Uncapped ADSL quality concerns from ISPs

[McGuywer]

Overall I'm happy with the service levels I'm getting from TI, haven't really seen any shaping to be honest (Currently 4 Mbps uncapped).

I'm wondering though, how long till I see higher speeds? According to Telkom's website I'm already upgraded to 10Mb, but I'm still getting 4 Mb speeds... Funny enough it says my area doesn't have 10Mbps capability, although I was previously on 10Mbps on this exact line (an I got 900KBps+ most of the time). The line was capped though, downgraded to 4Mbps but uncapped. The difference in speed is actually quite noticeable, that's why I can't wait till I'm on 10Mbps again...

But anyway, I guess I'll just have to wait.

Is your line syncing at 10 Mb? If not, you can ask Telkom if there is any open 10 Mb ports on the exchange and move your line over to that port.


If you are syncing at 10 Mb and only getting + - 400kbps, then your data account is only on 4 Mb. If you upgrade it, you should be getting around 900kbps.

 

[ranger]

the only cause of the squeeze which the ISPs are feeling is that there is an expectation from the user base that line speed

By bundling uncapped product offerings with wholesale line rentals ISPs have created a risk for themselves which has no actual basis. The differentiation by Telkom on ADSL access on a "line speed" basis only serves as a means to lower a barrier to entry on lower end products and to ensure a 1:20 contention ratio on DSLAMs it is at this point entirely unnecessary and the ISPs should actually be arguing that Telkom Wholesale should offer only 1 price for ADSL and another for VDSL with the ISP determining the speed at which the account runs. However because ISPs have built an expectation that they will offer connectivity at line speed which is not the international norm.

Did you know that when the VW Polo launched in SA, all the engines (1.4l, 1.6l, 1.8l, 2.0l) cost the same to produce, run-in, test etc. In fact, I believe the 1.4 and 1.6 shared one engine block size, the 1.8 and 2.0 shared another engine block size, the different capacities were achieved by different piston/piston-rod designs (the 1.4 and 1.8 shared the lower capacity piston/piston-rod design/size, and the 1.6 and 2.0 shared the larger one).

But, if they cost the same to produce, why was there such a difference in price? In order to differentiate, and have people with higher demands (usually willing to pay more for more kW) subsidise, to some extent, the costs of producing vehicles with lower power outputs and selling them at lower prices to compete with other low-cost vehicles.

There is a similar approach with covering the capital and operational costs of the DSLAMs.

If you want Wholesale ADSL prices to be the same across all speeds, then the median user will be paying more for the ADSL rental portion.

Also, note that while IPC charges cover some costs on the ADSL network, I believe there are some backhaul costs which are covered by the ADSL rental. I believe this is wrong, IPC should fully cover all the backhaul costs, but doing that would mean increasing IPC costs (while reducing ADSL prices). And then all the ISPs who don't wholesale ADSL lines will complain and make submissions to the regulator and the competition commission.

 

[ranger]

I can understand the concern ISP's have about abusers but will most clients actually use more data?
I only need around 40 to 50GB per month so doubling my line speed should have no impact on my ISP.
I'll switch back to capped if the ISP's jack up the uncapped prices but I really like the peace of mind about not being capped or having to pay for OOB top ups.

The problem isn't 95% who use <50% of the bandwidth, it's the other 5% who use the rest. If they double their usage (which they most likely will, judging by their behaviour to date), then total bandwidth requirements may increase by >50% (or about 70% if assume the other 95% will increase their usage by 20%).

 

[ranger]

Maybe ISPs should stop moaning and start delivering on at least half the things they promise. A happy client is unlikely to move ISPs for a few Rands saving. The problem here is alot of ISPs have been shafting their customers, giving them below standard services and suddenly Telkom goes from dirty word to shiney "White Knight"
And nobody saw that coming

The majority of customers don't buy on quality. When was there ever an article adequately covering network quality by various other ISPs? Yet, on almost a weekly basis MyBroadband has new price comparison articles.

Until customers buy on quality, ISPs have no motivation to maintain quality, instead the only motivation is to remain 'competitive' by dropping prices and putting pressure on the network.

 

[ranger]

Is your line syncing at 10 Mb? If not, you can ask Telkom if there is any open 10 Mb ports on the exchange and move your line over to that port.


If you are syncing at 10 Mb and only getting + - 400kbps, then your data account is only on 4 Mb. If you upgrade it, you should be getting around 900kbps.

Uncapped account upgrades were completed just before the announced start date for line speed upgrades. If the line is syncing at above 4Mbps, but your account is not achieving it, please PM your username.

 

[Paul Hjul]

Did you know that when the VW Polo launched in SA, all the engines (1.4l, 1.6l, 1.8l, 2.0l) cost the same to produce, run-in, test etc. In fact, I believe the 1.4 and 1.6 shared one engine block size, the 1.8 and 2.0 shared another engine block size, the different capacities were achieved by different piston/piston-rod designs (the 1.4 and 1.8 shared the lower capacity piston/piston-rod design/size, and the 1.6 and 2.0 shared the larger one).

But, if they cost the same to produce, why was there such a difference in price? In order to differentiate, and have people with higher demands (usually willing to pay more for more kW) subsidise, to some extent, the costs of producing vehicles with lower power outputs and selling them at lower prices to compete with other low-cost vehicles.

There is a similar approach with covering the capital and operational costs of the DSLAMs.

If you want Wholesale ADSL prices to be the same across all speeds, then the median user will be paying more for the ADSL rental portion.

Also, note that while IPC charges cover some costs on the ADSL network, I believe there are some backhaul costs which are covered by the ADSL rental. I believe this is wrong, IPC should fully cover all the backhaul costs, but doing that would mean increasing IPC costs (while reducing ADSL prices). And then all the ISPs who don't wholesale ADSL lines will complain and make submissions to the regulator and the competition commission.

I didn't know that it was the case with VW Polo engines I do however know of the general practice and I have pointed out quite often that Telkom practices subsidization in favour of the consumer - also Telkom wholesale ISP at a single price which I predict would be at the price of the 4Mbs option after the bumpup shouldn't preclude Telkom Internet from subsidizing down customers and offer things like a 1Mbps uncapped product or a 2Mbps line and whatever cap. Volkswagen would be pretty upset if they had to pay different prices for sheet metal.

I also don't think it will be necessary to increase IPC costs to make it all inclusive but it does make the case for reduction a harder sell.

My point however is that if we are going to get the ECA envisaged approach meaningfully

 

[Lightscribe]

Well blame yourselves for starting this uncapped price war disaster..

It's unsustainable! RUNNNN!

"Uncapped ADSL quality concerns from ISPs"? Simple, get rid of the clients that abuse the system. Oh, yes, stop crying also.

There are huge speed increases constantly being worked on, in this country, yet we have those that need to moan and groan.

The AUPs and throttling those that go overboard at the wrong hours, as being implemented atm, will control the worst offenders to a degree. Simply set up a national database, to allow ISPs to check the usage/total monthly throughput details, of other ISP accounts, that a new client may have had, which will specify whether that person abused the system and to what degree, thus preventing the ISP from accepting the client. Communicate this to new clients and they will know, that they will not be able to get an account with any ISP in the country, if they have a "bad record".

As SHVAK says:

Yes Telkom Internet (Telkoms ISP) did just that they gave through a free upgraded or one so close to free as to count. Up until Telkom Internet did this no one was complaining. Ironically it was Axxess (a subsiduary of Afrihost) who first gave a free upgrade. Telkom Internet jumped on the bandwagon assuming all other ISPs were going to follow...
The question now is who will be the next ISP to blink? Mweb has a massive Naspers bankroll so maybe they may look at killing the oposition as well?
Honestly it is anyones guess what will happen next, just grab some popcorn and enjoy the ride

Hang on tight to that popcorn also, since the speeds are going to keep getting better...

 

[Valerion]

The majority of customers don't buy on quality. When was there ever an article adequately covering network quality by various other ISPs? Yet, on almost a weekly basis MyBroadband has new price comparison articles.

Until customers buy on quality, ISPs have no motivation to maintain quality, instead the only motivation is to remain 'competitive' by dropping prices and putting pressure on the network.

I do seem to remember a large number of posts here, stating opinions along the lines of "ISP A has dropped their prices, I will leave ISP B and go to them cause they are cheaper" or "ISP A has dropped their prices, when will ISP B follow them?". I am not adverse to paying more to get a better experience, but that does not seem to be what the majority of consumers wants. But I suspect that is not limited to ADSL. Look at what consumers buy in general.