The internet and your money...

[Toms-SC]

Hello Beyond,

Over the past while I have been monitoring the increasing drama unfolding over net neutrality. I will spare you the long explanation but would advise you read my latest thread here (http://forums.beyond.ca/st/249630/more-canadian-isp-drama-yes-your-being-throttled/).

Bell has been thinking about moving to a metered billing service for internet much like how you get billed for water or electricity. For example, instead of paying $40 all in a month for internet access you'd pay a $20 'access' fee and $2.00/ per gig downloaded.

Do you agree with this move? How much are you personally willing to pay for the internet?

[Eleanor]

Man, I'd be forking over so much money.

Between TV shows, music, Live and other pursuits :D I'd be hammered.

[Toms-SC]

Just another money grab is what this is.

[JAYMEZ]

Bell can go F themselves if they think this way.

[semograd]

HAHA Bell has the SHITTIEST internet quality out of all the high speed companies anyways...


Originally posted by JAYMEZ
Bell can go F themselves if they think this way.

+1

[Tik-Tok]

Originally posted by JAYMEZ
Bell can go F themselves if they think this way.

It's inevitable though, I think.

Really, as long as the $/gig rate is kept reasonable, I don't mind the idea. You don't pay a flat fee for your electricity, natural gas, water, automotive gas, etc. So why wouldn't you pay for your usage on the internet?

[Toms-SC]

Best part is now they are looking at taking up a 0 tolerance policy. You go over your 40 gig's a month for your package? They pull the plug! Complete blackout.

[wardpr68]

because you pay a flat rate on your phone bill (or at least I do).

Should we start charging by the minute for local calls.

[Tik-Tok]

Originally posted by wardpr68
because you pay a flat rate on your phone bill (or at least I do).

Should we start charging by the minute for local calls.

You still pay/minute on long distance (unless you have an unlimited plan), and the internet is all about long distance communications.

You also pay per minute on cell phones.

[cherpintow]

I can't imagine all of the arguments over internet bills that this system would bring about, especially when you have a few roomates.

I wonder if the bill would show exactly what was downloaded and from what site or whether it just simply shows the amount of data you used?

[Toms-SC]

Originally posted by Tik-Tok


It's inevitable though, I think.

Really, as long as the $/gig rate is kept reasonable, I don't mind the idea. You don't pay a flat fee for your electricity, natural gas, water, automotive gas, etc. So why wouldn't you pay for your usage on the internet?

While in theory this is great how many people do you know of that max out their current plans? Example: I go over my quota of 60 gig's on Shaw, but the other 9 people on the same node have only used 7 out of their 60 gig's. It balances out.

Besides this is a Canadian server provider we are talking about. $20 access fee, $7 emergency internet access fee, $14 upgrade fee, $20 'speed extreme' add on, $3/an e-mail address + $50.00 for 20 gigs download + $1.50 overage.

[rumeo]

Originally posted by cherpintow
I can't imagine all of the arguments over internet bills that this system would bring about, especially when you have a few roomates.

I wonder if the bill would show exactly what was downloaded and from what site or whether it just simply shows the amount of data you used?

haha i dont think anyone would want this, imagine all the porn sites showing up lol

[Tik-Tok]

Originally posted by Toms-SC
Example: I go over my quota of 60 gig's on Shaw, but the other 9 people on the same node have only used 7 out of their 60 gig's. It balances out.

I don't know a single person who stays in their quota, except my in-laws, and elderly family.

[01RedDX]

.

[Mibz]

I think whoever makes the jump to a metered service first will be the first service to fail. Everybody will jump ship to an existing flat-fee service and the companies will see that a metered system will get them nowhere unless they're the last company to change.

At least that's how I hope it works out :P

[The Cosworth]

bullshit

:facepalm:

[Dumbass17]

$2/GIG?!

well, yesterday would've cost me over $200

[Canmorite]

Fuck regulation of the internet. It doesn't belong to one agency who decides what $/gig you should pay. There is no central 'hub' for everything to pass through.

[TheCheff]

I could understand upload rates being charged... but def. not download rates that's fucking ridiculous.

[xLostx]

Internet service in the rest of the world is much better and faster for the most part, fuck our ISP's.

[Kloubek]

As media becomes more filesize-intensive, and the amount of people downloading large files increases (as has been the trend for years, and will continue), this move will do nothing more than increase the average bill that people pay. The only ones saving are the idiots who are paying $30/month just so they can check their email.

The fact is that this pricing strategy doesn't make logical sense. With water or electricity, you're paying for a product. You use X amount of said product, and you get charged Y amount, because the supplier needs to produce more to keep your individual needs met.

With the internet, it doesn't work that way. A company puts together a network which exists regardless of how much a particular individual uses it. The complexity, size, and requirements of the network depends solely on how much use there is overall, by ALL their customers combined.

It seems to me that by moving to such a system, they make it unclear how much the customer will pay, since few ever monitor our internet usage by kb's. It creates an abstract payment amount the customer will not be aware of, until they even out the usage costs over a period of at least two or three months.

:thumbsdow

[1997GSR]

i would pay over 9000

[Tik-Tok]

Originally posted by Dumbass17
$2/GIG?!

well, yesterday would've cost me over $200

:facepalm:

It was an example, he took that number out of thin air.

[revelations]

Originally posted by Tik-Tok


I don't know a single person who stays in their quota, except my in-laws, and elderly family.

I dont go through a lot of data - however the internet is a must have for my SOHO - so portions of that are a writeoff anyways.

[R154]

^

Nice, good flight of the conchords reference.

lol

[Crymson]

That's ridiculous. Obviously p2p is a huge draw on bandwidth, but for most hosted contect, the hoster is already paying the fees associated with that data. Should both the uploaded and downloader have to pay for bandwidth twice on a large patch, or something like Netflix? That's like Telus charging to both send AND recieve texts. It's lunacy.

The only way Bell would get away with it, is because of the thinly veiled monopoly that the telecom's have in Canada. Bell will talk to the other ISP's, they'll all roll it out together, and there will be no alternative. Our government allows them to operate in this perfect little bubble of protection where the good international operators can't come in and compete and they're free to dry fuck us canadians in the ass for all eternity.

[HiTempguy1]

I'd pay up to $100 per month, as I basically watch TV on the internet as well (I don't have cable TV). Anything more then that though is getting ridiculous, for reasons already stated.

[thrasher22]

I had this when I lived in Australia, for $30 a month I got max 30gb bandwidth, afterwhich you were stuck on 56k style speeds. It was super lame, I just ended up using the internet less (which was actually a good thing). You could of course pay for more bandwidth and higher speed.

I fully support net neutrality, but I know eventually companies WILL be dicks and make short term money grabs. We'll just all move onto the next networking technology (whatever it may be)

[CUG]

We really need to be against this, otherwise it will turn out just like our shitty cellular providers or worse.

[QuasarCav]

Originally posted by 1997GSR
i would pay over 9000


Epic

[Generic]

Originally posted by xLostx
Internet service in the rest of the world is much better and faster for the most part, fuck our ISP's.

its scary how terrible our ISP's are.

[ExtraSlow]

I'd be fine with paying per Gb, dpending on the fee.
I'm currently paying nearly fourty bucks a month and I download very little.

Also, would that mean that my intarwebz are faster until I hit my bandwidth limit? that would be great in my situation.

[Mibz]

Originally posted by ExtraSlow
Also, would that mean that my intarwebz are faster until I hit my bandwidth limit? that would be great in my situation. Nah, it would mean your internet is the same speed as it is now. Until you hit your limit, at which point speed drops somewhere in the vicinity of 100%.

[Eleanor]

Originally posted by QuasarCav
Epic
:rofl:

[1997GSR]

ellen is epic

[black13]

How come in a 1st world country like Canada that is doing so well compared to most countries, we have such terrible Phone and internet companies? 3rd world nations even pay less for better coverage than what we get.

[ZorroAMG]

Ohhhhh FAAAACK. With all the home and garden tips I download daily, I'd be at $453,000/month. Damn you, Steven Sabados!!

[Antonito]

Originally posted by Crymson

The only way Bell would get away with it, is because of the thinly veiled monopoly that the telecom's have in Canada. Bell will talk to the other ISP's, they'll all roll it out together, and there will be no alternative. Our government allows them to operate in this perfect little bubble of protection where the good international operators can't come in and compete and they're free to dry fuck us canadians in the ass for all eternity.

Bingo. Bell might take the initial hit in order to make it look like it isn't a monopolised conspiracy...but the rest of the companies will be on board pretty quick I fear.

[Swank]

I think it's too late to go this route, it would be almost as difficult to sell as paying per minute for local calls on a landline. In 5-10 years 100GB/mth will be nothing, and you'd be paying for downloads twice, which would not go over well with anyone selling software or movie downloads. Of course, there will still be some poor souls stuck out there with 56gay.

[Xtrema]

Part of it is they fear eventually they will lose revenue from their TV/Entertainment business.

This is a total dick move and CRTC got to step in. If the Liberals wants my vote next month, this will be the issue they can win me over.