Let's drop the line rental

[me]

We need to focus on getting the line rental component of ADSL dropped.

It's the component most obviously lacking any justification.

Thing is, there's nothing special about ADSL lines compared with regular phone lines. ADSL lines are phone lines. Nothing justifies ADSL line rental. We're paying up to R680 / month for literally nothing.

Remember: An ADSL line is a phone line, nothing more.

Being plugged into the DSLAM is the only difference between a phone line and a phone line with ADSL. For that we pay monthly ISP fees. Telkom's already wholesaling that at sky-high prices - they easily cover the costs of the DSLAMs and IP backbone through reselling accounts.

It's outrageous that we're charged for "ADSL line rental" over and above phone line rental. If anyone can think of a single justification for it, please explain. Otherwise, phone billing and tell them they've made a mistake with your invoice. You've been billed twice for one line.

 

[noswal]

It's outrageous that we're charged for "ADSL line rental" over and above phone line rental. If anyone can think of a single justification for it, please explain. Otherwise, phone billing and tell them they've made a mistake with your invoice. You've been billed twice for one line.

Because the general public is too stupid to know better and telkom like to make money.

I gather that anywhere else in the world you just pay one (small) amount for dsl, which is a high speed internet connection.

 

[Nick333]

Well if youre using an ISP other than Telkom internet then Telkoms going to want to be be paid for the use of there equipment. The only way i can see this working is if the infrastructure is re nationalized and rented out to the ISP s in which case the ISP s could subsidize the cost of the line.

 

[me]

They are paid. Remember, they charge ISPs for the accounts they resell to us, and those funds should be going to paying for the infrastructure (DSLAMs, IP backbone). Still no justification for ADSL line rental. No equipment needs to change hands.

 

[Nick333]

Yep suppose youre right really.

 

[cmcbugg]

We need to focus on getting the line rental component of ADSL dropped.

It's the component most obviously lacking any justification.=.

I agree 1000% with this -- we spend a lot of time here discussing the caps and the exorbitant GB charges - but the line rental is probably 50% or more of the cost for most users and this is completely unjustifiable. This charge is non-existent is most other countries with ADSL and I would really like to see this issue taken up seriously with Telkom.

 

[nGAGEd55]

Well i remember somthing about this being mentioned in the ICASA ADSL Findings, so hopefully when they've got the new regulations sorted out, we might see some change. But i dont see these regulations coming into effect anytime soon, cos the draft regulations where promised to be done at least a month ago, but theres still nothing. So i suppose all we can really do is hope!

 

[TheRoDent]

We've been through this argument before. Even in other countries, the line charge exists. It's just levied by the ISP's not the Telco.

The fact is that DSLAMs cost money. Running DSLAMs costs money. Running Cisco gear to terminate the PPP session forwarded by the DSLAM costs money. Running an ATM backbone to connect all the DSLAMs costs money.

There's no way the line rental can, or should ever be dropped. It is a stupid idea. Yes, line rental can come down, much more. But it can never be entirely removed.

What we really need to focus on, is the cost of bandwidth. That is where Telkom is killing us.

 

[cyberbob]

We've been through this argument before. Even in other countries, the line charge exists. It's just levied by the ISP's not the Telco.

The fact is that DSLAMs cost money. Running DSLAMs costs money. Running Cisco gear to terminate the PPP session forwarded by the DSLAM costs money. Running an ATM backbone to connect all the DSLAMs costs money.

There's no way the line rental can, or should ever be dropped. It is a stupid idea. Yes, line rental can come down, much more. But it can never be entirely removed.

What we really need to focus on, is the cost of bandwidth. That is where Telkom is killing us.

would somebody take this "Telkom Spy" out back, and shoot him!

 

[Vox Populi Vox Dei]

Um. He's actually just pointing out facts.

How dare you call him a "Telkom Spy". You probably don't know his history do you? [with Sentech]

 

[Nick333]

I think on a short term basis cheaper data rates is more important. Its not as if Telkom has increased there line rentals a couple of hundred % lately .

 

[morebroadband]

Telkom are using this line rental to cross subsidize their ISP service. This was brought up at the hearings and ICASA has recommended that this be changed to a once off fee, to cover the costs of DSLAM.

RPM kindly proved to ICASA that Telkom justification for the line rental did not make sense.

I don't know where RODENT actually get his facts from, but by comparing us to the rest of the world in such a broad statement cannot go unchallenged.

Other Telcos may well be charging a type of line rental fee, but this is more than likely (in the few instances where this happens) $5 max. NOT fukcen the exorbitant prices Telkom charge.

This cross subsidization also makes it impossible for other ISP's to compete with Telkom Internet.

 

[nGAGEd55]

ICASA has recommended that this be changed to a once off fee, to cover the costs of DSLAM.

Well lets just hope that when the ADSL Regulations are eventually completed, this will happen!

 

[me]

TheRoDent:

The fact is that DSLAMs cost money. Running DSLAMs costs money. Running Cisco gear to terminate the PPP session forwarded by the DSLAM costs money. Running an ATM backbone to connect all the DSLAMs costs money.

There's no way the line rental can, or should ever be dropped.

You have an impressive grasp of the technology at work, but you missed part of my post - read:

For that we pay monthly ISP fees. Telkom's already wholesaling that at sky-high prices - they easily cover the costs of the DSLAMs and IP backbone through reselling accounts.

So what is the extra R680 for?

 

[Glipsie]

While you're at it, factor in the cost of IPConnect for the ISP's. Hell, that on its own can subsidise the entire network

 

[cmcbugg]

I think on a short term basis cheaper data rates is more important.

I couldn't agree less - if a home user could pick up a total ADSL package for say R199 (ie the ISP cost for a basic package) - there could then be a mass migration from dial-up to ADSL (and the majority of those users would probably not even touch their 3GB cap). At the moment with the line rental included the basic cost is more that R400 - to much as a replacement to dial-up. If that mass migration to ADSL were to happen, then ISP can start reaching economies of scale, then there would be much more public clout against telkom and they would have to listen more than they do now --- only then will people who want more/cheaper bandwidth truely start to benefit.

Don't get me wrong - I WANT more bandwidth - but until critical mass is reached with the general public able to afford ADSL (or at least the dial-up general public, like they can in most other countries with ADSL) - then we are going to remain a minority and Telkom wont give a fxxx --- so therefore ADSL LINE RENTAL MUST GO.

 

[Nick333]

I couldn't agree less - if a home user could pick up a total ADSL package for say R199 (ie the ISP cost for a basic package) - there could then be a mass migration from dial-up to ADSL (and the majority of those users would probably not even touch their 3GB cap). At the moment with the line rental included the basic cost is more that R400 - to much as a replacement to dial-up.

Fair enough. Incedently my total cost is R50 more this month because of higher data pricing.

 

[TheRoDent]

You have an impressive grasp of the technology at work, but you missed part of my post - read:

I didn't. Your post clearly said "Let's drop the line rental". My point is that I'd rather pay the line rental, whatever it may be and pay near nothing for the bandwidth. I'd rather pay Telkom for the service of being connected to the DSLAM and the ATM network, and then choose an ISP to my liking. Granted the line charge is still too high as it stands, but it's not the uncontrollable portion of the bill. The bandwidth is.

I am 100% against dropping the line rental. What you explained as "line rental" isn't. The DSL line rental is in fact the charge Telkom charges for the privilege of connecting you to a DSLAM at the other end of the copper. That's what you're paying for.

Imagine someone ordered a 1Mb line, but only ever used 1 Gig in a month. This would come to a total bill of let's say R54 at Telkom's current wholseale prices per Gigabyte.

With your suggestion, Telkom would only be able to clawback a percentage of the R54 from the ISP as appropriate for the line. Do you see how this is unsustainable? R54/month for sustaining a 1Mbit DSL line?

Line rentals must remain. Anyone proposing dropping of line rental in lieue of recovery per Gigabyte is just insane. It will take us past even the crap we've had on 1 November into the realms where DSL will only be usable by people that use a few Gigs a month. That is not the point behind broadband.

Sure the line rental price can get cheaper, but line rental isn't the most expensive part of the DSL service. Bandwidth is. And bandwidth isn't just expensive for DSL users. It's expensive for ISP's and Hosting companies, and anyone that wants to run a website.

We need to drop Telkom's monopoly on SAT1. That is what we need to do. I'd rather see the current monthly charges remain, and have gigs charged at R10 per gig.

 

[me]

Well put cmcbugg. I think line rental should be dropped, just like that - no pricing to debate or negotiate - just gone from our next invoice.

I think it's safe to say that Telkom isn't running ADSL on such razor thin margins that dropping line rental will put them in danger of bankruptcy.

But talk is cheap eh. Somebody please do something, and I'll fill your stocking with goodies this xmas.

 

[me]

TheRodent: I don't really understand your stance. Especially your example of my proposal in practice - R20 ISP charge - what?! That's certainly not what I was implying.

No, there will always be a base ISP cost - around R200 say. Telkom can have a portion of this. Then the ISP bundles bandwidth on top of that, for a total of say R250 to R500 to the customer.

The DSL line rental is in fact the charge Telkom charges for the privilege of connecting you to a DSLAM at the other end of the copper. That's what you're paying for.

R680 for this? Please. I don't disagree there's a cost, but it's not R680, and it doesn't depend on the speed. Rental costs can and MUST be completely absorbed into the monthly ISP fee.

The line rental is nothing but scandalous, and I try but I can't understand how you see it otherwise. Please think about this, because it's only with everyone's support that we have the power to change things.

Sure, bandwidth, through SAT-3 and locally, should be vastly cheaper, but we're doing this one step at a time, and the line rental is long overdue for deletion.