Slashdot Mirror
Netscape-Branded ISP Launching February 2004
Guppy06 writes "I'm too lazy to change my homepage in Netscape 7 to something else, and that's where I discovered an ad leading towards what appears to be a trial run of a new Netscape-branded ISP. While this isn't as momentous as, say, Netscape bundled with AOL would be, they seem to be aiming at Juno and NetZero with their price of $9.95/month ($1.00/month to participate in the trial run ending in February). This may just end up being a fizzle, or it could be part of a two-pronged attack on MSN by AOL."
If this is true, I have to wonder what if anything it will do for Mozilla's exposure.
C|N>K
I have been hearing ads on the radio for it here already. Sounds like one of those accelerated/compressed dial-up services.
EA David Gardner -"... but the consumers have proven that actually what they want is fun."
I've been hearing commercials for Netscape as a broad-band-like ISP in Canada on the radio lately.
They are going to have a tough go of it, competing against Telus.
They claim,
"Netscape Online Accelerator uses advanced web acceleration technology to increase the speed of dial up service, using your existing phone jack and modem without the expense of high speed services such as DSL or a cable modem. No additional equipment is required nor is there any waiting for installation"
Sounds like some sort of caching strategy to deliver content faster.
Overall, sounds like a step backwards to me. I'll stick with my Shaw 300KB/second cable-Internet for $30 Canadian a month.
While this could be part of a 'two pronged attack' on MSN, I highly doubt that. It will most certainly be a fizzle if they are merely offering basic dialup service. Unless they have a standard 'dialup accelerator' or some other value added feature that sets them apart from the rest of the dialup services, there's not much more room in this market IMHO. Unless of course they start this as their 'basic' level of service and offer a very cheap broadband solution along side (eventually). I fail to see that happening so long as DSL lines have to be bought from SBC and cable lines bought from Comcast. ~Dan
I don't understand this.
The Netscape ISP brand has already been tried, and AOL dumped it. The ISP was low cost.
This was done in the UK a few years ago, it lasted for not long. I don't know whether the Netscape ISP was also introduced to other countries, though.
I wondered when netscape would do anything to fight for it's very existance. It's lack of any new money-making strategy for the past decade has baffeled me.
Netscape has accomplished very little, and I'm not too sure that the ISP route is too promising. The internet boom spawned dozens of the "free" ISP's and almost all crashed and burned with the exception of NetZero and Juno that adopted a real money strategy before the crisis. While this one isn't free, it sounds like it offers very few innovations over the otherrs besides price, and because the competition is still fierce, I feel that there is very little money to be made in that area. In other words, it can be accomplished... but with what profit.
Don't invest in Netscape again just yet!
To me, the Netscape brand means browsers. After IE, it's probably the best known brand of browsers on the market. I've always thought the point of branding was to create a rock solid identity for a specific product, and then extend that product to new areas. For instance, Taco Bell creates a brand for Taco Bell tacos, and through incessant marketing convinces people that the slop actually tastes good. Then, once that brand is strong, they move on to marketing Taco Bell brand taco shells, that you can buy in any grocery store. You can see how there's a connection here, and how somebody who likes TB Tacos would be more likely to buy TB taco shells in the supermarket.
But with this Netscape thing, I don't get it. If Netscape isn't a brand name for a browser, what is it a brand name for? And what does a browser have to do with purchasing internet access?
The funny thing here, is that AOL/Time Warner already owns the top brand in ISP's: AOL. So why not come out with a $9.95 "AOL-Light", which you then cajole customers into upgrading to full-fledged AOL? Using Netscape as the brand for an entry-level ISP makes no sense whatever, whereas extending the AOL name makes perfect sense.
I'm generally "Interesting," "Insightful," and even "Funny" here. What the hell happens to me at parties?
and therefore will be sucktastically slow. Aol has a shoddy slow network that has been overloaded ever since they went to all you can eat dialup. If your gonna use cheap dialup, go for flex.com (note i am not a customer, but thats who i recommend when people need a decent dialup).
Lawyers, MBA's, RIAA? A jedi fears not these things!
No this isn't a flame its the truth. This is being marketed to people who are just looking for the cheapest price and who don't give a damn about the browser. No revolutions here. THe people won't even notice cause it'll be so customized you couldn't tell it form real stock netscape. Just a bunch of cheapskates using a dying form of internet access. If anything I'd be insulted if my favorite browser was getting marketed to the bottom barrel crowd.
uses advanced web acceleration technology to increase the speed of dial up service
It may just be a matter of time before this potential consumer misrepresentation attracts the attention of the trial attorneys. It certainly has riled up its share of consumers who were expecting cable-modem speed service from their tired POTS line.
Then again, if they can sell colored water advertised as a miracle diet drug ("just take three hours before bedtime and don't snack after taking it"), they can get away with dialup broadband.
Fact: Afer the disastrous merger, the TW people are re-gaining control of AOL/TW.
Fact: The AOL name is mud in the business world and approaching mud (slurry?) in the consumer world.
Fact: AOL has few friends among those regaining control of AOL/TW.
Predictions:
1. AOL/TW will drop the AOL part and revert to Time-Warner.
2. TW will start migrating AOL's content (such as it is) to TW branded properties.
3. AOL will start migrating its dial up subscribers to the Netscape branded service. "Just a name change."
4. Finally, AOL will cease to function as an ISP, and will channel everything through AOL.com, which will also eventually just whither away.
Good riddance.
"As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
I'm too lazy to change my homepage in Netscape 7 to something else
my only question is why anyone would still be using netscape when mozilla seems to be far superior. or is there something i dont know?
Gyrate Dot Org - "Where high-tech meets low-life"
AOL is losing money to companies that are offering a cheaper service so now when a customer calls and wants to cancel they can offer them a cheaper service and still keep their customer
This is less than true; granted, AOL's suffered some encroachment on the bottom, but it's not nearly as significant as the destruction from above from broadband availability. Over 80% of the rural broadband customers the company I work for signs up comes from AOL - not from low-cost dialup. Those $5 to $10/mo. Internet users stay with their low-use plans. It's the $22 for AOL + second phone line to use all the included hours (at another $20 with taxes) = $42/month for crummy old AOL that gives consumers a very easy decision going broadband.
Consider AOL's focus the past 10+ years: "unlimited hours." They were never the low price; consumers that wanted a $10 or less service found plenty of local ISP options and in the past 5 years, Netzero, ad-supported dialup and various sub-$10 approaches flooded the market.
Reading AOL's 10Ks, they've been pretty clear that they don't see themselves in this market. Instead, they proclaim more of a value pricing model - lots of hours at a good price. The only problem is that their unlimited buffet quickly became a fare that was unpaletable to an increasing amount of consumers, especially those who spend more time online and were AOL's primary market. Somebody opened up a buffet next door, and for another $10-$20/month (about 50% to 100% the price of that second phone line, so in many cases, the consumer ends up saving money by switching), it's several dozen times the quality.
So I wouldn't expect they perceive this move as a defensive one. Perhaps, in fact, its a low risk (no AOL brand name at stake) move to test the waters on the sub-$10 market where they never have been strong. I'll contradict a previous post - this actually might make sense. After all, AOL's a cash cow and they're going to have to do something with all the dialup foundation to keep it competitive as the dialup market loses most of its upper 80% of consumer. They're going to be left with 100% price-based market.
Move the AOL operations over to the Netscape brand (and rebrand as AOL) and you've got another lease on life. This sounds to me as if non-AOL execs made this call. This is a move 1 year out from cutting over AOL to a low-cost, low-price operation and Netscape (in a rather perverse way) might actually end up being the beginning of the end of AOL.
Interesting move, Time Warner...
*scoove*
That truly is an insighful comment. I learned a lot. For example: cable and DSL is good, but dial-up is too slow, also it is too old.
You can count me in as hoping it's not crappy! *rolls eyes*
I talked with those representing the Mozilla project at Comdex/LasVegas, They said that they were going to roll out the netscape branded ISP service. That is the true part. The fase part is that Mozilla/Netscape (Which Trademark AOL owns) Will only be involved as the name of the service, the Browser of choice will be Internet Explorer. Name Branded Marketing Strikes Again.
This makes no sense to me, especially where they could simply ship it with Firebird and make the web experience seem faster. Combine that with the dialup compression.. you could seriously convence older dialup users that it's actually a whole different service.
"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." G.W.Bush
I remember beta testing this service. I was a paying member for a few months, then decided to switch to a local ISP.
Hopefully AOL will learn from their previous experience and dedicate modem pools solely for the internet service. It was quite frustrating when you couldn't log into GNN because all the lines were being used by the more popular AOL service.
They set up a "netscape online" ISP in the UK, which has since been axed. It was back in the day when everyone and his aunt had started an 0845 "lo-call" isp, and then ran it off the profits from the telephone calls. The reason this one didn't make any money might have been something to do with the fact that you could use your netscape online username and password with AOLs freephone dialup. Although I don't know how many people noticed that.
I wonder if they'll manage to do the same thing again?
I'm curious as to how the American ISP market works. See, here in Scandinavia, dial up internet accounts have been free for years now.
That does however not include line usage, so you're still stuck with your telco's minute charge. In fact, there are (as far as I know) nobody selling "free" online hours with the service.
In central Europe, however, bundling a number of hours, or even an infinite number of hours, together with the service seems to be commonplace.
This is not a big issue here anymore, as DSL is now available for the vast majority of the population. Not like two years ago when I had to fight for my right to an internet service that was not charged per minute.
So how's the (average) situation in the USA?