SDSL Pricing

Is their likely to be any substantial movement in SDSL pricing
shortly?

I ask as it still seems very expensive, why is it so pricey?

jas0n wrote:

> why is [SDSL] so pricey?

1. SDSL includes an extra charge for line rental as it is a dedicated
line, not bolted on top of a voice line, but you still have to pay for
that copper.

2. The PTO would loose revenue if people had too much incentive to
switch from leased lines to SDSL

3. SDSL is newer and has fewer subscribers, so it's in the "charge high
to reclaim initial costs" phase as a product

In article <429b5af7$0$578$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-
reader03.plus.net>, (E-Mail Removed) says...
> jas0n wrote:
>
> > why is [SDSL] so pricey?
>
> 1. SDSL includes an extra charge for line rental as it is a dedicated
> line, not bolted on top of a voice line, but you still have to pay for
> that copper.

Still, line rental is a small percentage

> 2. The PTO would loose revenue if people had too much incentive to
> switch from leased lines to SDSL

Not a valid reason to keep prices artificially high, surely
should be something not allowed with current watchdogs around,
etc?

> 3. SDSL is newer and has fewer subscribers, so it's in the "charge high
> to reclaim initial costs" phase as a product

Yes, can understand this somewhat .... although a much wider
uptake would happen if the right pricing balance was to happen,
same with the way adsl took off.

Id guess an awful lot of business's that wont currently pay for
leased lines would opt for sdsl once pricing gets its act
together.

On Mon, 30 May 2005 18:47:07 +0100, jas0n <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>I ask as it still seems very expensive, why is it so pricey?

It's targeted at businesses not individuals. Look at the difference in
price between a chair in an office suppliers and the *same* one in
Argos.

--
Cheers,

Guy

** Stress - the condition brought about by having to
** resist the temptation to beat the living daylights
** out of someone who richly deserves it.

Andy Burns <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> jas0n wrote:
>
>> why is [SDSL] so pricey?
>
> 1. SDSL includes an extra charge for line rental as it is a dedicated
> line, not bolted on top of a voice line, but you still have to pay for
> that copper.
>
> 2. The PTO would loose revenue if people had too much incentive to
> switch from leased lines to SDSL
>
> 3. SDSL is newer and has fewer subscribers, so it's in the "charge high
> to reclaim initial costs" phase as a product

Are there any other costs than "write a brochure" ?
Isn't essentially all of it shared with ADSL?

Ian Stirling wrote:

> Are there any other costs than "write a brochure" ?
> Isn't essentially all of it shared with ADSL?

The infrastructure from ISP to exchange would be shared with ADSL, but
it would need at least different cards in the DSLAM, if not an upgraded
DSLAM itself ...

"jas0n" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed). ..
> Is their likely to be any substantial movement in SDSL pricing
> shortly?
>
> I ask as it still seems very expensive, why is it so pricey?

1. it's 1:1 cotention
2. upload & download speeds are the same, ie it's synchronous, as opposed to
ADSL which is Asynchronous
3. It usually comes with a Service Level Agreement (SLA)
4. It's competing for leased line customers. Leased lines ARE expensive, and
customers perception usually equates expensive = good ;-)

there may be more reasons, but I can't think of 'em right now ;-)

P.

On Mon, 30 May 2005 19:24:44 UTC, "PJB" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> "jas0n" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed). ..
> > Is their likely to be any substantial movement in SDSL pricing
> > shortly?
> >
> > I ask as it still seems very expensive, why is it so pricey?

> 2. upload & download speeds are the same, ie it's synchronous, as opposed to
> ADSL which is Asynchronous

You mean Symmetric and Asymmetric, of course....


--
[Kenism - a condition by which the sufferer experiences an inability
to give concise answers, express reasoned argument or opinion.
Usually accompanied by silly noises and gestures, and frequent use
of the word 'fanboy' (although he calls it 'words')]

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
jas0n <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
> In article <429b5af7$0$578$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-
> reader03.plus.net>, (E-Mail Removed) says...
>> jas0n wrote:
>>
>> > why is [SDSL] so pricey?
>
>> 2. The PTO would loose revenue if people had too much incentive to
>> switch from leased lines to SDSL
>
> Not a valid reason to keep prices artificially high, surely
> should be something not allowed with current watchdogs around,
> etc?

The watchdogs were set up in order to promote the free market. There is
a free market with leased lines: a number of telcos can offer you
point-to-point leased lines which use no BT plant at all. While they're
mostly cheaper than BT leased lines, BT can offer SDSL at rates which
compete with them, but still vastly more expensive than ADSL. Cable
companies, which could offer SDSL over their own copper pairs if they
wanted, don't feel it worth competing. That's the free market for you: a
number of companies competing to maximise their own profit.

--
Tim Clark

PJB wrote:

> 1. it's 1:1 cotention

Not necesarily, you can get it 1:1, 5:1 or 10:1, probably any other
ratio the provider cared to offer ...