netgear
Restless Native
Premium
join:1999-12-20
Arlington, TX
 ·AT&T DSL Service
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to TheGiant
Re: Users say no to AT&T
Fact is, broadband and bandwidth companies are dropping like rocks... The smart ones, will do whatever is necessary to survive. It's not good news for those who've been getting their connections for loss-leader pricing.
Here are the choices - you can pay more for services, or you can watch as your provider goes under.
This isn't "rocket science," it's simple economics. The cheap ride is coming to an end. |
|
Corddogs
join:2001-10-13
Danville, CA
| It's not the policy, it's the hypocrisy
said by netgear:
Fact is, broadband and bandwidth companies are dropping like rocks... The smart ones, will do whatever is necessary to survive. It's not good news for those who've been getting their connections for loss-leader pricing.
Here are the choices - you can pay more for services, or you can watch as your provider goes under.
This isn't "rocket science," it's simple economics. The cheap ride is coming to an end.
I agree they are in business to make a profit and I don't criticize them for that. But their public relations and news releases clearly are attempting to mislead, as others have pointed out, by pretending to talk about home networking and extending the service. They simply intend to charge more as more families trend toward 2nd and 3rd PCs and want them connected. Their AUP clearly targets these families.
The funny thing is, with Linux or Win2K or XP, you could have a single high-powered PC manage multiple sessions running on a number of smart terminals (thin clients) connected to that PC. This would not violate their AUP, and you'd simply be using the bandwidth you thought you were buying. Logically that's not much different from having multiple physical PCs with a NAT router in front, yet one is "legal" and the other isn't.
My advice to ATTBI is to be upfront -- clearly explain you intend to charge for each additional person simultaneously connected. |
|
Vesperion
join:2002-01-31
Louisville, KY
| reply to netgear
Re: Users say no to AT&T
said by netgear:
Fact is, broadband and bandwidth companies are dropping like rocks... The smart ones, will do whatever is necessary to survive. It's not good news for those who've been getting their connections for loss-leader pricing.
Here are the choices - you can pay more for services, or you can watch as your provider goes under.
This isn't "rocket science," it's simple economics. The cheap ride is coming to an end.
I disagree. the "cheap ride" will only end if we let it. @Home made good money as an ISP, they made very poor business decisions with regard to their "content business". Verizon and SBC keep shelling out fine money and they will finally get the message to play fair with the local ISPs.
Keep the faith with your local DSL ISP.
[text was edited by author 2002-01-31 02:32:01] |
|
nekote
join:2000-12-16
Hopkinton, MA
| reply to netgear
said by netgear:
Fact is, broadband and bandwidth companies are dropping like rocks... The cheap ride is coming to an end.
Sorry, don't believe it.
But I agree we are going to find out.
I think the repeated buying / re-selling / merging of regional cable monopolies at ever higher $/subscriber is the real cause. What started out as $2,000 per subscriber is now $5,000+ per subscriber. And what's new? Higher bandwidth? More pay per view channels? More corporate debt to repay for the take overs at ever higher $/subscriber?
My case has been Continental Cable; MediaOne; ATT Broadband; and now the Comcast deal is pending. What improvements have resulted for the subscribers as a result of these repeated take overs? Higher monthly fees? ;(
My guess is the best we can hope for is that the last buyer that gets caught hold the bag / no more musical chairs when this tulip bulb bubble bursts forcing them into bankruptcy leads to a serious mark down of the physical plant to no more than the real physical plant replacement cost.
--
Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all other forms of government. - Winston Churchill
[text was edited by author 2002-01-31 14:08:46] |
|
moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to netgear
said by netgear:
Fact is, broadband and bandwidth companies are dropping like rocks... The smart ones, will do whatever is necessary to survive. It's not good news for those who've been getting their connections for loss-leader pricing.
Here are the choices - you can pay more for services, or you can watch as your provider goes under.
This isn't "rocket science," it's simple economics. The cheap ride is coming to an end.
Companies are dropping because they make bad business decisions. @Home died only cause Excite drove them down. ATT is a company trying to hold onto old ways of doing business. Another reason @Home died (including some sabotage by ATT board members.)
Look at the front page of this site. Verizon and SBC get hit with more fines for not opening up their networks. Again, we are dealing with MaBell.
Fact of the matter is no company wants to compete on quality. They will continue to buy each other out until we have bigger monopolies. Why compete? Just be a local monopoly and make money with bad service because you are the only game in town.
OPEC hates a single work more than any other in the English language and doesn;t want to hear it from Americans: conservation. They raised prices and slowed production to get more money. Then Russia came in the game and now oil is all over the place and prices are falling. Competition plane and simple.
Millions of dollars a month go in. What does it all get spent on besides executive bonuses? |
|
nekote
join:2000-12-16
Hopkinton, MA
| said by moonpuppy:
ATT is a company trying to hold onto old ways of doing business.
They will continue to buy each other out until we have bigger monopolies. Why compete? Just be a local monopoly and make money with bad service because you are the only game in town.
OPEC hates a single wor[d] : conservation.
Couldn't agree more about monopoly and buy outs - sure seems to drive prices higher without increasing value to the subscriber.
As to the word "conservation" - I greatly prefer the word efficiency. Look 'em up in the dictionary - pretty similar. Yet conservation has the connotation of doing without, of saving, of deferring, while efficiency has a sexy, spend it wisely, get a better bang for the buck flavor.
6 of one, a half dozen of the other, but a world of difference in perspective / mental attitude!
This has been a "think speak" advisory. 
--
Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all other forms of government. - Winston Churchill |
|
moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| Well I disagree about the conservation/efficiency argument. Conservation is a knee jerk reaction that can take a very short time while efficiency is a thought out proccess that takes longer. When the gas crisis happened in the early 70's, it was conservation followed by efficiency with the developement and sales of smaller, fuel efficient vehicles. Again with the recent price hikes last year of petroleum products, people started to conserve by not buying that SUV or not taking that long car trip.
Still, if tomorrow Comcast or any other broadband provider said they had to raise prices 30% or more to stay alive, you would see people drop their service enough to where they made the same amount of profit. |
|
