• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Bellsouth considering Pay-by-the-byte broadband plans :(

Queasy

Moderator<br>Console Gaming
Link

I tell you what...between this and DirecTV's craptastic leasing plan where you have to pay a ton of money upfront for the privilege of leasing their receivers, I'm really wondering what marketing geniuses are graduating from college these days.

Large phone companies and telecom-equipment makers are developing plans that would blow up the flat-fee structure for high-speed Internet access and instead charge customers different rates based on how much bandwidth, or Internet capacity, they use.

Some phone companies, including BellSouth Corp., are considering "pay-as-you-go broadband" plans in which a consumer would pay more for streaming video, for example, than for mere Web surfing. Most current plans charge subscribers a monthly flat fee depending on the speed of their Web connection.

The plans, even though they are still in their nascent stages, are already drawing criticism from Internet content companies and consumer groups, which argue the new business models could create a tiered system and impede full access to all aspects of the Internet.

Part of the opposition stems from the fact that the Internet, once accessed, traditionally has been free of barriers such as special charges or fees. But that's starting to change. Besides eliminating flat-fee pricing for consumers, phone companies are also discussing ways to bill Internet content providers for premium delivery of their services, a move that has met with criticism from companies like Google Inc. in recent weeks. Another idea floated by Yahoo Inc. and Time Warner Inc.'s AOL to place a small fee on email to guarantee its delivery is opposed by bulk emailers such as the liberal advocacy group Moveon.org.

Major cable companies, for the time being, say they aren't considering new business models for Internet access. But cable companies, too, are introducing new pricing structures, such as video on demand that makes some programs available free, but charges users a fee for recently released movies and other premium content.

The new ideas such as pay-as-you-go are being fueled by operators looking to make up revenue after spending billions of dollars to upgrade their networks to boost capacity and by equipment makers that create the gear needed to technically implement the changes.

Managing networks to create new tiers of service is becoming a hot topic within the telecommunications sector caught up in a debate over "network neutrality," or the idea that owners of phone and cable networks can't dictate how a consumer uses the Internet or discriminate against any Internet content. Internet companies are pushing Congress to adopt network-neutrality rules that would keep intact the open nature of the Internet, but phone companies and equipment makers are opposed because they see the chance for more revenue. They also say they don't intend to block access or discriminate with their new plans.

On Tuesday, a meeting of five congressmen leading efforts to rewrite the nation's telecom laws ended with no decision about whether to tackle the network-neutrality issue. Equipment makers such as Ellacoya Networks Inc., Cisco Systems Inc. and Lucent Technologies Inc. have been pitching ideas to phone and cable companies for a number of new types of business models that their gear can make possible.

"The stars, the moon and the sun have really aligned for us that we can play a significant role [in providing services related to] network neutrality," says Gerald Wesel, the chief executive of New Hampshire-based Ellacoya.

But Internet companies such as Vonage Holdings Corp., which sells Internet phone service, strongly oppose the idea of charging Internet users on a per-application basis rather than the typical monthly flat fee that most operators charge for unlimited access. "It's such a significant departure from the way the Internet works," says Vonage spokesman Chris Murray. "It's exactly the opposite of the Internet model" in which customers buy access and can then do anything they want.

Consumer groups are also opposed. "The minute you let the phone companies decide which services are available, you've killed the Internet," says Mark Cooper, director of research at Consumer Federation of America.

Among the models under consideration is one raised in a December paper by Cisco that would charge consumers a nominal fee for instant messaging and steeper fees for Internet phone calls and gaming.

"Everybody is trying to experiment with what's the right service model and what's the right pricing model that gives consumers the right choices," says Robert Pepper, Cisco's senior managing director for global advanced technology policy. Cisco has discussed new business models with phone and cable companies.

Others include plans similar to those of wireless companies where customers would pay for a certain amount of monthly capacity and then face hefty charges if they exceed it. "Any model that allows the consumer to have more control and more choice makes sense to us," says BellSouth Chief Technology Officer William Smith, who is contemplating the new models but has no immediate plans to implement them.

Mr. Smith often laments the fact that his parents, who use the Internet for only low-capacity activities such as Web surfing and email, pay fees similar to those of heavy users who suck up capacity by downloading music or using BitTorrent, which is used by millions to download movies and other material off the Internet. Overall at BellSouth, 1% of broadband customers drive 40% of Internet traffic, he says. "People who drive cost in the network create additional charges in the network," Mr. Smith says. "If my elderly parents don't use a lot of traffic we ought to be able to create a service plan that meets their needs."

British Internet service provider PlusNet PLC worked with Ellacoya to put into place better network management tools, and the company also used a pay-as-you-go plan that charged subscribers the equivalent of $27 a month for a gigabyte of data transfer, then $1.80 for each additional gigabyte. Under the plan, Internet phone-call capabilities were free. The company says its new system boosted customers as well as revenue.

AT&T Inc. officials say they have been approached by equipment makers that have ideas for new broadband business models but are not considering any at this time. Verizon Communications Inc. says it offers a low-priced, low-speed monthly broadband plan for customers who don't need much capacity.

"I do think there are people who are saying just give me what I need, I don't need all this fancy stuff and it'll be fine," says Verizon spokesman Eric Rabe. "That's why we're selling this service."
 
They want to make moola like wireless companies on overage charges.

Imagine getting a $500 bill for downloading 300GB/month.

IMO, Bellsouth will lose customers quickly if they did this. Most other broadband providers are willing to give you unlimited downloads for the same price.
 
I see this alot. As far as I can tell, it's squarely aimed at the top 1% of bandwidth users. Run a game server from home? Use bittorrent 24/7? Use Newsgroups 24/7? Bellsouth and it's ilk doesn't make any money off you. Bellsouth makes money off the people who hardly use their high-speed internet at all.

Here's what it boils down to. ISP's want you to pay big $$$ for high-speed internet access, but they don't want you to actually USE it.
 
Screw BellSouth and the monopoly.

I am so mad that I have to pay $40/month for crappy 1.5MB DSL from them while others pay for less than half <$20 or less from SBC>.

You either stuck with BellSouth or Cox cable down here. It's sucked.
 
Originally posted by: Svnla
Screw BellSouth and the monopoly.

I am so mad that I have to pay $40/month for crappy 1.5MB DSL from them while others pay for less than half <$20 or less from SBC>.

You either stuck with BellSouth or Cox cable down here. It's sucked.

I'm not sure if it is just regional or what, but awhile back they lowered my bill from 43 to 37 base, for the 3M service. You may want to check and see if you can get an upgrade.

Also I had the 1.5 service but called them one day for an unrelated purpose, getting some wireless upgrades I believe, and they offered me the 3M service for 43 same price as the 1.5 was so of course I said sure. Then just recently a month or two ago they gave 5 off to all customers and now I have 3M at 37/month.
 
Originally posted by: Svnla
Screw BellSouth and the monopoly.

I am so mad that I have to pay $40/month for crappy 1.5MB DSL from them while others pay for less than half <$20 or less from SBC>.

You either stuck with BellSouth or Cox cable down here. It's sucked.

Similar thing here. It is either Bellsouth or Comcast. You have to pay Bellsouth $20+ for phone service just to get DSL. Or you can pay Comcast $14.95 for a horrible TV lineup or pay them $20 extra for Cable internet without their TV service...
 
Hmmm......... if they enforced "bandwidth cap" limits like some isps have......... they would not have to do this. Since they are going after the heavy users....... they can still make a pretty penny if they enforced a cap. So anything over the cap would be charged extra.

My ISP (telus) is supposed to have a bandwith cap........... but it's never enforced (confirmed by a friend who works there).

Cheers,
Aquaman
 
Originally posted by: OdiN
Are they going to refund all my dropped packets?

Good call, if they are going to start charging on a per-byte basis then they also should be held responsible for making sure every byte of requested data makes it to the end user. Just like when you get a bunch of dropped calls on a cell phone you can usually get your monthly fee reduced, ISPs should now bare responsibility for making sure everything runs perfectly.
 
Talk about working backwards. People buy broadband services to be able to interact with the vast capabilities of new entertainment. People who are just browsers, tend to hug their dial-up prices. If this flies, bellsouth will fall.
 
I see this as a common trend in the industry. Tiered service or "pay as you use" service.

Want a big fat pipe with all you can eat? Then you're gonna pay for it.
 
Originally posted by: Aquaman
Hmmm......... if they enforced "bandwidth cap" limits like some isps have......... they would not have to do this. Since they are going after the heavy users....... they can still make a pretty penny if they enforced a cap. So anything over the cap would be charged extra.

My ISP (telus) is supposed to have a bandwith cap........... but it's never enforced (confirmed by a friend who works there).

Cheers,
Aquaman
The problem with bandwidth caps is that they're retardedly small and often used in secret so you have no idea if you've gone over or not. At the university that I'm at, I have 3GB per day (which is once for upload and once for download), and a convenient page to see exactly how much I've used in the past 24 hours. If ISPs made it reasonable, then even fairly heavy net users like myself wouldn't complain - but the problem is, they won't do that. It will be something retarded like 800MB per week, with no way of knowing if you've used more until you get the bill. :|
 
Originally posted by: ProviaFan
Originally posted by: Aquaman
Hmmm......... if they enforced "bandwidth cap" limits like some isps have......... they would not have to do this. Since they are going after the heavy users....... they can still make a pretty penny if they enforced a cap. So anything over the cap would be charged extra.

My ISP (telus) is supposed to have a bandwith cap........... but it's never enforced (confirmed by a friend who works there).

Cheers,
Aquaman
The problem with bandwidth caps is that they're retardedly small and often used in secret so you have no idea if you've gone over or not. At the university that I'm at, I have 3GB per day (which is once for upload and once for download), and a convenient page to see exactly how much I've used in the past 24 hours. If ISPs made it reasonable, then even fairly heavy net users like myself wouldn't complain - but the problem is, they won't do that. It will be something retarded like 800MB per week, with no way of knowing if you've used more until you get the bill. :|

My ISP ...... you can check usage on your user account over the net......... although I get what your saying. It's a bit of a pain in the butt to check out.

Cheers,
Aquaman
 
Originally posted by: Aquaman
Hmmm......... if they enforced "bandwidth cap" limits like some isps have......... they would not have to do this. Since they are going after the heavy users....... they can still make a pretty penny if they enforced a cap. So anything over the cap would be charged extra.

My ISP (telus) is supposed to have a bandwith cap........... but it's never enforced (confirmed by a friend who works there).

Cheers,
Aquaman


I FVCKING HATE CAPS! THATS ALL MY DAM DIRECWAY IS ONE LARGE 170MB A DAY CAP! Whew! sorry about that. It pisses me off 😛. Seriously though, i have waited years for broadband to come to here (i live 30 miles out from the city) and now bellsouth has finally come just a month ago. i was going to get them in September when my contract with Direcway was up but now im going to have to rethink if im gonna be stuck in the same fvcking hell hole :|
 
Originally posted by: thecoolnessrune
I FVCKING HATE CAPS! THATS ALL MY DAM DIRECWAY IS ONE LARGE 170MB A DAY CAP!

It is somewhat amusing that you say that while writing in all caps. 😉

 
Back
Top