TelkomInternet’s new ‘relaxed’ capping policy

There is nothing "relaxed" about this new policy, the aim was to get rid of the local unlimited bandwidth and that is exactly what they did. I suspect the only reason they are allowing people to go over the cap is to avoid a massive outcry as people are less likely to get upset if they think they are winning by getting a few Gig more than they apparently should.
 
Well, this is much better than the straight forward hard cap. I am smiling but only until I get capped the first time with this new system. :D

I am interested to see how other ISPs will handle this and compete. I still say 30GB intl cap should be the entry level for caps and nothing less. Local must NEVER be capped.
 
Last edited:
antowan said:
I still say 30GB intl cap should be the entry level for caps and nothing less. Local must NEVER be capped.
Click to expand...

I agree. Especially with users on 1Mbps connections. Imagine having a 30GB cap on a BE type 24Mbps connection - LOL. Probably one of the "restricting factors" for Telkom improving the service to broadband type speeds.....the cap
 
Last edited:
As long as the cap limit remains a Telkom secret I strongly suspect that it will dwindle to the actual amount purchased thus quietly getting rid of the local bandwidth originally included in the subscription.

This is a de facto increase in tariff which must be investigated by ICASA and dealt with accordingly - Telkom's expected argument that "prices have been reduced" which do not mention that the service purchased has been reduced even more drastically, as it is now no longer possible to access local email feeds once capped, thus forcing the purchase of additional bandwidth.

In a non monopolistic situation Telkom would never dare to try such a ploy.
 
It is not possible for TelkomInternet to determine unused bandwidth over a month (with the exception of the last day). How do they know what people will use going forward?

An example to clarify, using just 10 users to make things simpler
1) Day 1 - user 1 uses 9GB on his 1MB line (about the right amount?)
2) Day 1 - users 2-10 do not use anything, it is a Saturday
3) Day 2 - user 1 uses 9 GB again, users 2-10 use zero
4) Day 3 - user 1 uses 9 GB AGAIN, users 2-10 use 1 GB each, Total bandwidth used is now (3*9) + (9 * 1) = 36 GB
5) User 1 is now capped, since 36GB > (10*3GB - which is the "pool").
6) Users 2-10 proceed to use up their 3GB between now and month end, resulting in a total use of (9*3) + (3*9) = 54GB.

Now, for the love of all things, when did Telkom "know" they had extra bandwidth in their "pool" to distribute?

IF (if, if,if) Telkom allocated unused Bandwidth from the PREVIOUS month into the nexts months "pool", it would make sense to me - but it does not.


EDIT: Another thought. Imagine 10 users in a "pool" - each of them has used 3.1GB and are all capped (since 31GB > 30GB - pool size). ONE (1) user now goes and buys another 3GB account - this "pool" now has 33GB available - are ALL users now uncapped, since 31GB < 33 GB??
 
Last edited:
Moederloos said:
It is not possible for TelkomInternet to determine unused bandwidth over a month (with the exception of the last day). How do they know what people will use going forward?

An example to clarify, using just 10 users to make things simpler
1) Day 1 - user 1 uses 9GB on his 1MB line (about the right amount?)
2) Day 1 - users 2-10 do not use anything, it is a Saturday
3) Day 2 - user 1 uses 9 GB again, users 2-10 use zero
4) Day 3 - user 1 uses 9 GB AGAIN, users 2-10 use 1 GB each, Total bandwidth used is now (3*9) + (9 * 1) = 36 GB
5) User 1 is now capped, since 36GB > (10*3GB - which is the "pool").
6) Users 2-10 proceed to use up their 3GB between now and month end, resulting in a total use of (9*3) + (3*9) = 54GB.

Now, for the love of all things, when did Telkom "know" they had extra bandwidth in their "pool" to distribute?

IF (if, if,if) Telkom allocated unused Bandwidth from the PREVIOUS month into the next months "pool", it would make sense to me - but it does not.


EDIT: Another thought. Imagine 10 users in a "pool" - each of them has used 3.1GB and are all capped (since 31GB > 30GB - pool size). ONE (1) user now goes and buys another 3GB account - this "pool" now has 33GB available - are ALL users now uncapped, since 31GB < 33 GB??
Click to expand...

This kind of argument doesn't work for a small number of users. What say you had 100000 users of which < 50% used 1.4GB of their 3GB? Then you have a pool. Of course the fact that the 'unused' 1.6GB which is pooled is stolen from those who purchased it doesn't come into account as they never ask for it.

Were the unused amounts to be carried over, similarly to unused minutes on an MTN contract, it would be much fairer as it would allow the subscribers with 'unused' minutes to plan for larger usage in a particular month. However this would be more user friendly than the current or previous caps, so would definitely not even begin to be considered by Telkom.
 
The biggest problem I have with this method is that I can no longer manage my bandwidth usage unless I keep it under 3Gb.

Once I go over 3Gb I could one morning sign on and have no connectivity because collectively the pool went over the limit and now everyone is hard capped. I then phone Telkom to order another account and knowing them this could take two days. Two days of productivity lost. I cant take that risk when I am delivering critical data. So I have to buy my 3Gb accounts as before.

This does nothing to help anyone except the "abusers" as Telkom like to call them. They rape the pool for as much as they can in as short a period of time as possible and then live with no connectivity for the the rest of the month. They make it wonderfull for "abusers".

Once again Telkom speaks and Telkom actions contradict each other.
 
antowan said:
I still say 30GB intl cap should be the entry level for caps and nothing less. Local must NEVER be capped.
Click to expand...

Ditto, anything short of that is bollox and if the average user is only using 1.4 gigs then Telkom has absolutely nothing to whine about either.
 
Myrrdin is right. Would you buy a car from a company that says "This car will do 500km per tank of petrol. Although sometimes it will do 1000. Or even 2000. It all depends on what everyone else is doing. Oh but we can never tell you upfront how far you can drive for the month".

It's ridiculous.
 
Myrrdin said:
The biggest problem I have with this method is that I can no longer manage my bandwidth usage unless I keep it under 3Gb.
Click to expand...

Exactly. If one relies on being connected then this new policy effectively makes the service unmanageable.
 
Myrrdin said:
The biggest problem I have with this method is that I can no longer manage my bandwidth usage unless I keep it under 3Gb.

Once I go over 3Gb I could one morning sign on and have no connectivity because collectively the pool went over the limit and now everyone is hard capped. I then phone Telkom to order another account and knowing them this could take two days. Two days of productivity lost. I cant take that risk when I am delivering critical data. So I have to buy my 3Gb accounts as before.

This does nothing to help anyone except the "abusers" as Telkom like to call them. They rape the pool for as much as they can in as short a period of time as possible and then live with no connectivity for the the rest of the month. They make it wonderfull for "abusers".

Once again Telkom speaks and Telkom actions contradict each other.
Click to expand...

This is the problem with Telkom system . You can't manage your account when you go over 3GB .
 
You guys are most ungrateful.:D

Telkom is bending over backwards to be nice to all you abusers.:D

At least for once Telkom are doing a bit of exercise them self.:D

I don't know what to think. Is this new policy sustainable? One can never tell with Telkom as they alter the game at random. How about that customer centric approach and ask the consumer what he thinks first?
A little bit of communication goes a long way.
And is the new policy fair at all to the other ISP's. From what I have read it is not and this to me is more of a concern as the smaller ISP's may decide to pack it in?
 
And is the new policy fair at all to the other ISP's. From what I have read it is not and this to me is more of a concern as the smaller ISP's may decide to pack it in?
Click to expand...

No, it is not. Telkom's cost structure (that is, the wholesale costs they pay) is entirely different. The "other" ISPS have to buy bandwidth from SAIX at around R60 per GB and sell it on. Telkom effectively gets this bandwidth for the cost of the infrastructure (abs. max R5-R10 per GB?).

So, Telkom is abusing its position (anyone surprised?)

EDIT: Actually, thinking about my R5-R10 per GB figure, it cannot even be this high. The SAT3 cable needs to be maintained regardless, as does the copper wires to your premises. The only additional expense to Telkom is the DSLAMs, which I am sure is more than covered by the ADSL line rental. Provisioning of ADSL bandwidth would cost them admin costs, and not much more. 50cents per GB? Remember, the "other" ISPS cover the admin costs in their markups (R5-R10 per GB).
 
Last edited:
In my opinion it's mearely a marketing scheme from Telkom to steal other ISP's clients. To me this reeks of anti-competitiveness, and me wonders if a case can't be made against them. First came the few months of apparent "no capping" from them, and now after stealing enough clients, come the "new relaxed" capping. Bha, they're just doing what they do best...
 
moederloos said:
The SAT3 cable needs to be maintained regardless, as does the copper wires to your premises. The only additional expense to Telkom is the DSLAMs, which I am sure is more than covered by the ADSL line rental.
Click to expand...
Maintenance? What maintenance? Maybe they do some maintenance on the SAT3 cable... but the piece of copper between my house and the exchange? Nada! Have never seen anybody from Telkom checking this, nor replacing any bad portions! As for the DSLAMs, I believe they buy them, plug them into the exchange, and then leave them alone, except for plugging in cables! Again, nada maintenance! They're too lazy to work! And, after firing their techies, there's nobody left to do the maintenance anyway! B@st@rds!
 
MFour said:
In my opinion it's mearely a marketing scheme from Telkom to steal other ISP's clients. To me this reeks of anti-competitiveness, and me wonders if a case can't be made against them. First came the few months of apparent "no capping" from them, and now after stealing enough clients, come the "new relaxed" capping. Bha, they're just doing what they do best...
Click to expand...

Yip - anyone switching to TelkomISP for the "no cap" thing deserves what they get when Telkom screw them over sooner or later. Not to mention the fact that they are helping Telkom destroy any competition.
 
I campaigned hard last year to highlight the gross unfairness of Telkom's retail capping here on the MyADSL forum and on the ISPA mailing list. The result was that the ISPA management deemed my experiments and reports unpaletable for them and did the old ostrish in the ground routine and first banned me from posting on the ISPA mailing list and then tried to (unsuccessfully) remove DOTCO's ISPA membership.

Ant Brooks (http://www.ispa.org.za/about/office.shtml#ant) made a scaling (and misdirected) attack on me and my investigation on Telkom's wholesale and retail capping on the ISPA mailing list. One almost got the feeling that Ant Brooks was in kahoots with Telkom. Actually, Telkom used Ant Brooks posting in a court case.

On 13 December 2005 from out of the blue Ant Brooks and ISPA released this press release "ISPA Press Release - ISPA Lodges Complaint With Competition Commission" (http://www.ispa.org.za/news/press131205.shtml). A request to get a copy of the complaints document has had no response.

Since, I'm not aware of any input that ISPA's management asked for in this complaint and since they were dead set against it, the contents of the complaint is questionable. Also nothing since then has yet been made available.

Perhaps, MyADSL has to move with a complaint to ICASA and the Competition Commision on Telkom's retail capping. ISPA is useless, me thinks.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X