Uncapped ADSL: why throttle?

[Swa]

If this article is true, AH are actually loosing money from me, eg:

I use +-120GB of data on my 1Meg business account for R397,and if they pay R4 per GB that i use then it works out to R480.

R480-397= R83, they are loosing R83 from me per month. Is this correct?

No that isn't quite how it works. ISPs don't buy bandwidth per GB as we do but per Mbps. Whether you are using 120GB or 1GB they still pay the same at the end of the month unless they buy more capacity. What therefor happens is the more you use the more the per GB decreases. The only thing your usage does is affect congestion.

 

[bekdik]

The first thing that must happen is to change the product name to exclude the term uncapped where a limit exists. The suppiers must find different wasy of selling the bottom end product.

When a product is offered as uncapped,the client expects to have unlimited Internet access. They expect to get the speed for wich the product is offered for 24 x 7. Now quite obviously, if the product is going to be sold at the bottom level of the market, it would be unsustainable to the ISP.

 

[Icedman]

The first thing that must happen is to change the product name to exclude the term uncapped where a limit exists. The suppiers must find different wasy of selling the bottom end product.

EXACTLY! This is what I said here.

 

[HDS]

No that isn't quite how it works. ISPs don't buy bandwidth per GB as we do but per Mbps. Whether you are using 120GB or 1GB they still pay the same at the end of the month unless they buy more capacity. What therefor happens is the more you use the more the per GB decreases. The only thing your usage does is affect congestion.

No, that's exactly how it works. They are losing from him, that loss is recuperated from low-end users.

 

[Swa]

No, that's exactly how it works. They are losing from him, that loss is recuperated from low-end users.

Then do the calculation to show it. So you're saying they would have a bigger profit margin without him despite that they would still incur the same costs bar perhaps a small administration expenditure?

 

[HDS]

Then do the calculation to show it. So you're saying they would have a bigger profit margin without him despite that they would still incur the same costs bar perhaps a small administration expenditure?

The calculations were done in the 2 articles mybb published. It was also explained pretty clearly.

Assuming that the link is used close to capacity for most of the time, the effective rate per GB for only the IPC portion of the service is around R4.25 per GB (VAT inclusive).

If they claim that ISPs use close to 100% of their IPC capacity most of the time, one can convert that in effective cost per GB. If an ISP has a total 30Gbps on let's say 50 links and all are running at almost full capacity, you work out
how much 30Gbps would download in 30 days.

Convert the bits to bytes. 30Gbps / 8 gives around an average 3.2GBps download speed.

That is, 3.2 * ( ( ( 60s * 60s ) * 24h ) * 30d ) == 8294400 gigabytes of data downloaded in 1 month ( assuming the month is 30 days ).

Now take the total cost : R920 per Mbps * 30000 == R27600000

Divide total cost by gigabytes used : R27600000 / 8294400 == R3.32 per gigabyte. Add the VAT and you have a close to R4 odd per gigabyte.

That's just a very rough calculation, might have made a mistake somewhere. But as I said, business accounts run at a loss, since if he pays less than the effective cost of his downloads.

If he leaves, more bandwidth is free up, and the said ISP can have 2 or more low-end users take his place. Ergo, more monies.

You can translate total bandwidth into gigabytes .

Also

 

[Swa]

The calculations were done in the 2 articles mybb published. It was also explained pretty clearly.

And all mybb articles must be right of course.

If they claim that ISPs use close to 100% of their IPC capacity most of the time, one can convert that in effective cost per GB. If an ISP has a total 30Gbps on let's say 50 links and all are running at almost full capacity, you work out
how much 30Gbps would download in 30 days.

Convert the bits to bytes. 30Gbps / 8 gives around an average 3.2GBps download speed.

That is, 3.2 * ( ( ( 60s * 60s ) * 24h ) * 30d ) == 8294400 gigabytes of data downloaded in 1 month ( assuming the month is 30 days ).

Now take the total cost : R920 per Mbps * 30000 == R27600000

Divide total cost by gigabytes used : R27600000 / 8294400 == R3.32 per gigabyte. Add the VAT and you have a close to R4 odd per gigabyte.

That's just a very rough calculation, might have made a mistake somewhere. But as I said, business accounts run at a loss, since if he pays less than the effective cost of his downloads.

Flawed logic. ISPs DON'T pay per GB so per GB figures are meaningless.

If he leaves, more bandwidth is free up, and the said ISP can have 2 or more low-end users take his place. Ergo, more monies.

If's mean nothing. They don't have more low-end users. If he leaves they lose money they would have otherwise had and bandwidth is wasted.

 

[HDS]

And all mybb articles must be right of course.


Flawed logic. ISPs DON'T pay per GB so per GB figures are meaningless.


If's mean nothing. They don't have more low-end users. If he leaves they lose money they would have otherwise had and bandwidth is wasted.

Okay, if you say so.

 

[Chevron]

Okay, if you say so.

Don't worry he is just as pig headed when it comes to science as well.

 

[Tazzybakes]

I'm new to the whole internet game but are we not paying to use Telkom's Infrastructure. We can pay to use it a for a certain amount time so why does the Telkom guy over the phone say Telkom pays for data. The file is on a server in the Netherlands and I paid Telkom to use their "Tollgate" . I paid to use this Tollgate an unlimited amount of times for the month(uncapped) but Telkom tells me I have used up my allotment of pass through's. He tells me my line is uncapped but I've been allotted 120 gigs and I've reached that limit in the same sentence. I aint gonna lie I'm extremely green regarding the World Wide Web but a lie is always going to be a lie.