Internet Solutions ADSL Capping Kicks In

[hj2k_x]

Because all IS cares about is money and they are following the South African trend of stuff the consumer we want more money.
IS watched there competitor Telkom implent hard capping successfully and now they also want to get away with it and think if telkom an do it then why cant they.Framework for understanding competitors.
Also i dont see IS offering packagaes with more cheap local bw after hardcap but it dosent really matter as they dont give a **** about the home users they just care about the businesses.Is it just me or must services always decrease instead of increasing.Nice one IS loose customer loyalty before the SNO starts up.

Wow dude, go easy on IS there! While I am as disappointed as the next guy to no longer be able to rape my local bandwidth( and belive me i was raping it!) to put all the blame at IS's door is a mistake.

When signing up with IS we were all aware that they could implement this local cap at any time and we all agreed to it. I know we never hoped it would come into operation but still.

And IS's offerings with the bundled 30gig local still beats the carp out of anbything that telskom can currently offer! I challenge you to tell me otherwise!

 

[Moederloos]

Wow dude, go easy on IS there! While I am as disappointed as the next guy to no longer be able to rape my local bandwidth( and belive me i was raping it!) to put all the blame at IS's door is a mistake.

When signing up with IS we were all aware that they could implement this local cap at any time and we all agreed to it. I know we never hoped it would come into operation but still.

And IS's offerings with the bundled 30gig local still beats the carp out of anbything that telskom can currently offer! I challenge you to tell me otherwise!

Agreed. We forget too soon.
When Telkom (spit) introduced the hard cap on local in Nov last year, we all thought how wonderful IS was for allowing 30GB local on top of the 3GB international. Then Telkom (spit again) introduced their flexi-c[r]ap (spits again) and people rushed off to sign up. Now, IS is enforcing what was always their policy, and people are harsh towards them.

I am upset that the 30GB is now enforced, but is still beats Telkoms 3GB c[r]ap (spit).

 

[geoffr]

Local bandwidth does cos ISPs money

What a lot of the posters here seem to be ignoring is that ISPs (like IS or Verizon Business) have to pay Telkom for leased lines (Diginet and ATM services) plus for IP Connect, in order to provide local bandwidth to users.

For instance, a 155Mbps IPC service costs nearly R400 000 per month. Of that, 15% is immediately lost to ATM cell tax (the way ATM transmission works, you immediately lose 15% of your capacity when you send IP traffic over an ATM link).
A 2Mbps Diginet link under 15km in distance costs around R10 000 per month. 2Mbps between Jhb and Cape Town costs at least R60 000 per month, and the pricing does not get much better when you buy bandwidth in quantity.

Taking all of these factors, and SAT3 pricing into account, it will cost an ISP nearly R80 per gigabyte to build a service which competes with Telkom, and uses SAT3 fibre capacity. This only covers bandwidth - things like rent, elecricity, routers, staff salaries etc are not even included.
Now keep in mind that Telkom is selling access at R57 per gigabyte.

Through this exclusionary behaviour, they are preventing the likes of IS and Verizon from presenting any real competition. If IS and Verizon could source their inputs at reasonable costs, it is almost certain they would undercust Telkom.

 

[Prometheus]

Everyone knows that all these companies only care about money. The only thing that really cares about us is competition. Competition cares because they want our business so they offer us better options. If bandwidth prices suddenly dropped IS would be the first one on the wagon. Do they care about you, no they care about your business only. May competition soon come to us.