exetel increase download limit in near future?

Old, inactive threads
Post Reply
lee
Posts: 28
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 4:21 pm

exetel increase download limit in near future?

Post by lee » Tue Jan 15, 2008 4:58 pm

read this article
Fancy a 100GB broadband plan?
http://www.pcauthority.com.au/news.aspx?CIaNID=68151
Australian ISPs are being urged to consider bigger download limits in the order of 100GB to 200GB in the wake of new cheaper access to overseas data.

The new link, launched yesterday by PIPE Networks, will provide overseas Internet links up to "50% cheaper" than the price currently paid by some ISPs. The most likely effect will be new bigger download quotas, not speed, with several ISPs including iiNet and Internode considering the option.

The savings should allow "true unlimited" broadband in Australia, predicted executive director Lloyd Ernst. "At the moment ISPs tend top see 20GB plans as unlimited," he told PCA.

"We want to see 100GB or 200GB. That's getting close to the realms of what you need when you start to do high definition video, and high definition games," Ernst said.

Internode managing director Simon Hackett confirmed the likelihood of increased quota limits, saying the ISP expects to expand download quota for the same monthly price. "Since the average monthly downloads for our customers continue to rise steadily, the arrival of [the PIPE link] in mid 2009 will be excellent timing," he said.



iiNet is also tipping improved download limits, rather than speed, with CTO Greg Bader telling us larger quotas were "definitely on the horizon". "Our position is access speeds aren’t an issue. But if you look at all the plans in Australia, they’re based around quota," he said.

The PIPE link, called the Pipe Pacific Cable 1, will link Australia to the United States and Asia when it is completed in 2009. It will offer ISPs an alternative to existing three overseas links, including Telstra’s Australia-Japan cable.

Despite government predictions of faster broadband as a result of the Pipe Pacific Cable 1, iiNet disagreed that broadband users wanted faster speeds. Bader said that a significant proportion of iiNet customers were happy to stay with broadband plans three or four years old.

"Many don’t actively look to upgrade to newer plans. Evidence of this is that we have a portion of customers, that whilst they have access to high speed ADSL (at the $49/59 marks), they are happy to stay on older legacy type plans ($39/49) at for example 512kb."

Bader was also critical of proposed plans to build a fast national fibre network, arguing it will drive prices up. "To be honest the worst thing that can happen now is a fibre to the node plan. Under a unilateral fibre to the node model, you’re talking anywhere between an eight and ten billion dollar investment. You can expect prices to double or triple."

"I certainly agree we need fibre to the node in some areas, but for large parts of metro areas, fibre to the node will offer minimal gain. 95% of metro areas today have access to reasonable speed broadband. It’s the five to ten per cent in outlying areas or blackspots that need to be fixed up."

"I’m concerned the pricing models on this need to be very clear and upfront before we go ahead with this. I’m concerned that prices will go through the roof."

NetworkAdmin
Exetel Staff
Posts: 559
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2004 1:19 am
Contact:

Post by NetworkAdmin » Tue Jan 15, 2008 5:24 pm

The 'authority' quoted in that article is Lloyd Ernst, who's claim to fame is he 'runs the businesses from his hobby farm outside Warwick'.

I am not saying his opinion is right or wrong, however uninformed it might be. But I am reminded of a line I heard Stuart Wagstaff give in a stage production of The Rocky Horror Picture Show (many years ago), when he was being heckled from the audience. I think is was "If I wanted to listen to an a**-hole, I would have f**ted."

The profession of editor, or sub-editor, really has taken a dive in the last decade.

alburyman
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2007 2:28 pm

Post by alburyman » Tue Jan 15, 2008 5:34 pm

Man this is 18months off. In australia not all of us can get adsl, so how about working on this first and then get bigger limits. Also its good to see that Helstra is slowly losing its stronghold on Australians and Isp's.

James
Exetel Staff
Posts: 2014
Joined: Mon May 09, 2005 10:27 pm

Post by James » Tue Jan 15, 2008 5:43 pm

International bandwidth is just one part of the equation, interconnection from Exetel to its DSL partners is still really expensive!

stormx

Post by stormx » Tue Jan 15, 2008 11:03 pm

James wrote:International bandwidth is just one part of the equation, interconnection from Exetel to its DSL partners is still really expensive!
Why don't Exetel build their own international link?

I suggest to Europe, it's a bit far but bandwidth is very cheap. I mean TPG can handle with large international bandwidth quantities, if Exetel are making over $3 million a month, then they could build their own national network, I guess on the east coast because that’s where most of the PoP’s are. If I was running Exetel, I would look for different wholesaler's to deliver broadband, I would also take away the netenforcer and just limit the offpeak to/from the internet to 1.8GB.

dogwomble
Posts: 375
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 12:21 am

Post by dogwomble » Wed Jan 16, 2008 7:33 am

There's a lot more to it than "Exetel has a turnover of $3 million a month". Remember, that's probably $3 million turnover - that won't all be profit. I wouldn't know the specific costs, but if they put the international link in, they'd be pushing it a bit tight for quite some time as they cover the installation costs and the ongoing costs of maintenance. It's a nice thought, but one that requires a lot more consideration.

As for the NetEnforcer ... you would seriously consider something that would seriously degrade internet access for all users? Some may argue that it causes performance issues, I argue that with the situation we have now, it would be a lot worse without it, given that the links carry multiple different types of traffic - including P2P traffic which could flood the entire link if left unattended, Gaming and VOIP traffic (which are both at least moderately dependent on a good quality link with plenty of bandwidth), and standard HTTP, FTP and Email traffic, which are less picky about the quality of the services. But I digress off topic.

James
Exetel Staff
Posts: 2014
Joined: Mon May 09, 2005 10:27 pm

Post by James » Wed Jan 16, 2008 8:48 am

stormx wrote:
James wrote:International bandwidth is just one part of the equation, interconnection from Exetel to its DSL partners is still really expensive!
Why don't Exetel build their own international link?

I suggest to Europe, it's a bit far but bandwidth is very cheap. I mean TPG can handle with large international bandwidth quantities, if Exetel are making over $3 million a month, then they could build their own national network, I guess on the east coast because that’s where most of the PoP’s are. If I was running Exetel, I would look for different wholesaler's to deliver broadband, I would also take away the netenforcer and just limit the offpeak to/from the internet to 1.8GB.
Why not make a bid for Exetel then? Email resolution@exetel.com.au but i doubt that someone still at school could afford it on their allowance...

James
Exetel Staff
Posts: 2014
Joined: Mon May 09, 2005 10:27 pm

Post by James » Wed Jan 16, 2008 10:05 am

dogwomble wrote:There's a lot more to it than "Exetel has a turnover of $3 million a month". Remember, that's probably $3 million turnover - that won't all be profit. I wouldn't know the specific costs, but if they put the international link in, they'd be pushing it a bit tight for quite some time as they cover the installation costs and the ongoing costs of maintenance. It's a nice thought, but one that requires a lot more consideration.

As for the NetEnforcer ... you would seriously consider something that would seriously degrade internet access for all users? Some may argue that it causes performance issues, I argue that with the situation we have now, it would be a lot worse without it, given that the links carry multiple different types of traffic - including P2P traffic which could flood the entire link if left unattended, Gaming and VOIP traffic (which are both at least moderately dependent on a good quality link with plenty of bandwidth), and standard HTTP, FTP and Email traffic, which are less picky about the quality of the services. But I digress off topic.
I doubt Exetel has $400,000,000.00 to spend on a cable to Europe.

crazyjohno
Posts: 19
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 11:28 am
Location: Kangaroo Flat (Exch), Victoria

Post by crazyjohno » Thu Jan 17, 2008 4:34 pm

NetworkAdmin wrote:The 'authority' quoted in that article is Lloyd Ernst, who's claim to fame is he 'runs the businesses from his hobby farm outside Warwick'.

I am not saying his opinion is right or wrong, however uninformed it might be. But I am reminded of a line I heard Stuart Wagstaff give in a stage production of The Rocky Horror Picture Show (many years ago), when he was being heckled from the audience. I think is was "If I wanted to listen to an a**-hole, I would have f**ted."

The profession of editor, or sub-editor, really has taken a dive in the last decade.
This is an interesting thread!!!
I too agree that the profession of editor and so forth to be rather poor these days.

As I understand it, this person is just a back yard reseller (?), if this is so... Why is some person being paid to write this crap? It is regardless / pointless having the opinion of another firm stating that they are looking at it, I am sure Exetel is looking at wining the gold lotto, but don't need to express it. With the evolution of IT in Australia getting faster and faster, better and better, for sure it would be great to see the standard household have a gigabit connection also to have larger download quotas.

I also take note of "alburyman" statement that lets fix it up first for all to have access. Metro is at great speeds and so forth so they can wait; they may not even know anything was happening, if they stay focused on looking after themselves. Which is the case, business is business.

This is a diverse country but also a bloody big one, (Smallest continent, biggest Island). I think I could go on for sometime about my views, but it is nice to see such views being discussed in an orderly fashion. So, my two bob for now is: "Look after yourself, look after your team, now you will achieve your goal." So, company first, country second, and then show the world how strong we are.

To some people Exetel may not be what they are looking for at this point in time of their views/interests, but I say lets remember that the foundation is what you build your house on. That’s Exetel's direction ("IN MY VIEW"), good for them. They inform you, and you have the option

Maybe a bit of the ex-soldier in me coming out, but I would like to hear others views to my comments and this thread (if no-one has any objections).

austdata
Posts: 629
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2007 12:38 am
Location: Melbourne

Post by austdata » Thu Jan 17, 2008 8:49 pm

James wrote:I doubt Exetel has $400,000,000.00 to spend on a cable to Europe.
Funny, I would have thought 1.5 to 2.0 times that.

Given the revenue centres from Adelaide to Perth I doubt any single ISP could afford to put a cable across the Nallabour, let alone the Indian and Atlantic.

Cheers,

Mike

James
Exetel Staff
Posts: 2014
Joined: Mon May 09, 2005 10:27 pm

Post by James » Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:11 am

austdata wrote:
James wrote:I doubt Exetel has $400,000,000.00 to spend on a cable to Europe.
Funny, I would have thought 1.5 to 2.0 times that.

Given the revenue centres from Adelaide to Perth I doubt any single ISP could afford to put a cable across the Nallabour, let alone the Indian and Atlantic.

Cheers,

Mike
I was being optimistic:)

austdata
Posts: 629
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2007 12:38 am
Location: Melbourne

Post by austdata » Fri Jan 18, 2008 1:03 am

James wrote:I was being optimistic:)
At least one of us was. :wink: :wink:

Cheers,

Mike

dogwomble
Posts: 375
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 12:21 am

Post by dogwomble » Fri Jan 18, 2008 7:03 am

crazyjohno wrote:To some people Exetel may not be what they are looking for at this point in time of their views/interests, but I say lets remember that the foundation is what you build your house on. That’s Exetel's direction ("IN MY VIEW"), good for them. They inform you, and you have the option
I think that's quite a good point of view.

Exetel are very public about the way they do things ... unlike some other ISPs ... and some people may find that what they're doing makes Exetel unsuitable for their needs. Simple solution? There are plenty of other ISP's out there, and as a consumer you have that choice.

However, there are plenty of people where Exetel meets their needs quite well. I believe Exetel now have 65,000 or more customers of various services - certainly not a number to be sneezed at. And while the occasional issue comes up, I generally see only a small number of them complaining here or in the live chat. There's a few more on Whirlpool, but given the fact that they tend to complain about someone sneezing while posting in a thread, I take their opinions there with a grain of salt So I think it's true to say that Exetel fits the needs of at least most of their customer base.

At this point, I think that increasing the download limit off-peak is currently not going to happen - 48gb is already quite generous (and a lot higher than the 36gb I got when I first joined a year ago). Exetel may consider increasing them though, they are constantly changing their plans. And as for Exetel adding some of their own upstream links, I think we've blown that out of the water as being (presently) unachievable for Exetel, but who knows, that may become achievable in the future - but with what Exetel wants to do, I don't think it's a priority right now.

austdata
Posts: 629
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2007 12:38 am
Location: Melbourne

Post by austdata » Sat Jan 19, 2008 12:23 am

Exetel still have the option of leasing additional bandwidth (not in blocks but Xbits a second). From memory it's about $230 a mbps a month.

So adding 100mb to the current bandwidth is only $23,000 a month :shock: or $230K a month for a gigabit link. :roll: :roll:

Glad I'm not paying for that, I couldn't even afford 10mbps. :wink:

Cheers,

Mike

Post Reply