On Sun, 2009-01-04 at 18:09 -0500, Kristian Kielhofner wrote: > On 1/4/09, Alex Balashov <[email protected]> wrote: > > I think if this gets traction you will see a lot of providers doing > > ultra-low bait-and-switch rates. Most cannot afford to be in a price > > race to the bottom. > > > > Agreed. > > This current race to the bottom, while somewhat inevitable, is not > necessarily a good thing for customers. >
to a point this is where the ISP market was just over 10 years ago in the US. Race to the bottom, then they discovered things like churn rate costs, and all that. They started charging set up fees, many providers went under or were so strapped for cash they sold to the competition that had the resources to float at/near cost and all that. When the dust settled there were far fewer providers, and any provider with fewer than 3000 customers basically was gone. So if people price it towards zero expect eventually other fees to come into play and the smaller players that cant get the volume discounts or cant interconnect in a cost effective way are going to have financial problems. > - Customer support will be non existent (or worthless). How are you > paying for it when your markup is %10 or less (whatever it may be)? > or it will be a pay to call service. Each customer support call will be like a MSFT customer support call where you pay just to talk to someone who may or may not be able to help you. See the above about "other fees" :) This can be a good thing for customers that do not need support, they can get a lower cost per month, and the business still remains profitable that is providing the service. > I don't mean to be such a pessimist but I can't help but speak my > mind, especially in the current economic climate. I dont think that you are being that pessimistic, its not the first time that a similar industry went through something similar and the results can be observed to try to guess somewhat intelligently as to how they may pan out this time. Of course each region of the world has different rules on what can and cant be done and at what costs. So what may be cost effective in one place may be a huge money sink in another. And even though I removed your "back on topic" comment I dont think that you were off topic with raising all of this, rather you touched on something that should be considered. For example "total cost" includes: minimum monthly usage fees start up/tear down costs term requirements (contracts) support (available, free, per incident, costs ...) geographic region can be helpful - recall in the last couple years where fiber went, off asia, through the med just recently, etc - knowing where you are sending calls to is not just about jitter/loss but also how vulnerable is it to going out for all calls. Why an automated lookup of the proxy IP and how well connected that is, and if possible the media gateways they send to if in a different network would be good, the AS number and all that could be searched to see if its on a single homed network or multihomed etc. In essence when you select a voip provider you are making a tacit decision on their upstream, and as we all know sometimes marketing on how well connected someone is does not always match the factual stuff, so autoprobing this can be handy :) and so on. There are a lot of other costs that have to be included in any "rate comparison" system. So I think you touched on something that will require a lot more thought to properly implement, and how can one search on what fields (what is important to one person may not be important to others). -- Trixter http://www.0xdecafbad.com Bret McDanel pgp key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x8AE5C721
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-biz mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
