My question to Telkom

[mrSteyn]

This is what I dont understand: They obviously dont worry about local bandwith, because once youve been capped, you have unlimited local bandwith every month, and people rape that for what its worth once they are capped. So why then do local uploads/downloads add to your cap? That is the insane part. I would be more than happy if the cap goes down to even 2 gigs, BUT if local uploads/downloads are not added to calculate your 3 gig usage. Or even give people a choice, 2 gigs international or 3 gigs combined? This will make a lot of customers happy!

 

[mbs]

The bottom line is that capping is patently unacceptable, as it infringes on your usage rights, is punted on a shaky marketing principle ostensibly for the common good, and constrains development, entrepreneurship and all those other good things that should go along with it. No amount of alternative suggestions will cause a change anyway, as Telkom do not have the courtesy to listen to their clients. Compare that to the approaches of Sentech, DLink, etc. I'm afraid your suggestion won't fly, because of this...

 

[antowan]

Hi there

This thread got me thinking. I have a theory which I need to prove first, but here it is. I think Telkom might be limiting this product (any product for that matter) which is aimed at ordinary residential customers in such a way that it cannot be used to surcomvent the other costly business services it is running at the moment. In other words. They looked at the cost of their commercial products and knew they could not price this residential product accordingly so they simply went and put some rediculous limits on usage in order to prevent users of their business services getting clever and switching... In other words it will end up costing you more than it should to get more out of this service.

Cheers
Antowan

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by mbs</i>
<br />The bottom line is that capping is patently unacceptable, as it infringes on your usage rights, is punted on a shaky marketing principle ostensibly for the common good, and constrains development, entrepreneurship and all those other good things that should go along with it. No amount of alternative suggestions will cause a change anyway, as Telkom do not have the courtesy to listen to their clients. Compare that to the approaches of Sentech, DLink, etc. I'm afraid your suggestion won't fly, because of this...
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

He who does not understand the value of war at the right time, cannot comprehend the value of life at any time - Anonymous

 

[Perdition]

It isn't theory, this is EXACTLY why they have structured and priced it the way they have. They don't believe businesses (and home users for that matter) are entitled to "cheap" always on internet access. If ADSL were uncapped and had the option of a static IP, 90% of their Diginet users would migrate to it. Only businesses that are hosting web sites or serving critical B2B applications would not migrate.

 

[MaD]

In another thread somewhere a Hellkom techie was quoted as saying DSL is a poor man's service... hhmmmm, I have yet to see a poor man afford a DSL line! Probly he'd be living in his car just to be able to afford to connect to the Net [B)]

Seriously though, even with dynamic IP and port shaping, a 10GB limit would be more reasonable.

But Telkom is soon to release different flavours of DSL packages, some of which are 'more suited for P2P applications' and have higher caps etc. Can't wait to see the pricing... laughter is the best medicine as they say heheheh! []

<u>_________________________________________________</u>
Just imagine where SA would be now if it weren't for Telkom

 

[mbs]

For Ant - as Perdition noted, their pricing and service structure is geared towards ensuring the maintenance of their client base, so you're not wrong in your thinking.

Most businesses adhere to pricing formulae which promote the realisation of their specific business objectives, whether this is maintenance or growth of the client base, maximising of revenue levels, expansionary growth into new markets, and so on. I think the term used is 'segmented pricing' - this can even mean deciding on 'loss-leader' pricing in certain segments, depending on the business objective concerned (retailers usually do this quite often, as they are more concerned with pushing sales volumes, due to their profit being derived from discounted margins for bulk volume purchases from their suppliers).

In the case of Telkom, they're endeavouring to retain their lucrative corporate clientele, so the obvious solution would be to maximise the pricing for the ADSL service to that which the market will bear (without material loss of new ADSL clients), and couple such pricing to a crippled delivery offering which would cause the corporate client base to lose interest. It's a strategy which works in the short term, but which is destined ultimately to fail. They now have some competition in the form of Sentech and the imminent SNO, they've been zapped by regulatory decision (the Competition Commission), and they've pee'd-off their client base. Quite frankly, their management should be fired!

 

[caroper]

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by mbs</i>
<br />Quite frankly, their management should be fired!
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

If that happens, at least Steve White could apply for a job at Dream World in Cape Town. [}]

Cheers
Chris

 

[Sadad]

Good One Caroper..
I would be happy with 128 and no cap...
I dont need 512 par say... But I do need permanently on...
Why is the 512/256 the only package???

 

[Mean_Monster]

That was also my question all along. I only want a 256K always on connection at a reasonable price.