 
Omega
Displaced Ohioan
Premium
join:2002-07-30
Cheyenne, WY
clubs:  | 50mbps service with 5GB cap Fast speed, super low cap. They will try and do it!
--
Whats smells like blue? | |
|
W7PSK
Just Me
join:2000-12-04
Everett, WA | We know how Executives are soo Truthful quote:
a number cable executives in the States say is closer to $100
More like you want your 100million Bonus. | |
|
Boricua65
join:2002-01-26
Puerto Rico
| Wow... imagine healthy competition between carriers. Image that!!  It never ceases to amaze me all they care about is money and not about provide service.
BTW, Japan is looking right about now  .
--
Yo te digo, el mundo esta jodido | |
|
 | 
baineschile
2600
Premium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI | Geography The United States has about 80/people per square mile. Japan, has 850 people/square mile. Face it, its just easier to service more people in condensed areas. | |
|
| | Lazlow
join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO | Re: Geography Ok, but that does not explain metro areas or states like RI(1000 people/square mile). | |
|
| | | 
JoeG4
join:2001-12-16
945941 | This is ridiculous. The major companies need to die! | |
|
| | 
kamm
join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY
 ·T-Mobile US
| said by baineschile  :The United States has about 80/people per square mile. Japan, has 850 people/square mile. Face it, its just easier to service more people in condensed areas. Ahh, suuure, that's why NYC is sliced up between providers, right?
Please, PLEAHHHSE: can we STOP with this UTTER BS corporate false argument???
It is FALSE, for fcuk's sake, FALSE.
--
[BQUOTE=[user=bicker]]Waaaa waaaa waaaa. You just want what you want and don't care to factor in what is right or true. Your perspectives are un-American, and deserve far more ridicule than I'm prepared to pile on them.
[/BQUOTE] | |
|
| | |
| | 
ReVeLaTeD
Premium
join:2001-11-10
San Diego, CA
| said by baineschile :The United States has about 80/people per square mile. Japan, has 850 people/square mile. Face it, its just easier to service more people in condensed areas. You also can't lump them all in like that. California alone has WAY more homes per square mile than 80, guaranteed, and don't get me started on areas like Houston, New York City, and Philly. If it were a simple matter of people per square mile, California should be one of the cheapest deployments around. It's not. If anything we pay more for less. | |
|
jester121
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL
 ·surpasshosting
 ·ViaTalk
| Fuzzy math? $20 per home passed vs $100 is a pretty silly comparison to make unless it's apples/apples; what are the differences in materials/labor here vs. there? How many customers are served out of a single facility there vs. here? How old is the physical plant?
It's a nice glaring headline but it's a pretty leading question. | |
|
| 
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| Re: Fuzzy math? said by jester121 :$20 per home passed vs $100 is a pretty silly comparison to make unless it's apples/apples; what are the differences in materials/labor here vs. there? How many customers are served out of a single facility there vs. here? How old is the physical plant? It's a nice glaring headline but it's a pretty leading question. who gives a shit even if it's $100 per house? Over a year year period that amounts to 83 cents a month. Over 25 years it's 33 cetns a month. Big whoop. In my book that's practically nothing. | |
|
| | 
BillRoland
Premium
join:2001-01-21
Ocala, FL
clubs:
 ·Cox HSI
| Re: Fuzzy math? said by BF69 :said by jester121 :$20 per home passed vs $100 is a pretty silly comparison to make unless it's apples/apples; what are the differences in materials/labor here vs. there? How many customers are served out of a single facility there vs. here? How old is the physical plant? It's a nice glaring headline but it's a pretty leading question. who gives a shit even if it's $100 per house? Over a year year period that amounts to 83 cents a month. Over 25 years it's 33 cetns a month. Big whoop. In my book that's practically nothing. Who cares? The companies having to fork over the $100 up front per house care. What an idiotic statement.
--
"Don't steal. The government hates competition."
Beyond AM. Beyond FM. XM | |
|
| | |
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| Re: Fuzzy math? said by BillRoland :said by BF69 :said by jester121 :$20 per home passed vs $100 is a pretty silly comparison to make unless it's apples/apples; what are the differences in materials/labor here vs. there? How many customers are served out of a single facility there vs. here? How old is the physical plant? It's a nice glaring headline but it's a pretty leading question. who gives a shit even if it's $100 per house? Over a year year period that amounts to 83 cents a month. Over 25 years it's 33 cetns a month. Big whoop. In my book that's practically nothing. Who cares? The companies having to fork over the $100 up front per house care. What an idiotic statement. sorry if a company can't afford that maybe they should be in business? what's with the welfare attitude towards business? No welfare for people, incompetent business people? Sure all the welfare we can give them.
$100 per house is NOTHING. How much did Verizon pay per house for FiOS? 25X that or more? quit making excuses for business people that suck at business. | |
|
| | 
JoesphM
@rr.com
| The companies who service maybe 50% of the homes in an area with maybe 30% of those having modem service. So out of 100 homes, 15 might have service.
So that $100 per home passed costs are $1500 per active modem customer.
Not including modems for customers, tech support, or tech training. | |
|
| | |
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| Re: Fuzzy math? said by JoesphM :
The companies who service maybe 50% of the homes in an area with maybe 30% of those having modem service. So out of 100 homes, 15 might have service.
So that $100 per home passed costs are $1500 per active modem customer.
Not including modems for customers, tech support, or tech training.
50% whose fault is that? If you have a better product than the competition at a competitive price you WILL be successful. If you can't even get half then it's YOU that is at fault. All those others cost you mention are just bullshit. Those costs have already been factored in. What before now that company didn't train it's people or have tech support? Modems don't cost shit. Those companies get them at a discount so they arne't paying what you would pay at wal-mart. Not to mention they charge their customers for those modems. Those companies make the money back on those modems within a year. | |
|
| | | |
JoesphM
@rr.com
| Re: Fuzzy math? said by BF69 :50% whose fault is that? That's just the nature of the industry... look around at the major cable companies quarterly reports. Some have a few points higher, some a few lower.
Some people just don't want to pay for cable, TV, or broadband. That's why roof antennas and dial-up still have a huge number of users. That's also why a 2nd cable company or overbuilder often fails, there just aren't enough customers willing to fork over the dough to support the costs.
Modems do cost money especially in when you buy thousands or millions, so does ADDITIONAL support costs for a NEW product or standard.
These are all still large UPFRONT costs that need LOANS to finance for repayment LATER. Great time for that sort of financial activity to happen... | |
|
| | 
vpoko
Premium
join:2003-07-03
Jamaica Plain, MA
| said by BF69 :who gives a shit even if it's $100 per house? Over a year year period that amounts to 83 cents a month. Doesn't it work out to $8.00 a month? | |
|
| | | jester121
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL
·surpasshosting
·ViaTalk
| Re: Fuzzy math? said by vpoko :said by BF69 :who gives a shit even if it's $100 per house? Over a year year period that amounts to 83 cents a month. Doesn't it work out to $8.00 a month? It's in poor taste to interrupt nonsensical rantings with facts or logic. | |
|
| |
| | |
battleop
join:2005-09-28
00000 | Queue the it's better in Japan crowd. Here we go with the 4 page thread about how great they have it in Japan.  | |
|
| 
neowulf
join:2000-10-20
Port Orange, FL
| Re: Queue the it's better in Japan crowd. Well the size of their homes are generally not great. Their taxes are not great. The crazy silly laws they have are not great. The crowded cities are not great. The cost of food is not great.
As a side note I see no reason for TWC to upgrade at all now, what would be the point of higher speeds with the low caps they are "testing" one market at a time. I guess that is why they are slow to upgrade. | |
|
| | nitzan
Premium,VIP
join:2008-02-27
·ViaTalk
·Comcast
| Re: Queue the it's better in Japan crowd. said by neowulf :Well the size of their homes are generally not great. Their taxes are not great. The crazy silly laws they have are not great. The crowded cities are not great. The cost of food is not great. Agree with all of these except food - the food in Japan is not only great - it's also relatively cheap when you consider the price you see is the price you pay. No extra taxes not already included in the price, no tips. 500 yen ramen is 500 yen ramen.
Of course- if you want to buy a banana it'd probably cost twice as much... so it depends on what you eat - if you want to eat like an American in Japan, yes - it'll cost more. If you want to eat like a Japanese - it'll cost less. | |
|
| | |
neowulf
join:2000-10-20
Port Orange, FL
| Re: Queue the it's better in Japan crowd. Well yeah depends on what you eat, any meats, besides fish, vegetables and fruit are expensive. If you want to live on ramen, soba and rice then yeah is cheap. You are right if you eat like a an American in Japan it will cost much more. But in general their prices on average goods are not what I would consider great ^^ | |
|
| 
Apathy
Premium
join:2004-09-01
Saint Louis, MO
| said by battleop :Here we go with the 4 page thread about how great they have it in Japan. I know, right? I'm starting to wonder if dslreports has a yearly quota for articles about this. | |
|
| 
dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
| said by battleop :Here we go with the 4 page thread about how great they have it in Japan. If the shoe fits. . . . .
--
When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee | |
|
jmn1207
Premium
join:2000-07-19
Reston, VA
 ·Verizon FIOS
| More PR? They always neglect to mention the 10Mbps upload and their competition from NTT that offers 100/100 FTTP services at similar prices. And why should we from this source? This is one of J:Com's promoters talking.
Offering 160/10 service is simply the best that cable can provide at the moment. It's absolutely necessary to provide these speeds considering the widespread competition in the region. If FiOS offered 100/100 service to everyone as a standard tier, our cable companies would probably have to offer similar packages where this FTTP competition exists, just as J:Com does now. | |
|
| 
Eat Me
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ
1 edit | Re: More PR? What would an average home user need 100/100 for?
By the way, this same carrier is offering upstream bonded DOCSIS3, so 10mbps up won't be 10mbps up for very long. | |
|
| | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO | Re: More PR? 100/100? Online backups and/or cloud computing. With a link that fast, I can store all my stuff online and pull it down to a netbook wherever I am. At 100 Mbps symetric, cloud computing isn't just a buzzword, it's an absolute possibility. | |
|
| | | |
| | | | 
sturmvogel
Obama '08
join:2008-02-07
Houston, TX
| Re: More PR? said by Eat Me :said by iansltx :100/100? Online backups and/or cloud computing. With a link that fast, I can store all my stuff online and pull it down to a netbook wherever I am. At 100 Mbps symetric, cloud computing isn't just a buzzword, it's an absolute possibility. I do cloud computing with a 2mb up connection already. Notepad in Terminal Server screen ?
--
Obama '08. Will help resolve the terrible broadband issues we have that put us so far behind other countries. | |
|
| | | | |
kamm
join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY
·T-Mobile US
| Re: More PR? said by sturmvogel :said by Eat Me :said by iansltx :100/100? Online backups and/or cloud computing. With a link that fast, I can store all my stuff online and pull it down to a netbook wherever I am. At 100 Mbps symetric, cloud computing isn't just a buzzword, it's an absolute possibility. I do cloud computing with a 2mb up connection already. Notepad in Terminal Server screen ? Do you even understand the term (cloud computing)?
OTOH it is indeed very helpful when I have 100+ Mbit ready - try to copy just few gigabytes up to your AWS S3 account...
--
[BQUOTE=[user=bicker]]Waaaa waaaa waaaa. You just want what you want and don't care to factor in what is right or true. Your perspectives are un-American, and deserve far more ridicule than I'm prepared to pile on them.
[/BQUOTE] | |
|
| | | | | |
Eat Me
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ | Re: More PR? Why are you copying a few gigs to your AWS account?
Most of what I do is from templates which require little to no uploading. | |
|
| | | | | | |
kamm
join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY
·T-Mobile US
| Re: More PR? said by Eat Me :Why are you copying a few gigs to your AWS account? Perhaps because I need to...? 
Most of what I do is from templates which require little to no uploading.
Because you don't do any data-intensive processing.
OTOH if someone just using S3 for file sharing - no, not that kind of file sharing  but rather like client ftp etc - that's already in the gigs range...
--
[BQUOTE=[user=bicker]]Waaaa waaaa waaaa. You just want what you want and don't care to factor in what is right or true. Your perspectives are un-American, and deserve far more ridicule than I'm prepared to pile on them.
[/BQUOTE] | |
|
| | | | | | | |
Eat Me
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ
 ·PenTeleData
·Future Nine Corpor..
·VOIPo
·Vonage
| Re: More PR? said by kamm :Because you don't do any data-intensive processing. OTOH if someone just using S3 for file sharing - no, not that kind of file sharing but rather like client ftp etc - that's already in the gigs range... I use EC2 for Java and PHP apps. Why would I need a lot of bandwidth if I'm doing a lot of processing anyway? Isn't that stuff supposed to happen in the cloud? | |
|
| | |
battleop
join:2005-09-28
00000
| The average user does not have a clue as to what cloud computing is. The average user is barely going to use 10-15Mbps of that 100Mbps connection streaming an HD move.
The Average user isn't even aware of DSLReports and I would consider most, if not all, readers of DSLR an above average user. | |
|
| | | |
See 23 replies to this post |
|
| |
jmn1207
Premium
join:2000-07-19
Reston, VA
·Verizon FIOS
| said by Eat Me :What would an average home user need 100/100 for? Anything they want. The speeds are sufficient enough in both directions to allow for a typical family to enjoy their internet experience, however they wish to use it.
The 100/100 service is merely a marketing ploy to make life miserable for Japan's cable industry. Until DOCSIS 3.0 came around, J:Com could not hope to compete, and they've even said as much, albeit with a different spin.
»www.multichannel.com/article/191···Subs.php
"DOCSIS 3.0 has given us pricing power back," Nair said.
If customers can get much higher performance at the same price, usually they will take that option. For J:Com, they are specifically omitting to advertise the upload speeds while raving about the 160Mbps download potential. This is purely a strategic effort to make it seem like they have a superior product. And it appears to be working as they have been increasing subs, although without a more objective source, it's difficult to blindly go by the information that is being presented.
I believe that NTT East and NTT West primarily use 1.25Gbps symmetrical EPON technology for their FTTP service. I'm willing to bet that while they enjoyed a massive advantage over their competition for a short span, they have probably oversold this service. Their "best effort" statement for 100/100 FTTP is most likely only a fraction of those speeds for many customers. It would also explain why in certain regions that J:Com's new DOCSIS 3.0 service is adding so many new subs migrating away from NTT. Eventually, the number of 160Mbps DOCSIS 3.0 customers will increase until they begin having issues with congestion, while no longer coming near the proposed 160Mbps maximum. Back-and-forth we go.
It's good to have competition, even oligopolistic competition is better than a monopoly, if only by just a wee bit. | |
|
| | |
See 6 replies to this post |
|
| |
kamm
join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY
·T-Mobile US
1 edit | said by Eat Me :What would an average home user need 100/100 for?
This is the type of BS corporate mouthpiece reply that annoys the HELL OUT OF ME immediately - who CARES WHY they need it?When you're a fuckin' PoS provider then it isn't your fuckin business what I am doing with my bandwidth - I pay for it, you provide it therefore I use it AS I SEE FIT.Let me get this straight: you are not doing a fuckin' FAVOR, you are fulfilling YOUR CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS.If you won't you should be fuckin fined for BILLIONS by the authorities (sans the corrupt, rotten FCC.)
Capisce?
quote:
By the way, this same carrier is offering upstream bonded DOCSIS3, so 10mbps up won't be 10mbps up for very long.
Cable is a DEAD business as it is, all cable providers know it, this is why THEY TRY TURN THE TIME BACK - if they could modify the business model (= turn it into a complete rip-off) then they could avoid those now very costly upgrades they kept postponing for a decade due to lack of competition and GREED.
--
said by bicker :Waaaa waaaa waaaa. You just want what you want and don't care to factor in what is right or true. Your perspectives are un-American, and deserve far more ridicule than I'm prepared to pile on them. | |
|
| | |
See 7 replies to this post |
|
XBL2009
------
join:2001-01-03
Chicago, IL
1 edit |  We need to put these CEO's on a leash
| |
|
|
See 8 replies to this post |
|
kamm
join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY | CROOKED corps->CORRUPT lobbies>MONOPOLIES->WE'RE SCREWED! How long we're going to tolerate this rotten system of corporate power? It corrupts EVERYTHING and kills ANYTHING thast moves against its monopolistic greed.
Get rid of monopolies and MANDATE network sharing, now! | |
|
|
See 20 replies to this post |
|
majortom1029
join:2006-10-19
Lindenhurst, NY
| not every one Not every cable operator is scared to offer the speeds. About two years ago cablevision was testing the 100/100 narad technology but never panned out due to it not being a standard tech.
Also cablevision tends to release news speeds and tech pretty much at the same time or close to it in their whole foot print.
Also verion doesnt even offer web and email ports open and those servers allowed on the conenction.
Here in the US its harder since everything is spaced out more which means its more expensive to deploy. | |
|
ncbill
Premium
join:2007-01-23
Winston Salem, NC | PUC time? Wonder if states will redefine broadband as a public utility.
Imagine cable or telcos being told "ok, you can cap, but can only charge $25/month for that 40GB cap". | |
|
|
neowulf
join:2000-10-20
Port Orange, FL | Re: PUC time? Yeah that is why providers lobby against that. They don't want to be considered a public utility. Being regulated would mean being capped on what they could charge their users would suck, they wouldn't want to be capped on what they could charge... | |
|
Alfred Newman
@bankone.com
| Greed and Lack of Competition To upgrade the network for the new DOCSIS 3.0 does require a bit of financing but I would say the larger corps. would be able to afford with the large customer base they have. The question does pop up in your brain though, what do they do with all that money. Well take a look at Comcasts addition to the Comcast Center in Philadelphia (»gizmodo.com/5018572/ten-million-···hd-video)
Ever wonder where you're money went? Look no further. CEOs pockets or pet projects.
Why pay $100 per household when you can easliy limit what they can use and charge more for less? | |
|
| kenshell
join:2004-01-21
Woodbridge, NJ | Re: Greed and Lack of Competition I'm glad my high comcast bill pays to have those sports teams and arena. | |
|
DVOOR8
join:2001-12-24
USA | The FCC is the stifling factor in the states. The dingle biggest obstacle to broadband growth in the US is the FCC. Its an antiquated bureaucracy that needs to go, plain and simple. | |
|
| |
| | DVOOR8
join:2001-12-24
USA
·Optimum Online
| Re: The FCC is the stifling factor in the states. said by Eat Me :said by DVOOR8 :The dingle biggest obstacle to broadband growth in the US is the FCC. Its an antiquated bureaucracy that needs to go, plain and simple. Please enlighten us as to how you came to that conclusion. I dont spoon feed, do your research and see how the FCC stifles innovation and competition in the broadband market and report back. | |
|
| | | Lazlow
join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO | Re: The FCC is the stifling factor in the states. I did look, could not find anything relevant that showed that FCC is stifling competition in the broadband market. | |
|
| | | | |
| | | | | Lazlow
join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO | Re: The FCC is the stifling factor in the states. Yes, I had already read most of those. While I would agree that they do show that Marten was an idiot (pretty much bought and paid for), I do not agree that they show that the FCC is stifling competition. | |
|
chronoss2009
join:2008-09-23 | whatever the math someone ought to show this ti the CRTC in canada so they can tell us how they justify a 150$ 5 megabit
that has around 300GB cap | |
|
|
Yatti420
@rogers.com
| Re: whatever the math said by chronoss2009 :someone ought to show this ti the CRTC in canada so they can tell us how they justify a 150$ 5 megabit that has around 300GB cap As far as I know this service doesnt exist in Canada.. We don't even get Docsis 3.0 modems as far as I know.. | |
|
Bit
Premium
join:2009-02-19
00000 | Isn't the modem alone more than $20 wholesale? Seems like $20/home is REALLY low. You can't get a kid to lick a stamp for $20 any more. | |
|
Core0000
Premium
join:2008-05-04
Somerset, KY
·Windstream
| History may not repeat but it sure rhymes...or so I was told "Other cable operators, he said, are concerned that not only will prices fall, but that the super-fast service will encourage customers to watch video on the Web and drop their cable service. The industry is worried that by offering 100 Mbps, they are opening Pandora’s box, he said. Everyone will be able to get video on the Internet, and then competition will bring the price for the broadband down from $80 to $60 to $40."
This reminds me of the RIAA and the MPAA.. and how they.. or so it seemed, fought tooth and nail to keep downloads off the interwebs, and I am sure there were lobbyist etc.. that fought digital downloads. Again at least this is how it seemed.
But now we have Amazon.com, Itunes.. probably others? and were able to download digital videos legally. etc..
My point is.. if this guy is on the money in what he said.. then, these cable companies are going to screw up. There going to hum hall around and not accomplish jack diddly squat. And it's still going to happen. There basically fighting the inevitable. It's all just a matter of time. | |
|
|
rjdriver
@cox.net
| Re: History may not repeat but it sure rhymes...or so I was told Once they find a way to charge people for Video/TV over the Internet, and they will, and it's coming sooner than you think, then the floodgates will open and suddenly 160MB will be offered everywhere. And Yes, the price of the speeds we have have now will come way down. | |
|
| | AnonShawUser
join:2006-06-17
Calgary, AB
| Re: History may not repeat but it sure rhymes...or so I was told Easy. Set up a customized viewer experience where customers can mix and match their channel lineup, to watch online/stream through a secured desktop application at a fixed cost, and charge a subscription cost for that, instead of forced tier service plus individual digital subscriptions. | |
|
| | Core0000
Premium
join:2008-05-04
Somerset, KY
·Windstream
| I think the means to charge people already exist.
Really what I think the problem is since you brought that up. Is these cable companies are trying to figure out a way of using there existing business model, ( A lot of channels with out any real value to the consumer). Like me, I haven't had cable for years now.
The only reason I had it was just for a few channels, and a couple hours every other day maybe, if that much. And it's not worth it. Of course I guess I should mention I am a workaholic.
Anyways, these cable companies will finally realize that there going to have to change there business model. But they will probably do a lot of bitching moaning and whining before hand, and spend millions of dollars in the process. | |
|
ditka_b
Premium
join:2001-10-05
Barrington, IL
·AT&T Midwest
| US cable companies Lie to everyone and make billions off us fools that pay 139 for 50MB that cost then 10's.
Cable TV cost them 20'-30's and they routinely charge 100's+. Why do you think Comcast grows so fast? They lie about costs and make billions. We are all fools with 150 a month bills for what the provider pays 20's.
14.95 for HBO? what do you honestly think their cost is?
ASK EM? | |
|
| 
Alcohol
Premium
join:2003-05-26
Somerset, NJ | Re: US cable companies Time warner owns HBO, they probably sell to Comcast and others at a premium. | |
|
|
|
|
DOC 3.0 In Japan: $60 for 160Mbps
....