Forum Discussion
Slow speeds only in prime time hours
- 8 years ago
Amanda has been working on my issue behind the scenes, so I thought I'd come on and mention that we are working through it. The result is that I'll be switching to Gen 5 on a lower data plan than what I currently have. With the compression of data on streaming that is used on Gen 5, I should be able to stay within the 30g. Even if I go over 30g the throttled speed is better than what I have today so it's a no-brainer.
thanks Amanda!
I live in the rural area outside a small town. Several years ago an alternative to satellite internet (Hughes and their competitor) appeared on the scene - wireless internet and a tower just down the road from me. Unfortunately at the time they could not offer the speed I needed - so I stayed with Hughes. When the current problems with Hughes started (speed at primetime hours), I called them to see if they had improved the speed on their system --and they yes they had. However, they were not putting any new customers on the local tower. To go on their system you had to go on a waiting list. I was told that they would not overbook, because they wanted to keep their current customers happy - and overbooking was only doing damage to all.
This company started out literally in a barn -the idea of one man. Today they serve over 400 cities and towns, with locations in Missouri, Illinois, Texas, and 31 other states.
And yes - there is a long waiting list!
Just thought you might like to know that an Internet company does not have to neglect their current customers in order to be profitable.
Bkeeper
bkeeper1 wrote:
Just thought you might like to know that an Internet company does not have to neglect their current customers in order to be profitable.
Bkeeper
Ground based ISP's are able to build, repair and expand their systems as demand grows. When they invest in a piece of equipment they can use it year after year. If a fiber-optic cable is layed to supply service to an area or as a backhaul to a cellular tower they will be able to utilize that investment for decades to come.
It was said the Echostart 17 had a price tag of about $500 million dollars. Many more $$$ were spent for launch and insurance costs. To that is added the costs of building and maintaining the 17 or so Gateways and 2 NOC's.
The issue is that despite very high costs, that satellite can not be repaired, it can not be expanded and it only has a service lifespan of about 15 years before it must be replaced. No building up upon previous investments here.
I haven't heard any numbers of Echostar 19 but I have read the that Exede's soon the launch ViaSat-2 had a cost of about $625 million dollars for the satellite and about $107 million more for insurance and launch services.
These satellites take years to build, launch providers can be another issue.
Trying to fold the new equipment into the Gateway network system can have some bumps in the road as we are seeing with the introduction of ES19.
I think that profitability line is much thinner than we think.
- bkeeper18 years agoJunior
TO, Gwalk900, Corrosive, (and anybody interested)
I agree with you on the above -- the point I was trying to make was that a company DOES NOT have to neglect their current customers in order to be profitable and grow.
Why in advertising alone Hughes must spend thousands upon thousands of dollars just to maintain their customer base. Think of the customers they lose to the "little" guy because the customer is unhappy.
And that "little" guy is growing by leaps and bounds. I predict that the "wireless" Internet providers, AT&T, Verizon, Sprint, etc. are the future.
I am copying this and sending it to Corrosive, because I agree with him also - there is a tremendous difference in the initial (and maintenance) cost of each system -- but profits can still be there without neglecting the current customer. I hope you don't think otherwise?
Bkeeper
Related Content
- 3 months ago
- 4 months ago
- 11 months ago
- 29 days ago
- 2 years ago