Re: Wahoot! Telecom have just invited me to a focus group!

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Alan, Jul 10, 2003.

  1. Alan

    Alan Guest

    "Howard" <> wrote in message news:cv3Pa.75083

    > Does anybody else want me to add their complaints to my list... Now's your
    > chance!


    See my thread 'Jetstream - what's your mileage?'. Give them a good hard poke
    in the ribs about their impractical pricing model.

    Alan
     
    Alan, Jul 10, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Alan

    Howard Guest

    Alan wrote:
    > "Howard" <> wrote in message news:cv3Pa.75083
    >
    >> Does anybody else want me to add their complaints to my list...
    >> Now's your chance!

    >
    > See my thread 'Jetstream - what's your mileage?'. Give them a good
    > hard poke in the ribs about their impractical pricing model.


    I just don't understand why Telecom continue to price it they way they do.
    My guess is 90% of the overseas traffic could be (and probably is) cached
    locally, so the southern cross cable pay back factor doesn't apply.

    Yes they're a monopoly so they can "just do it", but I love to see their
    econometric models which indicate hardly selling a product at all is the
    most profit maximising option! Someone else in this group has said that the
    reason might be they don't want to cannablise their toll call &/or fixed
    line data link revenue. That is more believe, but it still makes me angry.

    I think we'll only get movement on this when we join the modern countries
    and finally get competitive last mile access. I have asked Paul Swain why NZ
    has not done this, and while he agreed it was desirable, it was just "too
    hard". He wanted the new telecoms commisioner to have a year or two sort out
    some other issues. Well that was a year or two ago, so its time to start
    pressing for it again!

    Did anyone else read the article in last week's Independant (paper edition,
    so sorry - no link) where telecom was blaming free local calls as the reason
    why NZ is 25 out of 30 OECD countries for broad band penetration! The
    beginning of a campaign to end free calling! I can see it now, Telecom will
    "allow" competitor acces to last mile connections, in excahnge for an end to
    free local calling. They'll get their wish, and even better (for them),
    something in the fine print will make it uneconomic for competitiors to
    access those local lines.
     
    Howard, Jul 10, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. "Howard" <> wrote in message
    news:Yy6Pa.75233$...
    > I just don't understand why Telecom continue to price it they way they do.
    > My guess is 90% of the overseas traffic could be (and probably is) cached
    > locally, so the southern cross cable pay back factor doesn't apply.


    Er, you guess wrong, very litte traffic is cacheable now due to the huge
    uptake on peer to peer apps and the fact that 75% of web sites out there
    default to sending "dont cache me" tags..

    However, the pricing model of DSL in NZ is way out - 3 years ago it was
    worked out that at the $0.07/MB Telecom gave back to an ISP as a rebate to
    carry the traffic was actually enough to make a small margin on traffic
    costs - since then the cost on carrying international bandwidth has more
    than halved yet telecom still charge stupid amounts for DSL and excess data.

    The other interesting thing was that when telecom dropped the rebate system
    their excuse was (quoted almost word for word) "International traffic has
    become so cheap now that we do not believe you need a rebate" - Strange
    however that telecom never lowered costs to the end consumer..

    > Yes they're a monopoly so they can "just do it", but I love to see their
    > econometric models which indicate hardly selling a product at all is the
    > most profit maximising option!


    It can be if the product is over priced such as the existing DSL product is.
    It just doesn't make the end consumers very happy as they cant afford it
    *shrug* nothing to do with profits tho.

    --
    Steve.
     
    Steve Phillips, Jul 10, 2003
    #3
  4. Alan

    Howard Guest

    Steve Phillips wrote:
    > "Howard" <> wrote in message
    > news:Yy6Pa.75233$...
    >> I just don't understand why Telecom continue to price it they way
    >> they do. My guess is 90% of the overseas traffic could be (and
    >> probably is) cached locally, so the southern cross cable pay back
    >> factor doesn't apply.

    >
    > Er, you guess wrong, very litte traffic is cacheable now due to the
    > huge uptake on peer to peer apps and the fact that 75% of web sites
    > out there default to sending "dont cache me" tags..
    >

    Yes, but i) HTML make up a very small % of my bandwidth. Its large files
    that does it and they certainly can be cached and ii) Telecom have been
    known to ignore dont cache me tags too (according to Aardvark). Yes gaming
    can chew through the bandwidth, so there's something that can be restricted
    to NZ only traffic without complaint from me.

    > However, the pricing model of DSL in NZ is way out - 3 years ago it
    > was worked out that at the $0.07/MB Telecom gave back to an ISP as a
    > rebate to carry the traffic was actually enough to make a small
    > margin on traffic costs - since then the cost on carrying
    > international bandwidth has more than halved yet telecom still charge
    > stupid amounts for DSL and excess data.
    >
    > The other interesting thing was that when telecom dropped the rebate
    > system their excuse was (quoted almost word for word) "International
    > traffic has become so cheap now that we do not believe you need a
    > rebate" - Strange however that telecom never lowered costs to the end
    > consumer..
    >
    >> Yes they're a monopoly so they can "just do it", but I love to see
    >> their econometric models which indicate hardly selling a product at
    >> all is the most profit maximising option!

    >
    > It can be if the product is over priced such as the existing DSL
    > product is. It just doesn't make the end consumers very happy as they
    > cant afford it *shrug* nothing to do with profits tho.


    It all depends on the price elasticity for broadband. If usage climbs more
    than 100% for a 50% price drop then they're making more revenue. I for one
    think that would be very much the case.
     
    Howard, Jul 10, 2003
    #4
  5. Actully telecom have addressed this , Tight lipped at this stage. I was
    talking to some very seniour IP Architects at Telecom and changes are afoot.
    The comments where a little vague but it involved a more Clear Tempest
    model. Flat rate business products are the main focus and 2 new home models.

    the work Ethernet came out a few times as well




    "Alan" <> wrote in message
    news:1Y3Pa.3937$...
    > "Howard" <> wrote in message news:cv3Pa.75083
    >
    > > Does anybody else want me to add their complaints to my list... Now's

    your
    > > chance!

    >
    > See my thread 'Jetstream - what's your mileage?'. Give them a good hard

    poke
    > in the ribs about their impractical pricing model.
    >
    > Alan
    >
    >
    >
     
    Matthew G Brown, Jul 10, 2003
    #5
  6. On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 17:10:08 +1200, Howard wrote:


    > I just don't understand why Telecom continue to price it they way they
    > do.


    Simple. Low speed DDS circuits are _extremely_ profitable and if the
    Jetstream pricing is "too low", they'll utterly gut 3/4 of their data
    circuit profits.

    Telecom make substantial percentages of their profits on DDS (one estimate
    was over 50%), they're not
    about to do anything which may endanger that pricing model.

    Of course, should someone want to hurt them, targetting their DDS market
    is the best place to start.
     
    Uncle StoatWarbler, Jul 10, 2003
    #6
  7. Alan

    Howard Guest

    Uncle StoatWarbler wrote:

    >> I just don't understand why Telecom continue to price it they way
    >> they do.

    >
    > Simple. Low speed DDS circuits are _extremely_ profitable and if the
    > Jetstream pricing is "too low", they'll utterly gut 3/4 of their data
    > circuit profits.
    >
    > Telecom make substantial percentages of their profits on DDS (one
    > estimate was over 50%), they're not
    > about to do anything which may endanger that pricing model.
    >
    > Of course, should someone want to hurt them, targetting their DDS
    > market is the best place to start.


    OK, fair enough. Now why doesn't TelstraClear target this service? Sure it
    till requires last mile access, but a large number of businesses could be
    given built out access at these prices, surely?
     
    Howard, Jul 10, 2003
    #7
  8. Thus spake Howard:
    > Its large files
    > that does it and they certainly can be cached


    Can be, but it would a very challenging job to cache what even NZ'ers
    download. Terabytes of storage... probably cheaper just to get more
    bandwidth!

    --
    aaronl at consultant dot com
    http://homepages.visp.co.nz/~aaronlawrence
    ...Gross Ignorance: 144 times worse than ordinary ignorance.
     
    Aaron Lawrence, Jul 11, 2003
    #8
  9. Thus spake Matthew G Brown:
    > Actully telecom have addressed this , Tight lipped at this stage. I was
    > talking to some very seniour IP Architects at Telecom and changes are afoot.
    > The comments where a little vague but it involved a more Clear Tempest
    > model. Flat rate business products are the main focus and 2 new home models.
    >
    > the work Ethernet came out a few times as well


    Any idea of when? Months/years/pie in the sky?

    --
    aaronl at consultant dot com
    http://homepages.visp.co.nz/~aaronlawrence
    ...Gross Ignorance: 144 times worse than ordinary ignorance.
     
    Aaron Lawrence, Jul 11, 2003
    #9
  10. Alan

    T.N.O. Guest

    Aaron Lawrence wrote:
    > Any idea of when? Months/years/pie in the sky?
    >


    I have heard the month of August bantered about for quite some time for
    big changes to Jet*
     
    T.N.O., Jul 11, 2003
    #10
  11. On Fri, 11 Jul 2003 13:40:45 +1200, Richard Malcolm-Smith wrote:


    > If i recall correctly that was xtra he was complaining about. I have seen no
    > evidence of caching on any full speed ADSL connections that I have worked on


    Xtra run hefty Cisco transparent hardware caches on everything which
    passes through their networks, including high speed connections to
    companies, etc with multiple /24 ("Class C networks") on them.
     
    Uncle StoatWarbler, Jul 13, 2003
    #11

  12. > > If i recall correctly that was xtra he was complaining about. I have

    seen no
    > > evidence of caching on any full speed ADSL connections that I have

    worked on
    >
    > Xtra run hefty Cisco transparent hardware caches on everything which
    > passes through their networks, including high speed connections to
    > companies, etc with multiple /24 ("Class C networks") on them.
    >


    As Jetstream doesn't pass thru Xtra's Network then Xtra doesn't cache the
    data.

    Thanks
    Craig



    >
     
    Craig Whitmore, Jul 13, 2003
    #12
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. mdew
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    641
  2. Bruce Sinclair
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    657
    Bruce Sinclair
    Jul 10, 2003
  3. Callum
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    659
    Callum
    Jul 10, 2003
  4. Wombus
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    636
    RecylerMan
    Jul 10, 2003
  5. Philip Roy
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    699
    Philip Roy
    Jul 10, 2003
Loading...

Share This Page