dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
13
share rss forum feed

34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON
reply to InvalidError

Re: CNOC speed matching decision due next week

said by InvalidError:

As for the CBB R&V, I would not expect rates to go lower than 8k$/Gbps... at least not without some of the costs getting shuffled back into the per-sub access fees.

Last time I checked $8k/Gbps is much cheaper than $26k/$22k/Gbps...

InvalidError

join:2008-02-03
kudos:5

said by 34764170:

Last time I checked $8k/Gbps is much cheaper than $26k/$22k/Gbps...

Cheaper, yes. But still nowhere near as cheap as the 1-2k$/Gbps many people here are hoping for and 8k$/Gbps is near the optimistic end of my guess range.


Dones

join:2008-02-14
Toronto, ON

said by InvalidError:

said by 34764170:

Last time I checked $8k/Gbps is much cheaper than $26k/$22k/Gbps...

Cheaper, yes. But still nowhere near as cheap as the 1-2k$/Gbps many people here are hoping for and 8k$/Gbps is near the optimistic end of my guess range.

Holy shit! Makes you wonder how Google is offering 1Gb for $70. That Google fibre sounds sexy.

InvalidError

join:2008-02-03
kudos:5

said by Dones:

Holy shit! Makes you wonder how Google is offering 1Gb for $70. That Google fibre sounds sexy.

Google Fiber is 1Gbps only between the subscriber and Google's edge equipment. Beyond that, speeds vary wildly and even more so if you go beyond Google's own network.

Not quite the same provisioning burden as aggregated or dedicated links where ISPs and clients usually expect to be able to push links to full speed at any time of day for however long they need.

High speeds are much cheaper to offer when they come with minimal (if any) performance guarantees.


jmck
formerly 'shaded'

join:2010-10-02
Ottawa, ON
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·Start Communicat..
reply to Dones

while this isn't really the thread for it, Google is selling it at a loss and generally all their products at a loss too as long as it enables them to collect data off you and sell it or feed you ads.

they also are very interested in disrupting current broadband markets in the US and likely just using it as a scare tactic.



Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:23

Google is on the record as saying it's not being sold at a loss.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org



TypeS

join:2012-12-17
London, ON
kudos:1
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable

Unless they reveal all the costs associated with rolling out fiber on poles, running the into homes, installing in home, building their edge ip network, etc., it is simply just their word saying its not being sold at a loss.

And like other companies, they just reveal total profits for the company in financial reports, so those don't indicate much. Google's primary business is mining data, selling that data to advertisers and selling space to advertisers.

Look no further then Google's Android OS, they developed it and then just give it away to OEMs.

Comparing Google's fibre project in Kansas city to convential ISPs is not really is like comparing apples to oranges. I predict the Google's fibre rolling out to the masses to fizzle like Verizon's FIOS did when it first arrived in the States many, many years ago.
--
[img] »/im/103954564/64554.png [/img]



jmck
formerly 'shaded'

join:2010-10-02
Ottawa, ON
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·Start Communicat..
reply to Guspaz

said by Guspaz:

Google is on the record as saying it's not being sold at a loss.

again it's benefitting them to say it's not being sold at a loss. assuming it is then it's likely being sold at an even cost which isn't proving anything.

the big cost from fiber to the home is the installation/last mile infrastructure (not the actual bandwidth) and the install fee cannot cover that. it could be that city of KC or some other org is funding it and Google isn't counting that as their 'cost'.

InvalidError

join:2008-02-03
kudos:5

said by jmck:

again it's benefitting them to say it's not being sold at a loss. assuming it is then it's likely being sold at an even cost which isn't proving anything.

At $70/month with no speed guarantees, I think it is pretty safe to conclude that they will eventually be making a fair profit on it. Similar service in Hong Kong costs as little as $35/month and in Japan you can have it for ~$50/month in some areas.

As far as KC "funding" Google Fiber, the only conditions Google had were free access to easements and the city generally staying out of Google's way. Local incumbents did try to have GF shut down by saying free easement was an unfair advantage.