Quote:
Originally Posted by mikejones_uk
Does anyone believe this [Sky's unlimited usage ] is **really** sustainable over the long term? I'm personally skepticle, but would be happy to be proven wrong.
|
probably yes. My reasons below.
sky do not have the same costs and financial demands of other isps utilising adsl. They have their own LLU network which is massively cheaper than using BT's network (approx 10% of cost), bear in mind sky customers on sky connect (bt network) are 40 gig limited and shaped.
they have no need to make a profit as the broadband is to keep people subscribed to lucrative tv contracts.
the easynet network even before sky brought it was massive and is the 2nd biggest in the country, bigger than VM's. So sky have a bigger network with a 3rd of the customers, work that one out.
This announcement technically changes very little, some people think a lot of heavy users are suddenly going to join sky. Those users are probably already there as its been well known for ages that sky have never enforced the FUP anyway so before the announcement people treated it as unlimited anyway.
Fact is sky are a odd one out, they do actually have a proper capacity network to handle its demands, and it would be nice if other isps followed suit. Sky also want and expect people to use heavy bandwidth to download films etc.
---------- Post added at 23:25 ---------- Previous post was at 23:00 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maggy J
and having no competition so you can charge what you like...  |
its funny people see sky as poor because of monopoly tendencies but consider their tv service is superior to VM's and now the broadband is unrivalled in terms of what you can download, BE a close rival but still have the FUP on paper.
One thing you can almost garuantuee from competition is reduced prices, but usually quality of service doesnt come. Which is why the past 2 or 3 years have been horrific with broadband cost cutting everywhere.