Something to beat up Eircon over

Blaster99

This whole bb pricing thing has annoyed me for a while and I was thinking of sending in an e-mail to that programme this morning, but I think it would have gotten too convoluted to have gotten coverage in a programme of that ilk. But maybe you guys feel like phrasing this in a more accessable way at some stage.

If you look at how other countries price broadband, it's like €30 for the basic product and €60 for 8Mbps. Without looking at the details you'll see that there's a basic charge for the provision of broadband and then maybe €10-15 per Mbps (or less in many countries). In Ireland it's like €30 for the basic product and €180 for the 4Mbps product. Until the recent upgrades, Eircom (and everybody else except NTL) priced bandwidth as a unit of the 512Kbps retail price. From a marketing perspective that probably makes sense. But now, it's completely bollocksed and completely indefensible. You get 1Mbps for something like €40, 2Mbps for something like €55, 3Mbps for something like €100, 4Mbps for something like €180. The difference between the 1Mbps and the 2Mbps is also half the contention ratio supposedly, so any arguments about that won't work either. With this pricing structure 3Mbps should be €70, 4Mbps should be €85. Or something like it. I presume until Smart launches products priced along these lines, Eircom will stick with this but how the hell they can justify it is beyond me. Ok yes, the upload is faster on the 3Mbps and 4Mbps products but I can't image that will really bump up the prices to that extent. It obviously doesn't in any other countries where the upload speed is typically higher than 256kbps as well.

Cryos

This is a topic that has really been beaten to death on boards.

I belive the main aim of Ireland offline is to get broadband to everyone for the moment in time, You should not be so consumed with speeds because if you have your broadband you are lucky.

Ok so ireland has basic bread and butter broadband at the moment, but its a technology thats only really been let out of its box here (2003 if i recall) and its potential has only now been seen by most residential users. a 512/128 service is perfect at the moment for most people and so is the 4gb cap which is another subject which has been beaten to death on here. The vast majority of adults that use broadband only have it for the convenience of it being on 24/7, fixed price and that it loads web pages much faster there fore 4gb caps are not a major issue.

Lastly there is no set pricing arrangements for broadband, its obviously going to vary from every country and the state of the company providing the service, the cost of broadband is dictated no by the speed but the fixed cost plus a few extra bits of keeping that service up.

Uploads with ADSL are always going to be alot smaller than the downloads, besides why would you want to upload at anything over that? FTPing websites dosnt take long even over isdn, so its obviously something not legal.

thats my 2 cents on it.

Blaster99

I think you're missing my point by a very wide margin, but that's ok. My point is that the pricing might have made some sense but it now makes absolutely no sense. I would be very curious to hear Eircom's justification why 4Mbps is 3-4 times more expensive than 2Mbps. Perhaps that is in fact the very question I should have sent into that programme, sounds simple enough to comprehend.

I'm sure there are [a dwindling number of] people who are interested in various coverage figures. I'm not one of them.

clearz

It is simply because its the flagship product of broadband. It caters for the small portion of people who wants to be right at the forefront of the technology and for businesses who can afford these prices. Its the same right the computer industry. You can buy a 3 - 3.4 Ghz processor for cheap enough but when you goto 3.6 and then 3.8 ghz there is a massive increase in price even though the performance increase in minimum. 3D graphics cards are the same. for around 300 euro you can get top of the range models but for 600 euro you can buy the ultra top of the range model even though this might only get you 5 - 10 Frames per second more in your game.

SkepticOne

Blaster99 wrote:

Until the recent upgrades, Eircom (and everybody else except NTL) priced bandwidth as a unit of the 512Kbps retail price. From a marketing perspective that probably makes sense. But now, it's completely bollocksed and completely indefensible.

In what sense do Eircom need to need to defend their pricing? Do you mean like they need to justify it to ComReg?

cgarvey

Also the 3-4Mbps are geared towards business which usually get screwed for higher pricing.. presumably because of the old Irish mindset that "businesses can afford it", where ever that came from.

.cg

eircomtribunal

SkepticOne wrote:

In what sense do Eircom need to need to defend their pricing? Do you mean like they need to justify it to ComReg?

Isn't there the obligation that pricing by the quasi monopolist (now called the one with significant market power) has to be cost-orientated?

P.

Cryos

blaster i have not missed your point on the 4meg services

There are much less people on the service therfore the package is going to be priced highly to cover running costs for that service.

SkepticOne

eircomtribunal wrote:

Isn't there the obligation that pricing by the quasi monopolist (now called the one with significant market power) has to be cost-orientated?

I was wondering whether he meant justifying it to the comreg, shareholders or the public.

If it is justifying it to comreg then, techically, it is supposed to be cost orientated.

padraigf

Clearz, I don't think anyone missed the point of the pricing problem as much as you.

Do you have any idea why the top of the line graphics cards and processors carry such a price premium? Sure, its partially fleecing. It's also because they're far more expensive to make. They need the absolute best parts of the wafer and the yields are lower. Simple supply and demand, since so much fewer of them can be made.

On the other hand saying that 4meg should be 4 times dearer than 2 meg because it is a flagship product is just bs. It should cost maybe 50% - 75% more, tops. The only extra cost involved is that of the backhaul, which they have tons of anyway. By saying its right to price it so extortionately purely because it's the best is basically agreeing with their monopolistic price gouging ways.

I never thought anyone could be so suckered in with marketing bs as to believe there was a reason for that premium.

WizZard

Is this not more suited to the broadband forum?

Oh and

Blitz wrote:

so its obviously something not legal.

It's this sort of attitude that wrecks what would otherwise be good arguments. What about multiplayer gaming, VoIP, Video Calls (ever hear of webcams?), large email attachments (eg. hi-res photos). The list could go on (and in a separate thread ).

clearz

padraigf wrote:

Clearz, I don't think anyone missed the point of the pricing problem as much as you.

Oh the Irony. You have completely missed the point in your post about me missing the point. Im afraid It does not matter if the top end product cost less to manufacture than the low end product (even though this is extreamly unlikey) companys will still sell it at a huge premiem. Your little rant there at me is the only bs i see round here. I never once in my post tried to explain the pricing problem or condone eircoms pricing policy. I simply stated that the best of any product will always be sold at a premium.

padraigf wrote:

On the other hand saying that 4meg should be 4 times dearer than 2 meg because it is a flagship product is just bs.

Where in my post did I say 'should' can you point it out to me. Again read the post properly before going and making a fool of yourself while trying to be smart. I like everyone else here would also like 100Mb for 20 euro but it aint gonna happen. But then again I think of myself as more of a realist than the posters of half the rants I read on the broadband/IOFFL forums.


So padraigf if you are pissed off about eircoms phenomenonly high prices. write a letter to them what you said to me but dont take one of my posts and twist it so you can get your message accross here.

De Rebel

It strikes me that we have, to rob Abraham Maslow's phrase, a "Hierarchy of Needs"

First and foremost, we need broadband for all. For everybody, irrespective of where they live. Irrespective of the state of their copper.

Secondly we need to make it affordable. The quickest way to achieve this is to allow RAW DSL. That is DSL provision to be a standalone product, and orderable without paying eircom's line rental.

Thirdly, when we have availability and affordability sorted out, we can worry about all the niceties, whose importance depends on who you are and what you use the internet for. Things like, upload speed, download speed, pings, contention ratios, latency, etc. All of these are important, but their relative importance depends on you are and what you use the internet for.

First things first........ availability and affordability.

And the first of those is availability. Roll on, broadband for all. In the words of Noel O'Flynn, Broadband, the New Utility.

cgarvey

clearz and padraigf, please keep the personal insults out of your contributions, ta.
.cg

SkepticOne

cgarvey wrote:

Also the 3-4Mbps are geared towards business which usually get screwed for higher pricing.. presumably because of the old Irish mindset that "businesses can afford it", where ever that came from.

In the absence of competition, commercially, the price of 3-4Mbps probably makes sense. That way they can extract maximum revenue from each segment of the market. Those that absolutely need these speeds get to pay a premium for it.

Eircom can pile on costs if necessary to justify the price to ComReg. If ComReg object then Eircom can simply pull the product. Some of those businesses will then move to even more expensive leased lines. Eircom holds the cards.