Rick
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-06
Waterbury, CT
clubs: 
| One thing I just don't get is why.....
the telco's are SO insistent on requiring that people ALSO subscribe to their phone service as well in order to get HSI.
Clearly, the previous industry explanation that you NEED it, is a lie and I think what they're really winding up doing is shooting themselves in the foot.
They are losing and will continue to lose phone customers anyway to both VOIP and cell phone users. But what they're also doing in the process is alienating people who WOULD consider and use them for their DSL services.
DSL, with its distance limitations and contracts is a hassle anyway to start with but now with their lower introductory pricing and higher speeds, it is something to consider versus the cable options that people out there have. I'm very close to my CO and with AT&T's new 6MB service, it's something I would clearly be looking at versus even my cable connection which at 4500k, would be slower and more expensive.
But yet, the telcos in their infinate wisdom have insisted that if I want DSL, then I should have to subscribe to their phone service too. I don't want their phone service and have no need for it. I do just fine now with my cell phone(s) and have no intention of going back to a landline.
But, instead of recognizing with this LOSS of phone business that there are probably now a LOT of people out there like me that they CAN capitalize on with a la carte DSL, they remain committed to bundling these two things.
My cable company charges no difference in price for cable tv vs non cable TV customers who want HSI.
Most do, but even at that the point is, they OFFER it even if you don't want cable.
But the Telco's? Except in maybe VERY limited circumstances..it's do or die for them.
Take it all, or take nothing is their motto I guess.
Well, as they bleed away hundreds of thousands of phone customers, I guess many are choosing to take nothing from them.
And that's a sad way to run their business.
--
The life you help save just might be your own Team Discovery |
|
garagerock
Premium
join:2002-06-14
Louisville, KY
| Indeed, and this is the very reason I ditched it all together in favor of cable/VOIP. that and a much lower monthly price, which was really nice. I did this at first to lower my costs, and fell in love with the services I got to replace DSL.
Funny how that worked out-less expensive, yet better. |
|
Primis1
join:2005-06-13
Coldwater, MI
| reply to Rick
What you said is all nice if you ignore all the cableco's that require at *least* Basic Video to get HSD service (which you tried to gloss over). At that point your entire argument just falls apart into a fanboy rant.
You also have forgotten to take into account that they may be losing landline customers, but that doesn't mean they're losing them to cable VOIP. You (and the article both) leap to the assumption that every single one of those losses is to VOIP.
However, they're just losing them to a wireless service that's maybe under the same roof, in most cases. Most people that ditch a landline don't get VOIP instead -- they go to cellphone-only, which of course has nothing to do with the cableco's. I know a LOT of people that ditched the landline and went to cellphone-only. I know exactly only one party that ditched and went VOIP. |
|
pb5k
more cowbell
Premium
join:2005-11-16
Glendale, AZ
 ·Cox HSI
| reply to Rick
I agree. Verizon has caught on to this in my area at least and offers naked DSL. On the downside there's a $5 penalty fee for those people who don't want their antiquated telegraph service. The cable co has its own caveats that you have to be on the lookout for as well. Buyer beware, indeed. |
|
djrobx
join:2000-05-31
Valencia, CA
 ·PHONE POWER
 ·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T CallVantage
·Time Warner VOIP
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to Rick
quote:
the telco's are SO insistent on requiring that people ALSO subscribe to their phone service as well in order to get HSI.
That's not going to last long. SBC is required to offer naked DSL soon as a condition of the AT&T merger. Verizon is also required to offer it due to the MCI merger. The real question is, how much of a premium are they going to charge for the privilege of not having POTS? Comcast, for example, charges $15 more per month and gives you lower speeds if you don't have cable service with them. Who's to say SBC and Verizon won't pull the same tactic?
--
\\ROB - a part of the SCB local network |
|
Pathfinder
Dazed Confused
Premium
join:2000-03-26
Mount Vernon, NY | Verizon offers naked DSL now. It has a $5 premium. |
|
TheGhost
Premium
join:2003-01-03
Lake Forest, IL
clubs:
·AT&T U-Verse
·Comcast
| I checked about 1/2 yr ago here and premium for Comcast HSI here in NE Illinois for non-TV subscribers was equal to cost of getting basic service (~$17).
Telco requires you to have line as a premium, while Cable will sell you service w/o, but charge you the same. |
|
Rick
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-06
Waterbury, CT
clubs:
1 edit | reply to Primis1
said by Primis1  :What you said is all nice if you ignore all the cableco's that require at *least* Basic Video to get HSD service (which you tried to gloss over). At that point your entire argument just falls apart into a fanboy rant. You also have forgotten to take into account that they may be losing landline customers, but that doesn't mean they're losing them to cable VOIP. You (and the article both) leap to the assumption that every single one of those losses is to VOIP. Apparently you didn't spend much time reading my post.
I clearly stated that the telcos were losing landlines to both VOIP and CELL users and in fact stated that cell use was my reason for not having a landline.
In addition..I didn't ignore anything regarding the cable co's and stated that the negative about them is that most of them charge a premium if you don't subscribe to their cable TV service.
As far as your presumption though that they REQUIRE customers to have cable tv service, I don't think that's correct, for the majority of them anyway.
What they do instead is to require customers to pay more for the HSI instead.
Which once again, really boils down to my point.
That's not an option with most, if not all telcos.
You HAVE to have the landline to get the DSL.
And that I have the problem with. |
|
