Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by 5parks 3833 days ago
I'm sure cable execs are kicking themselves for not implementing usage-based billing two decades ago. Nearly every other service is usage-based but no one complains, because they've always been usage-based.
3 comments

The difference is that cable companies want it both ways. They charge you a minimum for a set amount of serivce AND they charge you if you use more than that AND you don't always get what you pay for (since it's "up to" xx mb/s)

With water if I don't use it I pay zero. If I use xxxx gallons I pay for xxxx gallons and if I turn the tap and water doesn't come out I get a bill credit at the very least.

With the internet I pay $50/ month whether I use it or not, if I pay for 100gb and I use 105gb then I pay $20 for the overage and if I have DOCSIS and everyone in my neighbourhood is using their internet then too bad for me that it doesn't work.

I think most other items are usage-based because when you use them they are gone. When you use electricity or water, more needs to be generated/cleaned.

Not so with Internet. It is more like phone service. If I make a call, nothing needs to be rebuilt for another one.

I believe it is obvious to people and that is why there is push-back.

Competition existed in the past.
From who? Dial-up SLIP/PPP and ISDN could hardly be considered competitive with a DOCSIS product. The market is far more competitive now, with increased FTTP deployments and advanced wireless.
Before the frequencies were reallocated to mobile usage, Sprint ran a cable-modem-over-wireless product called Broadband Direct that was pretty nice for its time. The system had a 30+ mile range to the towers, so lots of area could be covered with few towers.

The DSL/cable discrepancy also used to be smaller, and there were more, smaller cable providers.