how-to block ads
|
|
view: topics flat text |
|
Comments on news posted 2003-03-26 09:13:36: Nancy Levine's monthly fee for Comcast broadband recently jumped from $42.95 to $56.95 because she wasn't a Comcast cable television customer (she was locked into a 1 year contract with Dish Network anyway). ..
|
 jwh6
join:2002-05-03
Seekonk, MA | What if Microsoft did this What happened if for the new version of windows Microsoft decided to reward it's best customers by offering a "discount" for those who bought the new version of Office? The bundled price is $150 for Windows and $250 for Office or unbundled Windows is $250. Would the same people who say that there isn't a problem with what comcast doing say that Microsoft has the right to do this? | |
|  nunyaWho is John Galt?Premium,MVM
join:2000-12-23
O Fallon, MO
kudos:5
 ·Charter
 ·voip.ms
| Don't buy it No one is forcing this lady to buy service from Comcast. If you don't like it don't give them your money. It's not like there is a gun to her head.
People keep assuming bb access is an inalienable right. Wrong. It's a luxury service.
--
Look Mom, I'm a Provider. | |
| |  JTRockvilleData HoPremium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD
 ·Verizon FiOS
| Re: Don't buy it Here are TWO quotes that use the term "essential", when referring to broadband. said by FCC Commissioner Kevin J. Martin:
Encouraging the deployment of broadband services to all Americans should be a national priority. Such services are essential to the economy of the 21st century, dramatically reducing the costs of exchanging information and allowing previously local businesses to serve the world. Broadband services are especially important to rural America, providing business, educational, and healthcare opportunities to remote parts of the country. I am hopeful that, just as rapid developments in telecommunications and technology have driven much of this nation’s economic growth in recent years, broadband deployment will lead to a new period of growth. I thus believe that all levels of government should work to eliminate barriers to infrastructure investment and to accelerate broadband deployment.
said by MCMD Bill 28-02 FAQ:
Q: Why are cable-modem service requirements so important?
A: The Internet has become an essential tool in business and in many individual’s lives. Cable modems are by far the most common way of getting high-speed, broadband Internet access. Reliable broadband access will encourage telecommuting to reduce traffic and improve workers’ quality of life. It will help promote education, commerce, and employment. Montgomery County has one of the highest levels of computer use anywhere in the world. As the home of many high-tech employers, such as the National Institutes of Health, a thriving biotech industry, and several key media and communications companies, our community is more dependent than most on the wide availability of reliable broadband Internet access.
Both nationally, and locally (for me), our government disagrees with you, nunya  . As a full-time telecommuter, I also disagree with you. Broadband is an essential tool, not a luxury. | |
| | | | | JTRockvilleData HoPremium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| Re: Don't buy it said by nunya:
You don't have to tele-commute. You could work in an office like everyone else.
Are you sure about that? Do you know my reasons for telecommuting?
My region takes the bronze medal for traffic congestion in this country. My local government wants to encourage telecommuting. I'll be sure to pass along your suggestion of regression at our next cable meeting. However, since we pride ourself on progress, I don't think it'll fly. | |
|
|  KaltesPremium
join:2002-12-04
Los Angeles, CA | Many customers of Comcast live in areas where DSL service is not available. Even densely populated areas like the greater DC area lack DSL.
In those cases, you cant ditch comcast no matter what, unless you want to go back to dial-up, which is unacceptable for many people.
As for broadband being a "luxury service" who the hell are you to tell America that they don't really need broadband. Entertainment is one thing, but many people need and use broadband to do things like work from home. The simple fact is that broadband is not some 'cool gadget' or 'toy' anymore. It is something that people have come to RELY ON and the fact that YOU do not rely on it does not make the technology luxurious for those who do.
Your comment is selfish, ignorant, inconsiderate, and rude. While we are at it, you could go back to crapping in a bed pan and relying on candles for light, because electricity and water are just 'luxuries' after all.
I'd like to see a poll asking whether people think cable TV is a luxury or not. Nobody I know thinks it is. | |
| | |
|  It's about time that someone says something.
[text was edited by author 2003-03-27 00:25:16] | |
| | |  You can e-mail Senator Boxer...
Californias senator at work. | |
| KaltesPremium
join:2002-12-04
Los Angeles, CA | Bundling=Tying? (Im a law student and Im in an anti-trust class now. Several weeks ago I showed my prof the letter I received from Comcast, and she said that it certainly looked like tying and she would have advised Comcast against it, but that Comcast has some argument that it is not technically tying because they coerce you with a price increase instead of outright forcing you to take cable tv together with broadband)
Under Anti-trust law, tying arrangements are not permitted. A tying arrangement exists when the buyer is forced to take something they do not want, in order to get what they want.
Comcast's price hike is not EXACTLY tying, but neither is 'bundling'. The theory behind bundling is that by having all your services from 1 company, you somehow save them costs, and as a result they are passing that savings on to you. That is not the case here.
The true effect of this hike is identical to a tying arrangement. Instead of merely being forced to buy digital cable outright or lose internet service, the consumer is force to pay a $14/month penalty. In the end, Comcast is leveraging its market power in cable modems to obtain an unfair advantage over satellite competition.
A company can only violate anti-trust laws when they possess market power. This boils down to: if Comcast can raise prices without losing significant market share to competitors, it has power over the market. I believe that this is the case in many areas serviced by Comcast, though perhaps not all areas serviced by Comcast.
Consider the following:
#1. Attbi enticed many new users to bring their own modems, thanks to a great offer of $35/month + $10/month modem rental. Thanks to this scheme, many attbi (now comcast) customers will be forced to throw away a $150+ investment if they ditch cable service. For customers who own their modems, this reality gives Comcast even more market power.
#2. Comcast may be the only reliable broadband provider in some areas. In those areas where DSL is not a threat to Comcast's market share, Comcast would be utterly abusing its monopoly power to gain an unfair advantage over Sat Tv.
If Comcast has market power, and I think in this case it is obvious that they do, then the question is whether a judge will decide that the nature of their price increase constitutes a tying arrangement.
Think of the ramifications if what Comcast has done is found to be legal: companies will be able to force everyone into package/bundled services OR ELSE you will pay very high penalties. Companies with power in 1 market will be able to leverage that power to gain unfair advantages in other markets.
At the end of the day, there will be less competition, fewer choices, and higher prices: we will pay more for less. | |
| | | Singled Out I have to wonder (still) why it is ONLY a bundled service if you have HSI and cable tv.
I am in an area where digital phone service is also available. I've had the phone service and internet for almost 2 years. I was paying $35.95 for internet and just over $25 for phone service. Last June the net price went to $42.95 but I got coupons to keep the price at $35.95. This month the net jumped to $52.95 because I don't want and have no need for crappy cable tv. Thats is a pretty large increase in less than a year.
The point is in my area there are 3 available services from Comcast. Why is only the cable tv and HSI considered a bundled service. I still have the digital phone package, is that not a part of the 3 services offered. If they are going to use bundled service discounting then it should apply to ALL services offered.
My opinion is that Comcast seems to think that everyone is "stealing" basic cable anyway so they are trying a legal way to make everyone pay for it one way or the other.
A $17.00 increase per month in less than a year, wish I had that kind of control over my wages. | |
| | KaltesPremium
join:2002-12-04
Los Angeles, CA | Re: Singled Out The reason is that 'bundling' is only their excuse for this act: it is a marketing sham.
The truth is that Comcast wants to leverage the dependency of many customers on cable internet to gain an advantage over satellite tv services. | |
|
| | Price Fixing What did Comcast while not totally illegal is wrong, if they had offered a discount from the $40 to say $35 or $30 per month then there would not be a problem.
what they did was rise the price then say oh by the way if you want the old price then you have to buy our cable service, that is illegal.
there is nothing wrong with bundles, I actually enjoy my Cablevision(IO Gold)/Optimum bundle, but I knew the prices from the time I started using the service and yes I would get very upset if they tried the same tactics.
--
Optimum Rules!!! | |
| | | Fail the compairison test... Wow, why report such a minute' "issue". Do you go to McDonnalds, pay for a big mac, and a coke and then cry foul because it costs more than the meal? | |
|  rcdiverPremium
join:2000-12-13
Monessen, PA | I hate Comcast
And, if they're gonna give a discount for bundles, do it to the ones who already have service. You don't tell someone that you are gonna raise their prices unless they subscribe to another and/or additional services, that's blackmail.
When Verizon came out with their Veriations program, they didn't say that unless you use Verizon for your cell phone, we're gonna raise your local phone service.
--
You people protect one of the most evil men (Saddam) on the face of this earth and won’t lift a finger to save the life of an unborn baby. Charlie Daniels speaking out against Hollywood. | |
| | | Mediacom bungles bundling My experience shows that Mediacom will "graciously" rebate $5 a month off your HSD if you subscribe to basic cable for $14 a month but that rebate disappears if you do them the favor of providing your own modem. save them some capital expenditure and what do they do? raise your rates! Like most Mediacom marketing it doesn't amount to much of an offer if you look under the surface. | |
| | |  Can someone answer this ? 4 me?
| |
| | | Changing the rules is what's offensive. What seems to be missed in many of the posts is that Comcast just changed the rules 'midstream'; it was never advised or stated in advance that a bundle or tie-in was REQUIRED. As others have said, its also a negative/penalty bundling, rather than a discount for customers who take both cable tv and cable internet.
When they first took over AT&T cable in No. Cal, it was announced that they were raising cable TV rates (again) but not cable internet rates. This coincided with a sales-blitz by DirecTV and Dish on a plan that offered about over 100 more channels for about $1.00 more than then current AT&T/Comcast cable TV, and little or no installation $. Since no tying was stated, I was among a lot of people who switched. Better deal, better program choices...
In my particular area there is NO alternative to cable for high-speed-internet -- no DSL, no wireless (Sprint, et al), and satellite internet is not much faster than dial-up at a higher charge than even the increased Comcast rip-off rate. There is a 2nd cable/tv/phone/internet vendor in two nearby cities (called: Astound), but it will be 2-3 years before they can offer service to my city/address. The Comcast rate hike was declared after I signed my 1-year contract with DirecTV, and never mentioned when I cancelled my cable TV -- so there is no competition and no appeal possible. The local cable TV franchise authority (city) claims only the Feds can do anything, and Powell at the FCC already wants to make it even worse, so absent a popular uprising, I don't see much help coming.
We're not trying to change a contract after the fact (especially since the cable service is month-to-month), like the bad analogy on cell-phone contracts, just trying to be treated fairly. But you can bet that after this, that the microsecond a viable alternative exists, I will cancel ALL Comcast services, and never go back. They will lose more on bad PR and ripping off customers than they will make on the outrageous increases.
Bad timing for me, as I am currently out of work and can ill afford the $ increase but need the speed for my job search... | |
| | |  Black mail as a sales tool.
-Keep my service as is, and watch my bill jump from $42.95 a month to $57.95.
-Add basic cable and pay $53.95 per month (but get both for the first six months at my current rate of $42.95).
One local newspaper columnist who also has Dish Network said on "principle" he was going to reject the basic cable bundle rate and pay the $57.95 rate. I thought he was a idiot. (No one says you have to use the basic cable connection.) But I also refuse to be blackmailed into buying a service I do not want. I canceled my Comcast Broadband service and switched to Verizon DSL for $39.95 per month.
I could have swallowed a small increase, but I felt like $14.00 per month amounted to blackmail. (An attempt to make my reasonably priced Dish Network service seem as expensive as their crappy Digital cable service.) I agree with previous posts that the "bundled" price would seem more like a genuine discount if they had imposed a small rate hike on all services they provide (TV / Phone / Internet), and then offered the better price to bundled customers, instead of targeting one particular group of customers.
Fortunately I did have a choice of broadband providers. Many people are not in areas that do not qualify for DSL or other types of broadband.
So, am I happy that I made the switch? I'm still deciding, but I am having some regrets. The DSL seems slower and alot quirkier than my old cable connection. The cable was simple to setup, fast and rock solid.
Verizon just lowered their rates for new DSL customers, so maybe competition will win out, and Comcast will be forced to back-off on their overpriced "unbundled" rate, but I would not bet on it. | |
| | | It's not extortion its called economics! Well I think that this is fairly simple....they want you to sign up with them, so they raise he prices in an effort to get you to sign-up for more services in which MANY people will do.
If you are stuck either you are in an area that does not have a high demand for the product offered and only one person offers it... It's not extortion or monopolizing at all because:
1. You are not forced to sign-up for these services
2. Other companies can certainly come in and expand in these areas if they want.
But if other companies don't want to expand. It simple rules of economics... When competition moves in the supply of product increases to meet or exceed demand and prices go down.
Simple if you must complain about the price you don't need it..
And by the way: it's not the job of the government to regulate private enterprise..capitalism does a good job of that buy it's self..
If you have bad customer service you lose the product.
For example:
My former DSL provider was horrible so I simply dumped them and paid MORE for better,consistant service..
If you area has only 1 option that means that demand in your area isn't worth the price of moving that product there.
TOO BAD!
WELCOME TO CAPITALISM! | |
| RawhideBlue Balls
join:2002-02-18
The Moon | yada yada yada First off, comcast is closer to an electric company or phone company than say coke, pepsi, mcdonalds, or burger king. your house is immobile and cannot move. its like comparing apples and oranges. the argument that joes pop shop in nowhere land has a monopoly is bs. even though the drive would be a 100 miles, the point missed is you can still drive somewhere else to get that something you wanted that joes pop shop over priced and could make a decision to make that drive to somewhere else. you cannot drive your house and land somewhere else to get that same product jose pop shop offers at a marked up price. I dont know if there needs to be regulation or anti-trust against comcast but maybe someone with as much muscle as say comcast does need to have their shoulder looked over. honestly i dont really care one way or another because i do have a choice and can get dsl and sat both and drop comcast altogether. but the point i think was missed by people defending comcast is this, it was advertised as savings bundling but was actually a rate increase for there internet customers who didnt also subscribe to cable service. this specifically targeted satellite owners and other none comcast tv viewers who decided to have comcast internet service and not comcast cable or who never had comcast cable to start with and those who do not have cable or satellite. they are trying to push there cable television service for where they have a cable drop to a home to force customers to either pay more or get something they dont want.
if it barks like a dog and looks like a dog. | |
|
| |
|
