Re: [p2pi] For those who think "User Fairness/Cost Fairness" is unacceptable...

[Henning Schulzrinne <hgs at cs.columbia.edu>]

>
> Users are prepared to pay a premium for consistent month-to-month
> pricing.  ISPs are happy to take this premium.  If usage mix changes,
> they can change the pricing plans, but consumers will continue to be
> prepared to pay a premium for consistent month-to-month spending, and
> many ISPs will likely choose to continue to take this premium,
> offering different plans to different types of users.

In general, this is indeed an empirically well-founded observation.  
The problem is that this holds only if the penalty for predictability  
is reasonably small.

The old model of differentiating by access speed no longer works and  
is counter-productive (just makes uploading my photos a royal pain),  
so I'm unclear what you mean by "different plans" except volume-based  
tiering.

Just to take the cell phone example: We have both, quite successfully,  
all-you-can-talk plans at around $80 to $100/month, but also, at the  
other end, low-volume prepay plans that work out to roughly $10/month  
for minimal usage. (Less in Europe and Asia for reasons not worth  
discussing here.) It is very unlikely that those on the prepay plan  From p2pi-bounces at ietf.org  Mon Jun  9 06:03:46 2008
Return-Path: <p2pi-bounces at ietf.org>
X-Original-To: p2pi-archive at ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-p2pi-archive at core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4158A3A6BA2;
	Mon,  9 Jun 2008 06:03:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: p2pi at core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: p2pi at core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14B823A6C56
	for <p2pi at core3.amsl.com>; Mon,  9 Jun 2008 06:03:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.227
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.227 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.372, 
	BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32])
	by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id xyHOBDBIijIu for <p2pi at core3.amsl.com>;
	Mon,  9 Jun 2008 06:03:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from brinza.cc.columbia.edu (brinza.cc.columbia.edu [128.59.29.8])
	by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24E123A6BA2
	for <p2pi at ietf.org>; Mon,  9 Jun 2008 06:03:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.61] (pool-71-250-59-79.nwrknj.east.verizon.net
	[71.250.59.79]) (user=hgs10 mech=PLAIN bits=0)
	by brinza.cc.columbia.edu (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m59D3RV6004628
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT);
	Mon, 9 Jun 2008 09:03:28 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <8B41AFE5-C1CF-4E9A-9975-57C6B81864C1 at cs.columbia.edu>
From: Henning Schulzrinne <hgs at cs.columbia.edu>
To: Stanislav Shalunov <shalunov at bittorrent.com>
In-Reply-To: <dfa4ab960806090235p7d31e8f5q4f11cd30e6cb3c35 at mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v924)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2008 09:03:27 -0400
References: <BBCA80CA-34E9-40B1-9B37-628F014F9108 at ICSI.Berkeley.EDU>
	<215A468E-603E-486F-A544-D9CC0AF7C243 at cs.columbia.edu>
	<3efc39a60806081429k3a2d2df7u861b400e9188850e at mail.gmail.com>
	<ABAF7CFA-E029-4841-95DF-E474C3334E90 at cs.columbia.edu>
	<dfa4ab960806090235p7d31e8f5q4f11cd30e6cb3c35 at mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.924)
X-No-Spam-Score: Local
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.63 on 128.59.29.8
Cc: p2pi at ietf.org
Subject: Re: [p2pi] For those who think "User Fairness/Cost Fairness" is
	unacceptable...
X-BeenThere: p2pi at ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: P2P Infrastructure Discussion <p2pi.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2pi>,
	<mailto:p2pi-request at ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/p2pi>
List-Post: <mailto:p2pi at ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:p2pi-request at ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2pi>,
	<mailto:p2pi-request at ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: p2pi-bounces at ietf.org
Errors-To: p2pi-bounces at ietf.org

>
> Users are prepared to pay a premium for consistent month-to-month
> pricing.  ISPs are happy to take this premium.  If usage mix changes,
> they can change the pricing plans, but consumers will continue to be
> prepared to pay a premium for consistent month-to-month spending, and
> many ISPs will likely choose to continue to take this premium,
> offering different plans to different types of users.

In general, this is indeed an empirically well-founded observation.  
The problem is that this holds only if the penalty for predictability  
is reasonably small.

The old model of differentiating by access speed no longer works and  
is counter-productive (just makes uploading my photos a royal pain),  
so I'm unclear what you mean by "different plans" except volume-based  
tiering.

Just to take the cell phone example: We have both, quite successfully,  
all-you-can-talk plans at around $80 to $100/month, but also, at the  
other end, low-volume prepay plans that work out to roughly $10/month  
for minimal usage. (Less in Europe and Asia for reasons not worth  
discussing here.) It is very unlikely that those on the prepay plan  
would w
would want to switch to the Sprint $99 all-inclusive plan just for  
predictability, or vice versa.

I suspect that there will always be all-you-can-send plans for data,  
but they'll be more akin to the $99 cell phone plans than your average  
family $29.95 cell phone plan. (Monthly ARPU in the US for cell is  
around $50.) The "bucket-of-minutes model" with roll over seems likely  
a reasonable model. You don't worry about every byte, but you get  
segmentation.

Henning

_______________________________________________
p2pi mailing list
p2pi at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2pi


ant to switch to the Sprint $99 all-inclusive plan just for  
predictability, or vice versa.

I suspect that there will always be all-you-can-send plans for data,  
but they'll be more akin to the $99 cell phone plans than your average  
family $29.95 cell phone plan. (Monthly ARPU in the US for cell is  
around $50.) The "bucket-of-minutes model" with roll over seems likely  
a reasonable model. You don't worry about every byte, but you get  
segmentation.

Henning

_______________________________________________
p2pi mailing list
p2pi at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2pi