|
|
![]() |
#1 |
Your resident lancerHO
![]() |
![]()
Oh absolutely. The business reasoning behind it is genius. They say 2% of their customer base are the only ones being affected. So say 10% of those have the option or motivation to change providers when the limit goes into effect...that's only 0.2% of their total customer base that they'll potentially lose. They'll save on bandwidth, then entice the rest of their customers to use THEIR on demand stuff instead of Netflix/Hulu/Etc, increasing their revenues in that area as well.
Trust me, even though I probably rarely get close to the 250gb limit, out of principle I would switch providers if I had the option, but I don't even have another DSL provider option in my area, much less fiber or cable provider. The joys of living on the outskirts of town ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 | |
He Who Dares...WINS!
|
![]() Quote:
As more and more industries go to web driven and stream driven content it becomes harder and harder to operate in the rural parts of America, especially with these data caps. I'm too far out for any wire driven access, at current. It's either cellular or satellite, and satellite quite frankly is not even close to being worth the cost after having had it for a year. |
|
![]() |
![]() |