2009 and we are still stuck on 256kbps for broadband

  • Thread starter Thread starter Raditz
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 91
  • Views Views 29,921
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thanks mgcarley for your explanation. :) I think taxes on ISPs should be removed so that ISPs can serve us with better plans.

Perhaps taxes aren't the problem. The problem may be the somewhat anti-competitive behaviour by the consortium of companies who own (or co-own) the international cables and the consortium who run NIXI - also known as Reliance (who own FLAG telecom), Tata (VSNL), who own both SeMeWe3 and SeMeWe4 and a few others who own some of the others.

I don't intend to attack these two companies in particular, but as far as buying international bandwidth is concerned, it is almost what we might call a duopoly - whereas in the US, UK and rest of Europe, there are usually several providers all vying for your business.
 
@mgcarleyfirst of all let me wish you good luck on your new broadband compnay that you are starting. :thumb: hope your company reaches as far as Bangalore too. :)
 
@mgcarley

first of all let me wish you good luck on your new broadband compnay that you are starting. :thumb:

hope your company reaches as far as Bangalore too. :)

I hope so too, although firstly we are starting in Maharashtra, as I believe it to be rather under-served - even if we're willing to pay for it, we still can't get Airtel 16Mbps in Mumbai.
 
I wish you (mgcarley) success :)
Hope you expand all India.

Realistically, if we want to scare the pants off Reliance, Tata etc by providing excellent service, we *have* to go national. Glad to know we have the support (I'm guessing) of everyone here.
 
Realistically, if we want to scare the pants off Reliance, Tata etc by providing excellent service, we *have* to go national. Glad to know we have the support (I'm guessing) of everyone here.

WE Support you MGCARLEY
 
I think ISPs in USA and Eurpoe buy connections in multiples of 1 Gig lines to the internet exchange at flat rate and hence their cost of data interchange is low compared with what NIXI is charging from Indian ISPs. Here in India the mess starts at the very foundation i.e. NIXI. In our country prices of cellphone services came down drastically when interconnect charges between various operators were cut in 2002. Same can happen with broadband service providers also.I am sorry to say that the price that mgcarley is proposing to offer is not exactly revolutionary. But competition is good and if the prices don't go down with more competition, at least quality of service of existing operators will improve. Way back in 1990's we used to have government owned banks providing terrible service to the customers. Now the service standard of even a State Bank of India has improved because they have been pushed by likes of ICICI Bank and HDFC bank. The same may happen when more players enter the market with their offerings. Prices will come down, sooner or later.Despite all odds I am hanging my hat on the wimax providers, at least 4 of whom will be able to start service in next 1 year or so after the auction for spectrum in August.
 
I think ISPs in USA and Eurpoe buy connections in multiples of 1 Gig lines to the internet exchange at flat rate and hence their cost of data interchange is low compared with what NIXI is charging from Indian ISPs. Here in India the mess starts at the very foundation i.e. NIXI. In our country prices of cellphone services came down drastically when interconnect charges between various operators were cut in 2002. Same can happen with broadband service providers also.

I am sorry to say that the price that mgcarley is proposing to offer is not exactly revolutionary. But competition is good and if the prices don't go down with more competition, at least quality of service of existing operators will improve.

Way back in 1990's we used to have government owned banks providing terrible service to the customers. Now the service standard of even a State Bank of India has improved because they have been pushed by likes of ICICI Bank and HDFC bank. The same may happen when more players enter the market with their offerings. Prices will come down, sooner or later.

Despite all odds I am hanging my hat on the wimax providers, at least 4 of whom will be able to start service in next 1 year or so after the auction for spectrum in August.

I agree. It's not designed to be revolutionary by comparison with the rest of the world, just with the rest of India. A 24Mbps unlimited connection for Rs 500 would be revolutionary!

NIXI isn't the primary culprit here - although it really isn't helping. NIXI is, essentially, a consortium of all the major players - as such, it's kind of their fault, as they ALSO own the international cables. The general idea behind NIXI is "if you want to peer with us, you can pay for it". Naturally, the rates are exorbitant and thus stifle independent ISPs ability to compete properly.

We want to scare the pants off of the competition by providing superior service for the same-or-less price as they do. It causes customers to ask questions, and when they do that, the competition really heats up, and we'll have to keep ahead simply by staying the fastest and with the fewest restrictions.

Networks are, after all, designed to be used. Reliance, Tata et al have all this capacity, why not use it? The hardware itself has only got a shelf life of maybe 50 years if they really stretch it, but they're not even close. They could be offering so much more (4x as much speed and they'd be sitting only at maybe 50% capacity) - but they just aren't.

So people like myself who have recently immigrated to India from Europe and who desperately miss having many megabits available need to come in and say "I want a decent internet connection!"

It's not necessarily about number of players - there are countless small ISPs around, but the problem is, they all offer the same rubbish connections. Someone needed to come in and say "256kbps just IS NOT ENOUGH" - the subject line of this thread says it all, and that is, in essence, what I'm trying to do here.

WiMax is technically not a licensed spectrum - maybe you are thinking of 3G? That auction should have been over this time last year, but... well, the Indian government is VERY serious about "flex time" (Did we say May 31st? Sorry, we meant December 12th!) :P

In any case, within my network, we are considering the use of WiMax only for secondary or temporary access (until we can finish laying our fibre). It's OK, but again, WiMax is not a technology that I would suggest using as a backbone or running multiple connections over, yet some providers are using it as such.

I recently ran into a friend who had previously had Hathway in their building (Worli). Turns out, that cable connection was actually distributed throughout the building from a WiMax installation, and they tell me it was utter rubbish. I believe they now use MTNL.

Every other country that has WiMax or similar installations that *I* have seen are using it on a per-user basis, rather than as a backbone - much the way everyone has their own satellite dishes, everyone should have their own WiMax equipment.

It's a nice idea, in theory, anyway. So the installation charges would go up: you might have to pay Rs 2,500 instead of Rs 500. But the way I see it, people are perfectly willing to fork out Rs 2,500 on their Netsetter/Photon+/Netconnect+/EVDO devices, so this probably wouldn't pose a huge issue - and at the end of the day, the speed of the connection is improved because each WiMax install is handling one user only, which would usually mean less latency as well.

I moved to Europe for faster Internet... now I'm in India, I have to build my own network. This just keeps getting better :)
 
We want to scare the pants off of the competition by providing superior service for the same-or-less price as they do. It causes customers to ask questions, and when they do that, the competition really heats up, and we'll have to keep ahead simply by staying the fastest and with the fewest restrictions.


There are a bunch of broadband service providers in the USA who serve only a few cities. One such example is Sonic.net that is serving a few cities in California only. They don't compete on the basis of their pricing structure. They are competing on the basis of the quality of service that they are offering and they are very successful. We need a few of similar start up companies funded by venture capital may be.

WiMax is technically not a licensed spectrum - maybe you are thinking of 3G? That auction should have been over this time last year, but... well, the Indian government is VERY serious about \"flex time\" (Did we say May 31st? Sorry, we meant December 12th!)




Now the auction is scheduled for August, 2009. May god save India from its government. :p

WiMAX forum applauds Indian Govt decision to auction 2.3, 2.5 GHz frequency bands - The Financial Express

There are 4 blocks of (20 MHz each) licensed spectrum. That is more than enough for incumbent cellphone service providers having existing cellphone towers and fiber upto the towers, to offer upto 5 mbps service to a large number of customers without spending massive amount of money needed to dig up the roads. Wimax is not a proven technology till date but from what I have seen, it is a good enough technology for "per-user" basis. That is every consumer has a wimax receiver in his home that gets the signal from a tower nearest to him and the towers will use fiber optic cables for backhaul. The problem is that a number of service providers in India trying to use wimax for backhaul on their networks because it is cheaper than having to rent fiber from likes of Airtel or Reliance.

But even with wimax the problem is that the existing monopoly operators like Reliance, Tata, Airtel etc. will bid for the spectrum and win it. We need to break the monopoly of these operators by having some brand new but well funded companies coming into picture. May be a few venture capital funded startups can look at the wimax. Why am I talking about VC funded startups? I think they have the killer instinct and the ability to fight the established competitors.

Anyway, coming back to the major issue, that is pricing. Airtel has recently come up with a pricing plan where they are giving 2 mbps connections for Rs. 2999 per month. First 100 GB during a month will be downloaded at 2 mbps and after the first 100 GB download connection will be downgraded to 1 mbps unlimited for the rest of the month.

I think we need more of similar pricing structures. How about a Rs. 1000 per month plan with 10 GB download at 2 mbps or 8 mbps speed and after that the connection is downgraded to 256 kbps unlimited for the rest of the month.

The point is number of people taking internet connections in India will not increase at a rapid pace till we get plans with enough speed to see online videos (say youtube) and we assure the users that their bill not exceed a certain amount per month.
 
There are a bunch of broadband service providers in the USA who serve only a few cities. One such example is Sonic.net that is serving a few cities in California only. They don't compete on the basis of their pricing structure. They are competing on the basis of the quality of service that they are offering and they are very successful. We need a few of similar start up companies funded by venture capital may be.


That's what we're doing at first - but my point is, AT&T, Comcast and Verizon aren't exactly shaking in their boots with regards to Sonic.net. Likewise, Reliance, Tata and Airtel won't shake in theirs if we restrict ourselves to only one state or circle.

We are VC funded (though always looking for more).

Now the auction is scheduled for August, 2009. May god save India from its government. :p

WiMAX forum applauds Indian Govt decision to auction 2.3, 2.5 GHz frequency bands - The Financial Express

There are 4 blocks of (20 MHz each) licensed spectrum. That is more than enough for incumbent cellphone service providers having existing cellphone towers and fiber upto the towers, to offer upto 5 mbps service to a large number of customers without spending massive amount of money needed to dig up the roads. Wimax is not a proven technology till date but from what I have seen, it is a good enough technology for \"per-user\" basis. That is every consumer has a wimax receiver in his home that gets the signal from a tower nearest to him and the towers will use fiber optic cables for backhaul. The problem is that a number of service providers in India trying to use wimax for backhaul on their networks because it is cheaper than having to rent fiber from likes of Airtel or Reliance.



Like I have said in my last post. Additionally, thanks for correcting me - I should have said "not ALL frequencies supported by WiMax are licenced".

But even with wimax the problem is that the existing monopoly operators like Reliance, Tata, Airtel etc. will bid for the spectrum and win it. We need to break the monopoly of these operators by having some brand new but well funded companies coming into picture. May be a few venture capital funded startups can look at the wimax. Why am I talking about VC funded startups? I think they have the killer instinct and the ability to fight the established competitors.


Consider that part of my plan and the reason I'm pushing so hard for info about what you guys want.

Anyway, coming back to the major issue, that is pricing. Airtel has recently come up with a pricing plan where they are giving 2 mbps connections for Rs. 2999 per month. First 100 GB during a month will be downloaded at 2 mbps and after the first 100 GB download connection will be downgraded to 1 mbps unlimited for the rest of the month.


These prices only apply to Delhi and perhaps some other circles. In Mumbai, we get totally ripped off.

I think we need more of similar pricing structures. How about a Rs. 1000 per month plan with 10 GB download at 2 mbps or 8 mbps speed and after that the connection is downgraded to 256 kbps unlimited for the rest of the month.


I don't consider anything less than 1 Megabit to be "Broadband". The major players are becoming increasingly aware of the way they have to advertise their products now, and have changed the terminology of most sub-256 kilobit connections to include something like "not broadband".

The way I'm structuring my plans at the moment is pretty simple (preliminary pricing): For each Megabit, you can download 10 gigabytes - so someone with an 8 Megabit connection would have a limit of 80 Gigabytes. To make it an even sweeter deal, I'd be offering unlimited local transfers (that is, between customers of my provider) at whatever the maximum allowable speed of the backbone is (in most cases, speeds would be limited to 100 Megabits either by Ethernet or the Cabling itself - most peoples GigE cards might offer them up to 400 or so, but thats about the limit of most copper wiring when you take in to account the distance and repeaters and such).

The point is number of people taking internet connections in India will not increase at a rapid pace till we get plans with enough speed to see online videos (say youtube) and we assure the users that their bill not exceed a certain amount per month.

Agreed. This is why I would probably either:
1. Use "Hard Caps" - Charge per Gigabyte or users could buy "additional data" at a good rate: if, for example, a 1Mbit user has a 10 GB monthly limit, he could buy another 10 GB for say Rs 800, or 100GB for Rs 8000 - valid for up to 1 year. Essentially then he would have a yearly transfer "limit" of 130GB or 220GB instead of 120GB... (details to be worked out later). If the user gets to within 100 Megabytes of his monthly limit, he could be redirected to a page saying something like "You have used 99% of your limit this month. Buy more?"

2. Use "Soft Caps" - Reduce the speed of bandwidth intensive applications (VOIP/Video calling, Bittorrent, HTTP downloads, FTP downloads, IRC/DC++/other P2P etc) - but ONLY on the international and/or peering links, and not by so much that the connection is no longer useful (eg 1 Megabit to 128 Kilobits is silly, 1 Megabit to 384 or 512 Kilobits might be better). If a customer wants to video call with his girlfriend all night, or share a 250 megabyte music video with her - and they're both using my ISP - that should be allowed because really the traffic wouldn't leave the network, and in my view, it would cost me more to restrict the speed (several hours of constant network usage versus a minute or 2).

...In fact, ideally, if NIXI wasn't involved, I might not have to deal with data caps at all (in theory).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back