Ive had many colocation companies suggest that cogent would not be a good option because they are loosing $2 for every $1 of bandwidth they are currently selling?!?!

I dont understand how this can be true and they still be in business, wouldnt they have gone out of business already.
The colocation companies that suggest this dont offer cogent, and that may be a complete lie, but then again it could be true...

I dont know, does anyone know anything about this??

This was some time ago now (maybe a year ago) but I remember reading that the CEO of Cogent's salary was more that their revenues :)

Maybe when you are being paid so well, you don't really mind that the party will end one-day.

So now cogent is stable you would say?
Im worried if i colo my servers on a cogent connection that one day the guys at cogent will just descide that they have enough Mansions and Vets and pull the plug and little guys like me would be screwed...

Originally posted by jdp29053
worried if i colo my servers on a cogent connection that one day the guys at cogent will just descide that they have enough Mansions and Vets and pull the plug

I'd be personally worried about this with any provider I used, if it were the only one utilized. Your best chance of a good night's sleep is to have your server in a facility that has multiple providers. The more the merrier. NAC is a nice choice

Greg Moore

They have enough venture capital left to last around another year. I doubt they will go out of business due to having enough nice houses its more like they will run out of venture capital.
If you are looking for long term stability look for a host that is truly multihomed not with a "backup" line to a better provider. Most of the little isps who have cheap services and cogent will not be able to afford to stay in business if they have to switch to their backup lines permanently.

Just my two cents and worth about that much - but if Cogent or any major bandwidth supplier went under wouldn't the other providers see that as an opportunity to pick up large chunks of business?

It seems to me that companies - especially Verio they seem to be very aggressive in thesales department - would be waiting in the wings with bandwidth offers in the event that a competitor shut it's doors. I've seen this in every other business I've been involved with or followed closely and can't imagine it would be much different in this one.

I have no problem with Cogent hosts - I think Cogent is an excellent alternative for non-business sites. It definitely fills a huge need in the market.

That being said, I've talked with Cogent corporate staff who've shared revenue vs. burn rate figures off the record, and it doesn't look too good for the long term. Any host using Cogent as a primary feed without a backup contract in place for the full amount of capacity they need is a fool. I do dread the day that Cogent does go under, because if they do, it's going to turn the bottom end of this market (the one this forum is geared toward) upside down in a severe fashion.

Not to say I told you so, but as a measure of common sense, make backup plans now. Not because of some impending doom, but because its the smart thing to do for any customer. I am not looking forward to the overwhelming chorus of whining that's sure to emerge from everyone who thinks they got screwed when their 800GB for $49/month hosts go under.

Brandon

Yes, yes, an important distinction to make is between cogent's merit as a network versus their commercial viability. Even our beloved NAC.net uses cogent! Why wouldn't you - for the price!

Let's face it, we are, most of us, flying blind over all this stuff. I mean how do I know any of my upstreams are financial? We go on reputation and service and trust, but that won't stop them dropping off the face of the earth tomorow.

[waiting for Deb to come in to tell us about why she built her own data center]

Maybe this thread should be pointed to the more relavent cogent finances, where all of the people who said "cogent wont be around in 6 months" went *gasp*. Last quarter I do believe Cogent came up witha 530% growth, and were above or right on their expected income according to their business plan. Thats more then might be said for most carriers :).

So would people say that cogent is definately heading towards an end in the near(1-2years) future??

you people and your growth statement, hehe... WHo cares how much cogents growing, if i go out on the streets and sell playstations for 10.00 you better believe im going to be selling a ton all day everyday, but it doesnt mean im making any money.

Originally posted by cbaker17
you people and your growth statement, hehe... WHo cares how much cogents growing, if i go out on the streets and sell playstations for 10.00 you better believe im going to be selling a ton all day everyday, but it doesnt mean im making any money.

The point i was making that Cogent is still on track with the original business plan at this point. Obviously that business plan has very profitable ends to it in a few years, otherwise Cogent wouldn't have the type of backing it has, or any backing for that matter.

i would say that statement is pure speculation on your part, you have no idea whether cogent will be profitable in a few years. Every company that starts up expects to be profitable, few actually get there.

Originally posted by cbaker17
you people and your growth statement, hehe... WHo cares how much cogents growing, if i go out on the streets and sell playstations for 10.00 you better believe im going to be selling a ton all day everyday, but it doesnt mean im making any money.

haha your damn right!

Originally posted by porcupine


The point i was making that Cogent is still on track with the original business plan at this point. Obviously that business plan has very profitable ends to it in a few years, otherwise Cogent wouldn't have the type of backing it has, or any backing for that matter.

Do you work for cogent? Where are these reports?

Greetings:

"but if Cogent or any major bandwidth supplier went under wouldn't the other providers see that as an opportunity to pick up large chunks of business?"

Over the years, we've had many opportunities to purchase other companies.

Almost all of those opportunities where avoided because the companies we examined competed on price not value.

This meant we would have to increase the price to their customers (that we purchased as a result); and since those customers probably shopped on price rather than on value, we would loose those customers.

While NTT/Verio and others are looking to increase their business, they most likely would not purchase unless they knew that customers of that company being purchased can afford the price that it takes to stay in business.

Thank you.

Originally posted by cbaker17
i would say that statement is pure speculation on your part, you have no idea whether cogent will be profitable in a few years. Every company that starts up expects to be profitable, few actually get there.

"Pure Speculation"? I stated "Last quarter I do believe Cogent came up witha 530% growth, and were above or right on their expected income according to their business plan. Thats more then might be said for most carriers" and thats whats been reported, not speculation.

To speculate that their original business plan is profitable? Every business plan is profitable :) or it's not a business plan now is it.

Will they actually ever get there? who knows, i didn't say they would or they wouldn't, i said they were well on track, and thats more then we can say for most.

You're welcome :)

Originally posted by DD-SNC


Do you work for cogent? Where are these reports?

They're public :rolleyes:, maybe you should do a search.

**** NEWS FLASH *******

This just in !!

Unless you site on the board or are an executive of said named company, all else is simply a rumour.


**** End news flash *****

I lost something with that last one. Whats being called a rumor? The figures that were posted, or the fact cogent is going under, or what? :confused:

"Cogent, which became a public company when it acquired broadband provider Allied Riser last year, has also had its share of financial troubles. In the first six months of 2001, the company lost $28 million after taking in a paltry $90,000 in revenue."

http://www.nwfusion.com/news/2002/131404_04-01-2002.html

hehe, just throwing more copper into the fire :D

WOW! There is never a simple answer to these things is there???????

LOL,, I mean are they growing profit wise? Like the analogy on the playstations, the guy is selling an arse of em, but not making money...

From my understanding cogent isnt making money... is this true, i dont understand why they would be in business if they werent. But rumor has it they are going under because they are loosing apprx. $2 for every $1 of GB they sale... THATS ALOT OF MONEY!

it's called liquidation

maybe they get Bandwith from Sam's Club at 30 cents a GIG
you only think they aren't making money but they are!

they are responsible for over 96% of the US internet "pron" traffic!

in the end,
sex sells

Sex sells yes,, but if you sale sex below your cost you still loose money....

LOL

Hey to pimp hookers cost upkeep, LOL :D

Well lets throw some more gas on the fire shall we....

How about this one..

If cogent DOES stay in business and continues to strengthen there network, doesnt this pretty much mean that other providers are up the creek without a paddle?

I mean seriously could verio compete with cogents prices no, quality yes, prices no way... (of course im assuming this but could definately be wrong)

Cogent for some reason reminds me of walmart??? Am i the only one that feels this way?!?! lol

Who cares anyways?

If any of the above is true, cogent won't be here this time next year.

:flamethr: COGENT
:uzi: WHT PEOPLE WHO THINK DEDICATED SERVERS SHOULD BE $50/mo.

LOL i dont think dedicated servers should be $50 a month...

Im just concerned about where cogent is heading and sense many data centers are relying on cogent im looking for some info on how they are doing...

:puke:
LOL we need a guy puking with the words cogent spelled out!!

NO but seriously does anyone have an idea of if the info about cogent going under is legit or just BS?

Ignorance is bliss, especially around these parts. If you make a hat, and everyone else sells hats at $10 apiece, but you decide to sell yours at $5, are you loosing $5 per hat you sell? Cogent may sell their connectivity at lower rates then others for small quantities, but does that mean they're loosing money on it? If you think so, proove it. A lot of the big boys will compete on cogents level of pricing, if you ask for a gig-e link, you'll find a lot of quotes in the $30-70 ballpark.

Rackshack is a great example of this. If you're gonna shoot at Cogent for selling stuff like walmart, put your sights on rackshack and wallmart next, because they're doing the same thing, and are doing so quite sucessfully.

Is cogent going to take over the world? Hahaha, yeah right :rolleyes: if cogent was the only link in the entire world, think of how perfect everything would be, no more laggy peering points, no more 56k dialups, everyone would have an even 100mbps running to their home or business :laugh: wouldn't that be sweet :).

Regardless, if you want to argue cogents finances, dont be like jo-jo's psychic hotline, set a date, tell us when they'll go under, but before you do, read back maybe 6-8 months to all the people then who were setting dates (which have already long passed) that cogent would go under by.

Greetings:

"Last quarter I do believe Cogent came up witha 530% growth"

Growth in what?

Revenues without profits don't make a company surive ;-)

I never said they would take over the world, and i work for walmart and i will onlly say this.. its only a matter of time before they go buh-bye... they are not as profitable as people think they are taking huge risks that are simply not paying off at the moment and may or may not break them,, this is what i feel cogent may be doing, do know this, no... thats why i was asking, i wasnt telling,, was askig.....

someone needs to pull up that previous thread, it had all the juicy details in it :).

But it was 530% growth in income, and expenses weren't growing at the same rate (aka the 530% income growth wasn't accompanied bya 530% expense growth also).

It showed they were getting near break even levels, and on the right track :).

Originally posted by jdp29053
I never said they would take over the world, and i work for walmart and i will onlly say this.. its only a matter of time before they go buh-bye... they are not as profitable as people think they are taking huge risks that are simply not paying off at the moment and may or may not break them,, this is what i feel cogent may be doing, do know this, no... thats why i was asking, i wasnt telling,, was askig.....

Walmart isn't as profitable as people think? Or Cogent? (sounds like you're saying walmart there). Walmart is listed as the 3rd largest/most profitable corporation in the world is it not?

No one knows and anyone who does is lying.

I remember way back in the day when my IBM reps kept telling me that Dell would be out of business in a year. Now most of those guys work for Dell.

You never know. 8 months ago Worldcom seemed like a good choice for bandwidth. Do they now?

What about Sprint ION? Remember that?

How many people bought bandwidth from Global Crossings? They were supposed to have a rock solid business plan.

Anyone remember a company called Jato? One day they're there with tens of thousands of customers, the next day they're gone. Seriously, overnight everyone cleaned out the offices.

Northpoint?

K-mart?

Hell, my car could crap out tomorrow.

The point is, you never know. It's just as likely for Verio to go out of business tomorrow as it is Cogent. You should always have a backup plan. People who rely on a single pipe are just stupid.

You also have to take what your hearing in context. Most of the people saying that Cogent is going out of business don't use them. They've signed commitments with other providers and this is the only way they can compete, or feel they can compete. The only thing they can do is badmouth the provider.

As with anything, just make sure all your bases are covered and that you have a backup plan and everything should work out okay.

Aaron

gerbil crossings... erm global crossings... :D

They got screwd because they opened up 2 efnet servers that got gigabits of DDoS every day :bawling: but they were great ircd's! :bawling: i'll miss *.gblx.net (they disappeared months and months ago afaik, at least my connectivity to them did).

porcupine it seems a little odd that you getting on people for speculating that they wont be around, when you yourself are speculating they will be.

The couple of good reports you here on them pale in comparison to the hundreds you used to see on uunet, exodus, etc... now see where their all at today.

I think its pretty foolish to say without question any companys doing good, unless you own the company, and even then it seems ceo's seldom even know how good their companys really doing.

cbaker17, where do you see me speculating they will be around. I simply stated by the reports they're on track with whats stated in their business plan, and that they wouldn't be in business if that plan didn't indicate they'd turn a buck sooner or later.

This isn't speculation, it's just numbers that have been previously reported.

Charles for once i agree with you! :agree:

How can cogent make enough profits to last around with these prices?

Maybe revenue but...

Originally posted by cbaker17
you people and your growth statement, hehe... WHo cares how much cogents growing, if i go out on the streets and sell playstations for 10.00 you better believe im going to be selling a ton all day everyday, but it doesnt mean im making any money.

someone needs to pull up that previous thread, it had all the juicy details in it .

Maybe that person needs to be the person who keeps posting about them. HHmmmm... Who could that be? :confused:

Originally posted by porcupine
Rackshack is a great example of this. If you're gonna shoot at Cogent for selling stuff like walmart, put your sights on rackshack and wallmart next, because they're doing the same thing, and are doing so quite sucessfully.

in response to the rackshack thingy... k... nice that you bring this up porcupine... its true, they are selling at less than what it'd cost them on the bandwidth (assuming that the better providers they use cost them > $100/Mbps, which is not the case in the volume that rackshack buys bandwidth in)... say rackshack gives each one of their 8000 servers 400GB/month... that'd equate to what, 1.33Mbps per server of continuous use... that'd equate to over 10Gbps of bandwidth... BUT... they have only what, 5.2Gbps? rackshack makes their money on the bet that people don't even come close to their quotas (which is very true)... but if everybody used their quota, rackshack's expenses would go up accordingly and hence be a lot less profitable...

cogent... is making the same bet... $1000/100Mbps for their office customers... those office ppl probably don't use more than say 5% peak of their bandwidth... 5% of 100Mbps... 5Mbps... equating to $200/Mbps making it really worth cogent's while... but these hosting companies on their $3000/100Mbps feeds... generally use as much bandwidth as they can... say an average of 50% overall... $60/Mbps... still worth cogent's while, but not nearly as much... but tack on top of that the selling expenses/etc... thats where cogent loses the money... if they could develop a network (and billing system) that ran itself, they'd b in the black... but they can't... too bad...

do i think cogent will live (we all know how much i hate cogent)? yes, but ONLY if they can maintain their peering... from the point of view of other providers, its in their best interests to maintain peering with cogent because thats where a lot of smaller (which is generally the whole 'net) websites seem to be headed... but its in their best interests for cogent to go under so the clients scramble to their more pricey services... all being said, cogent will survive if they can maintain peering... if not: they f*cked...

note: if everybody peered with cogent unconditionally it'd give cogent a backbone as good as their own (assuming cogent could actually get some intelligent monkeys figuring out their routing)... with cogent's backbone as good as their own, they don't stand a chance because of cogent's price point... hence, nobody will peer with cogent unconditionally always making it cost cogent a hell of a lot more to get access to outside networks... hence a lot of their data goes through a few key cities via metromedia... making latency much higher... because cogent doesn't have access to metromedia in all their service cities, so data usually has to bounce around just to get in to one of those cities...

Originally posted by edude
Charles for once i agree with you! :agree:

How can cogent make enough profits to last around with these prices?



What prices? $30/meg? As it's been stated there are other companies that are providing $30/meg pricing when buying Gig-E's.. there are even more selling at $40-$45/meg on Gig-E lines. Price Verio and Yipes at 100mb and Gig lines and see how cheap it is.

Anyways... was it announced Cogent was raising prices soon to like $40/meg or so?

What prices? $30/meg? As it's been stated there are other companies that are providing $30/meg pricing when buying Gig-E's..

Where did you see this? This I do not belive. Sorry.

there are even more selling at $40-$45/meg on Gig-E lines. Price Verio and Yipes at 100mb and Gig lines and see how cheap it is.

This is stricly market and salesperson dependant. You can get Verio for like $50.00/meg in NY, but try getting that in other markets like SD. Same with Yipes.

Theres plenty of companies that will get dirty for gig-e lines.

Also, think of it this way (im sure most of you never thought of saying this), but the more market share cogent owns, the less need for peering they'll have. Eventually cogent may force other providers (like whomever provides the local dsl/cable) to peer with them because the other providers user base basically demands it, but their peering needs can only grow so far, if they controlled a substantial backbone, think of how the tables may slowly turn on this issue.

Originally posted by porcupine
Theres plenty of companies that will get dirty for gig-e lines.



But Billy doesn't believe you either.

I meant (and thought i said :confused: ahh well, not going back to search), they'll go in that range :), anything within 3x cogents price i consider the range (aka $100/mbps and under).

Nice to see companies using cogent defending cogent and companies who don't use cogent attacking cogent :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

it all boils down to who freakin cares?

it's cheap. use it while it's available. if you DON'T use it and it fails so what... you've lost nothing.

if you start using it now and it fails so what... you'll have to pay more for bw BUT if you started out with higher cost bw in the beginning you've ended up at the same point!!!!!! you're STILL gonna pay more. so use it while it's available.

the only people that's gonna suffer is the kids and idiots that do $2/month hosting. build a business that makes sense and you'll be able to cover higher bw costs if that was to ever happen.


does this mean EVERYONE should use it? of course not... there's needs and purposes for everything. some people need $99/month servers... some people need $1000/month servers with quad zeon cpu's, 5 x 80 gig scsi hard drives with redudant power supplies in a locked cabinet with daily tape backups and tapes stored off site in a fireproof vault.

how 'bout if everyone just uses what they want to and not worry about who uses Cogent and who doesn't ? whoa!!! novel idea huh?

i'm in a bad mood... sorry.

lol... dude... most of the people attacking cogent are either present or former clients (and need to point out flaws in cogent to justify the higher prices of other providers)... heh... thats why we know what the hell we're talking about... and for those support it... any good sales person can find the positive points out of the most flawed product... *points at the business plans of all those 'advertising-funded' multi-million dollar dot-coms that went kaput*...

i mean... all things considered... cogent has a great network (network itself), in terms of capacity and fiber paths throughout the US... if their peering and routing didn't suck camel ass, nobody could touch 'em... lol

Originally posted by edude
Nice to see companies using cogent defending cogent and companies who don't use cogent attacking cogent :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

example of cogent being great as a network... ~ 80ms from san jose to washington dc... thats pretty good... exodus ~ 64ms... but for roughly a twentieth the price, how could they be beat?

if they didn't offend all the other providers by undercutting them so badly (giving cogent their edge on the consumer side), they'd get the peering they need to compete in the real business world... heh

example of cogent being a great network, unstable pings! ive pinged to a cogent a connect at 80ms and all of a sudden it jumps to 1000ms

Cogent was originally designed as internet access grade connectivity was it not?

-Brendan

whats that supposed to mean???? 'internet access grade'?

Originally posted by HRBrendan
Cogent was originally designed as internet access grade connectivity was it not?

-Brendan

hmm... i don't doubt u... but most times i see stuff like that happen, its not from their own network... its from their external entry point...

Originally posted by edude
example of cogent being a great network, unstable pings! ive pinged to a cogent a connect at 80ms and all of a sudden it jumps to 1000ms

If your happy with Cogent, then let it be.

Originally posted by jdp29053
Ive had many colocation companies suggest that cogent would not be a good option because they are loosing $2 for every $1 of bandwidth they are currently selling?!?!

I dont understand how this can be true and they still be in business, wouldnt they have gone out of business already.
The colocation companies that suggest this dont offer cogent, and that may be a complete lie, but then again it could be true...

I dont know, does anyone know anything about this??

Look at Amazon.com they are losing hundreds of millions per year and still around.

Amazon is already profitable as far as I know.

Won't say anything on Cogent today as I don't want to repeat everything I've said in so many other posts :)

Cogent threads are always really entertaining though.

Cogent today is like Toyota used to be. Anyone remember Toyota in the 70's and earlier? Then, it was all about the domestics from MotorCity USA. People complained about the about the tin can Jap Crap. They rusted easily because of inferior steel. They were tiny and fairly unsafe in major accidents. But Toyotas were also economical to drive and were a great value. Were they perfect? No. But for the money, they were good cars.

Now look at Cogent. They're new. They certainly have their share of problems. I don't like to see my route go from Chicago, to LA, and back to Chicago again. But they are extremely economical. And for 95% of the Internet's traffic, Cogent is a viable option. Like Toyota, the hopes are that they will continue to improve their product. Time will tell. But it's pretty silly to bash a product for not performing up to another product that cost 5 times more.

The arguments here have been pretty clearly biased. You've got folks on one side who have no interest in Cogent. Their business doesn't rely on it. Then you have folks who primarily run Cogent who will defend it to the death. Not to mention the bandwagon participants who just love to be part of the yelling crowd.

Let be realistic folks. Cogent is not in any grossly better or worse condition than most of the other providers out there. If you're that 95%, there's nothing wrong with setting your business traffic on Cogent. Of course, a smart business will have a Plan B. I primarily run Cogent. It's smart business. If you want to pay more, that's your prerogative. You can show me traceroutes all day long. But so long as Joe's Web Design and The Widget Company website do not take perceptibly longer to long on my fast Cable connection, I'm going to save the cash to spend on other smart business decisions. That said, I have the ability to pull premium bandwidth into my server on a separate connection should I or my clients need it. I'll spend the extra money when it's prudent.

NetDude, your assertion that Cogent is just hurting the situation for all the other carriers is simply misguided. I could buy into that maybe if your view of a successful economic system was Socialism. But capitalism is based on competition. Do you think every other provider is not looking for successful ways to lower their prices, thanks to Cogent? Look at prices just a few years ago. Consumers drive pricing dude, not businesses.

Thank you and good night,

Brian

Originally posted by Gernot
Amazon is already profitable as far as I know.



They're profitable NOW but wasn't for a few years.

(just random numbers:) if you lost 1 million a year for 5 years and in the hole every year, on year #6 if you don't lose a million but make a million, you're still in the hole.

heh care to show me where their profitable at? I dont consider turning a profit, until your debt is paid off and your income exceed your expenses, neither of which has happened with cogent.

i just explained that.... you're considered profitable if you make money now or made money the last fiscal period.. but that doesn't mean you're out of debt for the previous YEARS of losing money.

:eek: :confused: :eek:

:idea:


Your crazy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

blah :yawn:

I just read Brian S reply on top of this page (Page 5) and I never agreed more in my life!!!

Originally posted by jdp29053
:eek: :confused: :eek:

:idea:


Your crazy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

let me add to that....

that is the business world's idea of being profitable... NOT mine :)

you can have a profitable year and a loss year..... there are companies that have been profitable their entire life of being in business BUT they are still in debt.

so what other way is there to explain it?

Originally posted by rastoma

you can have a profitable year and a loss year..... there are companies that have been profitable their entire life of being in business BUT they are still in debt.

so what other way is there to explain it?

Highly creative accountants :)

Well then how are they getting paid,, and how are they not being foreclosed, and how.....

ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.................

Lets just keep out of the details of financing and financial loop wholes...

In basic terms of what the general non-financiallly, non-corporate savy person see's to be profitable i think we can say is:

*The margin of money that a company is making above the costs of the product they are saling. Cost being all costs= rental, licenses, connection, support, etc. etc....

If they arent making a penny over there cost they arent profitable they are either in a loss or breaking even.. at least thats the way the average smo would see it...

So based on that is cogent profitable?!?!
Are do they intend on loosing money for the fun of it<~~~ explain this.. i mean if i owned a business and was loosing money, ruining credit, getting in bigger and bigger debt, eventually i would say... . you know what, enough is enough..

Why would they do this to themselves.. after years of lose will the end result pay off???
Not if they go out of business before they see there end result.. thats a stupid business plan i think..

But what do you say, is cogent profitable based on what i perceive to be profitable?

HEY!!!!!

Does cogent do any other kind of services, etc.. perhaps they are using there pull in the market only to generate sales in another market and this is how they are pulling it off???

I know some companies take a loss on specific products in order to generate leads to other products that in turn provide them with a large profit margin.. . ???

Dont know.

Cogent is specifically non-service oriented, they provide internet connectivity, and intranet connectivity, thats it, nothing more.

They're changing the market place, possibly at their own expense, but is there ANYONE in here who doesen't like the fact that they're forcing all bandwidth prices to drop? I cant argue with it, thats for sure! I don't think they intend to push other products, they intend their product to be sucessfull and generate revenue, give them another quarter or two and we'll see if it keeps on the same pace it's been going :D.

they aren't changing the market place, they aren't forcing other providers to drop their prices (not any that matter atleast)...

other providers are not changing their pricing structure because some bargain basement company decided to show up to the market place. They may be looking to find new ways to market their services, but not changing their prices. Prices in the bandwidth markets were dropping not due to cogent's appearance but rather because the market as a whole is changed as a result of the bursting of the bubble. I have still yet to see a major business relying on cogent in any way, even though cogent may cost a tenth or twentieth of what other providers do.

consumers don't drive prices, the market does (which is driven by the consumers i guess, but in conjunction with the businesses)...

btw... amazon is profitable, but it cost 'em 1.8 billion to get there... heh

cbaker17, your an investor's and entrepreneur's worst dream if you consider profitability as being totally out of the whole... because if you do, there are virtually no dot-coms out there that are profitable... heh... because i am guessing outstanding shares could be considered debt.

Originally posted by netdude
consumers don't drive prices, the market does (which is driven by the consumers i guess, but in conjunction with the businesses)...
The market is consumer driven. [eventually ;)]

Originally posted by netdude
they aren't changing the market place, they aren't forcing other providers to drop their prices (not any that matter atleast)...

other providers are not changing their pricing structure because some bargain basement company decided to show up to the market place. They may be looking to find new ways to market their services, but not changing their prices. Prices in the bandwidth markets were dropping not due to cogent's appearance but rather because the market as a whole is changed as a result of the bursting of the bubble. I have still yet to see a major business relying on cogent in any way, even though cogent may cost a tenth or twentieth of what other providers do.

consumers don't drive prices, the market does (which is driven by the consumers i guess, but in conjunction with the businesses)...

btw... amazon is profitable, but it cost 'em 1.8 billion to get there... heh

cbaker17, your an investor's and entrepreneur's worst dream if you consider profitability as being totally out of the whole... because if you do, there are virtually no dot-coms out there that are profitable... heh... because i am guessing outstanding shares could be considered debt.

I'd use the simple comparison of comparing pricing in facilities with cogent, and without. You'll find a price drop in between the two, or compare a data center that just gets cogent run in, compare the pricing trend over 2 years, then look at the 1 year after cogent moves in, all markets are consumer driven in a sense, cogent is definatly making an impact.

well then i guess we are the only colocation that is completely profitable.

Originally posted by netdude
I have still yet to see a major business relying on cogent in any way, even though cogent may cost a tenth or twentieth of what other providers do.

An example that glares in my face is my local University. Thousands of students and an academic community rely on Cogent everyday. There are not many other organizations where the Internet is so crucial to communication. Each student is provided with a laptop, that they use to connect to the university and the Internet through Cat 5 and Wireless. Cogent's the primary carrier of that information. And they've been doing a pretty good job of it.


consumers don't drive prices, the market does (which is driven by the consumers i guess, but in conjunction with the businesses)...

Dude, the consumer is the market! Businesses set prices according to what consumers are willing to pay. This is why government intervention is generally bad. Price fixing rarely works sucessfully because it upsets that delicate balance between pricing and consumer's desires.

Brian

dude... i was implying in the 'large corporation' sense of things... i have no idea how large your company is so i can't rate it... but there are tons of smaller providers (<200 employees) that are profitable... but amongst the large ones, not many at all

Originally posted by cbaker17
well then i guess we are the only colocation that is completely profitable.

just trying to make a point...

Cogent today is like Toyota used to be. Anyone remember Toyota in the 70's and earlier? Yes I do, but the major difference is that Toyota was profitable back then. well then i guess we are the only colocation that is completely profitable.It does not take much to become profitable when you don't have to invest much in the business :)

You guys didnt invest anything in your business?? wow... tell me your secret rackmy

charles, the secret is cogent, i thought you knew that already?

cbaker17, I was talking about yours :)

ahh well considering we host more managed servers, and more colo customers then you guys im not sure why you would comment on us before you comment on yourselves :)

ahh well considering we host more managed servers, and more colo customers then you guys im not sure why you would comment on us before you comment on yourselves LOL, That's a good one!

Id be more then happy to take you on a tour... been drinkin a bit too much there mike..

Nope don't drink, but I know who as had a little to much :)

Nope its a sunday i dont go to the bars on sundays only on fri and sat.

Originally posted by RackMy.com
Yes I do, but the major difference is that Toyota was profitable back then.
Actually, no. In the beginning, Toyota was not profitable.

Brian

i nominate this as best post ever!

Actually, no. In the beginning, Toyota was not profitable. When they were releasing cars in America, they were very profitable!

Very few internet companies were profitable in the three to five years after startup - with porn being the major exception. Burn rate was the measure of how big or small you were not profitablity. The net was a wide open market with new business models being tried out every day.

Those who didn't figure out how to obtain new funding or become profitable in time went under. Amazon cheerfully lost at least $1 per order shipped. But they were building brand recognition against the days when enough surfers would be comfortable buying online and would almost automatically head for amazon.com. Their gamble paid off. The dust is clearing and Amazon is on top of the heap.

I think Cogent's long term plans are of more discussion value than what they are losing or not losing right now. Where do they intend to be in three years? five? ten? And are they able to meet those plans with the capital they current;y have? If not how much of a cash infusion do they need to control the market they want to reach? If they have any hope of reaching those goals and the infusion is a reasonable amount in the eyes of the venture capitalists - they will get the funding and continue in business no matter what the current bottom line is.

If they are in the "burn rate = success" trap - they probably won't receive any more funding and will sink. I've dealt with venture capitalists for over 20 years and they don't look at a prospectus the way you and I might. We're concerned with how soon we can pay our bills from the profits of the company - they're concerned with a gamble. How much do they have to throw in for how long to receive enormous profits and control a market segment? If they win - they make incredible sums of money, if they lose, it's no big deal. Of all the plans presented to VC's only 1% are ever looked at in depth. Of those funded usually 90% do not pay off. The ones that do pay off handsomely and receive more funding when they need it.

If Cogent is close to whatever goals they have presented to the VC market - the capital will be there for them. VC spending is done in rounds - and rarely less than three. It's expected by the investors that the companies funded will lose a good chunk of money for several years. Cogent is beyond the startup stage and into the area where VC money is more readily available. Unless they stub their toe in a major way - I predict they will have the capital they need when they need it.

However I have worked with computers long enough to know the cardinal rule - backup often, and will apply that rule to my bandwidth suppliers.