 
inteller
Sociopaths always win.
join:2003-12-08
Tulsa, OK | welcome to the "consessions" feel the might of the all powerful death star!
oh and happy new year from ATT. | |
|
 | 
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | Re: welcome to the "consessions" Lets see...
DSL (with POTS) = $39
DSL (w/o POTS) = $45
Comcast (when it was here) was
HSI (with TV) = $ 44.95 (+ modem rental)
HSI (without TV) = $ 56.95 (+ modem rental)
How is this much different ? | |
|
| | 
kyramilan
join:2006-11-26
Pensacola, FL
| Re: welcome to the "consessions" Perhaps the phone line was subsidizing the DSL line???
That is cable's argument for charging more. Also, if you have a receiver, it used to be a lot of people got just HSI and full cable too.
$10 more than regular bundle pricing is fair.
Having that basic POTS line is pretty smart during times when everything else fails during major storms, etc.  | |
|
| | | 
ITZME
@sbcglobal.net
| Re: welcome to the "consessions" READ the Chicago Tribune article more closely. The customer DOES have a POTS - from a re-seller of AT&T and appears to be happy with the service from the re-seller. But AT&T does not allow the re-seller to sell the DSL service. Therefore, if the customer wants DSL service, he is left with 2 choices: 1) Pay for a phone line that he does not want, need or use; 2) Abandon the POTS re-seller, one of a number of companies enticed into the telecom business by Ameritech/ SBC when it was trying to prove it had "competition" in the local phone service business and should, therefore, be permitted to sell long distance service. Immediately upon approval for long distance, Ameritech/ SBC began "wooing" back their old customers with methods like the one the customer describes. And even if the customer wanted to "gamble" and go without a POTS, shouldn't freedom of choice provide him the opportunity. They call that "competition". And this whole thing has nothing to do with "true costs" or with one service subsidizing another. This has to do with the fact that AT&T was a monopoly prior to the mid-80's and is doing everything they can to attain that status again - at least for wired services. And the FCC appears to be assisting them in the process. On behalf of all the current AT&T customers, I’d like to welcome the Bell South customers to this world of “competition”. | |
|
| | fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| Glad to see people finally accusing phone of penalizing vs. discounting which cable has been doing.
And besides, no matter the price of DSL or Cable Modem service... considering Dial up was pushing close to $24.99 a month for a single computer on line, why would ANYONE complain at ANY broadband service for multiple computer for under $59 a month considering all you can do with this broadband over DSL.
Either way..
If anyone is familiar with making deals with the devil, this is very much one of them. The FCC said "offer naked DSL"... as like the devil would say "we did, but you didn't say it had to be cheap"... Ask the devil to be rich, who's to say he doesn't make you a drug load in South America who's always under assassination attacks.
The brain children who make up the body of our government still haven't gotten it that you have to spell out every detail, because the lack of detail usually equals a loophole.
--
"Wipe out the national deficit over night... Tax the stupid!" - about 50 gMail invites available. PM if you'd like one. | |
|
| | |
kyramilan
join:2006-11-26
Pensacola, FL
| Re: welcome to the "consessions" said by fiberguy  :Glad to see people finally accusing phone of penalizing vs. discounting which cable has been doing. And besides, no matter the price of DSL or Cable Modem service... considering Dial up was pushing close to $24.99 a month for a single computer on line, why would ANYONE complain at ANY broadband service for multiple computer for under $59 a month considering all you can do with this broadband over DSL. With dial-up, you have to have a phone line. So that dial-up requires a $25 POTS line. With some ISPs, you could come close to the $40-50 range just with dial-up. | |
|
| | | | 
Fox McCloud
Crazy like a fox.
join:2006-07-23
 ·Embarq
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| Re: welcome to the "consessions" yeah, this is the truth, sadly...
I pay $32 a month for my POTS line (that's after taxes/charges/etc) and $15 a month for my ISP....I'd go with a cheaper $5-$10 ISP, but I know that my current one has been extremely reliable.
Thus, I pay $47 a month for dial-up....I almost NEVER use my POTS line for phone calls. v_v; | |
|
| | | grandpinaple
join:2006-01-03
New York, NY | You've been watching Bedazzled too much. | |
|
| | | | fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20 | Re: welcome to the "consessions" Well, that's just one of them.  Good movie though. | |
|
| | jhcody35
join:2005-01-10
North Haven, CT | Agree!! Stop crying about it and just keep a land line if it's cheaper. Cable is the same way. I tend to believe people want something for nothing. | |
|
|
ideas1
@bellsouth.net
| I've had Bellsouth DSL for a long time. It's decent service, but I do believe it is overpriced. Fiberguy makes the point that no one is required to buy it, and of course that is true. Free market, yada, yada.
But that's not really the issue. Companies like Bellsouth have a virtual monopoly on telephone service and, therefore, DSL service. If I had twelve choices for high speed internet, sure, each company could charge whatever it wishes and they could slug it out for my business. If I had two or three choices, I'd feel the same way. But the reality is, if you want a landline in my area, you've got no where to turn but Ma Bell.
It is Bellsouth's dominance of the market that gives rise to regulation. Though it may be a private company, Bellsouth serves the function of a public utility. In exchange for a monopoly on tens of millions of users, Bellsouth should be able to offer its services at a pretty competitive price.
The word monopoly is especially relevant since the recent AT&T / BS merger has taken us a long way back toward the bad old days of the AT&T monopoly. Not that I think AT&T will ever be as powerful as it once was. The world has changed and there are a lot of options that didn't exist 30 years ago. Still, if AT&T does not achieve market domination it won't be because it didn't try.
Since Bellsouth is charging above average prices for its DSL service (compared to other carriers in other parts of the country), I think it's pretty apparent that some concession to the consumer is not unreasonable. That's what the FCC tried to do with the naked DSL deal, but since private industry is usually smarter than government regulators, I expect BS will find a way to avoid losing any substantial revenue on the naked DSL deal. They will make it so hard to get that the vast majority of people will never even know it exists, or so hard to qualify for that those of us who are watching will be out of luck. | |
|
|
| 
Michieru2
zzz zzz zzz
Premium
join:2005-01-28
Miami, FL | Re: Under AT&T/BellSouth merger this ends, right? The merger is between AT&T & Bellsouth so if I am not mistaken it would only apply in Bellsouth territories not in others. | |
|
| | 
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
3 edits | Re: Under AT&T/BellSouth merger this ends, right? said by Michieru2 :The merger is between AT&T & Bellsouth so if I am not mistaken it would only apply in Bellsouth territories not in others. The FCC order APPEARS to apply to both AT&T and Bell South territory according to this paragraph:
»hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/a···75A1.pdf
3. Within twelve months of the Merger Closing Date, AT&T/BellSouth will make available in its in-region territory an ADSL service capable of speeds up to 768 Kbps to ADSL-capable customers without requiring customers such to also purchase circuit switched voice grade telephone service ("Stand Alone 768 Kbps service").
AT&T/BellSouth will continue to offer the 768 Kbps service in a state for thirty months after the "Stand Alone 768 Kbps Implementation Date" for that state.
For purposes of this commitment, the "Stand Alone 768 Kbps Implementation Date" for a state shall be the date on which AT&T/BellSouth can offer the Stand Alone 768 Kbps service to eighty percent of the ADSL-capable premises in AT&TBellSouth's in-region territory in that state. The stand Alone 768 Kbps service will be offered at a rate of not more than $19.95 per month (exclusive of regulatory fees and taxes). --
--
My BLOG
My Web Page | |
|
| | | 
ropeguru
Premium
join:2001-01-25
Bridgeport, WV
clubs: | Re: Under AT&T/BellSouth merger this ends, right? Up to 768k?? That is NOOOOO concession. If they had said "every speed package", then that would be a concession.
--
FWD#: 223611 | |
|
| | | fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| The fact that the FCC required a maximum of 768 tier, that again shows a failure of the FCC to protect the consumer. I can't wait for American Thieves & Thugs to come back and tell the consumer that it's a technical reason why only 768 can be offered naked. Of course, they will have a hard time with that as Qwest has been doing it for years now, WITHOUT the FCC making them.
The fact that a speed was mentioned AT-ALL in the deal means that someone was in the pocket of the phone company as well.
This is the time where at&t sits on their hands, shuts the F up and accepts the terms of the deal ... either take it, or leave it.
--
"Wipe out the national deficit over night... Tax the stupid!" - about 50 gMail invites available. PM if you'd like one. | |
|
| | | | 
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·AT&T Yahoo
·AT&T DSL Service
·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southwest
| Re: Under AT&T/BellSouth merger this ends, right? It's also disappointing that they only have to offer it for 30 months. I mean wtf? This is a concession? BS!
So, you'll be able to get naked DSL, at the same price as it would cost now, or very close to it, for bundled service... BUT it will max out at 768 down and will only be for 30 months tops.
Great deal.... NOT....
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!) | |
|
| Enlightener
join:2006-01-28
Cedar Park, TX | RTFA. They mention this. | |
|
|
imeanseriously
@sbcglobal.net | I hardly think that $20 bucks for 768kb connection is a fair price, when you were able to get 1.5mb for just $14 bucks a while ago.
That's not a concession, it's a joke. | |
|
tmc8080
join:2004-04-24
Floral Park, NY | cablemodem time couldn't you just get an unbundled cablemodem for that price? | |
|
| 
Corona
It's cool, I'm takin it back
Premium
join:2000-03-14
Aubrey, TX | Re: cablemodem time Most cable companies also charge more for cable internet without cable TV service.
--
-Corona | |
|
| | tyscoj
join:2002-06-17
Fort Pierce, FL | Re: cablemodem time Yes, but most cable companies only charge a $5 fee or so, they dont make you pay the same price for having both services, and then the fee on top of that. | |
|
| | | 
Mactron
el camino Real
Premium
join:2001-12-16
CM94sv
| Re: cablemodem time said by tyscoj :Yes, but most cable companies only charge a $5 fee or so, they dont make you pay the same price for having both services, and then the fee on top of that. Comca$t charges $15 more a MO. here and only 4M DL available on top of that. 
--
If only the Verizon CSRs worked this well. | |
|
| | | | fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| Re: cablemodem time Stop lying. and stop trying to churn old crap. The price for HSI from Comcast is $57.95.. get it? there is a bundle discount. Stop spewing garbage to make it sound worse and in your favor for this argument.
I really don't give a crap what the walking wounded socialists on this site think about this. Bending what-is to make it sound better in your own favor is really old.
--
"Wipe out the national deficit over night... Tax the stupid!" - about 50 gMail invites available. PM if you'd like one. | |
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
1 edit | Re: cablemodem time Over paying? I guess since I can afford it, and live in reality, I am doing fine. If you want a reality check, I urge you to read Rick's post below. Maybe that will help people like you into reality once again.
Maybe you can start, too, by explaining where anyone is "over paying" for anything. I'll give you a hint, who are you to dictate what the price will be?
Considering that I used to pay $20 for a dial tone, $22.00 for dial up for 56k and for one computer only, I personally see that even the $79.00 I paid in 1998 was a bargain. So, when I hear about people bitching about paying $39.99 a month for 8mb broadband service, I have to take a quick laugh and then throw it in their general direction at how utterly ridiculous they are over the whole thing.
--
"Wipe out the national deficit over night... Tax the stupid!" - about 50 gMail invites available. PM if you'd like one. | |
|
| | | | | | 
Wild Goose
join:2006-12-03
| Mactron, as we say in Usenet, don't feed the trolls. fiberguy is either rich, or is pretending to be, and is going out of his way to put down the rest of us. My intuition says he doesn't even believe the crap he's spewing, he just loves to get a good flame war going (sort of the equivalent of the guy who starts a bar fight by throwing the first punch, then ducking and running). 
Other possibilities are that he really is rich and obnoxious (in which case his karma will catch up with him sooner or later) or he is a shill for the phone companies, perhaps working for one of their public relations firms or astroturf groups. In any case, he's definitely in the minority on this board, which probably explains why he feels the need to put his views across in such an aggravating manner.
There are guys in the world who feel the need to flaunt their wealth, and then there are a lot more guys who just like to give the appearance of being wealthy when they are really in hock up to their eyeballs. Neither is a path to making them likable individuals. | |
|
| | | | | | | fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
2 edits | Re: cablemodem time have another scooby snack there bub.
If anyone here is the troll, it's you with your last post. | |
|
| | | | | | |
| | | manfrommars2
Premium
join:2003-04-05
White Pigeon, MI
2 edits | Comcast is charging $15 for not having TV service. In my area anyway.
Edit: Mactron beat me to the punch.
2nd Edit: Sorry, the way Comcast puts it, you don't get a $15 price reduction on HSI if you don't have TV service. | |
|
| | | | 
The Beer
I Love It When A Plan Comes Together
Premium
join:2001-07-24
Omaha, NE
clubs: | Re: cablemodem time Cox ups the ante $10 for failure to have cable however has a $15/mo cable package that waives the $10 upchagrge | |
|
| | | | |
See 9 replies to this post |
|
| | Enlightener
join:2006-01-28
Cedar Park, TX | Corona-
That's not the problem. The probem would be comparable to charging more for internet then internet and cable. There is nothing wrong for charging a little more for internet only as long as it's still less then internet and cable. | |
|
| | 
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| said by Corona :Most cable companies also charge more for cable internet without cable TV service. Yes, but cable internet without cable doesn't cost MORE than if you had cable AND internet. Which is the problem with this naked DSL stuff. For example for 3 Mbps with Charter without cable it's $52 a month with cable it's $42 but add in cable TV and you're talking another $50 so that's over $90 to have cable and internet. Obviously if you have a dish then it's cheaper just to pay the extra $10.
So if AT&T wants to charge more for those that don't bundle I understand that almost of companies do that. Making that service HIGHER than having 2 or more services is crazy. I really don't get it. If you aren't going to use the phone anyways why bother forcing customers to have it? AT&T doesn't make more money they make less if people decide to say "screw it" to the naked DSL and just get a phoneline they'll never use.
Does at&t think that those people will stop using their VoIP or cell phones which have unlimited long distance and all of sudden use at&t's long distance just because they have a phoneline connected to their house? They must and they must also be very stupid to think such a way. | |
|
| | | alexintexas
join:2003-01-11
San Antonio, TX
clubs:
·AT&T Yahoo
·RoadRunner Cable
 ·Time Warner VOIP
| Re: cablemodem time AT&T doesn't make more money they make less if people decide to say "screw it" to the naked DSL and just get a phone line they'll never use.
mmmm, i think you got that wrong,,,ATT makes pure profit on pots,,,they loose a ton on cheap DSL pricing,,but then they offer cheap DSL to bring in the real money maker, which is POTS service, with added long distance pay per month plans, on top of the cid, cwid, etc.
which costs them maybe .10 cents a month to provide its customers per month, with the avg bill of $37.00 a month they charge for POTS from ATT, now that is profit.
DSL they loose money on every customer, a customer needs to stay on DSL for a min. of 2 years before they recoupe there loses. | |
|
| | 
n2jtx
join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY
·Optimum Online
| said by Corona :Most cable companies also charge more for cable internet without cable TV service. Sure do. I pay Cablevision $5 more a month for OOL without TV service. $6 does not sound terribly unreasonable for naked DSL. It is still cheaper than getting the phone service + DSL.
--
I support the right to keep and arm bears. | |
|
| | pabster
join:2001-12-09
Waterloo, IA
·Mediacom
| That is true. Mine charges $10 extra if you don't subscribe to any other services (like digital cable).
However, DSL takes this to an extreme. They always try to force POTS service on you as well. Around here that would cost an extra $45 (!) on top of the DSL fees.
Ah well. Looks like all that lobbying has paid off for Ma Bell. | |
|
Rick
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-06
Waterbury, CT
clubs:
| While we all might bit** and gripe over what our service costs at times the fact of the matter is overall I think it's an amazing value in most cases.
For most users their internet connection amounts to about .50cents to 1.50 per day.
Tell me. Where else do you get all that this delivers for that kind of money?
From that small fry at Mc'ds maybe?
Those 7 cigs that some of you will smoke today?
That half a cup of starbucks coffee you'll be slamming down?
That scratch off lottery ticket perhaps?
That's what this costs in relation to all the above when you boil it all right down.
I don't know about you, but for me, my connection is practically my right arm these days. I use it for work and play. It's the worlds biggest encyclopedia of everything you ever wanted to know and see, and then some. I simply cannot even begin to calculate what it has done and saved me in terms of money, time and efficiency over the years.
I've probably saved more in online shopping in the last 2 weeks alone to pay for a years cable HSI connection.
Add to that the way prices have come DOWN over the years..(are you old enough to remember those 200.00 and 300.00 month hourly charges?)and I think it all adds up to perhaps we should be looking at things this way instead.
And then maybe the real value behind it will become more apparent.
--
The Coyote captured the RR! Roadrunner Rick is now Comcastic! | |
|
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| Re: While we all might bit** and gripe over what our said by Rick :service costs at times the fact of the matter is overall I think it's an amazing value in most cases. For most users their internet connection amounts to about .50cents to 1.50 per day. Tell me. Where else do you get all that this delivers for that kind of money? From that small fry at Mc'ds maybe? Those 7 cigs that some of you will smoke today? If one is eating a small fries and smoking 7 cigs everyday eventually their medical expenses will make their internet bill seems like nothing.
I don't know about you, but for me, my connection is practically my right arm these days. I use it for work and play. It's the worlds biggest encyclopedia of everything you ever wanted to know and see, and then some. I simply cannot even begin to calculate what it has done and saved me in terms of money, time and efficiency over the years.
I've probably saved more in online shopping in the last 2 weeks alone to pay for a years cable HSI connection.
I kind of see where you are going. Before I had internet is used to read USA Today because of their sport coverage because I moved far away from my favorite teams and it was really the only way to get any kind of coverage for them. Well it was 50¢ a day 5 days a week. So that's $10 a month. Now it's 75¢ a day so if I was still buying it I'd be paying $15 a month. So I figure for an extra $25 I get all the news on my sports teams( and faster ) and eveything else the internet has to offer. Also I pay most of my bills online. Things that used to require me to mail which means buying stamps and money orders. So add in the savings there too. Not to mention not having to worry if the bill is going to get lost in the mail. Not bad. | |
|
| fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| You bring up good points, at times like you do.
Ciggs, for example, are usually about 25 cents per stick of cancer. However, people will spend about $120 to kill themselves but they will bitch and complain and moan about dropping $40 or $50 for high speed internet for the house.
People pay for that $5 hamburger meal now so they can sit their butts in front of that computer and HSI connection, most getting fatter and fatter... and don't like to pay for the internet.
I guess the moral is: priorities. Where are people's priorities? HSI should be cheaper so they can spend their money on things they really want? So I guess people really don't want HSI.
Really... Rick is right. People complain so much how Internet is important in their life, yet they don't want to pay for THAT.. they DO want to pay for coffee, ciggs, burgers, gambling, etc.. because "they get something from THAT".. and they don't from the internet.
I will make my own opinion here.. many people don't think.
--
"Wipe out the national deficit over night... Tax the stupid!" - about 50 gMail invites available. PM if you'd like one. | |
|
| | Jasper1970
join:2002-12-29
Finksburg, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
·Comcast
| Re: While we all might bit** and gripe over what our This guy is a idiot. The topic about Internet not anything else. Just because he has fiber and has no problem paying for it, I guess he is better then the avg. Joe. I must I think it is unfair to have to buy bundle services to get a cheaper price. In my area its Comcast for cable. With TV service you get it for 33 bucks a month. With just internet the charge 57 bucks a month. So its fair to charge 20 bucks more a month? I dont think so. So Fiberguy wake up and smell the coffee. | |
|
| | | fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| Re: While we all might bit** and gripe over what our said by Jasper1970 :This guy is a idiot. The topic about Internet not anything else. Just because he has fiber and has no problem paying for it, I guess he is better then the avg. Joe. Wow, and I'm the idiot? Where did I mention that I had fiber? And, if you knew much about fiber deployments across the U.S., fiber isn't necessarily more expensive than cable.
Really, check your facts before you come here calling someone an idiot for posting their opinion, Jack.
I must I think it is unfair to have to buy bundle services to get a cheaper price. Wow! Did that just SCREAM "I'm a victim!" Hey, sorry.. but please tell me where you should be afforded the right to the cheaper price with HAVING to have the bundle to get discounted... can you tell us that? The price of HSI is what it is. Just be glad that they offer you a bundle discount if you package together. It's true with all companies.. not just cable.
In my area its Comcast for cable. With TV service you get it for 33 bucks a month. With just internet the charge 57 bucks a month. So its fair to charge 20 bucks more a month? I dont think so. When you come here, and you try to bash someone, you really should get your facts together first ok?
First off, listen to what you said. "If I just take internet, THEN it's $57.00 a month"... and no, it's not $33 a month bundled. You are reaching so far to make a point which is wrong. The $33 price is a promo for new customers who take all three services or another new customer promo. Second, the price of cable bundled with discount is $42.95. You ARE right that it's $57 base price. Since you can't even add correctly, and choose to call me an idiot, I will simply consider the source.
If I can afford the service, then I"m doing something right. And if you can't, then maybe you should do something about it on your end. I have woke up and am smelling the coffee. I align my priorities in life. If internet is so important to you and you are having a hard time affording it, maybe a one less trip to the local McDonalds.. how about looking at what else you are spending your money on each month. Consider looking for a DSL service if available, and if internet is too much to afford, possibly think about canceling it.
I won't cry a tear for anyone who complains about paying for a luxury like internet if they have any of the following:
Cellular phone.
Any car other than a basic form of transportation.
East out at all.
Smokes.
Drinks.
Goes to Movies.
Has plasma or flat panel televisions.
Owns motorcycles or other rec vehicles.
iPod or MP3 Player
Uber ANYTHING..
Why? Because internet is just another luxury that you have the choice to make. Give one valid reason why any broadband provider should provide a cheaper service just so you can afford other toys and fixes in life? $42.00 for broadband internet or even $57.00 is nothing compared to the fact that when you look at Dial up modems that people paid $24.99 a month and most who also had that second phone line at another $24.99 (abouts) per month.. to bitch that a far superior, and more expensive service to provide, is about the same cost.
So, please.. tell me how I and everyone else that believes as I do why we should wake up and smell the coffee.
Are you young? are you starting out? I was there once too. However, I too don't find that a reason. I struggled when I started. I wanted 384/384 internet when it first came out. It cost me $79.99 a month plus $300.00 installation and a 1 year contract to boot + a $100 modem fee. I wanted it bad enough that I made choices and sacrifices. I gave up other things to have something I got alot out of and wanted. I got a second part time job as well as went to school. I didn't cry about something being too much.. I worked my butt off for what I wanted to be where I am today. I didn't cry foul like many people do today.. I worked for it. I paid into the system as an early adopter as a few others did which also allowed people like you to get a lower price that you DO get today.
So really... think before you post.
So Fiberguy wake up and smell the coffee.
I did.. and I enjoy it at $9.99 a pound that I buy it at too!
--
"Wipe out the national deficit over night... Tax the stupid!" - about 50 gMail invites available. PM if you'd like one. | |
|
viperpa33s
Why Me?
Premium
join:2002-12-20
Bradenton, FL
·Bright House
| Not true concessions The naked DSL they are offering is only for 768 down, not even for there highest download speed. In order to get the deal, you would have to downgrade to the slowest speed. It's only for 30 months and after that AT&T can do what it likes. This isn't what I consider true concessions, just a little icing on the cake.
I have Embarq and I get charged an extra $10 a month for dropping my phone service and pay an extra $8.88 for having the phone line. According to Embarq I do have local phone service, I just can't make any toll or long distance calls. It don't make any sense to me but I guess that is why I am not in the phone business. | |
|
cafields
join:2003-12-17
Muncie, IN
| Naked DSL Price - Muncie Indiana US Here is the price for Naked ADSL in Muncie Indiana I currently have the 1.5 package, on my UnNaked line, but I only connect at 384/384 and I get 320Kbps Down and about 200Kbps Up at about 11270 feet. We were just upgraded to UVerse here in Muncie and three other Indiana cities on 12/28/2006, were just waiting for the prequalification system to be updated so we can order, the nearest fiber DSlam is about 3000 feet away, so I should have no problem receiving VDSL 2+, at full speed, I plan on ordering the 6000/1000 UVerse enabled internet with my UVerse TV plan.
Package Down-stream Up-stream IP Address Term Monthly Price
AT&T Yahoo! High Speed Internet - No Voice Line - Express 384 Kbps to 1.5 Mbps 128 to 384 Kbps 1 Dynamic 6 Months $44.99
AT&T Yahoo! High Speed Internet - No Voice Line - Express 384 Kbps to 1.5 Mbps 128 to 384 Kbps 1 Dynamic No Term $49.99
Static IP Plans What is an IP Address?
Package Down-stream Up-stream IP Address Term Monthly Price
AT&T Yahoo! High Speed Internet - No Voice Line - Express S 384 Kbps to 1.5 Mbps 128 to 384 Kbps 5 Static IPs One year $64.99
AT&T Yahoo! High Speed Internet - No Voice Line - Express S 384 Kbps to 1.5 Mbps 128 to 384 Kbps 5 Static IPs No Term $74.99 | |
|
ZipZilla
join:2005-07-09
Ladson, SC
| what a joke Whitacre played the FCC like fools on this one.
a TRUE concession would be requiring at&t to offer naked dsl on ALL packages at a price less than that of dsl+ voice line. they don't want to do it because they know what we know: home landline telephones are obsolete. they just want to keep milking the copper
The FCC could have made a difference here, but instead they rolled over and played dead. and the democrats on the commission accepted Whitacres welfare handouts like obedient subjects | |
|
Varlik
Without Honor You Will Never Be Free
Premium
join:2002-01-06
Anderson, SC
| Hey didn't you Already.... Know that bundling saves you Money. See just look at the money you save with AT&T's bundled pricing. You can use the savings to purchase more services and features. Maybe AT&T can add a fee and make some money off of allowing our government to eavesdrop monitor and Spy protect us. They could call it a phone line security monitoring fee. | |
|
tmc8080
join:2004-04-24
Floral Park, NY
| new at&t subscribers Well.. if cable companies wanted to steal these AT&T subscribers, they could just not surcharge for having internet only.. they could do this as a "lite tier" package (6-12mbit)that would still beat dsl but not be full cablemodem speeds at 16+megabits, and have more universal coverage than AT&T, so they'd lose nothing by gaining these subscribers. | |
|
| patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
| Re: new at&t subscribers said by tmc8080 :Well.. if cable companies wanted to steal these AT&T subscribers, they could just not surcharge for having internet only.. they could do this as a "lite tier" package (6-12mbit)that would still beat dsl but not be full cablemodem speeds at 16+megabits, and have more universal coverage than AT&T, so they'd lose nothing by gaining these subscribers. Cable companies wont ever do that. TWC I belive will only allow low speed cable HSI when its bundled in a triple play. Having a low speed and low price package will seriously canabalize their HSI revenues since all the joe six packs who dont understand speed will automatically switch to the cheaper plan, plus a cable co can keep their memebers hostage in no-DSL areas on high price/high speed plans. | |
|
richardpor
Fur it up
join:2003-04-19
Portland, OR
| It about Economics The Price for Naked DSL is right. To me this is a non story. DSL with POTS or not ATT has every right to charge for the use of the copper form the CO to home. This is why bundling makes economic sense. One has already rented the transport so it is easier just to add a new service to the same line.
The price difference between bundling and naked DSL only says there is a base line charge for the copper. | |
|
|
See 6 replies to this post |
|
Zorglub
join:2000-11-18
Fremont, CA | Only solution is muni fiber Get the local government to install FTTH and then open those fibers to anybody who wants to provide services. That'd be the best way to have access competition. | |
|
| EngineerDave
join:2001-08-27
Hattiesburg, MS
| Re: Only solution is muni fiber said by Zorglub :Get the local government to install FTTH and then open those fibers to anybody who wants to provide services. That'd be the best way to have access competition. You used "government" and "competition" synonymously. Is that left coast logic? The private sector will always incur less cost than the government will. | |
|
| | Zorglub
join:2000-11-18
Fremont, CA | Re: Only solution is muni fiber Left coast logic? What kind of argument is that? The government is good at a few things: building infrastructure (i.e. roads, etc.) that benefit everyone is one of them. | |
|
dslextreme
Premium,VIP
join:2001-02-23
Canoga Park, CA | What will anyone do What will be the recourse be if they ONLY offer 768 naked DSL? AT&T has a history of sticking to the letter and no more. | |
|
|
The Beer
I Love It When A Plan Comes Together
Premium
join:2001-07-24
Omaha, NE
clubs:
·ViaTalk
| Re: What will anyone do I think the interesting question would be what numbers do someone like Qwest see in Naked DSL penetration?
I would think the only benefit to crapping up a stand alone line would be to disable it's a ability to handle VOIP. And 768 is plenty for that. | |
|
|
kyramilan
join:2006-11-26
Pensacola, FL
| said by dslextreme :What will be the recourse be if they ONLY offer 768 naked DSL? AT&T has a history of sticking to the letter and no more. Umm, you're out of business??? | |
|
|
| tmc8080
join:2004-04-24
Floral Park, NY
| Stinky telcos They are probably worried that the line will be used for VOIP, and not through them.. while they have to absorb the cost of all that extra bandwidth while a 3rd party makes money. Its like going to the supermarket with 200 coupons for items.. they really don't want to go through all the trouble of giving you what your entitled to...
And it's 2007, they're about to get their way with franchise reform and everything... | |
|
dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ | A T & T Sure we'll give you naked DSL, but it'll be POTS and we'll just say its naked and charge you the same price as POTS+DSL.
big surprise there.
--
You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth | |
|
ANONYNONON
@poundhost.com | Seems obvious to me Legislators required them to sell a certain product.
Company didn\\\'t want to sell certain product.
Company priced product to discourage sales.
Free Market. Who Cares. Vote with your wallet. | |
|
| EngineerDave
join:2001-08-27
Hattiesburg, MS | Re: Seems obvious to me I agree. Quit bitching. If you don't like it, don't buy it. | |
|
mark760
join:2005-08-15
Saint Paul, MN
·Cricket Broadband
·Comcast
| just play the game..... order the local line, have everything blocked. no local toll, no long distance, no pay per use. Dialing anything other than a local call or toll free # gets you a recording. My cost for 1.5 meg dsl and local phone service with all taxes is $32. My service has never been down, and I have always had 1.29 meg in speed. Not a bad deal for $32 a month. | |
|
|
overcharged
@bellsouth.net
| Re: just play the game..... that depends on where you live- here in Georgia to get exactly what you are getting I pay $60.92 per month- from BellSouth. Prices on all kinds of technology have come down, I do feel like our area is prisoner to over-priced pigs, and the FCC isn't strong enough to stand up to them. | |
|
Mr Anon
@ameritech.net
| The real kick in the pants. I use to live in the beverly area and I placed an order for DSL years back on June 2nd, when it first became avaliable for that area (acutally I had a terrible connection with the rep, I had to yell and lock myself in a quiet room just so I could kinda make her out but I ordered it anyway) when I got my connection I couldn't get it on a second line, they didn't have the needed approval, the only way to get it was on a second line.
One bad thing about having it with no dialtone though is that techs would pick up my line and think no one was using it and use it to fix some other problem. Hopefully that has been fixed. | |
|
|
linicx
Caveat Emptor
Premium
join:2002-12-03
United State
·CenturyLink
| It's too funny for words What did this bozo expect? Ma Bell has been a greedy grubby bitch for more than fifty years. The Sherman Act didn't mean a thing. The FCC is impotent and customer complaints fall on deaf ears. The only thing the rest of us can do is use the competition if you have one.
--
Mac: No windows, No gates, Apple inside | |
|
|
ITZME again
@sbcglobal.net
| Re: It's too funny for words I posted most of this earlier in the thread, but I'll post again because I think it's important to understand that the customer isn't a "bozo". The customer acquired the DSL service before AT&T began its so-called "naked" DSL service. And the customer did have an existing POTS when he went with AT&T DSL - from a re-seller of AT&T phone service. And the customer appears to be quite happy with the service from the re-seller. But AT&T does not allow re-sellers to sell DSL service. Therefore, if the customer wants ANY DSL service, he is left with 2 choices: 1) Pay for a phone line that he does not want, need or use; 2) Abandon the POTS re-seller, one of a number of companies enticed into the telecom business by Ameritech/ SBC when it was trying to prove it had "competition" in the local phone service business and should, therefore, be permitted to sell long distance service. Immediately upon approval for long distance, Ameritech/ SBC began "wooing" back their old customers with methods like the one the customer describes. So why didn't the customer just port the line over to AT&T and be done with the re-seller? Probably because, even with the AT&T charges for the unused POTS, the customer is still better off keeping the line with the re-seller who is providing local and long distance service at a price significantly below the AT&T retail phone service pricing. Now how can that be? How can a re-seller be selling for so much less than AT&T's retail price and still be making money while AT&T whines that it is losing money??? The answer is simple: They are an ugly, greedy corporation that lies, cheats and misleads in order to get what they want. This whole thing has nothing to do with "true costs" or with one service "subsidizing" another. This has to do with the fact that AT&T was a monopoly prior to the mid-80's, that it was a failure in the truly “competitive” world of long distance service and that it is now doing everything it can to attain a monopoly status once again. And the FCC appears to be assisting them in the process. On behalf of all the current AT&T customers, I’d like to welcome the Bell South customers to the new world of "competition” - SBC style competition. Good luck, y'all. | |
|
|
|
|
Users Annoyed At AT&T Naked DSL Pricing
Under AT&T/BellSouth merger this ends, right?
Over pay all you want for YOUR HSI. 
·