 Reviews:
 ·Comcast
4 recommendations | Got to show respect to the conglomerates and oligopolies High speed Internet really doesn't have competition in a large portion of the USA. The regulators love to fill their pockets with money and run a campaign saying we have competition. Same story every other day. Nothing new.
Funny how markets that hear Google Fiber is appearing in the area suddenly can afford better services for less for the customers in those areas. The same goes if the area is running their own municipal fiber network. All of a sudden those customers see their prices drop drastically. Competition is a great thing as we can see in the food business. Wonder what the price for a Taco would be if only one company sold Tacos. | |
|
 | |
| | |
 noc007
join:2002-06-18
Cumming, GA
·Comcast
| How Are They Measuring Feedback? So if this is a trial, how do they measure feedback? Are they sending out surveys? Are the CSRs actually going to note down how many people call in and complain? I really doubt their outsourced and inhouse CSRs that are probably not making much are going to care enough to pass along that kind of info.
I'd really be interested in seeing what they're testing. Perhaps it's seeing how much more revenue they can generate from doing this.
Right now I"m close to hitting 300GB/mo with my current usage. If they keep messing around with my TV service, I may just "cut the cord" and do streaming exclusively. Unless their policies with Business service change, I'll just sign up for that again and go capless. | |
|
| Reviews:
·Comcast
| Re: How Are They Measuring Feedback? Having been using Comcast for the past 10+ yrs I'm guessing it's going to be on the number of complaints they receive over the phone from customers about their HSI charges. I really doubt they will even care to send out a survey.
Comcast HSI for business is great alternative for those that are in an area with a lack of choice for providers and Comcast is enforcing caps. The only problem I find is that the upload is really lacking for $70 a month. You get 3Mbps if I remember that right. | |
|
|  maartenaElmoPremium
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA
kudos:1 | What they call "feedback" is really a report that says how much money they could potentially make if they set the bar at certain GB levels.
--
"I reject your reality and substitute my own!" | |
|
|  GlennAllenSunny with highs in the 80sPremium
join:2002-11-17
Richmond, VA
 ·Verizon FiOS
| said by noc007:...how do they measure feedback? In dollars and cents. (Money for nothing--your "extra" usage costs them nothing, just provides them with "extra" revenue.) | |
|
| | do the caps only apply to economy and economy plus? From reading the post on the website it seems to say the caps and overages only apply to economy packages. If that's the case i wouldn't have a problem with this as long as the higher unlimited tiers are priced reasonably and believe me I am no fan of caps. | |
|
| ssavoyPremium
join:2007-08-16
Dallas, PA | Re: do the caps only apply to economy and economy plus? They start at 300 and if my mind serves me correctly they scale up to...600 I think? | |
|
| Reviews:
·Comcast
| »customer.comcast.com/help-and-su···aunching
It seems to be 300GB across the board until you reach Blast and then it starts at 350GB and increases in the next tiers.
Keep in mind most people subscribe to performance or lower. Not sure how many subscribe to each tier but my guess would be 10% or less subscribe to Blast or higher. | |
|
| | | | Re: do the caps only apply to economy and economy plus? each "test" market is applying the cap and overages differently. | |
|
ssavoyPremium
join:2007-08-16
Dallas, PA Reviews:
 ·Anveo
4 recommendations | I never understood the problem with high caps Until we started streaming TV shows on Netflix every night. I think we hit 277GB last month. They were nice enough to send us a promo for Business Class.
And that $5 discount option is laughable because they know they can raise the bill another $2 every 12-18 months just because they can. | |
|
| | | Re: I never understood the problem with high caps said by ssavoy:Until we started streaming TV shows on Netflix every night. I think we hit 277GB last month. They were nice enough to send us a promo for Business Class.
And that $5 discount option is laughable because they know they can raise the bill another $2 every 12-18 months just because they can.
The problem is not now it's about the future do you think you used 277gb five years ago? If 250 gb the old limit was still the cap you would be paying a overage for the last month. | |
|
| | ssavoyPremium
join:2007-08-16
Dallas, PA | Re: I never understood the problem with high caps The sole difference is Netflix. Without that, we would be in the 30-60GB range. | |
|
| | |
1 recommendation | Re: I never understood the problem with high caps said by ssavoy:The sole difference is Netflix. Without that, we would be in the 30-60GB range.
So whats your point today it's netfix tomorrow it could be 100 other apps and services that haven't been invented yet. Do you really want too miss out because of your cap? | |
|
| | |  tshirtPremium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:4 | So when you use Netflix more you have to consider not just what Netflix charges, but the delivery charge too. | |
|
| | | | | | Re: I never understood the problem with high caps If Netflix pays for the bandwidth they upload, why then do you also need to pay? It's double dipping. | |
|
| | | | | tshirtPremium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:4 Reviews:
·Comcast
| Re: I never understood the problem with high caps They pay for what they upload, but they don't pay the full cost of delivery to your home. Adding the additional last mile capacity costs comcast who must then bill customer more.
They have 2 choices charge everyone more (not fair or popular) or charge heavy users more (not popular, but fair). | |
|
| | | | | | Bengie25
join:2010-04-22
Wisconsin Rapids, WI Reviews:
·Solarus
| Re: I never understood the problem with high caps The amount customers use is entirely covered by the cost that the customers pay, there is no "but Netflix users use more".
Last mile bandwidth is a sunk cost and is not part of monthly costs for the most part.
If the ISP is over-selling their last mile, that's their own problem.
The rates customers are paying some of these ISPs, they should be getting 10gb dedicated to the ISP. Really, it's not that expensive.
I'm sure if Google offered a 10gb tier, they could charge $300 and still turn a profit, but almost no one can use 1gb, so there really is no point right now. Even enthusiasts, short of hosting REAL servers.
Even if you were doing P2P of every torrent out there and seeding 24/7, on average, your connection would be mostly idle. | |
|
| | | | | | | tshirtPremium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:4 Reviews:
·Comcast
| Re: I never understood the problem with high caps Then why aren't there dozens of providers? If the return was as high as you believe investors would be fighting their way in with wheelbarrows full of money.
And why do the audited results of the cable industry average around 10% ?
It really doesn't matter if it's Netflix, your newsgroups or private servers, the point is the costs for more data CAPACITY within the ISP is expensive and improving the CAPACITY will be paid for by the end users, this is about how the cost is divided. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | Re: I never understood the problem with high caps So you're ok with paying more for the same level of service? Because that's the ultimate aim of all telcos. Their primary markets are saturated so not ARPU must increase to spur growth and shareholder value.
That works until a disruptive event occurs either slowly(looking at you Google Fiber and Loon) or rapidly(severe macro economic problems)
I'm the customer. I determine who and what I'm willing to pay. Let them bring their metered billing. They will invariably open a pricing hole and someone will fill it. | |
|
| | | | | | | | Bengie25
join:2010-04-22
Wisconsin Rapids, WI Reviews:
·Solarus
| "Then why aren't there dozens of providers?"
Probably has something to do with the amount of red-tape involved with getting Right-of-Way access, just to be able to dump tons of capital into a saturated mature market.
No one wants to invest into an established market, there's no quick money in that, and the incumbents can just lower their prices below cost and subsidize the lower prices from other regions.
If you want to see what it takes to even try to compete, look at a 100bil company named Google, but look at their prices. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | tshirtPremium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:4 Reviews:
·Comcast
| Re: I never understood the problem with high caps said by Bengie25:"Then why aren't there dozens of providers?"
Probably has something to do with the amount of red-tape involved with getting Right-of-Way access, just to be able to dump tons of capital into a saturated mature market. As I said if the profitability was as high as you claim, their would be lots of players with plenty of cash to back them.
said by Bengie25:No one wants to invest into an established market, there's no quick money in that, and the incumbents can just lower their prices below cost and subsidize the lower prices from other regions. But if it was so profitable it would happen everywhere, and no untouched areas would exist to provide the subsidy.
said by Bengie25:If you want to see what it takes to even try to compete, look at a 100bil company named Google, but look at their prices And the last time Google fiber's book were audited was? In fact nobody in the general knows if they have any chance of every turning a profit as they are, let alone if the had franchise fee payments and RoW fees and pole attachment fees and rack space/real estate costs, and power bills and investors to pay like every other ISP does.
I can say with great confidence, that Google has no reach break even, and will not for many years, in fact they are so new and small they probably have little idea what the Actual breakeven point is (average cost per home served x total homes served -average NET fee x homes served etc.)
A great deal of what your ISP collects goes immediately (or even in advance) into someone else's pocket (in a legitimate way) before the pay the employees and the suppliers.
and the cable plant is being incrementally built out as it has been for the last 40 years, currently working fiber closer to the end user, but not instantly there as a highly subsidize overbuild would be so it capability expands at the rate supported by the reinvestment portion of the income.
Of course it is oversold, ALL residential service is, even lower tier business is not expected to be used full speed 24/7 Only when you get to commercial and enterprise levels do you see anything close to 1:1 ratio's. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | Bengie25
join:2010-04-22
Wisconsin Rapids, WI Reviews:
·Solarus
1 edit | Re: I never understood the problem with high caps "But if it was so profitable it would happen everywhere, and no untouched areas would exist to provide the subsidy."
That's why places like Minnesota is rolling out 1gb fiber to the Farm and seasonal cabins in the middle of the woods. It's freaking cheap.
"I can say with great confidence, that Google has no reach break even, and will not for many years,"
A different company rolled out 1gb fiber and said it took 3 years to break even, so now they've lowered their prices as it's all profit and don't need to upgrade their last mile for a long time and only have to care about their trunk.
Chattanooga recently reduced their 1gb tier from $300 to $70 because they've paid off their network.
Sonic.Net sells 1gb for $80 for residential and $40 for business.
I see plenty of examples of how cheap fiber Internet really is.
I would like to see one case study not by an incumbent that says it's expensive and prohibitive, because EVERYONE else for the past decade has been saying otherwise. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | The 10% has to do with the low margins on providing TV service. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | tshirtPremium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:4 | Re: I never understood the problem with high caps If TV was so low margin to drag down, the AMAZING profits from broadband they'd dump it and new providers wouldn't even bother making it even more lucrative to overbuild.
your logic just doesn't fly. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | Bengie25
join:2010-04-22
Wisconsin Rapids, WI | Re: I never understood the problem with high caps You haven't see marketing and sales logic. If you don't offer TV services because the margins are so crap, then you lose out on a HUGE customer base because they want bundled TV. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | tshirtPremium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:4 Reviews:
·Comcast
| Re: I never understood the problem with high caps So maybe the TV Isn't the low value service you believe?
Maybe the 10% is the real markup the market will bear?
Maybe your belief that HSI is incrediable profitable is wrong, because in that price people EXPECT TV? which pays part of the price of the plant.
The industry annualized returns are pretty accurate measure of what the market will really bear, not your belief that CATV pays for everything so HSI should be nearly free.
The prices you see charged is what it takes to support the plant, cut TV, phone, security or other future services and HSI will have to pay all of it. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | Bengie25
join:2010-04-22
Wisconsin Rapids, WI Reviews:
·Solarus
| Re: I never understood the problem with high caps "So maybe the TV Isn't the low value service you believe?
Maybe the 10% is the real markup the market will bear?"
Great point. Indirect value is still value.
I would argue that HSI pays for the plant, but can anyone really tell? It's shared and almost always bundled.
Bundling TV+HSI does cause a kind of symbiotic relationship where the whole is greater than the sum.
The main point is that Internet is cheap, but not to say that cable Internet is cheap. DOCSIS uses some really expensive equipment to push the kinds of speed fiber can do with no effort.
Based on my readings, supply of Internet is outpacing the demand for it. The backbone is no where near capacity, and technology that is just becoming marketly available is about to increase speeds by about 1-2 magnitudes for trunks and aggregation switches.
At the current steady rate of decline, transit costs will reach about $0.04/mbit, which means someone saturating a 1gb connection would have about a $40 cost for transit, so a $100/month bill would cover the costs.
5 years is not a lot of time when it comes to rolling out vast upgrades to large networks. Can they handle offering 1gb to a large fraction with cable? | |
|
| | | | | | | | | tshirtPremium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:4 Reviews:
·Comcast
| Re: I never understood the problem with high caps Don't know, but they may be close.
2003- to 2013 they went from 3Mbps to 105 widely available, and higher speeds operational in limited areas AND a great deal of the physical improvements needed for a lot more.
But they now face a lot of resistance from older users being slow to upgrade as they push towards ALL D3, which can unleash a whole new wave of efficiency and speed boosts.
Certainly cable wins on homes passed at highest speeds ie most peeps served/most total bits moved, which could explain their concern over transit costs | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | said by tshirt:Then why aren't there dozens of providers? If the return was as high as you believe investors would be fighting their way in with wheelbarrows full of money.
There are in countries like the UK, where the telco is forced to sell access to their networks and infrastructure at a fair price for both parties. I really do have the choice of about 50 ISPs.
No need for pointless distribution of last mile infrastructure (and the delays that creates) when one company can own and maintain it at a lower cost.
said by tshirt:It really doesn't matter if it's Netflix, your newsgroups or private servers, the point is the costs for more data CAPACITY within the ISP is expensive and improving the CAPACITY will be paid for by the end users, this is about how the cost is divided.
Does Comcast take part in Netflix's CDN? If they aren't, then they don't really have a justification for penalising those who do use it. Relatively simple and cheap (Netflix gives them the hardware + support for free, don't they?) steps to reduce the amount of bandwidth needed between the two companies' networks and they don't want to follow them.
In the UK we seem to have worked out this issue already. Our state broadcaster runs an immensely popular on demand service which is a huge capacity hog for everyone involved. As far as I know, the BBC aren't giving every single ISP money to make sure it works.
The BBC is very happy to peer for free with any ISP that wants to, and a number of our ISPs do this because it makes things so much cheaper and better. I don't have to pay a "BBC iPlayer" tax. | |
|
| | | | | | | | Why do you repeat this tripe in every article about bandwidth caps? It's been explained to you countless times how flawed your logic is and yet you persist. | |
|
| | | | | | | Bengie25
join:2010-04-22
Wisconsin Rapids, WI Reviews:
·Solarus
| Re: I never understood the problem with high caps Comcast, is that you? Does real competition hurt?
Hmm.. lets see.. 100gb port at an IX.. $5,000/month.. Wow, so expensive.
Well, trunk costs aren't the issue.
What about the last mile? Hmmm,, case study after case study after case study shows fiber pays it self off in 3-5 years and you can offer 1gb FTTH.
Show me several case studies that show the opposite. | |
|
| | | | | |  AlcoholPremium
join:2003-05-26
Climax, MI
kudos:3
·Comcast
| said by tshirt:Adding the additional last mile capacity costs comcast
How so?
--
I found the key to success but somebody changed the lock. | |
|
| | | | | Bengie25
join:2010-04-22
Wisconsin Rapids, WI | Netflix pays just enough to get to a common exchange, then the ISP's customers must pay to get to that same exchange, but they both pay their own fair share. They both pay to get to the exchange point and cover their own costs. | |
|
| | . My area got out of it again, nice. When they do extend to my area my Verizon unlimited plan is going to get absolutely hammered so I can stay below the threshold when needed. My entire gaming life is DD now, and Saturday I have several streams of football going on and Slingbox running. Between that, Slingbox and the ever increasing size of games on Steam and next gen systems, 300GB doesn't really cut it. | |
|
| | Charter Communications will never have Usage Caps They're not smart enough to know how to implement them.  | |
|
| | | Re: Charter Communications will never have Usage Caps You sure Charter doesn't have any caps?
Their acceptable use policy would suggest otherwise. | |
|
| | | | Re: Charter Communications will never have Usage Caps Policy is one thing. Implementation of Policy is something else. | |
|
 firephotoFacts hurtPremium
join:2003-03-18
Brewster, WA | Great new feature, can't wait! Good thing they don't have a digital pipe that is streaming video data 24/7, those things suck up lots of bits. 
--
Say no to astroturfing. go to their profile, start ignoring posts and ignoring what's not true. | |
|
deadzonedPremium
join:2005-04-13
Baton Rouge, LA | Meters I bet their meters still don't work accurately either. Just bad timing. 
I'm sure that it is just an unfortunate mistake that they are working tirelessly 24/7 to fix though. | |
|
| | | Re: Meters My meter has been gone for a few months, around the time they first expanded the test markets, and i think i know why now. | |
|
| | caps and people thought mediacom's cap were bad. I have a 2TB cap if I hit that someone in the house is in trouble | |
|
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| And then they came for me ! Glad my new house has 3 options for triple play, 5 for just internet and 3 for phone.
RCN, Comcast, Verizon. One mistreats us we step to the next !
--
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt......and then it's absolutely friggin' hysterical!" | |
|
| | | Re: And then they came for me ! It has to be awesome to live in an area that is not serviced by a monopoly/duopoly. My apt complex forces basic Comcast service for $45 a month and you pay whatever extra for internet, receivers tiers etc. | |
|
 Anonymous_AnonymousPremium
join:2004-06-21
127.0.0.1
kudos:2 | just in fantom data just in phantom data you will be using 1gb or so in a month
--
Live Free or Die Hard... | |
|
decifal
join:2007-03-10
Bon Aqua, TN
kudos:1 | feasible At least 300 gigs is actually usable, and 50 gigs for $10 is much easier to swallow than any of the wireless plans for home internet use that i've seen provided by any of the bigger more capable to provide cheaper but do not companies.. | |
|
|
••••• |
| | lol thats my screen cap i wish i could have given you this one, cleaned up though
| |
|
|
••• |
| | some discount 5$ off for the right to pay a huge overage fee? That's a joke right there. | |
|
2 edits | Want to bet if we will see this in a market with google comcast says this is about improving network performance so if comcast doesn't impose these caps in google markets does that mean they don't care about network performance in those markets or is it that they can't gouge there customers ,and why are all these test markets in the south? | |
|
|  IowaCowboyWant to go back to IowaPremium
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA
·Comcast
 ·Verizon Broadban..
| Re: Want to bet if we will see this in a market with google I bet in Google/FiOS markets, Comcast is looking to unload their systems along with some their debt like Verizon did with FairPoint and Frontier.
I bet those Comcast systems are operating at a loss and Comcast would like to either shut them down or sell them like VZ and T with DSL markets but their hands are tied by franchising agreements. I bet when those franchising agreements expire, they'll file a notice of discontinuance and flee town.
--
I've experienced ImOn (when they were McLeod USA), Mediacom, Comcast, and Time Warner and I currently have DirecTV. They are much better than broadcast TV.
I have not and will not cut the cord. | |
|
| brad
join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON | said by bluedyedvd:comcast says this is about improving network performance so if comcast doesn't impose these caps in google markets does that mean they don't care about network performance in those markets or is it that they can't gouge there customers ,and why are all these test markets in the south?
Only a fool would believe that it has anything to do with improving network performance which it does not. It's just another revenue source. How can we not deliver the service and also gouge you too. | |
|
IowaCowboyWant to go back to IowaPremium
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA Reviews:
·Comcast
·Verizon Broadban..
| Like I've said many times Broadband internet is becoming more characteristic of a public utility (like water, sewer, electric, and natural gas) and needs to be regulated as such.
I personally think until we have true competition, they should have to justify caps, metered billing, and pricing through rate cases and state DPU filings. | |
|
|  batterupI Can Not Tell A Lie.Premium
join:2003-02-06
Netcong, NJ | Re: Like I've said many times said by IowaCowboy:Broadband internet is becoming more characteristic of a public utility (like water, sewer, electric, and natural gas) and needs to be regulated as such.
Ma Bell is dead; get over it. | |
|
| | brad
join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON | Re: Like I've said many times said by batterup:Ma Bell is dead; get over it.
And your point is? | |
|
|
|
