OK, I dont think ive seen it appear much before but many people seem to be getting GB's of transfer extremely cheaply or bandwidth extremely cheaply.

All I ask is that you all list and discuss the price you actually receive your bandwidth/transfer at, and if you are an end user or a host.

I know many hosts prefer to keep this kind of thing private, but I think it would be good for everyone to see the cost of bandwidth, and also to see if it is possible to get close to unmetered transfer.

your thoughts on this ?

I can tell you that we pay over $2.00/GB, but we have a BGP4 routed network with top tier 1 providers; UUNet, AT&T and Genuity (all active OC3s).

Hope that helps!

is $2 the minimum around or can it be purshased cheaper?

what i am trying to understand is the MINIMUM cost of bandwidth/transfer, what are the rock bottom prices?

for example, how do cable providers pay for their bandwidth, i sure as hell use alot of bandwidth each month on mine and it is a fixed price for me.

so what is the lowest cost available for bandwidth in purchase?

could i go somewhere and get it for $1 a GIG? is that possible? how much is a T1? and how many people can you get on it? and how much would you have to charge per GB to earn the money back?

im interested in getting the definitive guide to bandwidth/transfer, its something that has annoyed/puzzled me for some time!

Well, efreeservers is offering 200GB + a decent server for $300 per month. So their bandwidth price must be pretty low.

thats what im wondering, why is nobody willing to tell people how much they get their transfer per GB for ??

I know it may be personal information and private, but what do you have to loose? maybe people will trust the hosts a little more if they let us know they arent risking us using all of the tx available?

WeinBar charge me $2.50 per GB (i think its still that), i feel that is reasonable if it costs them $2 per GB, but does it? do they get it for $1 a GB.

im hunting here first, if i dont find out it looks like ill be doing some personal phone calls to find out for myself what it costs, then ill only report back here anyways with my results.

help me out people dont be so up-tight about revealing the info, or is there something you are all hiding? ...

No one that uses UUNET can get bandwidth for a 1.00/gig even if they did it would be bandwidth at COST UUNET does not go below 330.00/mbps which is yes about a 1.00/gig, but any reputable provider uses bgp routing and redundancy so then you have to factor in a second backup provider which might run 300.00/mbps so to provide you with a reliable connection it now costs us at cost 330.00 for uunet and 300.00 for another backup provider so your look at cost for us to provide our customers bandwidth 630.00/mbps (or around 2.00/gig) then you have to factor in the cost of equipment/staff/etc which raise the price per gig closer to 3.00/gig.

Anyone selling bandwidth for below 2.00/gig is either:

1. Not using UUNET (the defacto standard for quality).
2. Not making a profit anymore and undercutting their own company.
3. Not using BGP to provide redundancy to its customers.
4. Playing the number game. IE hoping that customer wont use as much bandwidth as he/she orders.

All of the above is simply bad business. So anytime you see somone selling bandwidth for less than 2.00/gig its bad news.

Sure we could sell bandwidth all day from level 3 for below 1.00/gig. But theres no redundancy, and the financial and company stability is questionable. We would rather charge a bit more and provide a better quality of service, more redundancy, and use the top of the line providers.

Anyone shopping around for bandwidth at 1.00/gig or 1.50/gig is simply not serious about his or hers companys Internet infrustructure.

Charles hit the nail right on the head! :)

xstrike,

I've compared a lot of hosting packages for some time in an attempt to develop fair packages with my service and one thing I've noted is that main tier providers (those who own their NOC) have bandwidth from $1-2, while hosts with leased or collocated servers usually charge $3-4, while the highest is often resellers usually charging $5-8.

I know this question is a tad off topic but have you sent a email to weinbar asking for less costly bandwidth? If you continue using over your allotted bandwidth say 25, 50, 100 gig a month ask if they will give you 25, 50, or 100 gig bandwidth at a packaged price.

Word is that Marc gets some of his bandwidth for under 1$ per gig.

According to one of his posts.

Yes, it is possible.

Well, you can get bandwidth from Cogent for something like $.02/GB.

Originally posted by cbaker17
...

Anyone selling bandwidth for below 2.00/gig is either:

1. Not using UUNET (the defacto standard for quality).
2. Not making a profit anymore and undercutting their own company.
3. Not using BGP to provide redundancy to its customers.
4. Playing the number game. IE hoping that customer wont use as much bandwidth as he/she orders.

...

Anyone shopping around for bandwidth at 1.00/gig or 1.50/gig is simply not serious about his or hers companys Internet infrustructure.

Let me work this out. A recent quote I recieved for a T1 line was $900/month. Lets assume I get 2, so my cost is $1800. Lets further assume that I only ever use 1, the other is merely a hot backup. (Doubtful I would only use 1, but for sake of argument.)

1.54 Mb/sec = 188 KB/sec = 0.183 MB/sec

So in order to transfer 1024 MB we would need:

1024 MB / 0.183 = 5596 seconds or 93 minutes

Being that there are 1440 minutes in a day, with this 1 T1 line we can transfer 15.48 GB per day.

With 30 days in the average month we end up with a maximum transfer of 464.4 GB in a month with 1 T1 line.

The total cost is $1800 then for 464.4 GB of transfer, or about $4 per GB.

If we used both T1's we could obviously transfer twice as much, which would place the price per GB at about $2.

Clearly this isn't a realistic example, but I think it goes to show that bandwidth costs around $2 are bargain basement. Certainly with bigger connections (DS-3, T-3, etc.) you gain in economies of scale, but I don't know just how much. Also, this is just the cost of the connection. Don't forget staff, equipment, power, cooling, backups, and oh yes, profit.

Take care,

Brian

In the past I have received qoutes down to 0.80 $ GB and it wasn't Cogent. I know it's not the highest quality but if you are just transferring a lot of files or have many images this should do just fine.

In the past I have received qoutes down to 0.80 $ GB and it wasn't Cogent.Do you mind if I ask who?

No doubt level 3, level 3 is always having fire sales on their bandwidth, but review their financial history and company stability, it would scare you. You can easily get bandwidth for under a 1.00/gig with level 3, but it certainly isnt quality bandwidth and their company isnt doing all that great.

[warning - i'm obviously from the obscure little island]

Using a 56k dialup to AOL on an 0800 number for £15 a month... you can get the cost to around £8.80 ($15?) per gig.

Wait a minute, that sucks.

Sorg

thanx for all of your replies, ive got the general impression from this thread that in no way shape or form can quality hosting be offered at a rate any lower than $1.5 - $2 per GB transfer ?

those offering anything below these levels or anywhere into the unknown/unlimited is simply gambling with low quality sub standard service likely to pack in at a moments notice?

it does seem like this is the situation out there.

to sum it up <$1.50 per GB of transfer is a load of rubbish and deserves to be thrown to the pits of hell never to return?

unless someone offering such a service can explain otherwise how it is done???

offers welcome :)

You can always run a BGP/OSPF connection between Yipes! and Cogent :D.

General bandwidth costs from a decent backbone run $1.00-$1.50 per GB, depending on the capacity of the line. You get better pricing if you are using full 45mbps of a DS3, rather than 22mbps..for example. The only way I can see of it being cheaper is if a NOC is in the same building as a backbone POP, and they can avoid paying $3500+ for a local loop. If that is the case, they may be able to get down to $0.85 per GB....BUT their space rent would be MUCH higher, and would make up for the difference, if not make it more expensive. There are always cases where you know the right people in the right positions to get you some extra discounts on your lines, or if you play one backbone against the other and get them to lower the price to take business away from a competitor...but that would still not be enough to get sub $1.00 pricing. Companies selling deals for $100 for 100GB+ are definately gambling on % of that usage AND/OR cancelling accounts that actually use that much. That, or they pay for more bandwidth than they could ever possibly need, and are dumping it to recoup some funds. Another possibility is a "loss leader", which is when a company sells something below or at cost, in order to get the customer in the door. They then hope to sell extra features/services, or additional service, and make some profit. I know we do this on some of our low-end dedicated server specials...and it pays off...with many clients upgrading within 2-3 months, or ordering upgrades.


Sean R.
BurstNET

I think that Sean may have hit one something that nobody has mentioned in this thread. If a company has bought too much connectivity, they may be willing to sell it at cost just to get some cash. If I added a couple of extra T3's to my NOC (this is purely hypothetical as I don't have a NOC) because my company was growing quickly, but that growth slowed, or even stopped, I'd be stuck with too much bandwidth. I might have long-term contracts that force me to keep those new lines. So I have a NOC with too much bandwidth and not enough cash coming in to pay the bills. Suddenly it might make sense for me to run a sale and offer some of that bandwidth at or near my own cost. I might lose money on those new accounts, but I might have lost even more without them.

PS This is just an idea. I don't actually know of any companies that are in this situation, but I wouldn't be surpsised to hear that some are.

It seems this could be the case, we have done loss leaders before, as im sure everybody has.

The only problem I can forsee is that the host has to keep to their promise for a whole years hosting at least, where as it could be just a single month where bandwidth has not been used.

Its certainly interesting and something ive always felt it not discussed enough publicly, so many people complain about its cost and people offer "unlimited" transfer (which isnt the subject here) but its not been discussed as to exactly how much bandwidth and transfer costs and why it costs that much

I can break down, line cost, local loop cost, employees, buildings, servers, repairs, from what members have already told me it seems it is all based upon economies of scale.

so following on from what BurstNET have told us, maybe $1 per GB is the absolute lowest limit, presuming you have the line fully used or are advertising a loss leader.

but is it possible in any other ways that anybody knows to get it any cheaper, we are looking at possibilities here, and costs that "YOU" the hosts pay for your bandwidth.

if you would prefer the information not to be public then message me privately how much it costs you, i promise, overall analysis will NOT release any information you do not want released. (i already have the server, I will not be looking for hosting from you based upon your cost prices, the information is purely for research)

kind regards

wayne

Originally posted by bteeter


Let me work this out. A recent quote I recieved for a T1 line was $900/month. Lets assume I get 2, so my cost is $1800. Lets further assume that I only ever use 1, the other is merely a hot backup. (Doubtful I would only use 1, but for sake of argument.)

1.54 Mb/sec = 188 KB/sec = 0.183 MB/sec

So in order to transfer 1024 MB we would need:

1024 MB / 0.183 = 5596 seconds or 93 minutes

Being that there are 1440 minutes in a day, with this 1 T1 line we can transfer 15.48 GB per day.

With 30 days in the average month we end up with a maximum transfer of 464.4 GB in a month with 1 T1 line.

The total cost is $1800 then for 464.4 GB of transfer, or about $4 per GB.

If we used both T1's we could obviously transfer twice as much, which would place the price per GB at about $2.

Clearly this isn't a realistic example, but I think it goes to show that bandwidth costs around $2 are bargain basement. Certainly with bigger connections (DS-3, T-3, etc.) you gain in economies of scale, but I don't know just how much. Also, this is just the cost of the connection. Don't forget staff, equipment, power, cooling, backups, and oh yes, profit.

Take care,

Brian


Good analysis.

To this I would add that redundancy is a cost of doing business if you're goal is to maintain a high level of service. Some providers maintain a minimum of 3 diverse connections.

One thing missing is the cost of local loop charges which may dramatically raise the cost of the bandwidth if you are purchasing small quantities.

Also, you cannot base calculations on an average throughput analysis as you will likely need to provision much higher for peak bandwidth usage (9am to 9PM EST) assuming you do not want your service to slow down or time out. This means you have to purchase enough pipe to at least provide for bursts with a minimum headroom of 50%. Essentially you are buying twice as much bandwidth as you need on average.

The way to make this more profitable would be to sell bandwidth in off peak hours at a lower cost but I think this would be tough to control.

So I guess the message again is you get what you pay for and bandwidth is no different.


Franc

maybe $1 per GB is the absolute lowest limitYes, but can you have reliability/redundancy for that price?

it would seen you cant have the reliability and performance for that kind of cost.

$1 per GB would seem a "budget" price and lower performance would be expected as part of the service.

we would therefore expect $2 per GB to be a more realistic price for "some" reliability and greater performance.

maybe something here for reference to allow you to understand if your host can "afford" to host you ??

I'm a complete notice on this issue but am interested in the subject and found the discussion quite enlightening.

I thought I might find the current typical cost of a T-3 line. I did find what appears to be one of several years ago, indicating a T-1 cost about $3,000 a month and T-3 $6,000 a month.

I fully realize such a source is not the best one and any decline in the line costs might not be uniform for the two types.

Anyway, I repeated the earlier posted calculations, using T-3 as twice the $900 quote price, and of course got a lot lower figure, assuming T-3 is 28-30 times bw of T-1.

Level3 (Very Fast) $.50 (Cents) per GB.

Originally posted by Gordo
I'm a complete notice on this issue but am interested in the subject and found the discussion quite enlightening.

I thought I might find the current typical cost of a T-3 line. I did find what appears to be one of several years ago, indicating a T-1 cost about $3,000 a month and T-3 $6,000 a month.

I fully realize such a source is not the best one and any decline in the line costs might not be uniform for the two types.

Anyway, I repeated the earlier posted calculations, using T-3 as twice the $900 quote price, and of course got a lot lower figure, assuming T-3 is 28-30 times bw of T-1.

You will not find a full T-3 for twice the price of a T-1. You might find a T-3 capped at 3 megabits for something approaching that price, but for a full 45 megabit T-3 you will pay much more.

-joe

Originally posted by joe52


You will not find a full T-3 for twice the price of a T-1. You might find a T-3 capped at 3 megabits for something approaching that price, but for a full 45 megabit T-3 you will pay much more.

-joe

T3 prices in Northern Virginia run about $16000 per month. If you can find only for $6000 its a steal. But, I'm not so sure you will find someone giving that much bandwidth away for just $6000...

Take care,

Brian

hahahahahah how funny a t3 at 6000.00 yea right. THey quoted you for the pipe and not transit, try going back to that same provider and asking for the pipe and transit and watch 6000.00 go to 20,000.00/month, and level 3 aint .50 cents a gig, you might get 75 cents a gig or around there but thats only if you colocate in their facility, try running a local loop cost it alone will run 4000.00.

In addition using level 3 gives you no redundnacy, offering pure level3 bandwidth with no bgp routing is called bad business! So try throwing level3 and a real competitor like uunet into the mix to offer true redundnacy and youll see you so called 50 cents a gig just to 1.50/gig - 3.00/gig

Originally posted by bteeter


Let me work this out. A recent quote I recieved for a T1 line was $900/month. Lets assume I get 2, so my cost is $1800. Lets further assume that I only ever use 1, the other is merely a hot backup. (Doubtful I would only use 1, but for sake of argument.)

1.54 Mb/sec = 188 KB/sec = 0.183 MB/sec

So in order to transfer 1024 MB we would need:

1024 MB / 0.183 = 5596 seconds or 93 minutes

Being that there are 1440 minutes in a day, with this 1 T1 line we can transfer 15.48 GB per day.

With 30 days in the average month we end up with a maximum transfer of 464.4 GB in a month with 1 T1 line.

The total cost is $1800 then for 464.4 GB of transfer, or about $4 per GB.

If we used both T1's we could obviously transfer twice as much, which would place the price per GB at about $2.

Clearly this isn't a realistic example, but I think it goes to show that bandwidth costs around $2 are bargain basement. Certainly with bigger connections (DS-3, T-3, etc.) you gain in economies of scale, but I don't know just how much. Also, this is just the cost of the connection. Don't forget staff, equipment, power, cooling, backups, and oh yes, profit.

Take care,

Brian

i seen some companies selling T1 for around $400 per month at
ispworld.com.

Originally posted by bteeter [B]
Let me work this out. A recent quote I recieved for a T1 line was $900/month. Lets assume I get 2, so my cost is $1800. Lets further assume that I only ever use 1, the other is merely a hot backup. (Doubtful I would only use 1, but for sake of argument.)

1.54 Mb/sec = 188 KB/sec = 0.183 MB/sec

So in order to transfer 1024 MB we would need:

1024 MB / 0.183 = 5596 seconds or 93 minutes

Being that there are 1440 minutes in a day, with this 1 T1 line we can transfer 15.48 GB per day.

With 30 days in the average month we end up with a maximum transfer of 464.4 GB in a month with 1 T1 line.

The total cost is $1800 then for 464.4 GB of transfer, or about $4 per GB. [.B]

Actually, that's assuming that the T1's will be used to full capacity 24/7. Common sense will tell you that the lines aren't used as much around oh say 4 AM as they are during the evenings. Factoring in this inactive time will drive the cost of the bandwidth up even more.

Since some of the post have been about cost of line I thought I would do two calculations, one for a T-3 and a second for a OC-3. The figures are from information that I just looked up so I am taking it as being somewhat current prices.

T-3: $22,500 (including local loop)
Bandwidth (100% usuage): 14,400 (approx.)
Bandwidth (50% usuage): 7,200
Cost per GB (100%): $1.57
Cost per GB (50%): $3.13

OC-3: $60,000 (including local loop)
Bandwidth (100% usuage): 50,000 (approx.)
Bandwidth (50% usage): 25,000
Cost per GB (100%): $1.20
Cost per GB (50%): $2.40

As for higher lines such as OC-48 all I found was text that said cost several hundreds of thousands of dollars. I have also talked to serveral hosting companies as how they can offer it so low and the most popular statement is that there is an over supply right now and alot of companies are just selling cheap, going of the theroy that some money is better than no money. :smokin:

And who are those prices for (what company)?

You guys dont understand bandwidth at all, you cant decrease the cost of bandwidth because theres peak and offpeak times, you pay 22,000.00 for that T3 no matter how much you use when you buy a t3, you could not put a singlee bit of data through your t3 and it still costs you 22,000.00/month

Originally posted by Dollac
T-3: $22,500 (including local loop)
Bandwidth (100% usuage): 14,400 (approx.)
Bandwidth (50% usuage): 7,200
Cost per GB (100%): $1.57
Cost per GB (50%): $3.13

Nice, in theory, but since you will never be able to utilize 100% of the pipe, this figure needs to be thrown out. The $3.13 is more accurate.

That is exactly why I did the 50%. Maybe I should have explained it so I would not cause confussion. The magic figure that some people are trying to get is $1.00 GB and my calculations were to show even at 100% (based on those prices) you would not be able to do that. Since there is peaks and valleys and from what I gathered from this site 50% of a line is what you should shot for atmost since that leaves room for the peeks and at 50% the cost would be $xx.xx per GB, ofcourse I know that if you use less per month than the per GB cost goes up for that month since you have to pay the price for the line regardless of the amount used, I just assumed that I did not have to actually specify that last part. :smokin:

<<MOD NOTE: Ohhhhhhh, heh whups! The more I read, the slower I get apparently :o >>

A little update, I just pick up a copy of the september issue of a magazine (by the way why does the september issue come out in the beginning of august) and here are some quotes taken from an article that I just finished reading

...pays a $1,000 monthly fee to Congent Communications for a network speeds of 1,000 megabites per second.
...his company gets fast 10-mbps access for $4,000 a month... ...it's provider, Yipes Communications.
:smokin:

Originally posted by Dollac
A little update, I just pick up a copy of the september issue of a magazine and here are some quotes taken from an article that I just finished reading


Yea, I read the same article in Interactive Week. This has been discussed on this board before, and the general feeling with both of these companies is to watch out. Their business model does not scale well, and their peering agreements suck right now. Hopefully this will change in the future, but i'd be wary of using them as primary providers.