Time Warner Cable Cripples TiVO, Gets FCC Fine > one more way.

said by tiger72:

They haven't raised my rates... In fact, I just got ~20 new HD channels thanks to SDV.

said by fiberguy:

if you recall, they charged per outlet until 1996 when the law changed.

said by 56403739:

How does that have anything to do with paying for cable boxes? Or anything in the reality-based world for that matter?

Each one of these revenue-raising tactics, taken in a vacuum, is negligible, but as a whole they are a death of a thousand financial cuts. Each one of these rented boxes is revenue (despite what some here will claim) and gets reported as such to prop up the income figures. Don't kid yourself...it's definitely not just about HD channels.

said by fiberguy:

when are you going to learn or get it through your head that there will NEVER be clear QAM digital basic!?

You can't control channel tiers with out security - period! Get your head out of basic analog cable and traps.. those days are over. If you want clear QAM basic, guess what? Expect to pay more, for one, and expect to lose out on the ability to have just a lower tier 1 basic tier for about $10 a month. There's so much more to say but it's not worth it.

said by tiger72:

It was a simple remark re: a market economy. If you don't like it, then put your money where your mouth is.

said by r81984:

You watch The Hills???? Sad....

I love your comment "stop giving them money"
Well what are you supposed to do when you want cable and internet and you have no other choice?

Canceling their service really just screws you over not the cable company. Most people will not cancel, they will just complain because many people do not want to go without cable and internet.

When it comes to utilities, we should have government caps in place to prevent these companies from gouging us. Just like with gasoline and electricity, it will take prices that make us poor before we will give them up. Gasoline is getting very close to that and cable companies are on their way.

Just as companies raise rates for TV, they will start download caps and raise rates of your internet.

What if you reach your download cap for the month and you need your "the hills" tv show fix, then you will wish you did not cancel your cable to stick it to the man.

said by tiger72:

See: Vonage vs ATT; See: Southwest vs American Airlines; See: local wisps vs incumbent DSL.

said by tiger72:

In my area, Time Warner has been EXTREMELY aggressive with their retention

said by tiger72:

That's because utilities (Water, Electricty, Gas) are deemed necessary for human existence. Cable Television... not so much.

said by insomniac84:

Sadly you seem to think unequal services are competition. And you assume everyone can get VoIP or wireless. This is why you are wrong and no matter what you argue you will always be wrong.

Isn't competition nice! Too bad I don't have any. And I had to sign a contract with TWC just to lock in the currently advertised deal. So I cannot use that trick to get a better deal for another 13 months. And if Time Warner logs who has apartments they could easily call your bluff knowing you have no other option.

It seems like you are ignoring all the facts I have laid out based on your own situation and your own needs. Do you live in an area with uverse? Or surewest? If so I would be appalled that someone with competition is going to argue this much against someone in a situation without competition.

I am sure I can find someone as ignorant as you to claim water, electricity, and gas aren't necessary.

said by insomniac84:

I don't get it, you are in the same situation. No choice but TWC. And yet you insist monopolies aren't the problem, but instead lazy consumers. If Time Warner documented that your apartment has no competition, you would not have gotten any deal.

And cable allows you to pay one price for many tvs. No dealing with rented equipment or expensive equipment to buy. FIOS, satellite, and uverse all charge per tv. Therefore the services are not even comparable.

said by r81984:

tiger72,

Why do you have to be THAT GUY?
That guy that no matter how wrong will try to argue against others.
It was classic for you to link to the wikipedia of sarcasm.
Also, its funny how you claim to have business and economic understanding. I bet you could not answer correctly any questions off an econ or business test. You do not sound that formally educated (I am not trying to be mean, just stating the obvious).

You do deserve a slow long clap that gets slowly faster over time for your success in getting the company to not lock you in a contract.
What would you have done if they refused to let you bypass the contract?
Would you just have said, "I dont need cable, so I will not give them my money?" or would you have caved in so that you could get the cable that you wanted?

Time Warner cable is a monopoly in your area, but yet you think you have some kind of choice for cable tv.
If you consider electricity a need, then you have to consider cable a need.
Do you really need electricity to live????

Also, if you ever come to Louisiana, I will show you many people that live without electricity, water, or gas. I went on an airboat ride a few weeks ago through swamps and met many people who live just fine off the land. They make their money selling fish to pay like $500 a year to lease land from the state.

Let me know how your negotiation goes with your electricity company. I will be waiting...

said by r81984:

What textbook did you use for your basic econ 101 class???
I'm just curious because I do not think you even have a highschool degree.

How does going without cable solve the problem if you want cable tv?

I bet I can find a psychiatrist that will claim a person who has no entertainment in life could end up dying of suicide enduced by boredom. People are deemed legally crazy all the time.

People can die from just about anything, just because you said people do die from a lack of things in a city does not make it a need because they do not need to live in the city.

Cable is just as much of a need as electricity.

said by insomniac84:

(of course I have already stated the apartment I live in only has cable, nothing else, so I have zero choice for tv and internet). And right now people buy cable and have no other choice but to pay any fee the company bills them.

said by insomniac84 :

Because you are already renting the equipment. If you hooked up 4 more tvs, are they going to get those 20 new channels for no extra charge(The way analog cable has been for decades)?

said by insomniac84:

Per tv fees added to your already high monthly rate.