Slashdot Mirror
AOL Not Alone In Subscriber Decline
E-Rock-23 writes "Our registration-hungry friends at the New York Times are running this article with a few more details on the AOL Subscriber Decline, covered in a recent /. post. And it looks like they aren't alone, as Earthlink and MSN are experiencing similar troubles. The article cites a major reason being that users "are buying broadband services offered by cable and telephone companies." Looks like broadband is finally gaining some significant ground with home users..."
....the big 3 ISPs have seen the writing on the wall for a LONG time, yet they continued to expand their POTS infrastructure...ESPECIALLY earthlink. They better figure it out really freaking quick that when users find out that they can work just a little harder to find the same content through a non-branded ISP, they are going to drop their asses in droves. Looks like they already are. AOL has the potential infrastructure through Time Warner Cable...Earthlink has been able to finesse some cable sharing deals, but MSN going the DSL only branding route is going to lose if they don't sign some cable sharing deals.
I don't get it, are they surprised? AOL costs 25$ a month. In my area you can get get DSL for 38$ so I don't think it should come as a surprise that people would go for a connection ten times as fast that didn't require the worst designed software on earth for an extra 13$. AOL has been robbing people for the past 5 years, they kept their prices jacked up because they could and had a corner on the market.But I doubt AOL is really noticing too much of a hurt, because I have noticed idiots who get broadband and still pay for AOL as well. People are dumb and that will keep AOL and MSN in business for a long time.
Anonymous Cowards - Oh God, How I hate you
I was one of EarthLink's earlier subscribers, and appreciated its services, which were quite reliable.
My business needs required something faster than dial-up, so when EarthLink offered DSL, I applied. At the time, however, DSL wasn't available for my part of the city (a medium-large midwestern one--think race cars), so Time Warner Cable's RoadRunner service was my only option.
Today, as a result of court agreements and such, EarthLink and AOL can provide their services through cable and DSL options, but the carriers (the cable and phone companies that own these lines) don't advertise the options much, from what I see.
I use Comcast High-Speed service today, which works OK, but they have tech support that's about as bright as a bag of coal.
I agree that the Internet was a fascination for some, and now a relatively expensive one to those who don't use it much. So, many of the users who've signed off are probably the "sightseers."
High-speed access is still a bit too expensive for most, despite the faster speeds. Paying twice to 2.5 times as much isn't a strong marketing point.
Vos teneo officium eram periculosus ut vos recipero is.
Ok, so with the number of cable broadband subscribers going up, it makes sense that the cable companies can finally (hopefully) start collecting on those economies of scale. So when will we start to see the price stabilize? Or are we stuck with endless rate increases a la cable television?
I've already given up on DSL from the phone company (Good luck getting competitition-inducing rates from those guys.)
IMHO community run broadband (see this link) and other means like this are the only hope we have of keeping prices reasonable.
Erp, did I just come out in favor of regulating Internet pricing?!?
Most people who have the option wait to do some of their surfing at work on a fast connection. For people who don't have that option, they must pay for a faster connection or accept that some web content and services will be barely usable or unavailable.