New Concept ADSL Plans

[ForumAdmin]

Its a good concept to have more lower end user to join in but lower end user would most probably use most of their quota during peak than off-peak.

Why not make prepaid plan user's data to be "use anytime"? This could reduce heavy users to further degrade off-peak periods.

"Retirees" and other pensioners may well find Exetel's off peak (which is 12 hours every day up to noon) - more useful than the "off peak" time frames of ISPs who end their version of off peak at 7 am in the morning.

[Michel]

Yes - these plans are not intended for anyone but low end users.

I am sure many high end users would be happy to pay for what they use, why would you restrict the plans to low end users.

For a high end user who is happy to do most of their usage in the off peak window these would make for good value plans.

I can't see why Exetel would restrict high end users as we would be paying for what we use, but allowing for great flexablity.

[peterh_oz]

Yes - these plans are not intended for anyone but low end users.

Will this be a "rule" or a "suggestion"? In other words, will there be an enforced limit?

[ForumAdmin]

Yes - these plans are not intended for anyone but low end users.

Will this be a "rule" or a "suggestion"? In other words, will there be an enforced limit?

I really don't know - these plans are intended for low end users and I wouldn't wnat to think that yet another 'positive initiative' has to be 'played around with' because of unintended consequences.

[CoreyPlover]

I really don't know - these plans are intended for low end users and I wouldn't wnat to think that yet another 'positive initiative' has to be 'played around with' because of unintended consequences.

In all honesty, it should not be up to customers to determine the intentions of an initative and do the right thing; The initiative should be set up in a way that achieves the desired consequences and naturally prevent abuse. In this case, it sounds as if there should (will?) be a limit to the amount of prepaid data purchased per month.

[peterh_oz]

If I was a high user of P2P or other large download usages I'd get one of these plans, use about 2Gb in peak, and saturate the offpeak period. At 35c a Gb, the current 48Gb of offpeak is worth $16.80, so 100Gb a month or more really is VERY cheap. Maybe too cheap ...?

Maybe the plans need to be 35c for offpeak up to 50Gb (its just an easier number than 48Gb) and then all data is $1.30/Gb after that. Even then, its still cheaper than the current $3/Gb excess.

Compared to say the 1500/256 TL-BA plan .. TL-BB is $50 for 12/48Gb, this would be $54.30 + $1.30 per Gb peak. 12Gb peak would put the total to $69.90 which is quite an increase, but you could almost double the offpeak for the same price (85Gb) if you kept peak to 2Gb (more than enough for browsing etc).

I wonder what effect that would have on the network if the high-download users were to flood it, at just 35c a Gb they very well might. Could it be worthwhile charging uploads (maybe over 10Gb for example) at 35c/Gb also (peak and off peak)? This would mean that most users would not be charged for uploads, but large uploaders (P2P users and possibly new Carbonite customers) would be. Of course this then puts Exetel into the "We charge for uploads" category which is something I'd rather NOT see, but if it has to be done ...

Maybe you could have 2 offpeak networks - 35c for most people, and a 75c "premium offpeak" which would be similar to the old "I promise not to use too much" network for gamers etc (was that Exetel or am I getting my wires crossed somewhere?). Or keep the price at 35c, but split people into an "under 20Gb" and "over 20Gb" usage - under 20Gb would be on a faster network on the slower, saturated network. The actual network would be the same, but the traffic on the "under 20Gb" would be less saturated and therefore more consistent. Of course you'd have to enforce a rule similar to "if you use 20Gb and are switched to the power-user network, you will remain there for a period of a full 30 days" not just until the end of the calendar month. That will help alleviate the new-month saturation that seems to occur currently as everyone rushes to use their full monthly quota in 3 days.

Maybe the new AppCache has already solved this problem for you, in which case I'm talking out of my hat and I apologise for wasting your time.

[LordS]

Just have different offpeak periods...

I'm sure some people would elect for a reversed period, or to start and end their off peak 2-3 hours earlier etc.

[ForumAdmin]

In all honesty, it should not be up to customers to determine the intentions of an initative and do the right thing; The initiative should be set up in a way that achieves the desired consequences and naturally prevent abuse. In this case, it sounds as if there should (will?) be a limit to the amount of prepaid data purchased per month.

You're probably right.

It never occurred to me that anyone would look at it that way.

I will put limits of 5 gb on both periods

[ForumAdmin]

If I was a high user of P2P or other large download usages I'd get one of these plans, use about 2Gb in peak, and saturate the offpeak period. At 35c a Gb, the current 48Gb of offpeak is worth $16.80, so 100Gb a month or more really is VERY cheap. Maybe too cheap ...?

Maybe the plans need to be 35c for offpeak up to 50Gb (its just an easier number than 48Gb) and then all data is $1.30/Gb after that. Even then, its still cheaper than the current $3/Gb excess.

Maybe you could have 2 offpeak networks - 35c for most people, and a 75c "premium offpeak" which would be similar to the old "I promise not to use too much" network for gamers etc (was that Exetel or am I getting my wires crossed somewhere?). Or keep the price at 35c, but split people into an "under 20Gb" and "over 20Gb" usage - under 20Gb would be on a faster network on the slower, saturated network. The actual network would be the same, but the traffic on the "under 20Gb" would be less saturated and therefore more consistent. Of course you'd have to enforce a rule similar to "if you use 20Gb and are switched to the power-user network, you will remain there for a period of a full 30 days" not just until the end of the calendar month. That will help alleviate the new-month saturation that seems to occur currently as everyone rushes to use their full monthly quota in 3 days.

Maybe the new AppCache has already solved this problem for you, in which case I'm talking out of my hat and I apologise for wasting your time.

Probably a sensible way to go - charge more once some 'limit' is reached.

[Country Bumkin]

This discussion seems seriously off the sensible track.

The key aspect is that if the charging model matches the costs there will be no 'unintended consequences' of customers moving large amounts of data, just a bigger profit for Exetel.

FA wrote...

I will put limits of 5 gb on both periods

There should be no need to limit a customers prepaid purchases, they are offering Exetel interest free unsecured loans which could benefit the business in many ways. Also a deliberate advantage of 'pay as you go' was to eliminate the subsidising of heavy users, this seems to entrench it. Heavy users of any of Exetels services should be an advantage so it is reasonable to have a discount plan based on total monthly spend.

peterh_oz wrote...

If I was a high user of P2P or other large download usages I'd get one of these plans, use about 2Gb in peak, and saturate the offpeak period.
(snip complicated off peak arrangements)

Al this is weaving around the problem of 'abuse' of off peak when the fundamental issue is the most profit effective use of Exetel network bandwidth. The best solution is to offer two streams (standard-fast and cheap-slow) and let each customer decide the value of time and data based on the the price difference between them.
( Did the proxy idea here http://johnl.blogs.exetel.com.au/index. ... rease.html ever get to a possibility ?)

Regards C Bumkin

[ForumAdmin]

( Did the proxy idea here http://johnl.blogs.exetel.com.au/index. ... rease.html ever get to a possibility ?)

Regards C Bumkin

It is a reality.

Implementing it before mid 2009 is not financially 'doable' as we have put all capex on hold.

[Country Bumkin]

It is a reality.

Implementing it before mid 2009 is not financially 'doable' as we have put all capex on hold.

Is it possible to have an interim option for P2P only using the existing proxy capability of the Allot ?

Regards C Bumkin

[ForumAdmin]

It is a reality.

Implementing it before mid 2009 is not financially 'doable' as we have put all capex on hold.

Is it possible to have an interim option for P2P only using the existing proxy capability of the Allot ?

Regards C Bumkin

We changed our network topology to provide separate direct IP in all States - something you as a QLD user would get some benefit from.

In doing this we lost our 'central' controls of the IP feeds and will now have to wait until funding is again available to control P2P traffic in QLD, VIC and WA and therefore to provide caching of P2P in those States.

[ForumAdmin]

The plans can now be ordered from the Exetel web site.

We will tidy up some of the wording as prospective customers make it clear where we need to add more explanation.

In general erms these plans are not suitable for any current user as they are aimed at very low usage users andpriced to the absolute 'bare bones'.

We will add the restriction of 5 gb downloaded in both periods with any excess charged at $6.00 per gb to ensure these plans are only used by 'genuine' low usage users.

I have no idea how popular, if at all, these plans will be and we won't know that for a while. They are aimed at pensioners and similar 'light users'.

[Col]

We will add the restriction of 5 gb downloaded in both periods with any excess charged at $6.00 per gb to ensure these plans are only used by 'genuine' low usage users.

While I do agree with what Mr Bumkin said, that if "the charging model matches the costs there will be no 'unintended consequences' of customers moving large amounts of data, just a bigger profit for Exetel", I realise that Exetel does not want to attract super heavy downloaders who will flood the off-peak period.

How does the proposed 5GB restriction work? If you currently have 5GB or less quota in a period the blocks are at the normal rates, but if you currently have more than 5GB credit in a period the blocks will be at $6 per GB? That wont stop a person intent on "abusing" the plans as they will just top-up after each DVD they download or whatever. Perhaps a better system is to limit the number of top-ups per period to once a fortnight. If you buy a block then the block rate of that period goes up to $6/GB for a fortnight and then comes down once the fortnight is up, meaning the maximum anyone can download a month (28 days) at the normal block rate is 10GB per period. Downloading more than that means they have had to buy a $6/GB block, however I think that $6/GB is too excessive, $3 would be enough to deter heavy usage imo.

You need to get someone to go over the plans page with a fine tooth comb trying to sort out all the * ** + ++ etc because they are all over the place. For instance, you have a ++ in the normal table to do about shaping and the outdated info to do with that is in the toggle hide/show bit down the bottom, but you also have a ++ underneath the PAYU table explaining the pre-paid concept, but there is no ++ in the PAYU table. Also take a look at * in the page, it's used more than once too, but the info regarding the guarantee of speeds on a 8mbit line is MIA.

Also the info about the Account Admin. charge on the application page reads like the PAYU plans are subject to it, so that needs to be fixed up along with all other references to the Account Admin. charge on the website.