en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
 ·RoadRunner Cable
 ·DSL EXTREME
1 edit | Why provide a Rolls-Royce when a Chevrolet will do?
quote:
Qwest is on "the other side of municipally backed telecom projects" mostly because "of the long-term harm to consumers." Back in 2003, Fenn asked the question: "Why provide a Rolls-Royce when a Chevrolet will do?"
Because Qwest is charging Rolls-Royce pricing for their Chevrolet. I don't think the average user cares that its 50Mbps vs 12Mbps... they will care if they are being charged more for their 12Mbps after bundling than others pay for 50Mbps.
Lets see...
$39.95 for symmetrical 50Mbps service
or
$42.95 for 12Mbps/896kbps AFTER having to pay for voice service, bringing it past $60
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
Halo5
join:2000-07-20
Dayton, OH
clubs:  | This is pretty much the mind set of most American businesses now days it seems.
"How can we provide as little as possible and charge as much as possible"? |
|
S_engineer
join:2007-05-16
Chicago, IL
·Comcast
| said by Halo5  :This is pretty much the mind set of most American businesses now days it seems. "How can we provide as little as possible and charge as much as possible"? This is the trickle down theory....since most Telco/cablecos are doing it, theres no incentive to give the consumer anything else. This status quo also preserves future rate increases. |
|
dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
| reply to en102
said by en102 : quote:
Qwest is on "the other side of municipally backed telecom projects" mostly because "of the long-term harm to consumers." Back in 2003, Fenn asked the question: "Why provide a Rolls-Royce when a Chevrolet will do?"
Because Qwest is charging Rolls-Royce pricing for their Chevrolet. I don't think the average user cares that its 50Mbps vs 12Mbps... they will care if they are being charged more for their 12Mbps after bundling than others pay for 50Mbps. Lets see... $39.95 for symmetrical 50Mbps service or $42.95 for 12Mbps/896kbps AFTER having to pay for voice service, bringing it past $60 Don't forget the 15% PPPoE penalty you'll pay with that tired old protocol so that shiny new 12000/896 is really 10200/762 and thats assuming PERFECT SERVICE which we all know doesn't exist on qworst[qwest].
--
When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee |
|
cornelius785
join:2006-10-26
Worcester, MA | put down the crack pipe dude. the overhead is less than a percent (1492/1500*100=0.5333...). nowhere near 85%. |
|
djrobx
join:2000-05-31
Valencia, CA
 ·PHONE POWER
 ·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T CallVantage
·Time Warner VOIP
·RoadRunner Cable
1 edit | He's mostly referring to ATM overhead, not PPPoE overhead. Typical ATM+PPPoE DSL circuits have an overhead that is quite close to 85%. He got his facts a little wrong but he's hardly smoking crack. 
-- Rob
--
AT&T U-Hearse
Your funeral. Delivered.
|
|
