 
Camelot One
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-21
Sarasota, FL
clubs: | $40 a month? $40 a month for VoIP service....AND bundling is required? Are they smoking crack? | |
|  | 
morbo
Complete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000
clubs: | Re: $40 a month? is it possible to smoke copper? | |
| | | | | | | MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·AT&T Southwest
| Re: $40 a month? said by en102  :Problems with this service: 1. Internet and/or VoIP REQUIRES purchase of MS IPTV service  Cable will allow this Yes, but it is possible to cancel the TV and keep HSIA and Voice.
2. No 'signup' deals ? TW Cable triple play deals start at $90 / month (sure, add in ~ $12/month for a couple more TVs), but it at least comes with 6Mbps service, not 1.5!
Cable is famous for these. The other vendors (Satellite, FIOS, Uverse) not so much. I don't know why.
3. Why isn't AT&T also promoting Call Vantage VoIP... if they want subscribers, its almost half the price.
It's a very different market. See my post above. | |
| | | | | | | | | hottboiinnc
ME
join:2003-10-15
Toledo, OH
 ·buckeye cable
| I know someone that has the FTTP service of AT&T in MI. Everyone always claims that TV must be purchased with the HSI but thats not the case. The only thing my friend ordered was HSI and Phone. No TV at all. And had the option of just getting HSI as well but VZW doesnt have great service inside his house. | |
| | | | | | | | | | | hottboiinnc
ME
join:2003-10-15
Toledo, OH | Re: $40 a month? they never ordered then canceled. they were given the option not to order it or to order it and still get the HSI FTTP. | |
| | MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
| As has been posted before, $40/month is the going price point for digital phone services that come from the Cable companies (Comcast and Time Warner Cable are the big ones). And, they have been extremely successful. They are viewed by consumers as simple, reliable, and they like the fact that they receive a single bill and can call a single vendor for support. Consumers see that they save money versus their POTS service (which is typically well over $50/month with features and long distance). Consumers are very satisfied, generally, with their Digital Phone service, ranking it very high in quality and reliability. Can Vonage or even CallVantage say the same?
AT&T U-verse is adding Voice as the third component of their triple play (TV, Voice, Internet) so that they can complete directly with cable offerings.
You are not the target market for U-verse Voice. You are willing to go with a third party, install a new box in your network, deal with separate billing, setup, configuration, and support, all to save $15 or $20 a month.
AT&T CallVantage competes in this VoIP market also, and are right on the price point of $25. | |
| | | | | | | MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
| Re: $40 a month? said by en102 :CallVantage is the same vendor (AT&T) and should be on the same bill, and should also use the same network (AT&T). I am a CV customer. It is a separate entity within AT&T with its own billing. It's not tied to the AT&T network in any way I can see.
By tying it into its own VLAN on an RG and adding a battery pack, should I pay $15/month more ?
Who's "I"? You personally? That's up to you. Me personally? No I would not. But see my previous post for an explanation of the consumer POV on this. | |
| | | | | | | | | | | MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
| Re: $40 a month? said by en102 :Part of the consumer POV is also the forced bundling. As a potential consumer, I feel that I have to bundle just to get service. I can understand bundled discounts, but what if I want Internet or Internet + VoIP only ? Not that I prefer cable (I'm a DSL subscriber, with forced POTS on DSL-Extreme), but the restrictions placed on ordering makes it difficult to want to order service. You are confusing yourself with the target market.
To the target market, bundling is a BENEFIT, not a PROBLEM. | |
| | | | | | | 
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME
·DSL EXTREME
| Re: $40 a month? Target market = AT&T's vision of who they want to sell their product to (i.e. those wanting AT&T TV service). I don't mind bundling, in fact, I would bundle Internet, VoIP and Wireless... but not TV.
The problem is that AT&T's target market is basing its foundation on TV service, which has an expensive entry point.
Consumer POV = what does the average consumer want. Average consumer wants services for the least amount of money and hassle.
There are exceptions to everything. Sure there are customers that want to pay for it all (i.e. 4 HD sets), and AT&T won't deliver, and have 20Mbps service. On the other side, there are those that want and ISP, and low priced VoIP. AT&T has shed itself as being an ISP unless you're wanting to fit into their target high(er) profit window.
For many consumers, AT&T bundling may work, as it might be cheaper than what they currently pay, and for others, it might have more features than they currently have (DSL/POTS).
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
| | | | | | | | | 
r81984
Tough to beat.
Premium
join:2001-11-14
Morgan City, LA | Well this is in California where $40 CUSD (californian united states dollars) = $20 USD
--
»www.ryanoneill.us | |
| 
jjoshua
Premium
join:2001-06-01
Scotch Plains, NJ
edit:
March 17th, @12:14PM
| Plus... Add on taxes, surcharges, fees, unfees, activation, and deactivation charges.
What's the total now? I get $835/month but that may be a bit high.  | |
| satellite68
join:2007-04-11
Louisville, KY | (yawn) quote:
U-Verse Voice is available only with purchase of
Lost me right there. Go "bundle" yourselves in dog poo. | |
| 
pokesph
It Is Almost Fast
join:2001-06-25
Sacramento, CA
clubs: | $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$... why on earth would I pay $40 a month + dsl/tv fees when I can get a POTS line for $5.50 /mo?
Its WAY over priced. maybe if it was 10 bux for the 1000 min plan and required NO bundling then I'd even consider it. Otherwise, no way. | |
| | | | MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
| First the 5.50/month includes only 25 local calls/month (or something like that) and zero features. Plus fees take it to about $15/month.
Any POTS service comparable to unlimited VoIP in features and long distance will be well over the $40/month price point. | |
| | |
pokesph
It Is Almost Fast
join:2001-06-25
Sacramento, CA
clubs:
·Comcast
| Re: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$... said by MyDogHsFleas :First the 5.50/month includes only 25 local calls/month (or something like that) and zero features. Plus fees take it to about $15/month. Any POTS service comparable to unlimited VoIP in features and long distance will be well over the $40/month price point. we have unlimited local calling and elected to not have a long distance plan (at extra cost) on this line since we rarely use it... the 5.50 (actually $5.45) includes all taxes and unfeees. | |
| | | | MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
| Re: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$... said by pokesph :we have unlimited local calling and elected to not have a long distance plan (at extra cost) on this line since we rarely use it... the 5.50 (actually $5.45) includes all taxes and unfeees. What plan is this? Is it Lifeline? Do you have to be low-income or be otherwise qualified? Who is your provider? | |
| | | | | | | | | | 
gaforces
United We Stand, Divided We Fall
join:2002-04-07
Santa Cruz, CA
·Cruzio Internet
edit:
March 17th, @12:48PM
| More high prices There is a point between pricing services to make them seem valuable and actual cost + profit margin to draw customers.
ATT consistently goes way over that so the customers they do get, either don't have any other choice, are fools, or have so much money it doesn't matter.
VDSL is a waste of money, they pay to "upgrade" their service only to have that service obsolete and uncompetitive before it's even rolled out. | |
| EPS
join:2008-02-13
Hingham, MA
| VOIP vs POTS What is the benefit to AT&T for offering this? I mean, the part of the phone line for POTS can't be used for anything else, can it? So that copper bandwidth basically sits vacant, while part of the bandwidth being used for internet gets taken up by an equivalent service... | |
| | MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
| Re: VOIP vs POTS said by EPS :What is the benefit to AT&T for offering this? I mean, the part of the phone line for POTS can't be used for anything else, can it? So that copper bandwidth basically sits vacant, while part of the bandwidth being used for internet gets taken up by an equivalent service... I believe that the frequencies used for POTS really aren't useful for other things, being in the kHz range. Maybe some telephone techie can verify this. | |
| | | 
Corona
It's cool, I'm takin it back
Premium
join:2000-03-14
San Antonio, TX | Re: VOIP vs POTS True. POTS is in the 0-4 HZ range. | |
| | | | MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
edit:
March 17th, @03:26PM
| Re: VOIP vs POTS said by Corona :True. POTS is in the 0-4 HZ range. I kinda doubt THAT.
OK you made me look it up. According to the WikiPedia POTS article, it's 300 to 3400 Hz. | |
| | | | |
Corona
It's cool, I'm takin it back
Premium
join:2000-03-14
San Antonio, TX
| Re: VOIP vs POTS said by MyDogHsFleas :said by Corona :True. POTS is in the 0-4 HZ range. I kinda doubt THAT. OK you made me look it up. According to the WikiPedia POTS article, it's 300 to 3400 Hz. So, I was right then? | |
| | | | | | MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
| Re: VOIP vs POTS said by Corona :said by MyDogHsFleas :said by Corona :True. POTS is in the 0-4 HZ range. I kinda doubt THAT. OK you made me look it up. According to the WikiPedia POTS article, it's 300 to 3400 Hz. So, I was right then? Am I missing something?
In what way does a range of 0-4 equate to a range of 300-3400?
Maybe you thought you typed kHz? | |
| | | | | | |
Corona
It's cool, I'm takin it back
Premium
join:2000-03-14
San Antonio, TX
edit:
March 17th, @06:04PM
| Re: VOIP vs POTS said by MyDogHsFleas :Am I missing something? In what way does a range of 0-4 equate to a range of 300-3400? Maybe you thought you typed kHz? yep, I did think that. I shouldn't multi-task. First I typed 0-4000kHz, and I thought to myself, no, that isn't right. So, I took out the "000" and the "k" and messed it all up. | |
| | patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
| said by EPS :What is the benefit to AT&T for offering this? I mean, the part of the phone line for POTS can't be used for anything else, can it? So that copper bandwidth basically sits vacant, while part of the bandwidth being used for internet gets taken up by an equivalent service... According to »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asymmetric···e_2_Plus
you get a extra 256 kbit/s upload for sacrificing the voice POTS. I guess the cost of programing that option into the provisioning system isn't cost effective. | |
| 
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southwest
| Ripoff.... More proof AT&T isn't thinking about the future but thinking about protecting revenue from the past (IE POTS and Long distance.)
It's very disappointing. Seems like Cox's bundle WILL be cheaper then AT&T U-Verse, or even a Broadband + VOIP + DBS Satellite will be cheaper then U-Verse.
AT&T needs to realize that VOIP needs to be cheap, and stop thinking about their old Telco POTS heyday.
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!) | |
| | jester121
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL
 ·ViaTalk
| Re: Ripoff.... You're right on the money here.
Even reliability isn't going to be such a big selling point in the future -- in 20 years the entire marketplace will be customers who have grown up with cell phones, including dropped calls, iffy sound quality, and dead zones. | |
| | | 
kilometers
join:2007-01-24
Sacramento, CA
·SureWest Internet
·AT&T U-Verse
| Yay, I guess? No thanks. I already have enough trouble using all my minutes on my at&t cellphone service. Plus I have thousands of rollover minutes as well. Besides, I could imagine it taking like 4 seconds for my voice to reach whoever I'm talking to given how bad my latency has been lately.
At this point I'm happy with using my cellphone as my main contact number. Plus I never get telemarketing calls on it. | |
| MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
| "Fiber-rich network" I got a laugh out of this PR spin from AT&T (found it here).
quote:
AT&T said its U-verse voice service is a "managed IP-based service that is delivered over AT&T's fiber-rich network, unlike many Voice over IP (VoIP) providers that offer best-effort digital phone services over the public Internet."
Maybe one of their QOS goals is a healthy colon!
Kidding aside, they have found a "creative" way to describe their FTTN architecture. | |
| 
David
Last man standing
Premium,VIP
join:2002-05-30
Granite City, IL
clubs:
·magicjack.com
·AT&T Midwest
| just a thought hate to say it but I think Karl Bode mentioned it here
»AT&T Unveils New VoIP Service
Said by article
The $40 price point seems high, but expensive VoIP hasn't stopped cable operators from dominating the industry.
Another point by Camelot One
That was my point. Not only are there cheaper (and better) VoIP carriers, AT&T's own CallVantage VoIP service is cheaper!
But I guess they are just pricing off of the cable companies, their branded VoIP service seems to run the same price.
Said by manhole
$39.95
I am in no way trying to defend AT&T's pricing, however I have not seen anyone yet mention this.
In my opinion AT&T is basically copying Comcast's pricing at $39.95. Comcast is having great success even at this seemingly high price.
There is a significant difference between all other VOIP providers and U-Verse Voice which will allow AT&T to charge this higher price. U-Verse Voice does not get routed over the public internet. The profile in the gateway has a special amount of bandwidth allocated just for voice, and it is not routed over the internet, instead it goes over AT&T's private network. AT&T also will be providing users a battery backup system for the gateway incase of power outages. I know many of you will say that you can just as easily purchase a UPS for your VOIP connection, but the average user does not have their VOIP connected to one whereas virtually all U-Verse Voice users will have battery backup. If done right the system can be just as reliable as standard telephone service, whereas standard VOIP reliability depends on your internet connection.
So exactly what is "Too Expensive" if you price it where everybody else is? If the cable companies can collect $40 why can't att? I didn't see their success hindering comcast at $40 a month. Aren't they "number one" or so I read?
--
If you have a topic in the direct forum please reply to it or a post of mine, I get a notification when you do this.
Koetting Ford, Granite City, illinois... YOU'RE FIRED!!
| |
| | | 
Fiber is King
@surewest.com | Re: at&t = little infrastructure in Sacramento Sure West still dominates the Internet, 20 meg up and down. Their VOIP is costs less compared to Comcrap and ATT. | |
| | | | | | |
|
|
U-Verse Voice Launched in Sacramento
