Kitz Forum

Announcements => News Articles => Topic started by: camallison on April 17, 2012, 10:33:01 AM

Title: Now isn't this a good idea!
Post by: camallison on April 17, 2012, 10:33:01 AM
ISPs should get 'up to' full fee for 'up to' broadband - see http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/04/16/wispa_upto_campaign/

I am sure we would all complain very loudly if petrol was sold on the basis of receiving up to a litre/gallon.

Colin
Title: Re: Now isn't this a good idea!
Post by: roseway on April 17, 2012, 11:14:39 AM
The petrol comparison isn't really valid, because it costs the ISP just as much to provide a slow connection as a fast one. If a measure like this were to be introduced, it would mean that costs would have to rise for people on fast connections, to pay for the reduced income from people on slow connections.

But in any case I think it would be impossible to administer, because practical speeds are dependent on so many factors, many of which are out of the ISP's control.
Title: Re: Now isn't this a good idea!
Post by: sevenlayermuddle on April 17, 2012, 11:53:07 AM
Personally I don't have any issue with the 'upto' word(s), providing you take it at face value it does actually describe the service.  And at face value, 'upto 20Mbps' actually means anywhere between 20Mbps and 0Mbps.  To me, that is useful information.

Rather I think the public need to be educated, so as to not confuse the word 'upto' with 'guaranteed'.  It's surprising really as the 'upto' word is all around us these days, in shop sale posters "Up to 50% off", newscasts "Up to 200 people were injured" and the likes, yet it only seems to be ISPs who are criticised for it.   :hmm:
Title: Re: Now isn't this a good idea!
Post by: silversurfer44 on April 17, 2012, 12:18:20 PM
Yes it's rather like the Under £5 bargain at £4.99
How long as that been going. People think they have a bargain as well.
I'm with 7LM on this one. Well said.
Title: Re: Now isn't this a good idea!
Post by: kitz on April 17, 2012, 01:14:52 PM
hmmmm not sure if that would be a good move at all.

Its bandwidth used (ie amount of data transferred) not bandwidth speed that is where most of the money goes.

Basic connection costs ie  exchange, port, backhaul are exactly the same regardless of what speed can be achieved.

The SP's have to sink huge amount of funds into the backhaul costs and ensure that there is enough backhaul bandwidth to cope with demand and along with MSANs, gateways and other routing costs, this is where the vast majority of the money goes.
 
"Final mile" costs are actually more expensive for the ISP/BToR as these lines tend to be the most troublesome and therefore cost far more in human resources than the shorter lines that can get higher speeds.

You could have user_a on a 24Mbps line downloading 2GB per month and user_b with a 60db line @ say 2Mbps downloading 100 GB per month.

Without doubt user_a is going to be costing the ISP very little compared to user_b not to mention that user_b is going to be far more likely to be wanting and needing more CS support and interaction with BTw/BToR.

Therefore why should user_a have to pay more than user_b when they are actually costing the ISP far less in real terms.

I also have some fears about what this could do to the pricing structure as a whole.. will it actually be a backward step?  Whilst I appreciate some general costs have decreased,  those of us who had broadband on fixed speeds many many years ago will know just how expensive fixed speed adsl was back then.  Bringing in 'up to 8Mbps' opened up speeds for many and better pricing, but as already said above, people needed to understand what 'up to' means and why it is 'up to'. 

Its always been my ethos that although I do sympathise some people not being able to get higher speeds, people need to understand that its not any cheaper to provision a 2Mbps line than a 24Mbps line.  If this comes to fruition then it may actually be a backwards step for adsl. :(

The worst part of 'up to' has already been dealt with by OFCOM as there were some ISPs who in the early days would advertise 8Mbps without the word upto being there..  but thats all been sorted now.
Title: Re: Now isn't this a good idea!
Post by: kitz on April 17, 2012, 02:15:10 PM
Perhaps I should clarify what I fear so much about a tiered price structure  based on speed again.

-----------------

When they brought in 'up to' broadband costs across the board decreased.
I used to pay £30 pm for a fixed 2Mb line (at one time it was £40!)  1Mbps fixed was about £25 and 512kbps fixed was about £22 prior to maxdsl.

I was very happy to swap over to 'upto' 8Mbps for £22 pm once my exchange was maxdsl enabled and the 'up to' came into effect.

Overnight thousands upon thousands of UK broadband users suddenly found their broadband was either cheaper and/or they got higher speeds for exactly the same amount of £.
Maxdsl and 'up to' pricing structure was a huge step forward.  A good step forward for broadband in the UK. It was based on the strategy that it doesnt cost any more to provision the higher speeds, therefore everyone paid the same and got what they could.


For me personally it was an instant saving of £8pm and a 6Mbps increase in speed.  Most people got 'up to 8Mb' for about the same monthly fee as what a fixed rate 512kbps would cost.

-------

Should we go backwards to those days again? 
I dont think so, because baseline + provision costs are still going to be the same regardless of speeds..  I honestly dont see how it will benefit many. 
Those getting slower speeds may get a few pence (say 50p at the most!) slashed off their bill, but you can bet the higher speeds will increase drastically. Anyone who thinks that because someone only gets 2Mbps that they will pay a quarter of what someone getting 8Mbps will is very naive because it just cant and wont happen.
Title: Re: Now isn't this a good idea!
Post by: CurlyWhirly on April 17, 2012, 07:36:57 PM
I also have some fears about what this could do to the pricing structure as a whole.. will it actually be a backward step?  Whilst I appreciate some general costs have decreased,  those of us who had broadband on fixed speeds many many years ago will know just how expensive fixed speed adsl was back then.
Yeah I can remember paying £34.99 to AOL for a 1 Mbps connection !



Should we go backwards to those days again? 
I dont think so, because baseline + provision costs are still going to be the same regardless of speeds..  I honestly dont see how it will benefit many. 
Those getting slower speeds may get a few pence (say 50p at the most!) slashed off their bill, but you can bet the higher speeds will increase drastically. Anyone who thinks that because someone only gets 2Mbps that they will pay a quarter of what someone getting 8Mbps will is very naive because it just cant and wont happen.
I entirely agree with your comments above even though I am only able to get around 3 Mbps on MAX DSL
Title: Re: Now isn't this a good idea!
Post by: GigabitEthernet on April 17, 2012, 08:37:27 PM
I like the new rules. For techie users, which many of us are, the new rules won't make much difference, but they are designed for the average consumer who doesn't understand broadband like we do. So the new rules will help them.
Title: Re: Now isn't this a good idea!
Post by: camallison on April 18, 2012, 08:08:28 AM
Thank you all for such detailed responses - I now stand corrected  ;)

It is good to hear such well-reasoned arguments on a respected Broadband forum, and I hope the Google trawl picks this up in response to the newspaper articles.

Colin
Title: Re: Now isn't this a good idea!
Post by: sevenlayermuddle on April 18, 2012, 09:46:31 AM
I don't think any of us meant to 'correct you', we were just stating viewpoints that may not have agreed with the original article.  :blush:

Thank you all for such detailed responses - I now stand corrected  ;)

It is good to hear such well-reasoned arguments on a respected Broadband forum, and I hope the Google trawl picks this up in response to the newspaper articles.

Sadly, newspaper articles don't seem influenced by well-reasoned arguments these days, it's usually just a case of whatever makes the best headline and will sell the most papers or (in the case of the Beeb) get the best audience figures.
Title: Re: Now isn't this a good idea!
Post by: camallison on April 18, 2012, 02:34:35 PM
>>  I don't think any of us meant to 'correct you', we were just stating viewpoints that may not have agreed with the original article.

You DID see my  ;) didn't you?  I wanted a measured response and got it.   ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;)

Colin