[132678] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Kevin Blackham)
Tue Nov 30 02:47:10 2010
In-Reply-To: <4CF42FC5.9080401@emmanuelcomputerconsulting.com>
From: Kevin Blackham <blackham@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 00:47:10 -0700
To: William Warren <hescominsoon@emmanuelcomputerconsulting.com>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Nov 29, 2010, at 15:57, William Warren <hescominsoon@emmanuelcomputercons=
ulting.com> wrote:
> I think Karl Denninger has this one called right:
> http://market-ticker.org/post=3D173522
I don't think so. Let's do a little math exercise:
Comcast charges me $75/mo for my pipe, but let's discount that for bundling,=
promos and lower tier services. $30-40 avg ok?
For that money I get 250GB a month. Let's assume I actually use it - which I=
never do, even with Netflix, other VOD, and many habits common to eyeballs -=
but for the sake of a number to work with, I do. That's less than 1Mbps ave=
rage per month. I'm not factoring in deviation from avg to peak, so I am goi=
ng to assume 1Mbps per sub is peak per sub and 250GB is not the average for t=
he user base.
That is at least $40/Mbps paid by the eyeballs... or if I am very wrong, $20=
/Mbps. This is unsustainable and requires income at both ends for a healthy b=
usiness model?=20
I'm not convinced. Either I'm calculating something wrong, or greed is at wo=
rk.=
