Kitz ADSL Broadband Information
adsl spacer  
Support this site
Home Broadband ISPs Tech Routers Wiki Forum
 
     
   Compare ISP   Rate your ISP
   Glossary   Glossary
 
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Author Topic: Now isn't this a good idea!  (Read 3049 times)

camallison

  • Kitizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1357
Now isn't this a good idea!
« 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
Logged

roseway

  • Administrator
  • Senior Kitizen
  • *
  • Posts: 39560
  • Penguins CAN fly
    • DSLstats
Re: Now isn't this a good idea!
« Reply #1 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.
Logged
  Eric

sevenlayermuddle

  • Helpful
  • Kitizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4650
Re: Now isn't this a good idea!
« Reply #2 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:
Logged

silversurfer44

  • Kitizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 4422
  • Lord Muck
    • Ben Novice Weather
Re: Now isn't this a good idea!
« Reply #3 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.
Logged
Colin II : It's no good being a pessimist, it wouldn't work anyway.

kitz

  • Administrator
  • Senior Kitizen
  • *
  • Posts: 32315
  • Trinity: Most guys do.
    • http://www.kitz.co.uk
Re: Now isn't this a good idea!
« Reply #4 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.
« Last Edit: April 17, 2012, 01:22:28 PM by kitz »
Logged
Please do not PM me with queries for broadband help as I may not be able to respond.
-----
How to get your router line stats :: ADSL Exchange Checker

kitz

  • Administrator
  • Senior Kitizen
  • *
  • Posts: 32315
  • Trinity: Most guys do.
    • http://www.kitz.co.uk
Re: Now isn't this a good idea!
« Reply #5 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.
« Last Edit: April 17, 2012, 02:29:40 PM by kitz »
Logged
Please do not PM me with queries for broadband help as I may not be able to respond.
-----
How to get your router line stats :: ADSL Exchange Checker

CurlyWhirly

  • Reg Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 370
Re: Now isn't this a good idea!
« Reply #6 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
Logged
Mike

GigabitEthernet

  • Kitizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1933
Re: Now isn't this a good idea!
« Reply #7 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.
Logged

camallison

  • Kitizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1357
Re: Now isn't this a good idea!
« Reply #8 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
Logged

sevenlayermuddle

  • Helpful
  • Kitizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4650
Re: Now isn't this a good idea!
« Reply #9 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.
Logged

camallison

  • Kitizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1357
Re: Now isn't this a good idea!
« Reply #10 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
Logged