Offering Gb plans at $65 wholesale is all very well, but don't expect the retail price to be anything like that.
On top of that price, the ISP has to pay for all the backhaul, which for a Gb plan is going to be a shed load more. Then there is the international capacity.
Whilst I'm not expecting ISPs to buy 1Gb of capacity for a 1Gb customer, I would expect at least 8-10Mbs per customer to give a reasonably good experience on a 1Gb plan.
Then there is all the other normal ISP overheads.
Just those things alone mean the retail price of a 1Gb plan is going to rock in somewhere around $300. Anything less than that and it's being oversold. It's nothing more than a 6 lane onramp leading onto a single lane motorway. And then there is the cost of the CPE that can actually handle 1Gbps speeds properly.
I'm afraid your comments here show you may not have knowledge or experience of how these things work out in decent sized networks.
On what basis do you even get to "8-10mbps per customer"?
Demand doesn't scale with caps or speed. It scales, on a large enough customer base, with evolution of OTT services and organic growth in use and content sizes. Additionally, when you make an access faster, people are using it less often, so doubling access speeds never means doubling of utilisation.
Cheers - N
the 8-10Mbps was a bit of a guess.
I'm figuring that, based on the $3 cost quoted by Telecom for the 'average' user and the quoted price of around $20/mbps for international, that equates to around 150kbps per customer for 'ADSL' which is of course the average across the board of all the very low users and thevery high users high users, and that's with most high users still only on ADSL because that's all they can get.
200Kbps per users on an average bandwith of 20Mbps is 1/100th of the max throughput. so 10Mbps is 1/100th of the 1Gbs max throughput.
so yes, it down't quite scale up that way, however, I am assuming that the kind of people who want to pay for a 1Gbps residential plan are mostly the kind of people who want to actually use the bandwidth, so the average utilisation will be considerably higher anyway
Specifically, people who do an absolute massive amount of tormenting or other huge file downloads. e.g. downloading the full blu-ray (and soon 4K) rip versions of the things they want.
Hence the need for a much higher amount of international bandwidth.
I'd disagree about this point:
"when you make an access faster, people are using it less often, so doubling access speeds never means doubling of utilisation."
whilst there is a bit of that, so it won't meani a doubleing, it still increases utilisation a lot.
The reason is that it also means usage is compressed, which pushes the peak much higher. So instead of a large file download being spread across peak and non-peak times (with only the peak usage actually driving costs), it all comes through at peak times, which has a much bigger impact on the cost of international. You also have things like video default to the highest setting when it detects bandwidth is available. And then there is a 'attention deficit disorder' factor. People start a youtube clip then get bored quickly and switch to a different clip. With more bandwidth, the entire clip is already downloaded before they switch. With lower bandwidth, the experience is identical, but less of the clip has come down, so less bandwidth has been used.