 |
 | | | Re: "somebody who reads email once a week" True, 100kbps should come free with TV for grandma (they can still rip her off by renting the modem). | |
|
| | | | Re: "somebody who reads email once a week" Yes, that phantom $5 for 100 kbps grandma tier that never materializes.... | |
|
| | | WHT
join:2010-03-26
Rosston, TX
kudos:5 | Re: "somebody who reads email once a week" said by Karl Bode:Yes, that phantom $5 for 100 kbps grandma tier that never materializes....
Our most popular start-up tier is $15 per month for 512 Kbps speed capped at 10GB per month,and most people usually upgrade to the $20 1,024 speed after couple of months (but still 10GB cap).] | |
|
| | | | | | Re: "somebody who reads email once a week" Which carrier is this? | |
|
| | | | | | | Re: "somebody who reads email once a week" crapISP.com "(but still 10GB cap)" | |
|
| | | When are they going to get rid of unlimited customer support? Obviously this is a cost that is unsustainable  | |
|
| me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO | Why does everyone always invoke grandma when they talk about low usage people? My grandma uses several GB a month, probably at least 100. Granted she spends a lot of time online since we got her that laptop. | |
|
| | Reviews:
 ·Frontier Communi..
| Re: "somebody who reads email once a week" This is very true. I have a friend who is 83 years old and uses around 300GB a month. He discovered the joys of Netflix and Roku. I set him up with a DD-WRT router and couldn't get over how much bandwidth he uses.
By contrast I'm in my late 20s with a tech background and rarely use more than 100GB. I watch some Netflix but TV/movies aren't really my thing and the bulk of my online activity is web browsing and gaming. | |
|
| | Mr. Anderson Someone put a photoshop of the CEO with Agent Smith. | |
|
Reviews:
 ·Charter
| Gee... When an internet provider is attending not a tech conference but a BANKING conference it should give you the full indication of who TWC is in bed with. If a company has profited repeatedly over the years then tell the consumer the only way they can survive is to charge you more money (unless of course you sign up for 150 channels of useless cable TV service) then one can consider it bull.
Only problem is people here in the US have their heads up their collective butts instead of sitting on their elected officials until they support a free and open internet and not one controlled by people who's sole and only motive is increased profits. If the people here stand up like they did in Canada these companies will either back off or upset the customers which in turn will upset profits when in turn - upsets the stockholders.
The only way to stop them is to stop the flow of money and if that means shutting off your internet for a few months isn't that worth the loss to save the internet you've been using for years? No money, no profits. No profits = unhappy stockholders. End of story. Contact your local officials and if your provider imposes caps and outrageous fees SHUT IT OFF and find another provider if possible. Those who take care of their customers deserve to get our business. Those who do not need to be put out of business. Since all these companies have debts to pay if their income is strangled they'll have to back down. | |
|
| | | Re: Gee... Probably less than 40% of customers would even notice the new pricing, and if the top 25% of bandwidth users canceled TWC's profit would probably only increase. Even if there was a slowdown in profit growth, a price increase on existing accounts would bring things back to normal. | |
|
| | rebus9
join:2002-03-26
Tampa Bay Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
·Bright House
| Re: Gee... said by Wilsdom:and if the top 25% of bandwidth users canceled TWC's profit would probably only increase. How so?
The network is currently supporting those users and still has some excess capacity available (headroom). If the hogs dropped out, all you'd have is more UNUSED capacity, NOT lower costs, because the ISP will not DOWNGRADE the network if utilization drops a few percent.
So you've lost the monthly revenue those ex-customers were paying, and ended up with more of something that's (now) sitting there un-used.
Given a choice between (a) having unused/slack capacity, or (b) filling up some of that slack capacity with paying customers, as a business owner I would choose 'b'.
You act like bandwidth is a rare-earth element (and only finite quantities exist) and those 500 bandwidth hogs paying $49/month are taking up resources which COULD BE given to 5,000 grandmothers at $49/month.
And that's just NOT the case.
Bandwidth is plentiful, and getting MORE plentiful every year. AND the cost to acquire/deliver that bandwidth is going down. This is nothing more than (another attempted) money grab by TWC. | |
|
| openbox9Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2 | said by megarock:When an internet provider is attending not a tech conference but a BANKING conference it should give you the full indication of who TWC is in bed with. It's an investor conference. Where do you think money comes from to expand capacity and build infrastructure? Paying customers are only one piece.said by megarock:The only way to stop them is to stop the flow of money and if that means shutting off your internet for a few months isn't that worth the loss to save the internet you've been using for years? We're a consumption, gotta have it, society and many aren't willing to make that sacrifice. Witness the continuing cost increases in pay TV. | |
|
| | | | Re: Gee... Investors siphon money from expanding and building infrastructure from a very profitable company. | |
|
| | | openbox9Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2 | Re: Gee... From your perspective maybe. From the perspective of the financial world (what truly matters  ), investors provide capital to enable that expansion and infrastructure build to make a profitable company even more profitable. | |
|
| | | | | | Re: Gee... Capital is only provided to the company upon the initial sale of the stock. Beyond that, it is investors siphoning off the profits of a company that could be reinvested into it. | |
|
| | | | | openbox9Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2 | Re: Gee... Equity isn't everything, companies often sell debt to finance business expansion. Don't forget secondary equity offerings when they do happen. Stock price is important to a publicly traded company. Perhaps you are discussing dividends with your siphoning claim? | |
|
| | | | | ind_ed
join:2011-03-11
Edison, NJ | Common man,
You know, Its the Ceo's and the few others at the top that suck these
company's dry for everything there worth, then cry crocodile tears about
having to raise prices, so they can repeat the raiding of cash for them self's
over and over again.
You hear about 100 million CEO salerys, like its no big deal, were do you think
the money comes from? foolish Investor's and inflated consumer prices
remember for every cent you personally make off a stock a ceo makes
around a hundred dollars. not to mention when you add all CEO salerys
up and the inflated prices of everything that causes, throughout a avg workers
life the stock market as it is now is destroying any decent quality of life for the
masses.
Think this is BS
Look at your Portfolio, check out what YOU made from owning a particular
company's stock then compare that to what a CEO and a few other top exc
got paid during that time period and you will see, its nothing but a ponzi
scheme, thats kept alive only by increasing consumer prices.
Someone once told me, wall street was nothing more then one giant booky
I said please don't give bookys a bad name, gambling doesn't effect food,
gas or housing prices for millions of workers on a national scale. causing
starvation and wars over oil, so a few could live like kings | |
|
| | | Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..
| said by Skippy25:Investors siphon money from expanding and building infrastructure from a very profitable company. That profit incentive is the reason why they invested the money in the first place. That's how capitalism works.
We've gotten a lot of excesses in the modern age (CEO salaries and toothless Boards of Directors come to mind) but you are seemingly taking issue with the foundation of our system itself. I doubt you'll find a very sympathetic audience for your viewpoint outside of the extreme left wing. | |
|
| |  ArrayListnetbus developerPremium
join:2005-03-19
Evanston, IL
·Comcast
| said by openbox9:We're a consumption, gotta have it, society and many aren't willing to make that sacrifice. Witness the continuing cost increases in pay TV.
customers do sacrifice for new infrastructure. they pay their monthly fees.
Pay TV only increases in price because the market hasn't stabilized yet. The powers that be realized that they can get away with charging more and more for the service and people keep paying for it. There is no competition therefore the products will just go up in price all the time. | |
|
| | | openbox9Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2 | Re: Gee... said by ArrayList:Pay TV only increases in price because the market hasn't stabilized yet. The powers that be realized that they can get away with charging more and more for the service and people keep paying for it. Thanks for solidifying my point. The market is still willing to bear price increases.said by ArrayList:There is no competition therefore the products will just go up in price all the time. No competition in the pay TV market? | |
|
| | | | ArrayListnetbus developerPremium
join:2005-03-19
Evanston, IL | Re: Gee... Where else can I get ESPN other than the regular 3 sources? Cable/Sat/IPTV? | |
|
| | | | | openbox9Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2 | Re: Gee... Don't know, and I really don't care since Disney is a major reason as to why pay TV costs continue to increase. Anyway, cable + 2(sat) + IPTV appears to give you four choices for ESPN porn. | |
|
| | | |
|
1 edit | The cost of T1 has come down low enough that several people in a neighborhood could share one or two and each person kick in an equal share of the price. | |
|
| | |
| | Maybe Glenn Britt Will Finally Get It I would laugh if TW does go to a usage model and another ISP company comes in (or already exists) that does flat rate and all the TW internet customers flock to the flat rate ISP in droves.
Maybe then Britt will finally get it. Then again maybe he's too stupid not to get it at all in that he'll probably think of another lame excuse to explain as to why TW customers are leaving for the flat-rate ISPs. Ten bucks says he'll blame piracy.
--
The true patriot is motivated by a sense of responsibility, and out of self interest for himself, his family, and the future of his country to resist government abuse of power. He rejects the notion that patriotism means obedience to the state. | |
|
|  antdudeA Ninja AntPremium,VIP
join:2001-03-25
United State
kudos:4
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: Maybe Glenn Britt Will Finally Get It said by Nightshade:I would laugh if TW does go to a usage model and another ISP company comes in (or already exists) that does flat rate and all the TW internet customers flock to the flat rate ISP in droves.
Maybe then Britt will finally get it. Then again maybe he's too stupid not to get it at all in that he'll probably think of another lame excuse to explain as to why TW customers are leaving for the flat-rate ISPs. Ten bucks says he'll blame piracy.
I can't even get another broadband ISP in my area.  | |
|
| ind_ed
join:2011-03-11
Edison, NJ | Worst case should one even come along.
Then TW will simply just buy out that company
with meaningless paper based on the fact prices
will raise after the accusation not to mention most
likely generating another venue for even more top
executive and Ceo bonuses.
Its a no lose for TW, Our US system is great for
these guys don't you think? | |
|
 IIIBradIIIComm M-E-L Instr
join:2000-09-28
Greer, SC | Because Repeating It Over And Over Magically Makes It True? Because Repeating It Over And Over Magically Makes It True?
It worked for evolutionary theory. | |
|
|
See 15 replies to this post |
|
| | Not true No one will pay less, but many people will pay more.
It is not true metered billing, but low caps and high overage charges.
If I use almost 0 electricity this month I will pay almost 0, but even if I turn off my cable modem, I will not pay 0 no matter what plan I choose. | |
|
|  baineschile2600 ways to livePremium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI
·Comcast
| Re: Not true said by AlexNYC:No one will pay less, but many people will pay more.
....If two people are paying two different prices, one is more, and one is less? | |
|
| |  jmn1207Premium
join:2000-07-19
Ashburn, VA
kudos:1 | Re: Not true said by baineschile:said by AlexNYC:No one will pay less, but many people will pay more.
....If two people are paying two different prices, one is more, and one is less? I believe it was meant that everyone will be paying more than they currently do, despite the variations between each households' bills.
I'm sure there will be a few customers that may see smaller bills, but the idea behind this shift would be for the cable company to make a bigger profit. While I am certainly not privy to the exact numbers involved, I strongly suspect that the overwhelming majority of customers would see an increase on their monthly bills with this proposed scenario of usage based billing.
This appears to be the typical modus operandi of any major corporation. Once the maximum profit has been attained and growth begins to stagnate, additional value-added features are introduced. Once this space has largely been filled, completely different segments of business are implemented, such as moving into the telephone service arena, as a relatively recent example.
It's a bit like a corporate version of the movie Highlander. "There can only be one!"
| |
|
| | Gami00
join:2010-03-11
Mississauga, ON | relative to what your paying now..
both are paying more, just one is paying more than the other one..
regardless, you don't actually save anything. | |
|
| | | | If the basic rate is lets say $42 per month, but they put a cap in place down to lets say ~50 GB per month + overage charges, no one will be paying less than $42, but a whole lot of people will be paying a lot more. Get it?
It's a scam and they can get away with it since for most people there is no real competition when it comes to ISP. | |
|
 QCPremium
join:2008-03-02
Cleveland, OH | The meter's running OK, lets say AT&T does metered billing. Could IPTV (like U-Verse) traffic be separated? Because that's Mega GIGs, and if they can separate it, I will fear them. | |
|
|
See 8 replies to this post |
|
 gatorkramNeed for SpeedPremium
join:2002-07-22
Winterville, NC
kudos:2 |  Abuse your internet connection day...
Everyone could find some things to download and upload, utilizing their full pipe for a 24 hour period.
It would be to protest silly per gig usage charges, caps, etc.
--
Give me bandwidth or give me death!
»/testhistory/661871/4f240 | |
|
|
See 6 replies to this post |
|
 espaethDigital PlumberPremium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2 | Because Repeating It Over And Over Magically Makes It True? You're just annoyed that they're stealing your approach, Karl. | |
|
| openbox9Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2 | Re: Because Repeating It Over And Over Magically Makes It True? Hehe, couldn't help but snicker at this one.
Nonetheless, repeating rumors over and over does tend to cause many of those rumors to take hold in my experience. So, Karl is on to something (witness many around this site) and so are these management teams to continue to harp the necessity of UBB. | |
|
| | | Touche. Though he started it. | |
|
|  BHNtechXpertBHN StaffPremium,VIP
join:2006-02-16
Saint Petersburg, FL
kudos:86 | said by espaeth:You're just annoyed that they're stealing your approach, Karl.
LOL!!! | |
|
| | | said by espaeth:You're just annoyed that they're stealing your approach, Karl.
Except that in Karl's case, what he says is already true to start with. | |
|
| | No one is fooled when you get your internet bill As can be seen with Rogers and Bell in Canada under usage based billing many people see their internet bill double. | |
|
| | Repeating a Lie They teach in business grad school that if you repeat a lie over and over the public will believe it. As the cost of providing the service decreases all they care about is increasing the cost to the customer because the pool of customers is drying up, everyone is connected. | |
|
baineschile2600 ways to livePremium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI Reviews:
·Comcast
| Proposal: Speed AND consumption pricing models. A while ago, I thought of a speed/consumption based model. I dont think per-gig is the answer, but there may be overages.
This is just an example
Speed:
3mb - $10
10mb - $20
25mb - $35
100mb - $70
Usage:
10gig - $10
100 gig - $20
500 gig - $35
Unlimited - $50
That way, people that need a lot of bandwidth, but may not need the speed (big file transfers, work related) can buy a large useage, but maybe a lower speed. If someone needs a lot of speed, but not necessarily a lot of usage (occasional video online, gaming), it can support them. Then, people who want a super fast connection with as much as they can download will have an option, but it will be more expensive than the rest. "Grandmas" can get a lower internet, and low usage, for the "reading the emails once a week" as a reasonable cost.
Again, these are just ballpark figures more than anything. Obviously over time, speed and consumption will increase, but a foundation where people actually have a CHOICE would be nice.
Thoughts? | |
|
| | | Re: Proposal: Speed AND consumption pricing models. That's actually not the worst idea I've ever seen... | |
|
| | baineschile2600 ways to livePremium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI | Re: Proposal: Speed AND consumption pricing models. Thanks...is it near the bottom at least?!?!?!?! | |
|
| | | There's nothing wrong with what you have listed, except that what TWC will do is look at usage patterns. If they find that 90% of their users go over 2GB then that will be their first tier, not 10. That would be called "leaving money on the table". Then they find that next point is 5GB, so that will be their 20 dollar one. Then 20GB will be their 35 GB one. The goal of this pricing type is to make the tiers right at that point where average users will go into overages or be forced to pay into the higher tier they wont really use. Cell companies have perfected this and for some reason we accept it, even when there are providers who charge the same or less for unlimited. This is why the TWC CEO thinks consumers will "come around" because they are already used to it as VZW, AT&T, Sprint and Tmo voice customers, and VZW, and AT&T data customers.
There are basically two types of ATT customers, ones that always bust over their minute usage and pay overages, or ones that have tons and tons of rollover they will never use. Sure there is a small minority who the plans fit really close to their usage. And ~90 million users put up with that crap. And that's just at&t. | |
|
| | | That would be nice. But we are Capitalists and that will never happen. | |
|
| |  DaveDudeNo Fear
join:1999-09-01
New Jersey
kudos:1
 ·ViaTalk
·Vonage
| Re: Proposal: Speed AND consumption pricing models. said by ToiletMint:That would be nice. But we are Capitalists and that will never happen.
Dont be too sure of that. | |
|
| | I'll move to a business account When this happens I will move to their $71 a month 5mbps business account with no caps. | |
|
|
| | How about this usage based billing model So lets charge the customer whats fair.
So 5 cents per GB(300GB = $15) and then a monthly system access fee. Sounds fair to me. Well as long as the system access fee(for installs and, etc.) is only about $20 and not $50 per month.
Lets get rid of all that "under the line" pricing add-ons. We all know that is just B.S. intended to make the 'advertised price' look a lot cheaper than what the customer actually pays in the end.
Lets stop ISP's from charging you a 'modem rental fee', when you are 'not' renting a modem. It's just a scam to get more money out of the end user. It's also called Fraud and Theft, for pretending to be providing a product that does not exist, to the end user.
Now excuse me while I go to pay my Oxygen Tax. I didn't know there was one, but some guy in a 3 piece suit just showed up at the door alerting me about it and he has a receipt book, so it must be legit.
--
Consumer Rights is more than just a suggestion. | |
|
| | | Re: How about this usage based billing model That all makes too much sense. How dare you even think of such heresy!
Death to zalternate! | |
|
| | | PUDDY: Let&'s finish this up.
JERRY: Did you two break up?
PUDDY: (While punching up numbers on a calculator) That chick's whacked. We're history. (Back to the transaction) I just left out a couple of things:
rust-proofing..
JERRY: "Rust-proofing"?
PUDDY: (Reading off what he's adding up on the calculator) Transport charge, storage surcharge, additional overcharge, finder's fee
JERRY: "Finder's fee"? It was on the lot!
PUDDY: Yeah, that's right. (Continues reading off) Floor mats, keys..
JERRY: "Keys"?!
PUDDY: How ya gonna start it?
(Scene ends) | |
|
| | | said by zalternate:So lets charge the customer whats fair.
So 5 cents per GB(300GB = $15) and then a monthly system access fee. Sounds fair to me. Well as long as the system access fee(for installs and, etc.) is only about $20 and not $50 per month.
Lets get rid of all that "under the line" pricing add-ons. We all know that is just B.S. intended to make the 'advertised price' look a lot cheaper than what the customer actually pays in the end.
Lets stop ISP's from charging you a 'modem rental fee', when you are 'not' renting a modem. It's just a scam to get more money out of the end user. It's also called Fraud and Theft, for pretending to be providing a product that does not exist, to the end user.
Now excuse me while I go to pay my Oxygen Tax. I didn't know there was one, but some guy in a 3 piece suit just showed up at the door alerting me about it and he has a receipt book, so it must be legit.
sounds just like the wallet inspector....
i have said it once ill say it 100 times if this is all about keeping the pipes free flowing send out notice to the high users that in peek time they might be throttled. having your connection going full blast during peak times vs middle of the night when no one is on is 2 different stories. if they ever start talking about true things ill hear what they have to say. until then its just a ploy to get more money. | |
|
| | Wouldn't be easier.... Since it's all about the video demand anyway, and now that Neutrality's dead, for ISP's to just slap a 'video' toll (or codec toll, whatever) on VOD providers, and do a complete end run around the consumer?
Big ISP's could negotiate with the Netflix's of the world on their own and smaller ISP's could federate to participate. They could even share a bit with the studios as a way to ensure compliance by the streaming companies. | |
|
| kaila
join:2000-10-11
Lincolnshire, IL | Re: Wouldn't be easier.... 'just slap a video toll'? 'share a bit with the studios to ensure compliance'? 'do an end run around consumers'?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
Just how corrupt do you want the system to be?!?
--
Jeff Howe
Jeff's Blog - »www.ostjournal.net | |
|
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
| Stop mentioning video downloads. I hope Dish and Direct TV don't get the crazy idea that the more TV I watch each month the more my satellite TV bill should be. I don't agree that metered billing is needed any more for ISPs than it should be used by satellite TV providers.
Can you imagine your cable or satellite bill being metered. Don't tell me that commercials keep those costs down, becasue I can't open a web page that isn't loaded with some type of ad, which I suspect is increasing the volume of data on the website and thus soon will be increasing my internet cost. So now I'm forced to pay more to see more "commercials" aka internet ads, popups, etc.
--
Everyone in my family votes democrat except me, I learned how to read.
The government cannot give you anything that it did not take from someone else. | |
|
|
See 6 replies to this post |
|
 SLDPremium
join:2002-04-17
San Francisco, CA | LOL.. the truth: "something that's going to happen whether U.S. consumers like it or not" And Time Warners' stock drop is something that's going to happen whether their investors like it or not. | |
|
 SnakeoilIgnore Button. The coward's feature.Premium
join:2000-08-05
Mentor, OH
kudos:1
·RoadRunner Cable
·magicjack.com
| Bring it. I am willing to cut the cord and be internet free. Or find a provider that will met my needs.
IMO, if they go to metered billing, then the cable/phone companies need to open the last mile to any provider. So the rates can be more competitive.
Right now, I have to it the shit Time Warner is selling me, because there is no competition in my area.
Sadly though, our whore of a government appears to be in bed with businesses and is all for screwing the consumer over.
--
To All Real Dads. For All Real Moms Every Real
Service. | |
|
| | You forgot the key part... Speaking this week at the Deutsche Bank Securities Media & Telecom conference in Palm Beach, the CEO Time Warner Cable CEO Glenn Britt proclaimed that metered billing on residential broadband remains something that's going to happen whether U.S. consumers like it or not: He forgot to include the key part of this statement. That they will only implement this metered billing in areas where they don't have competition or the other member of the duopoly has implemented metered billing as well. That was the lesson they learned in the previous trial, when the customers have another option you will lose them so you only implement metered billing where they don't have a choice.
I'm absolutely certain that they will be implementing this where they have no competition (or they convince the competitor to implement this as well) and customers don't have the ability to vote with their wallet. | |
|
|
|
·
Time Warner Management Mis-spoke!
