PLDT Bandwidth Cap: Why It Makes Sense

Tuesday, January 04, 2011

This article is a repost of what I wrote a few months back, after rumor spread that ISPs in our country are implementing speed capping. Speed capping is different from bandwidth capping (the one approved by ITC) in a sense that instead of limiting the total amount of data you can get from the internet, ISPs will limit the maximum speed that you get it. While this is happening already in a sense because your ISP package has speed limits, speed capping also applies for selected services, like torrenting and video streaming. But I digress. Speed capping is NOT implemented as far as I know, but in the near future, bandwidth capping might. And even if clients do get pissed off about it, PLDT/Globe/Bayantel still has a lot to gain even at the cost of losing clients. (hint: This is for those angerfags who say "I'll just switch to the other ISP! You'll see!)

People of course are saying it's a bad business call, and barring any moral transgressions/indignations it may have, is it really a bad business call?

On a pure business sense, I think it's sensible.


See, ISP connections to other countries aren't like the ISP connections that we have at home. They're not exactly unlimited, and the business model of giving people unlimited internet connection is based on the idea that people will never be able to utilize their internet connections's actual worth when translated to the per byte fee ISPs have to pay for some of the outgoing connections (due to some arrangements with other ISPs in other countries)

Network equipment, of course need to be constantly upgraded for as long as bandwidth peaks rise, since most equipment can only handle a certain amount of bandwidth before they gain sentience, look for a pistol, and shoot themselves. Upgrading costs more than a shiny penny, that I know.



Above is the traffic internet percentage trend from 1996 to 2006 and as you can see now, it's speculated that more than 60% of the total bandwidth consumption online is because of peer-to-peer. It's said that somebody who uses torrent consumes the BW load of at least 20 normal users (even those fags who use youtube whose videos average 40mb per video)

That also means maintaining the account of a single torrentfag who downloads at least 1 gigabyte worth of data every other daycosts at least 20 times as much as a normal users who contents himself in sending email, and answering facebook quizzes with only occasional downloads.

Suppose one in every five ISP user is a torrent user and after the cap, he leaves for another ISP. That means the total average consumption will go from 24 average users to just four average users and still maintain payments for four users. That means the profit margin actually will rise if the torrent users leave for other ISPs.

The decrease in cost is so great compared to the decrease in earnings, I wont be surprised if all ISPs start pushing hard for this capping even though most of the users will rant to hell and back.

Bottomline is, if losing 20% of your customer base causes your costs to fall 95% for the total population, it's practically a goldmine strategy.

Of course, this move is a huge step back for people just beginning to exploit the potential of the internet in the only way third world countries can. As for myself, I'd stay neutral until I see where this leads.

In any case it'll be a most interesting case.

p.s. (Most interesting will be the wails of dramafag torrent junkies who'll pull no punches in making the most ridiculous of justifications despite the bottomline that majority of torrenting/p2p is really just related to pirating shit off the net. Don't be hypocritical, you know what I'm talking about.)

22 comments:

Jherskie said...

i usually DL free software off the internet so i don't root for bandwidth caps.

Anonymous said...

I noticed a month or two ago that my PLDT dsl connection apparently slowed down, although their call reps wont admit it. Instead of switching ISPs, am considering having my dsl disconnected.

redistypingfromaninsecureplace said...

There are a lot of possible reasons for this. Get a technician to have a look see, and then bribe the dude into giving you a fatter bandwidth.

Alejandro said...

Well, the one's that will mostly be affected are the ones on the Multimedia/Arts business, the ones on the I.T. line of profession.

How about the ones with VPN or Virtual Private Network, in which you work from home SEND / RECEIVE data from remote office - Server.

this will definitely bring some businesses/profession in to deep trouble...

dburgito@yahoo.com

Genkuro said...

Bandwidth Capping is OUT as of January 13, 2011. "Fair Use Policy" is in. You forgot to factor in this post that telcos have areas of operations. Not all areas are covered by multiple Internet Service Providers. So if you are in an area wherein only one telco can provide a service almost seamlessly, "silent capping" will surely be a problem more so if you operate an internet cafe. Although we know they have already been doing that already.

Anonymous said...

You sure do like to say fag a lot. Are you some kind of closet homo?

The Chosen One said...

We the "torrentfags" as you like to call us, love to download most of the time and we put to good use the high internet speed we subscribed to rather than waste spending around P1,500-P2,000 a month just for what? Facebook? Social media? Browsing?

REDKINOKO said...

You're paying for it. Of course it makes sense to utilize it as much as you can. I'm writing this from the view of the ISPs, who of course, find it sensible to make sure they don't lose house advantage by letting you download to your hearts content. *shrug*

Anonymous said...

Dear writer,

Try to be a serious(hobbyist) software developer where you usually download Linux distros, SDKs, patches, MSNDC materials(which include IDE suites, full OSes), virtual machine packages, etc. Add to that the fact that normal users are also being introduced to cloud storage(ever heard of Google Drive or SkyDrive?), which makes capping more of limiting access to content that's already the user's in the first place.

Also, I buy my games through Steam. Just as a sample, DOTA2 and TF2 receives regular patches roughly ~500MB each. And that's for just two games. If PLDT caps my connection even though I ain't using it at max speed most of the time, how will i be able to redownload my game library when I do a reformat? Steam's game backup process is still not that good(look around in the Steam forum). High speed home connections are being subscribed to for reasons beyond the piracy issue you're pointing out.

Also, please stop calling torrent users "fags". That just proves what kind of person you are. Just FYI, I'm a software dev involved in platform distribution development, which includes P2P protocols like the BT protocol. Your "fag" comments are insults to my work, and many others'.

Charles Tolentino said...

Fail Article IMO.

bim thetruebitchslap said...

you call us a torrent fag? what are you a porn junkie? lol i bet you earned enough from writing this blog they will be very happy about this... lol

bim thetruebitchslap said...

he's a pldt/smart bitch....lol

Anonymous said...

only thing is, he forgot to mention those legitmate ones who paid for their downloads ... im sure there are a lot of those who still have their morals intact. Should they also suffer the speed cap as well?

Anonymous said...

hahaha...the writer has a lot of haters, your in deep trouble man.

i do downloads too, using torrent. but free software's. so that defines me as a "torrentfag" also?

how bout this, im paying for an ISP to provide me 2mbs of internet speed. in my 2 yrs of subscription, i never reached even 1.9mbps, not even once did i see my speedtest results to 1.9mbps, not even close, then they put that FUP?. how about FIP, "Fast internet provided"

well lets say we can't do anything about that FUP now, 5 out of 10 users switched or have their internet disconnected. will the ISP be able to provide the 2mbs to those 5 left? i strongly believe "NOT". but then they go and implement FUP. how was that suppose to favor us, the subscribers?

Anonymous said...

hahaha...the writer has a lot of haters, your in deep trouble man.

i do downloads too, using torrent. but free software's. so that defines me as a "torrentfag" also?

how bout this, im paying for an ISP to provide me 2mbs of internet speed. in my 2 yrs of subscription, i never reached even 1.9mbps, not even once did i see my speedtest results to 1.9mbps, not even close, then they put that FUP?. how about FIP, "Fast internet provided"

well lets say we can't do anything about that FUP now, 5 out of 10 users switched or have their internet disconnected. will the ISP be able to provide the 2mbs to those 5 left? i strongly believe "NOT". but then they go and implement FUP. how was that suppose to favor us, the subscribers?

vghortex said...

You easily call people fags, ever have a real life outside your internet world. Real people don't sit and state at the computer nonstop for facebook alone. Ever heard of patches and online game software distribution. In 2 days, I can easily consume 3Gb to 5Gb of download from patches and purchased software.

The person who can easily call people torrentfags or just fags only reflects what they are. Maybe you are a proud buyer of pirated softwares in CD format. Sadly dude, we pay for what we used.

Ever heard of the contracts signed between the ISP and the subscriber which also details what the subscriber needs? Like me, I need virtual desktop and ftp access at speed at least 50% on what I signed up on the contract.

You must way be behind technology since your normal usage is only stuck at facebook. Torrents used to be throttled until the ISP themselves issues devices and packages for torrent users so don't use that as an excuse. Way back before they release this packages, torrents are either blocked or throttled down at the ISP levels.

Telcos are plainly using this as an excuse to stop them from upgrading and to make a false hope on the new subscribers that they tricked that the system is fair and working in good condition.

Martin Kim Dela Paz said...

It's nice how the new trend today is along the lines of Cloud Storage and Cloud Computing while you on the other hand call these people faggots.

Yes it makes sense from a greedy perspective.

Good job faggot.

By the way I'm a heavy user because my niece watches educational cartoon shows on youtube.

While I'm making a mirror of my files off google drive.

Nice faggot article fag.

Dhan said...

I pay for legit online games with size ranging from 5gb to 20gb EACH..

So after downloading a huge "online" game, my connection should be crap after that for the whole month because I use bandwidth more than others in a short span of time?

This author's perspective seems to be "capped". ironic isn't it?

Arnuld said...

If torrents is PLDTs problem for the rise in bandwidth consumption, then surely they can isolate that particular software and limit its bandwidth usage? Or is their system so darn prehistoric that they'll rather put a bandwidth cap on all their subscribers for the simple fact that IT IS EASIER?

Anonymous said...

Who's the faggot writer?

Anonymous said...

YOU are full of *bullshit* !

Anonymous said...

YOU are full of *bullshit* !

 

Search This Blog

Most Reading