Re: What is a regional exchange point?

On Thu, 2003-03-06 at 16:29, Dave Siegel wrote:
> > The problem we found is that even though we (ATG) were well connected to
> > both peers and transit providers, we were often 7-12 hops from service
> > providers in the same building.   The latency and hop count were causing
> > problems as customers were switching their transit to us, all of the
> > sudden their favorite local web site loaded half as quickly.
> 
> Do you feel that being connected to RenoIX offers you a competitive
> advantage over other, perhaps larger, ISP's in your area?

In the Reno area, ATG is, aside from C&W (pulled out) and Genuity
(pulling out most likely) the largest, company-wise, ISP in the area.

ATG's business is prehaps a bit unique, so let me explain.  Our core
business is channelized DS1s with voice and data service on them.  So
when we enter a market, we pick up a lot of data customers (eyes)
because of pricing advantages with the bundled service.

This process moves eyes off of competing ISPs and the ILEC and onto
ATG's network.  The boggle is that if our service appears to be less
speedy than the service someone is moving from, we can loose both the
voice and data revenue from the customer.

Whereas if we have peering with the other ISPs in the area, the
reachability of web sites still hosted locally remains quite good.


> If you had both the web sites and eyeballs, why would you connect
> to RenoIX to make it easier for your competitors to steal your 
> access customers?
> 

We're in the opposite situation where we are coming into a market and
trying to win customers away from the competitors.  If their access to
local sites suffers, they'll move back to their old provider. 


> Or, wouldn't it be more compelling to sell local content off servers in
> a high-speed colo in the Bay area where it was equally fast for everyone
> in Reno?

We sell content hosting as well, and it does come from our California
operations, but many small/medium businesses prefer to host their
content locally.  

> Just playing devil's advocate...

I understand your position as well but it assumes we are arrogant enough
to expect to own all of the Internet business in a given region.

ATG currently, and for the foreseeable future gains more than it looses:

Wins:

1> Happier Customers (less churn/support costs/etc)
2> Increased word-of-mouth business (it's twice as important as you
think)
3> New customers for both transit and hosting

Loose:

1> 1 DS1 sale per ISP we peer with, made up for in increased sales to
end customers.
2> Some hosting customers of peers will not feel the need to move to
ATG, but probably wouldn't anyways because they want local servers.

Basically ATG does not assume it's importance to be so great we can
dictate the nature of the Internet in Reno, and have no compelling
reason to make our customers suffer by acting in such a way.

<ObSoapBox>
Too many companies (both 'Net and not 'Net related) are failing when it
comes to remembering the customer is the bottom line, and the better the
customer experience, the more likely they are to bring a friend next
time, instead of not coming back at all.
</ObSoapBox>



-Scott
> Dave
-- 
Scott Call <[email protected]>
Advanced TelCom Group