 |  | Biskit
join:2003-02-07
Fenton, MO
| Re: Old Story, new Technology So.....Since they run a vertical service on the line that basically cost them nothing means? They should give it to you for free, right?
"The fact that prices havent fallen is proof they are soaking there customers"
Isnt that what the article is about, falling prices? Why shouldnt investors be worried, whether it is fleecing or not, isnt profits why you invest in any company??! | |
| | | 
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
| Re: Old Story, new Technology I'm sorry, who is giving away free DSL? Investors are ALWAYS worried, no matter what a business does.
If they raised their prices investors would be worried about losing customers to competitors. If they drop the price they worry about margin.
This is nothing new. The article should be about how investors put their money in businesses they really don't understand, then freak 'cause they don't understand it.
--
Life is good without the headache of Comcrap HSI | |
| | | 
Sebastian
Premium
join:2000-12-22
New Haven, CT
| said by Biskit  :So.....Since they run a vertical service on the line that basically cost them nothing means? They should give it to you for free, right? "The fact that prices havent fallen is proof they are soaking there customers" Isnt that what the article is about, falling prices? Why shouldnt investors be worried, whether it is fleecing or not, isnt profits why you invest in any company??! on my cell phone i get caller-id, 5-way calling, callwaiting, voicemail, and many more at no extra charge.. try adding those service to your land-line. it'll cost an arm and leg.
my land line phone cost $50 a month with no long distance, and with just a caller-id.. pretty basic for $50. my cell phone however cost $60/m and i can call anywhere i feel like it for no extra charge.. time for the Bells to lower prices or everyone might switch their land-line phones for wireless..
--
BBR Gaming Server Admin.
gaming.broadbandreports.com, cstrike-planet.com | |
| | | | 
tsu9
join:2001-08-17
Wheeling, IL | Re: Old Story, new Technology Cellphones include those "standard" as a means to justify a substantially higher premium price. It isn't the only thing that does this, but it does attribute. | |
| | | | cptmiles
Premium
join:2004-04-22
Swayzee, IN | Don't forget that most of those big companies that own the landline owns that cell phone service as well. No one is clean. | |
| | | | fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| on my cell phone i get caller-id, 5-way calling, callwaiting, voicemail, and many more at no extra charge.. try adding those service to your land-line. it'll cost an arm and leg. Except for Caller ID, and Voice Mail (which is usually resold), you mentioned services that they WANT you to use. 3-way calling, call waiting, and some of these other services make you use more minutes which means more profits.
Comparing the cell phone model to landline services is not a great example.
But I agree, if I were investing in a company that was not trying to get the most $$ from each customer, I would think twice about my investment.
Also, the $14.95 service is a loss in profit. Please read the article again and pay attention to the WHOLE thing and not just what makes people happy.
Like I have said in other forums, SBD is doing this to draw custoemrs away from Cable who is on thier butts to get them as a captive audience. A captive customer is easier to migrate into higher charges.
Did anyone also notice how they stated that after the $14.95 promotion is over it reverts to the *$30.00* monthly charge? Also, SBC is not being honest on this "prmotion" as they will offer this to anyone who asks for it without argument and over the phone.
Disagree if you want, but SBC won't be running this promotion as loose as they currently are for long. I don't think cable has much to worry about with this.. it's all the balance of the business coming to play.. competition, you know? I know most of you can't see this because it's not government forcing the price drop. However, the last thing I want is either cable or telephone to go under.. because what are you left with? NO CHOICE! | |
| | Cod
join:2000-07-05
Greensboro, NC
| said by DaveNJ :The Bells havent been know for reducing prices in anything, for example when has called id ever been free from a bell, yet it costs basicly nothing to provide. The fact that prices havent fallen is proof they are soaking there customers, and the investors dont like it when your not fleecing them. haha, I love it when people try to justify that caller-id should be free. Ok, so lets put your theory to use:
-Satellite companies charge an extra 5 bucks a month per additional receiver. Is it costing them any more to provide a satellite signal to additional receivers? No. They do it because they can. Not saying I agree with it.
-Cell phone companies over charge for text messages. With each message being a measly few bytes, I seriously doubt that 10 cents per message (incoming & outgoing) is what it costs to provide this service. But by your theory, doesn't text messaging basically cost nothing to provide thus should be "free"?
You see, if you knew the architecture of the telephone system, you'd realize that there are servers & switches that do cost money to run which provide you with caller id. There are technicians who get paid to maintain these switches. Yes, caller-id could be a bit more reasonable pricewise, but to justify that it should be free is bogus. | |
| | | 
DaveNJ
No Fear
join:1999-09-01
New Jersey
 ·Comcast
·Patriot Media
 ·Cingular Wireless
| Re: Old Story, new Technology said by Cod :said by DaveNJ :You see, if you knew the architecture of the telephone system, you'd realize that there are servers & switches that do cost money to run which provide you with caller id. There are technicians who get paid to maintain these switches. Yes, caller-id could be a bit more reasonable pricewise, but to justify that it should be free is bogus. I work on phone switches everday, and all i have to do is enable a feature, a single field, thats built into the switch. It doesnt cost anything to provide it, all those features just need to be turned on. --
Liberalism weakening The USA everyday... | |
| | | | Cod
join:2000-07-05
Greensboro, NC
| Re: Old Story, new Technology said by DaveNJ :I work on phone switches everday, and all i have to do is enable a feature, a single field, thats built into the switch. It doesnt cost anything to provide it, all those features just need to be turned on.
So do I, Dave. And I assume that depending on what type of switch you work on, that Lucent/Nortel/Siemens or whomever didn't charge your company millions of dollars for that software feature in the generic release of your switch software? How about the money it costs to pay your salary to maintain that switch or the bills your company pays to power that switch... How about the costs of the SS7 network that retrieves and relays that callerid info for millions of customers? How about the costs of the database & employees who maintain and run that database? There's more to it then the "oh its just a software option that needs to be turned on" mentality. Its a feature/service that they have a right to charge for like any other company who does the same. Whether their pricing is fair or not is not for me to judge but it is ignorant to say it should be free. | |
| | | | |
DaveNJ
No Fear
join:1999-09-01
New Jersey
·Comcast
·Patriot Media
·Cingular Wireless
1 edit | Re: Old Story, new Technology said by Cod :said by DaveNJ :I work on phone switches everday, and all i have to do is enable a feature, a single field, thats built into the switch. It doesnt cost anything to provide it, all those features just need to be turned on.
So do I, Dave. And I assume that depending on what type of switch you work on, that Lucent/Nortel/Siemens or whomever didn't charge your company millions of dollars for that software feature in the generic release of your switch software? How about the money it costs to pay your salary to maintain that switch or the bills your company pays to power that switch... How about the costs of the SS7 network that retrieves and relays that callerid info for millions of customers? How about the costs of the database & employees who maintain and run that database? There's more to it then the "oh its just a software option that needs to be turned on" mentality. Its a feature/service that they have a right to charge for like any other company who does the same. Whether their pricing is fair or not is not for me to judge but it is ignorant to say it should be free. Okay answer me this then, what is the actual cost for caller-id ? I have read it costs at most 20 cents to provide a month. Plus how come companies like vonage can provide it free, is it just the cost of the copper wire, which is at least 20 yrs old. How come voip, cellular, and clecs can sell it as a free option, but because we are connect via copper its more expensive. hmmm ?
--
Liberalism weakening The USA everyday... | |
| | | | | | grumpygeek
join:2004-12-14
Houston, TX
| Re: Old Story, new Technology It really isn't relevant what it costs to provide. If you want to start your own phone company, you can give it away for free. (And you'll get a lot of customers like myself).
I think it costs you nothing to do an extra hour of work each day - I mean, really, what does it cost you? So, you should do that work for free. | |
| | | | | | | 
Fatal Vector
@aol.com
| Re: Old Story, new Technology
Just like it cost them nothing to provide touch tone service, with the switch actually set up to prefer touch tone, but they still raped you for $2-3 per month for it untill they were basically forced to stop fleecing customers for it. The telcos problem is that they have been pulling such ripoffs for so long that they cant think any other way. It doesn't cost them anything to use 20 year old lines that have long been amortized, and all the "features" are provided by computer.
I'm sure there are basic costs like power and maintenance, however, these are business expenses which they likely write off to a large extent. Why should the customers be fleeced for outrageous fees for every individual service the computer can provide? Just because "they can" doesn't make it right. They have just been getting away with it for so long generating that cash cow that they cant concieve of anything else. It's their business model. This has a lot to do with why many people are migrating to cellphones as their promary line.
However, this does not mean you are getting anything at "no extra cost" with a cellphone either You are surely paying for everything you get as part of the monthly charge, no matter if you use it or not. Why do you think your minutes are limited, with high charges for each minute above what you are allowed, billed with computer accuracy? Because many subscribers go over their alloted "anytime" minutes on a regular basis and since SBC, Verizon, etc own the major cell providers, you are getting screwed no matter what you do. It does not "cost" them $30 per subscriber, per month to provide service that is, essentially, computer driven and managed over their own private network. The only real cost is for power and for repairs/maintenance when needed. This is why the profits are so high. | |
| | | | | | | | fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| Re: Old Story, new Technology So, let's have the government take over this, run it at a break even and just remove the ability for companies to generate profits all together. Where do you get the right to say what the service is worth? You have options, take them!
Rather, what I hear is "becuse Vonage does it, I want SBC to do it too!" You are a price leach then! Support Vonage and like like if you want that price. Don't expect because Voip provider are pricing in your range that SBD has to or must. With out customers, the whole competition idea is moot as the competition will go out of business. You want OTHERS to support cheaper VOIP so you can have cheaper service. Put your money where your complaint is.
This is REALLY silly.
There are several people who with no idea how business runs. Seriously, you can easily identify yourself by not looking at simple reason being offered you by those WTIH a clue.
You have answered your own question. You want free caller ID? Go to one that provides, or "bundles" it in the cost of service. Those services also don't have thousands of miles of plant to maintain, they don't have thousands of employees, brick and mortar costs, you name it. Yes I think the cost is relative to the service.
I sugges you go to vonage or others like you said who give it away. You also get service that is WORTH the $14/$24 fee you pay. Service that has NO SLA to be available 99.99% of the time, the quality, and all the service available to you when something goes wrong.
Vonage and other services have few employees and some servers to operate - that's it! They don't even have to provide the transport, cable or telephone providers do with broadband. | |
| | | | dogo88
join:2001-09-24
Old Bridge, NJ | And would you be willing to do this for free? | |
| | | 
LinuxJunkie
join:2005-01-19
Cyberspace
| Obviously nothing is absolutely free to provide, but to charge $5 extra a month for a service that costs them about .01 cent to provide to every customer a month is a little exorbinate... it's highway robbery with a 50,000% profit margin -- and that's not an exaggeration. Same goes for text and pix messaging on cell phones. Most people don't realize how little it costs these companies on a per customer basis to provide these services, yet they'll charge 50,000% more for it. | |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
3 edits | Are they really losing money? How much is a quantity extra subscriber? Isn't the HW and support paid for whether you have 10 subs or 11? How much does it actually cost to add an 11th subscriber?
It's like an airline flight. It costs little more than the difference in fuel and a meal to put 1 more passenger on the plane cause everything else is done and costs viturally same whether there is 1 person on the flight or 400.
--
Life is good without the headache of Comcrap HSI | |
| | k_mumm
join:2001-06-14
Laramie, WY
| Re: Are they really losing money? Yeah that's called a fixed cost. Problem is adding a DSL sub does cost money.
You have to pay for the modem as SBC does not charge for this. Then you know tech support calls are going to go up when you tack on customers. Then what if a DSLAM runs out of ports and antohter has to be added. Also maybe a tech will have to condition the line. These are all examples of variable costs. | |
| | |
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
| Re: Are they really losing money? Yeah but those are still incremental costs. $15/ subs aren't the ones that pay 100% of the DSLAM costs, or tech support costs.
The question again is what does it cost to add 1 more subscriber? The cost of the modem sure. But the tech center is already manned and established. The DSLAM is already installed and the addition of another is shared by all subscribers on the DSLAM, just not the new $15/ one.
You already have the DSLAM, you already have a call center, the orders are placed electronically...and how much is a modem? How much does it cost to provision a line.
It goes back to the airline analogy. It doesn't cost that much more to fly a full plane than a 1/2 full plane. To add one more passenger doesn't cost nearly as much as the 1st passenger did.
--
Life is good without the headache of Comcrap HSI | |
| | | |
Industry_Pro
@comcast.net
 from:
fiberguy
| Re: Are they really losing money? The internet access business is cyclical in many ways. The most prominent cycle in a growth stage, like DSL is in, is a cycle of "build capacity->sell capacity until it is used->build capacity->sell capacity until used->etc" The cost of adding that "1 more subscriber" depends on where you are in the cycle. If you have just added a bunch of ports and backbone stuff, then actually NOT adding 1 more subscriber will cost you money, because you are paying for unused capacity and your margin per customer is hurt by that. IF you are at the top of the "capacity used" part of the cycle, then adding that one more customer can cost you one hell of a lot of money. They don't sell DSLAM's and OC3's and stuff in one user increments!
SO in order to add that "1 more subscriber" to a CO may cost you tens, or even hundreds of thousands of dollars, not to mention that now you have a ton of unused ports and capacity laying around and you are going to have to shell out megabucks for the advertising/marketing and the labor and cost of setting up however many thousand customers you need to add to (maybe someday, hopefully?) pay for the gear you added because you were out of ports and had to add "1 more subscriber."
I know this doesn't happen to the bells but there have been several times in the last 10 years when we completely stopped adding people for a while, actually telling interested prospects that we aren't selling new accounts right now, just to avoid adding "1 more subscriber" - because that puts you right in a cash flow hole. The way SBC is doing it, they just keep digging that hole deeper and deeper and deeper. They think that they can get Wall Street to finance their upside down business, and they may be right since they have a monopoly on the telephone network again and those Wall Street guys LOVE a monopoly.
- IP | |
| | | fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| ... and let's not forget the money it costs to acquire the customer too. That cost is the advertisemnet spent over the net gain of customers divided by the profit generated to break even.
There are SOOOOOO much in cost and overhead that non-business savvy people consider when coming up with how much it costs for a service.
That .01 cent cost to deliver the $5.00 service? Part of that pays the power bills, rent, insurance, taxes, advertisement, vehicle feets, repairs, law suits (justified or not, you have to defend yourself when called to court) support contracts, travel expenses, training, you name it.. this is why companies look for low cost to provide services and slap a fee on them.
Again, we only care what we pay. | |
| 
Camelot One
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-21
Sarasota, FL
clubs:
 ·VoicePulse
| They'll still turn a profit on it Since SBC has no real plans to offer Naked DSL, they could easily market their DSL service for $5 a month and still turn a nice profit by jacking up the POTS costs. Which I'm sure they will. It's all about hitting customers with hidden costs anyway.
--
AMD A64 3200+/ MSI K8N Neo/ 2x 512Mb Kingston HyperX PC4000/ WD 74Gb Raptor/ Gainward GF4 4600/Gainward 5200PCI/ Antec 550 True Control/Custom water cooler | |
| | fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| Re: They'll still turn a profit on it said by Camelot One :Since SBC has no real plans to offer Naked DSL, they could easily market their DSL service for $5 a month and still turn a nice profit by jacking up the POTS costs. Which I'm sure they will. It's all about hitting customers with hidden costs anyway. You can't just "jack up the POTS cost" wihtout getting permission from the PUC or regulatory body. Telco must ask permission to raise rates AND justify them. | |
| | |
Camelot One
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-21
Sarasota, FL
clubs:
·VoicePulse
| Re: They'll still turn a profit on it Telco must ask permission to raise the cost of dial tone, not to raise the cost of call waiting, caller ID, Tone Dialing, (still an extra feature here) or anything else most people use.
--
AMD A64 3200+/ MSI K8N Neo/ 2x 512Mb Kingston HyperX PC4000/ WD 74Gb Raptor/ Gainward GF4 4600/Gainward 5200PCI/ Antec 550 True Control/Custom water cooler | |
| 
sweintz
Premium
join:2002-03-01
Hamden, CT
| Telecom Investors... Telecom Investors need to get their heads out of their @sses.
If they want the company to be competitive at all, in any way, shape, or form in the long run, and wind up with stock that is still worth something 10 years from now, then they need to bite the bullet and accept the fact that, for the time being, ANY telecom that is forward thinking should be posting NET LOSSES. Big ones. Unless they have a HUGE war chest that they can raid.
Right now technology is changing. Any telecom company that wants to remain in business in the future needs to be dumping mega amounts of money to migrate their infrastructure away from circuit switched technologies, retrain all their staff, and start deploying a packet switched infrastructure. They need to bite the bullet and start deploying fiber direct to all their customers. Not just to the curb, but fiber to the premises.
That is where the future lies. Any telecom company unwilling to accept it has a dim future. | |
| | 
zoebisch01
join:2003-11-10
Julian, PA
| Re: Telecom Investors... I can agree with that. Either they have realized it and are just riding it out for whatever they can still get, or they have very bad analysts! I always thought a good approach would just be to cut your prices and keep your customers rather than see them migrate. Kind of reminds me of the movie theater, if they would just lower the price on popcorn and soda a bit sales would most likely increase to the point of outperforming higher prices to begin with. The reason I think is simple, people know they are getting taken for a ride and do not like it. Same thing with copper, I mean in all honesty when was the last time you saw the copper lines swapped out (ie...they are more than bought and payed for)? | |
| | | 
Aggie Dan
Stop... Reverse That.
Premium
join:2001-01-30
Frisco, TX
clubs:
| Re: Telecom Investors... Maybe they are paid for in your area, but what about the copper lines running out to more rural houses? These are places where you've got lower income families with less disposable income to spend on extra phone features or long distance.
Their lines are not bought and paid for. Or rather they were bought and paid for but there is not going to be a positive return on the investment ever.
--
Note : The statements made by myself are my own and not the opinions of my employer or of my coworkers. 15.81 GHz Crunching Power | The Ryan Foundation for MPS Children | |
| | | | fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| Re: Telecom Investors... To this, I guess you aren't familiar with Universal Lifeline service - and yes, they are paid for by you and I who pay that little fee each month to cover thier costs. Also, you will find that alot of low income people generally buy more than they can afford in phone and cable.
So, don't discount the low income population. They often spend money in misguided areas. We are a nation where even the poor people have on average 2 televisions, a DVD player, video game console, Microwave oven, and OTHER luxuris that a "poor" person by definition would not normally have. Therfore, our large class of poor people still spend money in this area. There is a study out on what low income people spend their money on.. It made big headlines just a few months back. You may want to look for it on google. | |
| | 
wwdubbia
join:2002-06-03
Clinton, NY
| said by sweintz :Telecom Investors need to get their heads out of their @sses. If they want the company to be competitive at all, in any way, shape, or form in the long run, and wind up with stock that is still worth something 10 years from now, then they need to bite the bullet and accept the fact that, for the time being, ANY telecom that is forward thinking should be posting NET LOSSES. Big ones. Unless they have a HUGE war chest that they can raid. Right now technology is changing. Any telecom company that wants to remain in business in the future needs to be dumping mega amounts of money to migrate their infrastructure away from circuit switched technologies, retrain all their staff, and start deploying a packet switched infrastructure. They need to bite the bullet and start deploying fiber direct to all their customers. Not just to the curb, but fiber to the premises. That is where the future lies. Any telecom company unwilling to accept it has a dim future. Haven't you heard of Fios?
And there aren't too many companies who can afford to post six or seven figure losses repeatedly and A. expect be a viable investment, B. pay their employees' salaries let alone pay for training, and C. provide adequate customer support. All of those things require significant cashflow.
The reason why you see so much convergence in the industry today is because people overextended themselves in terms of infrastructure and could never recoup the costs. Build the network, get a few subscribers, sell out... that was the formula for many early telcos/ISP's, etc. and largely it did more harm than good in terms of prices and service to the end user. Profits = good service = happy you and me. Debts = poor service = mulitple migrations between providers = headache.
--
vertiblog.com | |
| | |
Fatal vector
@aol.com | Re: Telecom Investors...
Like the Bells dont have "signifigant cash flow". | |
| 
dslwanter
Why would I want DSL? I have FTTH
Premium
join:2002-12-16
Lowellville, OH
·Armstrong Zoom In..
 ·AT&T Midwest
1 edit | Losing money? You figure this, just about 4 years ago DSL was going for $45-50 a month for basic service. You make that up if you get 3 or 4 new subscribers on the $15 plan. Also keep in mind how many more people are able to get DSL now compared to just a few years ago. I can't tell you how many people have switched from Cable to DSL for the price as well and plus these people are locked into 1 year contracts. I think SBC made a wise choice and they are ahead of the game.
Just my $0.02 either you agree or don't.
--
"and he will raise you up, on eagles wings, there you are the breath of dawn, make you to shine like the sun, and hold you in the palm, of his hands" | |
| |
See 7 replies to this post | |
ib50MbSoon
Formerly TwoKDialup
Premium
join:2002-06-07
Coloma, MI | DSL is a flawed technology... The problem is they can't deliver the faster speeds (like Comcast) so they have to chop the price. I'm 2.2 miles from SBC's central office and can't even get DSL. Hell, I cant even get 56k dialup.
Comcast is kicking SBC's butt! | |
| |
See 6 replies to this post | |
| | | | | 
djtim21
It's all good
Premium
join:2003-12-22
Buffalo Grove, IL
clubs:
| Re: $30? Where did that number come from? said by wifi4milez :This is basically a scam, and here's why: 1) $15 per month, but only if you sign a contract for a minimum of 1 year. 2) The DSL goes up to $30 a month after 12 months, and you need to re-sign to get that rate. 3) You need to pay for the phone line that the DSL runs on, costing you and additional $15 to $40 per month. Thus your "actual" cost is somewhere in the neighborhood of $30 to $55 for a really slow internet connection, AND you are locked into a contract. Well, Lets compare Comcast to SBC's deal:
This is only for the suburbs of Chicago
You must have some type of basic service either for cable or DSL. Cable's basic service is 40 dollars give or take. Basic dial tone is around 15 dollars a month.
I think Comcast still has the 19.99 a month for 3 or 4 months - then it goes to 49.99 + other fees. so it ends up around 50 to 60 bucks a month.
SBC as the 14.99 deal, and that's just for the basic package. There are other deals.
so let's total now:
Cable - 40 for basic, and 19.99 for 3 or 4 months: around 60.
DSL - 15 for dial tone and 14.99 for 1 year: around 30 dollars.
I guess SBC has the better deal all around for no frills connection.
Please prove me wrong. And don't forget this is for the Chicago suburbs market. I'm sure there are deals in other markets.
--
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” - Edmund Burke | |
| | | | fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| Re: $30? Where did that number come from? Please prove me wrong. And don't forget this is for the Chicago suburbs market. I'm sure there are deals in other markets.
Ok, I will take you up on that offer.
Based on YOUR numbers in the Chicago Comcast market, you couldn't be any more wrong on alot of your facts:
1) Comcast does NOT require the purcahse of basic service.
2) The current Comcast offer is $19.99 for 6 months with cable and $34.99 without cable.
3) Basic cable is not $40.00, rather, $23.99 and $46.49 for Standard Full basic.
4) Comcast full price cable HSI is $42.99 after 6 months plus cable modem rental if you rent, NOT $49.99 as you stated.
Let's total Comacst 4000/384....
CHSI Promo with cable: 23.99 + 19.99* = $43.98 + $4.50 tax
CHSI Promo W/O cable : 34.99* + about $2.25 tax
Neither hold a contract.
SBC Services... in Chicago...
Basic Telephone in Chicago is $12.05 - $18.50 depending on which area you live.
Express pro 1 Year contract: $14.95 + $15.03 (middle price) + DSL global service fee $3.50, Fed Acess 3.50, other taxes about + 2.50 = $39.48 and that's WITHOUT long distance. Just a basic plan for long distance these days on an ala cart line is about $9.00 with all taxes.
If you do not renew your contract, the monthly fee for the DSL is $49.95 a month. That's a $30 jump. One big downer? If you don't like the quality of service, too bad. You are in a 1 year contract. Even funnier? The termination fee is actually MORE ($200.00) than 1 years worth of basic service fees ($179.40). So, who got who where again?
DSL has alot of hidden baggage. But, again, it has it's place and for some? It's JUST fine.. for others? Cable is fine. This is what choice is all about today. Competition IS working.
*not counting equipment.
My facts were pulled from both SBC.com and Comcast.com as of 6/6/05 | |
| jdir
join:2001-05-04
Santa Clara, CA
| DSL is a small picture SBC is trying to save the home land line by offering DSL. Almost everyone I know drop their land line and subscribe to cell phone. Why having a cell phone and a regular land line?
SBC regular land line = cash cow, and they need that cash cow. | |
| | tiamold8
join:2004-07-21
Tucson, AZ
| Re: DSL is a small picture SBC has joint venture in Cingular with Bellsouth. They need to allow us to use Cingular as a replacement to the landline, while still offering the DSL for cheaper.
Same thing with Verizon. If they let me bundle my DSL with my Verizon Wireless service, and not have a landline, it would be nice. I have no use for a landline. | |
| | | | fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| Re: Organized Crime Syndicate... but who here supports any business detroying the competition anyway?  Sure, you get a cheaper price, but when the competition is no more? Then what? Prices will rocket like a mutha! | |
| 
lt_wentoncha
Red6
join:2002-05-12
000000
|  So, who wants to pay $30
For the detractors, you've rationalized that it is a bad business decision. But if you could volunteer and pay the $15 while everyone else didn't have to, would you? | |
| | 
footballdude
join:2002-08-13
Imperial, MO
| Re: So, who wants to pay $30 said by lt_wentoncha :Wow, I was expecting a lot more people to lambaste the investors Count me in. SBCs stock hasn't gone up in five years. Who cares what the whiney investors think? | |
| 
tomkb
Premium
join:2000-11-15
Avon, OH
clubs: | Not to mention that it puts aol in a bad spot. How they can compete at $23/month is beyond me. | |
|
wow1966
@172.24.x.x
| SBC not worth it . I was actually considering giving DSL a try,especially with the 14.95/mo. deal right now.
So first, I called the current accounts line and asked,what the monthly charges will be after the year promo is over.
The sales gal said,$39.99 THEREAFTER.
Then I called new accounts and asked them a,what the monthly charges would be after the year was up. He replied, anywhere between 14.95 and 19.95. He said he couldn't see why SBC would raise the rates that much and make alot of customers mad. I said, its called fishing. Their just using 14.95 bait. I asked him to send me a written gaurantee that it would not be more than 19.95 after the first year was up. He couldn't give me a gaurantee.
My reply was,so you hook people like a fish with the 14.95 deal for a year, then you raise the charges over double?
I asked if there was a trial period. She replied, No.
I asked her if there was a early termination fee. She replied,Yes.
I asked her,what if I move and DSL is not offered at my new address?
She replied,you will still be responsible for the full year charges, even if you can't use service.
I asked her,do I have to be a SBC land line customer to use SBC DSL? She replied, Yes.
Well folks, all in all:
1.Comcast is offering first 3 months at $19.99.
2.$42.95 thereafter w/your own modem.
3.You don't have to be a TV customer to get braodband.
4.No year contract.
5.No termination fee.
6.Fastest connections,
4.2-5.8Mps.depending on time of day.
7.You don't have to change your land line provider.
8.If you move your much more likely able to use Broadband
anywhere cable is.
Probably many more reasons why comcast is better but, you get the picture.
| |
| | computerman2
Premium
join:2002-04-20
Rockwood, MI
·AT&T Midwest
·WOW Internet and C..
| Re: SBC not worth it . I'm perfectly happy with SBC DSL internet, I had a choose of Comcast, or SBC when I moved here, and so far dsl seems alot better, especially with price point, and also bundled sbc landline and dish network service, 4 tvs with satellite on them, and dvr supplying 2 tv's, all for one price, and one bill. But if DSL price ever goes too high or dish network, we may consider Comcast again possibly. | |
| gvinson
join:2001-12-03
Houston, TX
| Now it starts Hi it is my 3rd year with sbc/yahoo dsl.I started at $29.95,2nd year 26.95 this year back to 29.95,but higher speed.They say 4000 but you only get 2400 on a good day.Still all in all not bad.Like everthing on the internet before u play u have to click I agree.Well before u agree there is one little sentence that say's other charges apply but they never say how much.So u can play are not.O by the way if u think caller id is to much how about unlisted number at $4.95 a month | |
| 
Nogard is me
Premium
join:2004-01-08
Columbus, OH | Can't sign up online I was going to take advange of this deal but I can't sign up online. I call Costumer service but I'm onhold forever. It does look like a good deal. Anyone know how long this deal will last for? | |
| | | |
|
|
Inside SBC's $15 DSL Deal
·
Investvors Not Amused huh?
:D