insomniac84
join:2002-01-03
Schererville, IN
1 edit | Hopefully this forces some changes
A town next to mine got WOW to move in and they offered cheaper rates and more content than comcast. Instantly comcast matched their offerings, while not letting people where I live enjoy the same deals. Comcast should be forced to have the same rates everywhere. Although I have no faith in our government to actually help the consumer. |
|
dadkins
Can you do Blu?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA
 ·Comcast
| Waaaaa
"Comcast is offering its customers a 16-month discount on a combination digital TV and high-speed Internet package that would cut its usual price of $97 a month to $52."
It's a "Promotion"! After this "Promotion" is over... guess what, the price goes back up! DUH! 
If this muni really wanted to compete, they would offer the same or better "Promotion" to snag customers, no?
--
No Firefox here, move along! |
|
Rammer
Premium
join:2001-03-06
clubs:  | h really
like we all no comcast wont do that
now come on
a fine upstanding out fit like them
who would have throught such |
|
xdeadhead
220, 221, Whatever It Takes.
Premium
join:2000-11-08
Mechanicsburg, PA
 ·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast
| reply to insomniac84
Re: Hopefully this forces some changes
well they should at the very least be forced to open their network to competitors the same way the tecos have been forced to do so. only then, when the customer has real choice for services will we begin to see in improvement in situations like this. |
|
shimonmor
join:2000-12-30
Sedro Woolley, WA
·wavebroadband
1 edit | reply to insomniac84
This is typical of big, greedy business. I'm a hard core conservative but I think the way big business gets away with raping the middle class is ridiculous.
So what's the solution? Well we can, as the general public, purchase our goods and service from whomever we feel would better serve our community and avoid large, faceless, "customer serviceless" companies such as Comcast or Walmart or whatever. Or we can sit on our arses and cry for government control. I suspect the latter will happen.
We had a great video rental store here in our small town and then Blockbuster moved in. Blockbuster offered lower rental fees and everyone flocked there (since it was built in a great American "strip mall" along with a Starbuck's and Pizza place). Eventually they ran the small town video store out of business. As soon the old place shut down, Blockbuster's prices shot up higher than they ever were and we were stuck crummy service.
Careful what you wish for...cheap is not always the path to happiness. |
|
ropeguru
Premium
join:2001-01-25
Bridgeport, WV
clubs:
 ·VOIPo
| reply to dadkins
Re: Waaaaa
To me, though, this comes back to anti-trust tactics. The big boys leverage their monopolistic advantage with all the $$$ to undercut everyone else so as only to run them out of business. Then, they raise their prices back up until the next person comes along.
I think it is time for the SEC to jump in again and stop these actions.
As far as the muni trying to match Comcast, their may be no feasible way to do that. I am sure that Comcast has calculated just how much it is costing the muni to run their system. Then Comcast cuts their rates to below what the muni can afford to charge. If the muni then drops their rates to below Comcast, then they lose money and wind up going out of business. Comcast has probably figured out just how long this will take to do and that is why the promotion is 16 months.
Comcast can afford to lose money in this locality because they will funnel money from all their other over priced areas to cover the loss. In the end it is a no win situation for the muni. |
|
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| LAME
I'm sure the municipal utility is able to offer great discounts because they don't have to pay the same taxes and franchise fees that Comcast does. Of course, that's not considered "unfair."
This situation is exactly how competition is supposed to work. You have multiple providers of the same type of service and the providers lower their costs to snag the most customers. There is nothing wrong with that.
--
Hey Fast Eddie... you're next! |
|
AbBaZaBbA
Premium
join:2002-07-10
Wildomar, CA | well
well at leas't they're trying to compete with a muni instead of spending a bunch of money on pr lies to convince stuipd people to vote against it. |
|
SpitefulCrow
Insert Witty Tag Here
Premium
join:2003-06-04
Berkeley, CA
| reply to pnh102
Re: LAME
Exactly. And there's nothing wrong with a nationwide company having different service charges in different markets. If Comcast set its rates the same everywhere it would get undercut by municipals where they exist and could get undercut by Verizon and SBC everywhere else!
--
Powered by Optimum Online
Please do not feed the trolls.
Computer specs:Athlon XP 2600+/1GB DDR333/120GB 7200RPM SATA/GeForce FX5500 256MB AGP8x + IBM T86a LCD 1280x1024x24@60/Marvell Yukon GigE/Onboard VT880 6.1-channel sound |
|
frankenfeet
Premium
join:2001-10-14
Smiths Grove, KY
·Insight VOIP
·Insight Communicat..
| No different than Walmart.
This is how Walmart competes on the local level. They can afford to take a loss in some locals because they make up for it in others. Eventually the local supermarket will get to the point that it can no longer compete with the prices that Walmart offers, so they go belly up. Walmart can the raise it's prices back to their originals, or even go higher because of the lack of competition. At that point they become a monopoly, and the government should step in and fine them, IMHO.
--
ƒ ® ä η κ € η ƒ € € † |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
| Predatory pricing is a Federal Crime
It's predatory pricing plain and simple and could be considered a violation of the Robinson-Patman Act.
»assembler.law.cornell.edu/uscode···00-.html
said by The Act:
TITLE 15 > CHAPTER 1 > § 13
§ 13. Discrimination in price, services, or facilities
Release date: 2004-05-18
(a) Price; selection of customers
It shall be unlawful for any person engaged in commerce, in the course of such commerce, either directly or indirectly, to discriminate in price between different purchasers of commodities of like grade and quality, where either or any of the purchases involved in such discrimination are in commerce, where such commodities are sold for use, consumption, or resale within the United States or any Territory thereof or the District of Columbia or any insular possession or other place under the jurisdiction of the United States, and where the effect of such discrimination may be substantially to lessen competition or tend to create a monopoly in any line of commerce, or to injure, destroy, or prevent competition with any person who either grants or knowingly receives the benefit of such discrimination, or with customers of either of them
The main exception being where the price difference is justified due to the cost of delivery or manufacture, meaning in Alaska where it costs more to deliver goods, or where labor may be more expensive a higher price may be justified, but when comparing prices here with say 80 miles away, they'd have a hard time proving that there is a significant cost difference.
And according to a different section of the act, it may even be illegal to receive the discounted price.
said by The Act:
(f) Knowingly inducing or receiving discriminatory price
It shall be unlawful for any person engaged in commerce, in the course of such commerce, knowingly to induce or receive a discrimination in price which is prohibited by this section.
What it comes down to is the Act means to stop predatory pricing so that everyone gets the same 'deal' based on what it costs the seller to produce and deliver the goods. In Comcast's cast the Act would justify a nationwide pricing mandate (the similar mandate that DirecTV and Echostar agreed to when they tried to merge that would have protected consumers in rural areas against predatory pricing).
--
Don't get it, demand it! The Anime Network www.theanimenetwork.com |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
| reply to frankenfeet
Re: No different than Walmart.
Predatory pricing is a bit different. It would be like Walmart at a particular store dropped their price to drive out competition while all the other Walmart stores charged market prices.
And that's the whole point, in this case Comcast is using their market position to siphon off money from other markets to subsidize this predatory pricing to drive out this specific competitor. If Comcast simply implemented a new lower nationwide or regional pricing schedule to drive out competitors there would be less of a question as to whether it's true predatory pricing.
--
Don't get it, demand it! The Anime Network www.theanimenetwork.com |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
| reply to dadkins
Re: Waaaaa
It's not that the have a promotion, it's who qualifies for the promotion. I'm not familiar with this specific deal but if the promotion is available EVERYWHERE, then I would agree with you. If it's only available in a single franchise then it could be considered predatory pricing and be illegal.
--
Don't get it, demand it! The Anime Network www.theanimenetwork.com |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
1 edit | reply to pnh102
Re: LAME
It's predatory pricing, not competition. It's not competition when other franchises subsidize a particular market. As soon as the competitor is driven out and Comcast establishes their micro-monopoly in that market they'll raise their prices back up.
As for unfair, there are plenty of industries that have no problem competing against gov't.
UPS, Fedex and DHL seem to be able to compete on their merits against the USPS just fine and they do so despite the USPS being in most cases cheaper.
Private schools seems to compete just fine against public schools when public schools are FREE.
Meanwhile we have Comcast which must resort to predatory pricing to compete with a muni rather than simply offering better service.
Comcast should be competing based on it's merits as other companies do rather than relying on their market position to break the law.
Fact remains there would be no demand for muni services if Comcast was doing a better job for its customers. It's because Comcast has such an array of anti-consumer policies and tactics that creates the market for the munis.
--
Don't get it, demand it! The Anime Network www.theanimenetwork.com |
|
JTRockville
Data Ho
Premium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD
clubs:
·LINGO
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·surpasshosting
·Verizon FIOS
| reply to pnh102
said by pnh102  :I'm sure the municipal utility is able to offer great discounts because they don't have to pay the same taxes and franchise fees that Comcast does. Of course, that's not considered "unfair." It would be unfair if it were true. But the town of Braintree requires equal franchise fees from both cable providers: investor-owned Comcast and publicly owned BELD.
It's more likely BELD doesn't get the same tax breaks as Comcast. |
|
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD | thank you oliphant
thanks for the post - I was pretty sure such behaviour is illegal, but couldn't site anything specific. |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA | reply to JTRockville
Re: LAME
...and it's often the case that municipal services are subject to much more regulation and oversight than private sector companies like Comcast.
--
Don't get it, demand it! The Anime Network www.theanimenetwork.com |
|
Blackened
Your Freedom Fries Are Stale
join:2003-09-29
| reply to oliphant
Re: Predatory pricing is a Federal Crime
While I agree 100% with you, what do you think our corporate-backed government will do about it?
It's sad. When I moved to this town we had roughly 5 video stores, all mom-and-pop. Then in came Blockbuster. I watched them first-hand (as a blockbuster employee in high school) cut prices way below their average prices and way below the competition's. Soon after the other video stores folded, and not surprisingly, the prices on rentals skyrocketed, literally. It went from $3 per rental to $6 in the span of a few months. Now being the ONLY video store in town, they have been free to charge whatever the hell they want to those too paranoid to rent online.
I probably shouldn't mention the shady contracts that a phone and cable company have with this town to be the sole provider of their mediums.
Sufficed to say these corporations are supposed to be following laws which oliphant elaborated on, yet are not and anyone with a grasp of the obvious can see they aren't being forced to. What happened to capitalism in this country? |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
| said by Blackened :While I agree 100% with you, what do you think our corporate-backed government will do about it? Depends. If the muni files a federal complaint then they'll get investigated and Comcast would most likely settle rather than have too much attention drawn to it.
--
Don't get it, demand it! The Anime Network www.theanimenetwork.com |
|
sharksfan3
Premium
join:2004-02-16
Poughkeepsie, NY
·Verizon Wireless B..
·Optimum Voice
·Optimum Online
·Time Warner VOIP
·RoadRunner Cable
| Goes back to one issue
Forcing Comcast to open up their lines to other providers in the first place is wrong. They built the network, they should be the sole operators.
You built the house you live in. Now the government is forcing you to let me live there too at a rent rate substantially below market value.
These other companies (ie earthlink) need to front the money to build their own networks. Freeloading isn't the answer. |
|
