0.03 cents is not 3 cents

^^ DO you know the cost of laying fibre? I work in in the industry and it isn't all that cheap. Add that on top of all the switches and equipments you need and the actual labor cost it is not cheap.

Why do you think some of the start ups only provide service to dense areas where there are tons of apartments. Is way more efficient and the cost ratio makes sense.

Like I've said, my article accounted for all operating expenses (fixed cost = cost of laying fiber), if you prefer to overlook facts then I got nothing more to say.

Does your operating expense include support, maintenance, on call etc etc... coz adding all those cost up (and yes they are part of operating expense) it is going to be more than 3 cents.

It's taken us like 40 years to get the cost down to 3 cents or whatever it is a GB in 2012. In your mind you think in 3 years that they have managed to 1/3 that cost further.

I'm trying to turn over a new leaf and be a more polite person, but you're making it really hard for me to not call you a fuckin idiot right now.

EDIT: also that article is just one extrapolation based on one sale of a block of data to a whole seller, one cannot just take that valuation and assume it accurately represents the costs of a service.

Last week I did some analysis work for free as a favour to a company I am interested in doing future work for. By your logic, someone using that particular piece of work as a basis for my pricing strategy would assume that I work for free permanently.

I've brought facts and evidence to back up my claim, others resort to opinions and ad hominem. I don't work in the Telecom industry so you know where my interest lies. The moment you bring personal attacks, this discussion will go nowhere, hence our conversation ends here.

There are many other articles that peg the cost of the infrastructure at anywhere from 10 to 15 cents:

How much does bandwidth actually cost? | Financial Post

Keep in mind that none of this factors the cost of overhead for a company like telus, this is ONLY THE COST OF DELIVERING THE DATA. It may or may not in some cases factor technicians and maintenance, depends on the person running the calcs.

Also as briefly alluded to in these articles (although they fail to thoroughly explore it), is the fact that in order to keep up with demand companies like telus continually have to be building newer lines and new infrastructure.

This isn't like a business where you build a building, and then you are good for the next 50 years.

Lets run our own calculation on this new line that telus is planning on installing (this is going to be remarkably simplified):

it's gonna cost 1 bil to build

Now lets just assume the life of the line is in the decade mark (it probably won't be, as you alluded to earlier some of this stuff doesn't even last 3 years). Lets put maintenance and last mile at an EXTREMELY CONSERVATIVE 100% (this will be for the life of the line). That's 2 bil.

So over 10 years Telus has to make 2 billion, plus their overhead and some form of profit in order to make this shit worth it. Lets put that hard number at 3 billion (again this is a shot in the dark completely as I do not feel like doing research on this, but this is obviously very conservative).

Lets assume the entire population of the GVRD subscribes to this service That's 2.5 million people.

A post above outlined Telus charges like 100 bucks for 500 gb (without any incentives). Lets assume nobody goes over so they don't get hit with overage fees.

So 2.5 million people use 500gb per month of data and they each spend 100 bucks per month.

Price paid to telus per gig of data = 5 bucks per gb.

Total money made over the life of the project = $3.0 billion.

So if somehow Telus Manages to get 2.5 million subscribers to pay 100 dollars a month for 10 years (without failure). They will break even.

Now you go and find real stats and try and poke holes in this theory. The most obvious one would be the fact that this project is supposed to remain in service for much longer than 10 years, but I'll let you try to figure it out.

Companies like Shaw that use the large copper pipe will be able to move data far quicker and more efficiently than the telcos who are still using the twisted pair. For those companies, the only future they have is to go to a glass distribution. Shaw overbuilt a number of areas in Delta about 7 years ago, with nothing but glass. The only way they got away with building over an existing copper network was because they were marketing it as data distribution, as the crtc rules won't allow another cable company to come into an existing area.

Long story short, Telus has no choice but to roll out glass. The cost of theft, not only for the cost of cable, but the downtime to a person's landline is very high. Telus is still bound by the old crtc rules that the service must be reliable 99.9% of the time. So when a crackhead cuts a 100m run of twisted pair for the copper value, the liability and costs are high.

Fiber is a wonderful invention, but as you said the electronics are still quite expensive. In the transmission side, you will see more and more fiber being rolled out. But the concept of fiber to the home is flawed, because of the cost limitations of converting light to digital/analog is still so high. The fiber itself is quite cheap. But ask anyone who has spliced before just how intensive the procedure is, and you begin to realize why the hidden costs of fiber are high.

That said, there are a number of splicer options these days that make it so much easier. I come from a time when you needed to line everything up by little dials while looking through a glorified magnifying glass.
:lol

From a 2012 article about wire thefts, idiots were cutting 2m chunks from the access ports at the base of 5 poles:

That morning in Whalley, a total of 10 metres of wire was stolen from the base of the poles. Yet Telus had to replace the chunks with 1.3 km of new wire because each new length must run, unbroken, from the top of each pole hit by thieves and underground to the adjacent pole. The most timeconsuming portion of the repair is reconnecting each of the hundreds of individual phone lines.

wow only 200 gb usage on a 60 mbps plan?

i'm using in30 with shaw with 300gb, but they don't charge for going over which is pretty awesome

While it's not 150mbps, my parents have 100mbps on the top of a mountain in Chilliwack.. LOL. It's amazingly fast. Honestly, if you don't have a cap no one really "needs" more than 100mbps.

When I bought a computer with 10 times more hard drive space then my old one I thought I would never need more space but that 1 gig HD filled up pretty fast. Who knows what people will use 150mbps internet for but I can tell some one will find a way to use it all.

Also why is Telus capped at 150 mbps?

with 4k ultra HD steaming to your smart TV's,the faster internet is going to be needed sooner or later