have yet to see how Telus or Shaw or any ISP can justify a 10 dollar cost for 50 gigabytes which cost them pennies.

Well for a start the first 50 Gbytes costs $5, and the increase to $10 for subsequent 50 Gbyte buckets is clearly intended to be a penalty fee intended to push people to switch to a plan with higher limits rather than constantly exceeding theirs.

As for 50 Gbytes costing pennies, I think you are confusing incremental cost with proportionate cost. You might as well tell the airline that it only costs them a couple of dollars of fuel if you sit in an otherwise-unoccupied seat on their flight to Hawaii, so it's unfair for them to charge you more than $5 since the plane was flying there anyway.

MerinX
Crunching for Cures
Premium Member
join:2011-02-03

1 recommendation

MerinX to pb2k

Premium Member

to pb2k
Better stick to network management because you are horrible at Public Relations and really should not post on this forum since you just make Telus look worse, even worse then shawjames was for shaw.....
MerinX

2 recommendations

MerinX to AJ102

Premium Member

to AJ102
What has changed? last i checked it gets cheaper and cheaper for and ISP as the years go by.

»business.financialpost.c ··· ly-cost/

The cost associated with transmission and switching on a modern network is a non-issue — less than five cents per gigabyte and dropping fast,” David Buffett, chief executive of Radiant Communications Inc., an independent ISP, wrote in the Vancouver Sun this week.

“If the CRTC ruling survives federal government scrutiny, however, consumers will be paying in excess of $2 per gigabyte. (That’s about a 400-per-cent markup.)”

[Correction: Charging $2 of overage fees when data costs 5 cents per gigabyte to transmit would actually be a 3,900% mark up.]

Depending on who you believe, the cost for a large incumbent ISP to deliver one gigabyte of data — when you factor in fixed costs like fibre optic cables and networking gear, as well as operating costs such as technicians and electricity — can range anywhere from a few pennies to between 10¢ and 15¢ per GB.
AJ102
join:2005-03-22
Vancouver, BC

AJ102

Member

said by MerinX See ProfileDepending on who you believe, the cost for a large incumbent ISP to deliver one gigabyte of data — when you factor in fixed costs like fibre optic cables and networking gear, as well as operating costs such as technicians and electricity — can range anywhere from a few pennies to between 10¢ and 15¢ per GB.

I guess there's no problem then. With costs that low we can expect plenty of independent ISPs to be showing up at our doorstep any day now offering cheap internet plans on their newly-constructed networks. Or maybe somebody is understating the true costs by conveniently ignoring some of them...?

MerinX
Crunching for Cures
Premium Member
join:2011-02-03

2 recommendations

MerinX

Premium Member

Or maybe the telecom duopolies in Canada have the CRTC by the balls which makes sure there is minimal competition and ZERO regard for the consumers. Shaw and telus did a really good job of buying up all the smaller ISPs then charging more for less already it is pretty safe to say the same will just happen with smaller ISPs trying to get into the market.
I pray for google or other ISPs to one day build affordable fiber and inject real competition into what is a stagnation collusive market manipulation by SHAW and TELUS to charge more and more well being allowed to provide less and less.

Perhaps is ISPs were required to not be massive conglomerations with vested interests and just provide an internet connection they would care about what their customers think instead of trying to preserve their own Media empire like Bhell and Shaw.

»blogs.howstuffworks.com/ ··· ario.htm

What does a gigabyte of Internet service really cost? A look at the worst case scenario

With Internet Service Providers (ISPs) in Canada and the United States planning to impose monthly bandwidth caps on us, and with extra fees being planned for people who exceed those caps (e.g. $1 per gigabyte), it brings up a great question – how much does it really cost to provide Internet access?

We can get a sense of that by looking at some of the most expensive bandwidth in the world – the bandwidth being provided to Africa. This article provides some interesting data:

Massive Undersea Cable Connects Africa

A new undersea telecommunications cable to boost Africa's Internet access will land this month, mobile service provider MTN said Thursday, calling it the continent's largest data pipeline yet.

The 14,000-kilometer (8,700-mile) West Africa Cable System (WACS) fiber optic line is scheduled to reach South Africa's Western Cape province on April 18, linking the continent's Internet providers directly to the servers of Europe and boosting the bandwidth of the world's least-connected region.

The cable starts in London and will connect 15 points along Africa's western coast, said MTN, which has a $90-million (63-million-euro) stake in the $650-million system and is the project's single largest investor.

From this article we learn several important facts:

The cable costs $650 million
The cable provides 5,120-gigabits/second
The cable provides 15 access points along the coast
The cable is incredibly long: 14,000-kilometer (8,700-mile). It could go from Los Angeles to New York City and back to LA and then back to NYC: [googlemaps »maps.google.com/maps?f=q ··· 5&h=350]

Now let's make several of assumptions:

The cable will need to be maintained. Let's round the $650 million price tag up to $1 billion to cover that expense.
The cable will eventually become obsolete. Let's imagine that happening on an aggressive schedule of 10 years, given the pace of technology.
The people who put this cable in place wish to make a profit on their investment. Let's assume a 200% return on investment (20% per year). So, after investing $1 billion, the operators wish to receive $3 billion.

Given that cost structure, and the fact that the cable can handle (in round numbers) 5 terabits/second or 500 gigabytes/second, how much does a gigabyte cost in this system?

Each year, the system costs $300 million
Each year the system can transmit 500 gigabytes/second * 3,600 seconds/hour * 24 hours/day * 365 days/year = 15.7 billion gigabytes
$300 million/15.7 billion gigabytes = 1.9 cents per gigabyte.

1.9 cents per gigabyte on a very expensive system. Remember that we already baked in a 200% profit margin. But even if you want to get greedy and mark that up an additional 100%, it is only 3.8 cents per gigabyte.

In other words, bandwidth by the gigabyte is incredibly inexpensive. Pennies per gigabyte. And that is on one of the most expensive systems we can imagine.

The question we have to ask, however, is this: does that number represent the true cost of bandwidth? And the answer to that question is no, because of congestion.

Note that people tend not to use bandwidth evenly throughout the day. If they did use it evenly, then the cost per gigabyte truly would be 1.9 cents per gigabyte. However, at 4AM this undersea cable is likely to be very underutilized. At other times during the day, demand is high.

The big uproar right now is the problem that Netflix and Hulu are causing. These online streaming services use a lot of bandwidth (relatively speaking), and usage tends to concentrate in the evening hours.

So let's look at the very worst case scenario that Netflix/Hulu could cause. According to this article...

Detailing Netflix's Streaming Costs: Average Movie Costs Five Cents To Deliver

We know that the average encoding rate for video streamed to the Xbox 360 is about 2000Kbps. That means one person watching a two hour movie would transfer roughly 1.8GB of data. For high definition movies, the average encoding bitrate is around 3200Kbps and one user would transfer about 3GB of data.

Worst case, imagine that every customer wants to watch Netflix every night at exactly the same time. And let's make it even worse – let's imagine that a household has multiple people in it, and there are three simultaneous Netflix feeds going to each customer. Now we need approximately 10 megabits/second for each customer. During a three or four hour window every night, the demand caused by this Netflix loading caps the number of Internet accounts we can give out. The undersea cable can only handle 5 terabits/second, so we can have at most:

5 terabits per second / 10 megabits per second = 500,000 customers

So we have to spread the $3 billion cost of the cable over those 500,000 customers. What does that work out to per month? In 10 years there are 120 months, so:

$3 billion / 120 months / 500,000 customers = $50 per customer per month.

$50/month is the worst case scenario. We are assuming that every single customer will be watching 3 simultaneous high def Netflix movies (10 megabits/second) simultaneously. The pipeline can handle that kind of worst-case load, with a 200% profit margin, for $50/month. And that would be some of the most expensive bandwidth in the world.

What is the cost per gigabyte now? If you assume that each customer is allocated a true 10 megabits/second (call it 1 megabyte/second) pipe, and if you assume that each customer fully uses that allocation for 6 hours a day, each customer is pulling 21 gigabytes per day, or roughly 600 gigabytes per month. $50/600 = 8.3 cents per gigabyte.

In other words, Internet service can be provided profitably for pennies per gigabyte in the absolute worst case scenario.

Let's imagine that we lived in a rational world, where ISPs were not trying to gouge customers and we were all trying to utilize resources efficiently. Netflix/Hulu really can increase the cost of bandwidth because they create congestion in finite pipelines. There are a number of things we could do, working together, to relieve that congestion. For example, bandwidth at low-usage times would be essentially free, and bandwidth at 8PM might cost a dime per gigabyte because many people are trying to use the pipe simultaneously.

If time-of-use pricing like that were put into place, what would happen? Many activities (like Internet backups, bit torrent, file uploads and downloads, etc.) would move to low-cost hours, spreading out the load. Places like Netflix and Hulu might offer customers services that pre-dowload what they want to watch tomorrow. People might voluntarily choose lower-bandwidth versions of shows they watch during peak hours. New applications might spring up to take advantage of essentially-free bandwidth in early morning hours. And so on. In other words, the marketplace would take actions to spread out bandwidth usage throughout the day to make better use of the resource, and the cost of bandwidth would go down.
pb2k
join:2005-05-30
Calgary, AB

pb2k

Member

I have something better to do at the moment, but rest assured, I'll dissect and systematically pick apart your post tomorrow.

Good night
Dreyfus
join:2013-02-18

1 recommendation

Dreyfus to Karthanon

Member

to Karthanon
According to Telus' press release: "These usage charges have been designed to ensure ... you pay for what you use."

So I agree, hit the 5% (Telus' number) with overage fees, and refund the 95% for what they don't use. Telus doesn't do that, because it has nothing to do with fairness or network management. It is about screwing both groups.

I hope everyone realizes that you have other options (& I don't mean just Shaw).

Muncher
join:2008-04-15

Muncher to pb2k

Member

to pb2k
said by pb2k:

I have something better to do at the moment, but rest assured, I'll dissect and systematically pick apart your post tomorrow.

Well, we are looking forward to your dissection. This UBB thingy, is just regurgitated from the past. Before DSL was introduced, dialup had exactly the same 'issues', and the current arguments were also used. DSL was going to be the technology that was going to make bandwidth issues a thing of the past. Yeah, right!
As for leaving Telus, go ahead. Same thing happened at Shaw, look at how much their shares continued to climb. Last time I looked something like 1500%. Oh that really hurt them. Buy shares in Telus. Why fight the Pricks, buy them. That way when they go to screw you, at least you get paid for it.

I wish the Telus execs were honest and just come of the closet and admitted that they were only doing it for the money. Great, finally some truth. I can respect that! BTW, I want more money on my dividends. lol.
no serious.

edit for spelling.

Mashiki
Balking The Enemy's Plans
join:2002-02-04
Woodstock, ON

Mashiki to W16

Member

to W16
said by W16:

Shareholders trump everything, and the mighty dollar marches on to the catchy tune of greed. I get your position, I really do. I just can't agree with it.

All snarkiness aside, great discussion. Thank you.

Well, we all know how well the pillage the pocketbook mentality is working for Rogers and Bell right? With both of them hemorrhaging customers as they flee to anyone else. Share holders can deman and push for more profit, but when there's no customers because they're leaving they're pretty much toast.
spectrum70
join:2011-01-14

spectrum70 to Karthanon

Member

to Karthanon
Here's a little fun with math.
Assuming that $5/50GB is roughly the cost of the traffic over their network (since the $10/50GB appears to be a 'penalty' rate of sorts,) here's what their valuing the allocated traffic for their various packages as:

Internet 15   150GB/50GB = 3 x $5  = $15
Internet 25   250GB/50GB = 5 x $5  = $25
Internet 50   400GB/50GB = 8 x $5  = $40
Internet 100  500GB/50GB = 10 x $5 = $50
 

Now if you take the base/unbuncled price for all these packages, and subtract the number calculated from the included traffic allowed per each service you get this:

Internet 15   $63 - $15 = $48
Internet 25   $68 - $25 = $43
Internet 50   $83 - $40 = $43
Internet 100  $93 - $50 = $43
 

So based on these numbers, it seems like they're valuing their actual service at $43, regardless of the tier it is.
You could make the argument that the higher tiers are getting a 'discount', but it still seems odd that the number works out to exactly the same in the 25/50/100 cases.

Either way, if they were going to do this correctly, which they obviously won't because it would hurt their profit margin; they'd set base rates for each of the tiers, sans traffic and then just meter it on a per GB basis which is $0.10 based on their $5/50GB number.
pb2k
join:2005-05-30
Calgary, AB

pb2k to MerinX

Member

to MerinX
said by MerinX:

Or maybe the telecom duopolies in Canada have the CRTC by the balls which makes sure there is minimal competition and ZERO regard for the consumers. Shaw and telus did a really good job of buying up all the smaller ISPs then charging more for less already it is pretty safe to say the same will just happen with smaller ISPs trying to get into the market.

Shaw did a fair bit of cable tv conglomeration in the 80s and 90s if memory serves. Telus is just AGT + BCTel + Edtel - TAC was just a puppet that existed while the CRTC adjusted to the modern world. Never heard of any of them buying up small ISPs. Care to back up your claims?

How are Telus and shaw charging more for less? 10 years ago 3mbit internet was $40 and most people used under 25GB per month of data.
said by MerinX:

I pray for google or other ISPs to one day build affordable fiber and inject real competition into what is a stagnation collusive market manipulation by SHAW and TELUS to charge more and more well being allowed to provide less and less.

Let me know how that praying goes for you.
said by MerinX:

Perhaps is ISPs were required to not be massive conglomerations with vested interests and just provide an internet connection they would care about what their customers think instead of trying to preserve their own Media empire like Bhell and Shaw.

We're talking about Telus, remember?I'm not going to bother pointing out the flaws in a posts you plagiarize, but suffice to say, transport services != the cost of bandwidth.
DanteX
join:2010-09-09

3 recommendations

DanteX to Karthanon

Member

to Karthanon
Nice to See How Telus is getting ripped a new one by people ranging from IT Professionals , People who know Enterprise networking and to the average user.

Keep up the good work and raise the pressure
Symtex
join:2005-04-06
Burnaby, BC

Symtex

Member

have you notice there is about only 3 of you guys complaining. You are using circular logic to reinforce your position.

If you guys are willing to have a constructive discussion around the cap # itself. How it is not sufficient. I am with you on that. But please stay out of how much is cost to build a infrastructure because you absolutely no ideas how much is cost. I gave you some information and you just blatantly discard it because it doesn't fit your narrative.

TELUS is investing heavily in their network infrastructure to try to keep up with the demand but we are at a tipping point where we just can't. Everyone wants more and more for less. We have to do something. We have to make sure we can continue offering the same level of service for now and the future. You keep complaining you want more speed. Well that cost money. Now only on the access side but we need to assure we can sustain it on the network side also.side. It not only about bandwidth. There is a lot of devices between the your modem and the time you go out of the internet. We have RE/PE/CA etc... People in the region that have been stuck in ATM also wants more speed. We are working tireless in retiring that whole network. We have some serious challenges in region just because of the nature of the geography.

Our profit margin doesn't come on the HSIA per say but more on the Optik and the wireless side of the house. Often it's the wireless profit that fund the wireline infrastructure. Now we can talk about the wireless side of the house but that will be for another topic. I am not as familiar with wireless as I am with wireline.

So I am asking you again guys. If you want things to change, your endless rant are futile. If you want to have an adult conversation about how the cap might not be high enough for a normal usage. I am with you. The facts is UBB is here to stay.

TOPDAWG
Premium Member
join:2005-04-27
Calgary, AB

3 recommendations

TOPDAWG

Premium Member

only if you're foolish enough to stay with the mean guys 3rd party's still have unlimited. I'd push anyone looking for net to go with a 3rd party. I don't even care if you go near the cap as that may change one day and the piece of mind is so sweet.

Hell I just downloaded like 20GB of games and game updates last night and a 9GB game update the day before. I also stream WWE network all day too. I used 43.5GB yesterday and it was all legal downloads. I also forgot to turn off my WWE stream last night as it was still on when I turned on my TV. So I was streaming HD video all night.

That little mistake would cost me with this UBB BS.

3rd party's people that is your answer.

I'm cool with telus doing this they want money nothing wrong with that and shaw will follow suit soon enough so go with a 3rd party and hope the CRTC does not screw them over so they can keep offering unlimited at a good price.
DanteX
join:2010-09-09

1 recommendation

DanteX

Member

Kind of shocking thinking Shaw will follow suit when that stinks of collusion and not competition then again competition doesn't exist in Canada when competitors raise prices or lower caps in almost unison

SquirrelKing
@telus.net

2 recommendations

SquirrelKing to Symtex

Anon

to Symtex
How about having our ORIGINAL caps that we signed up for restored? You know, the 500 on the 25 plan that was slashed in half two years ago. All the while the supreme leader Entwistle said, but oh, we don't enforce those! After the original cap is restored, perhaps we can have some constructive conversations! Halving the cap and then implementing UBB is borderline criminal!
pb2k
join:2005-05-30
Calgary, AB

pb2k to TOPDAWG

Member

to TOPDAWG
said by TOPDAWG:

Hell I just downloaded like 20GB of games and game updates last night and a 9GB game update the day before. I also stream WWE network all day too. I used 43.5GB yesterday and it was all legal downloads. I also forgot to turn off my WWE stream last night as it was still on when I turned on my TV. So I was streaming HD video all night.

You're bragging about deliberately wasting bandwidth?
pb2k

pb2k to SquirrelKing

Member

to SquirrelKing
said by SquirrelKing :

How about having our ORIGINAL caps that we signed up for restored? You know, the 500 on the 25 plan that was slashed in half two years ago. All the while the supreme leader Entwistle said, but oh, we don't enforce those! After the original cap is restored, perhaps we can have some constructive conversations! Halving the cap and then implementing UBB is borderline criminal!

Not criminal, just good business. Get HS50 or HS100 if you want a larger cap. An extra $15-25 per month it's really a big deal

timerider2
join:2010-12-19

2 recommendations

timerider2 to pb2k

Member

to pb2k
He's bragging about using a service he pays for to do things he needs done. What are you saying. "enjoy your internet, but try not to use it". I didn't buy a new car so it can sit in the garage and not get used, and we did not signup for internet so it can be unused for most of the month. If anyone is whining and bitching on these forums it's you pb2k. Don't worry when everyone with a brain in their head moves to 3rd party providers you guys will be free to not use your connection on an empty uncluttered network and pay through the nose to not use it. Also I'm sure he said he was wasting bandwidth to get a rise out of you pro UBB fools. Mission accomplished