ISP Bandwidth Caps = Net Video Tax

Fri Jan 18, 2008 11:04AM EST

See Comments (8)

Think $4 for a Net movie rental is pricey? You could be paying a lot more if your ISP takes a liking to bandwidth caps.

Chris Null wrote yesterday about Time Warner Cable's experiment with tiered bandwidth caps, which (ostensibly, at least) would charge extra for the small percentage of users who—thanks largely to massive P2P file sharing—are hogging 50 percent of its bandwidth. Those who are just surfing the Web, sending e-mail, and buying the occasional song would pay a much smaller fee (exact rate plans are still up in the air).

Sounds reasonable, but check out this New York Times story, which puts the experiment in a different light. Until now, the only individual users downloading gigs and gigs of data were Kazaa and BitTorrent fanatics trading unaired episodes of "Battlestar Galactica" and movie bootlegs with their buddies. But what's a coming trend in Net usage that could change all that? Legal movie and TV downloads, starting with the likes of Amazon, Netflix, and Vudu, and culminating this week with the unveiling of iTunes movie rentals and a revitalized Apple TV.

Many are already groaning at the rental prices of Net videos: typically $4 for a new release, and $5 for a new HD movie. But consider this: the average SD movie comes in a 500MB file, and an HD movie can use as much as 5GB. So let's say you rent, oh, eight movies a month (or two a week). If you're sticking with standard def, that'll use up about 4-5GB of bandwidth a month—not including all your other Net usage. Gotta have your video in HD? Now we're talking 40GB a month.

As I mentioned before, TWC has yet to set specific rates for the bandwidth cap trial, but the Times talked to a spokesperson and learned that packages would "probably" range between 5GB and 40GB a month, with the 40GB plan costing about $50 or $60 a month. (As a TWC customer in Brooklyn, I pay $30/month for my all-you-can-eat Net plan.) So if you plan on buying eight HD movies in a given month, you could easily burn though all your monthly bandwidth—on the priciest available plan. And what if you go over the limit? The Times notes that Bell Canada, which is already using bandwidth caps, charges its customers more than $7 per extra gigabyte over your monthly allotment. Seven dollars times five for a 5GB HD movie...you do the math.

Of course, the TWC bandwidth cap trial is just that—a trial—and the spokesman quoted in the Times story is careful to say that the operator will make sure customers "feel like they are getting a good value" before going ahead. That said, the rise of widespread (and legal) movie and TV downloads represents a huge opportunity for your friendly neighborhood ISP (which, as the Times notes, pays an estimated "all-in" cost of less than 10 cents for every gigabyte you use). So if you think $4 to rent "Pirates of the Caribbean" over the Net sounds expensive...well, think again.

Related:
Time Warner: Download Too Much and You Might Pay $30 a Movie [New York Times]

Comments on ISP Bandwidth Caps = Net Video Tax

Post a Comment

Join in the discussion. Here you'll see the comments in the order they were posted.

  • 1 Posted by johnord on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:39PM EDT Report Abuse

    The idea that Time Warner - or any high bandwidth ISP - currently has an "all you can eat" plan is a myth. It's been well documented that Verizon and other ISP's put a stranglehold on your bandwidth if you download more than a certain amount of data each month (it's been rumored to be about 4-5 GB's a month). The problem is, they were sued over this and now may be forced to change thier advertising to reflect that in reality, they are not offering "unlimited" internet access. Time Warner is looking to avoid this kind of litigation. A price structure is thier first solution. But as you've written here in this article...they really aren't providing much of a solution. Sure, grandma and grandpa will pay less if all they do is send e-mails and receive Jpeg images of the grandkids. But for the vast majority of us, we need access to more cheap bandwidth - not less. This type of pricing structure will only lead to angry customers and bad press. This is definatley a bad idea.

  • 2 Posted by taficke on Thu Sep 3, 2009 9:54PM EDT Report Abuse

    This might be one of the worst ideas ever. This is TW trying to be cheap. The future will be all done on the internet, and at the rate they are going TW wont be ready. If they are doing this instead of buy newer machines that can handle all the bandwidth then they wont have to do tis and will have much happier customers.

  • 3 Posted by lewinjon on Thu Sep 3, 2009 6:49PM EDT Report Abuse

    Perhaps the solution can be found on the upload side rather than the download side. P2P users use far more than the average upload bandwith. Comcast is being investigated for cutting such users off. I feel no sympathy for those who traffic in bootleg video or audio and it certainly seems fair to me that such users pay a higher rate for their internet service or be cut off when their upload limits are reached.

  • 4 Posted by ytech_patterson on Thu Sep 3, 2009 10:58PM EDT Report Abuse

    @lewinjon: Excellent idea re: uploading bandwidth. That should cover ISP concerns about P2P'ers. Unfortunately, this whole issue could be more a question of revenue rather than bandwidth.

  • 5 Posted by robertkeller48 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 8:45PM EDT Report Abuse

    I like the "good value" phrase, that's the one they use to keep CD prices high and we know how well that's worked. It's only generated methods of getting Cd's copied to get around the high prices for something that costs less than a couple of cents to make. How else can the CEO's have their multi-million dollar incomes. You want it, they've got it, your going to pay to the hilt for it.

More Posts: First Prev 1 2 Next Last

Post a Comment


My Tech

Please enable your browser's cookies to activate the My Tech column.

Also on Yahoo! Tech

Computers Home Office Wi-Fi & Networking Phones & PDAs Cameras & Camcorders TV & Home Theater Portable Audio
 

Question and Answer content at Yahoo! Tech is written by Yahoo! users at Yahoo! Answers. Yahoo! does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any Yahoo! Answers content. For more information, read the Full Disclaimer.

Opinions expressed by the Advisors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Yahoo! Inc. Yahoo! receives no compensation from any manufacturer or distributor nor does it compensate any Advisor for the coverage of any product or service in any Advisor's content.