AT&T CFO Sees Tiered Pricing Future for Carriers
Actually 4G makes this argument an even bigger lie
Considering LTE offers as many as 10x the data sessions per 10mhz of bandwidth versus hsdpa this argument is actually moot. As we move towards true IP based WWAN networks, IPv6 not withstanding, these arguments hold less and less water.
It would be more accurate to say that the corporate CFO is betting we'll pay more just because he says so. Unfortunately americans have thus far told the big 4 wireless providers in the US that it is OK to do so. Contracts with high (even teired) ETF fees are OK, we want our $800 phones for free, and we'll then pay anything to keep them on the air.
Such a dumb model, I wish we'd become more like Europe, where most pay full price for their phones, and there are enough competitors that true unlimited offe...
(continues)
It would be more accurate to say that the corporate CFO is betting we'll pay more just because he says so. Unfortunately americans have thus far told the big 4 wireless providers in the US that it is OK to do so. Contracts with high (even teired) ETF fees are OK, we want our $800 phones for free, and we'll then pay anything to keep them on the air.
Such a dumb model, I wish we'd become more like Europe, where most pay full price for their phones, and there are enough competitors that true unlimited offe...
(continues)
...
Amen. I now buy my phones unlocked anyway and have since been with CinBell (best rates so far). I'm glad to see Sprint is going with $70 unlimited plans. I have a feeling that Evo is gonna sell like hotcakes with that plan.
...
Yes, just Cincinnati area. When out of the area, you hop on T-Mobile and ATT towers.
...
WarriorProphet said:
Considering LTE offers as many as 10x the data sessions per 10mhz of bandwidth versus hsdpa this argument is actually moot. As we move towards true IP based WWAN networks, IPv6 not withstanding, these arguments hold less and less water.
While you're right about the huge throughput upgrades, you are paying no attention at all to the cost of providing the service.
Actual cost savings per GB delivered under LTE is only about a 50% reduction.
Multiply 10x data speeds with a 50% cost savings, and you'll quickly find that a 4G user running full speed for 2 hours costs the carrier at least FIVE TIMES MORE to service then a 3G customer running full speed for 2 hours.
So- as long...
(continues)
...
Well that actually runs into the secondary issue of the cost of broadband and fiber backhaul in the US, which is also out of proportion, providing more bandwidth on the datacom side is also similarly cost effective, but people like AT&T and Verizon enjoy overcharging each other for the use of their fiber networks in between, so we get this spiraling price issue.
Essentially the lack of regulation on what these things should cost vs what the end user is charged has screwed us in the US, with big companies getting richer. Even if Google doesn't end up delivering their fiber to the home as a product, they should spurn someone to realize that data bandwidth shouldn't be so expensive. We could easily be experiencing speeds up to 100x what we c...
(continues)
Essentially the lack of regulation on what these things should cost vs what the end user is charged has screwed us in the US, with big companies getting richer. Even if Google doesn't end up delivering their fiber to the home as a product, they should spurn someone to realize that data bandwidth shouldn't be so expensive. We could easily be experiencing speeds up to 100x what we c...
(continues)
...
I will agree that this country needs a third MAJOR fiber backhaul supplier. Two horses is not enough to spur sufficient competition to keep prices down.
The rest of what you mentioned has very little basis to support it. I prefer open-market competition over government regulation whenever possible. I do not believe telecom needs to be financially regulated in the way natural gas and electricity are, because they are not strict monopolies anymore.
The rest of what you mentioned has very little basis to support it. I prefer open-market competition over government regulation whenever possible. I do not believe telecom needs to be financially regulated in the way natural gas and electricity are, because they are not strict monopolies anymore.
...
Most European plans do NOT include calling landlines, ever, in their minutes. Even if you have an unlimited plan, you have to pay per call to landline.
The concept of unlimited mobile to mobile on network, or free nights and weekends is also a fantasy.
And tiered data pricing? the Europeans ALREADY HAVE IT.
The "it's better in europe" is seriously a "grass is always greener" argument.
The concept of unlimited mobile to mobile on network, or free nights and weekends is also a fantasy.
And tiered data pricing? the Europeans ALREADY HAVE IT.
The "it's better in europe" is seriously a "grass is always greener" argument.
...
AT&T should fix their lousy 3G network first, before thinking about a 4G network.
...
Ah, but you just hit on one of the other fallacies of american wireless, that there is a cost per minute. There in fact isn't, though there is a minuscule (1/10th or less of a penny) cost in connecting the call, it actually doesn't cost any different if you talk 5 minutes or 5 hours, same as on a land-line. (And on LTE based systems where calls are routed as VOIP it is even less).
That is if net neutrality doesn't continue to get whittled away at (by rulings like this: http://bit.ly/a7RwGW).
If net neutrality were protected 4G and beyond is more likely to look like this: http://bit.ly/23ZTmY
That is if net neutrality doesn't continue to get whittled away at (by rulings like this: http://bit.ly/a7RwGW).
If net neutrality were protected 4G and beyond is more likely to look like this: http://bit.ly/23ZTmY
...
1) the Court ruling was in FAVOR of net neutrality. by forcing congress to actually pass a law about it, they will protect net neutrality instead of putting it in the hands of non-elected officials.. the FCC had no right shooting from the hip without authority. NOTHING of net neutrality was widdled away.
In fact this ruling ALSO prevents the FCC from forcing a carrier to throttle bandwidth (to improve the experience for more people and allow carriers to expand faster)
Seriously.. people saying that ruling was against net neutrality don't understand our government or legal system.
2) your argument about how much a call costs completely ignore sunk costs (towers and backhaul), Upkeep, and the power needed to keep a signal active. ...
(continues)
In fact this ruling ALSO prevents the FCC from forcing a carrier to throttle bandwidth (to improve the experience for more people and allow carriers to expand faster)
Seriously.. people saying that ruling was against net neutrality don't understand our government or legal system.
2) your argument about how much a call costs completely ignore sunk costs (towers and backhaul), Upkeep, and the power needed to keep a signal active. ...
(continues)
...
This forum is closed.
