<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule">

<channel>
<title>Topic &#x27;Re: Time Warner&#x27;s Response?&#x27; in forum &#x27;&#x27; - dslreports.com</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Time-Warners-Response-21583826</link>
<description></description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 04:06:27 EDT</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 04:06:27 EDT</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>Re: Time Warner&#x27;s Response?</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Time-Warners-Response-21584933</link>
<description><![CDATA[anon posted : True, but U-verse poses more of a threat to TWC, as they offer triple play over their incumbent network.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Time-Warners-Response-21584933</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2008 13:41:30 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Time Warner&#x27;s Response?</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Time-Warners-Response-21584836</link>
<description><![CDATA[hottboiinnc posted : People said the same thing when U-Verse came to Toledo. I can drive around the City all day and never see any ATT truck at anyones house getting U-Verse.<br><br>Buckeye is still keeping their customers.  Local support and offices win over more channels. Especially when it comes down to if the tech support person speaks English or not.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Time-Warners-Response-21584836</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2008 13:21:38 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Time Warner&#x27;s Response?</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Time-Warners-Response-21584575</link>
<description><![CDATA[MrMoody posted : <div class="bquote"><small>said by RR User :</small><br><br>I still doubt that TW will increase speeds into the realm that I would hope to see them offer. They have always historically not only matched but exceeded offers from AT&T/Bellsouth on the download side, and usually match the upstream. I'd love to see them offer 10/1 or 20/2, or something along those lines... They seem to offer similar speeds in other area's across the country, so why not here? Do we just not deserve it or something? </div>Embarq offers 10/896 in their territory (here) and that never seemed to bother them.<br> <br><small>--<br>"It is absurd to say that our country can issue $30 million in bonds and not $30 million in currency. Both are promises to pay, but one promise fattens the usurers and the other helps the people."-Thomas Edison</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Time-Warners-Response-21584575</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2008 12:34:50 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Time Warner&#x27;s Response?</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Time-Warners-Response-21584400</link>
<description><![CDATA[anon posted : I want to see what TWC will do in response before making my decision. When I had TWC install my triple play in my current residence it cost me over $450 and took them a good 4-6 hours to do the install (new behind the wall cable runs). I don't want to go though that kind of trouble again only to find that a week after switching to U-verse, TWC offers 20/2 or something similar.<br><br>I still doubt that TW will increase speeds into the realm that I would hope to see them offer. They have always historically not only matched but exceeded offers from AT&T/Bellsouth on the download side, and usually match the upstream. I'd love to see them offer 10/1 or 20/2, or something along those lines... They seem to offer similar speeds in other area's across the country, so why not here? Do we just not deserve it or something?]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Time-Warners-Response-21584400</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2008 12:01:26 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Time Warner&#x27;s Response?</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Time-Warners-Response-21584005</link>
<description><![CDATA[dustman81 posted : If TWC's response in Raleigh is the same as TWC NEO's response, they will arrogantly claim that people will stick with them because they're better. They will not increase internet speeds or add channels, but happily raise prices.<br><br>Which explains why people are jumping ship around here to go to Uverse or if they can't get Uverse, then they go to satellite.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Time-Warners-Response-21584005</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2008 10:42:32 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Time Warner&#x27;s Response?</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Time-Warners-Response-21583896</link>
<description><![CDATA[hlw0 posted : Are you kidding?  TWC is not onlt arrogant but the bully on the block.  They will CRY just like they did when the City of Wilson created their own fiber network GREENLIGHT.  I can't figure out why the triangle isn't completely fiber.  Kudos and GOOD LUCK.  I hope they bust TWC's chops!!!! GO AT&T!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Time-Warners-Response-21583896</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2008 10:15:36 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Time Warner&#x27;s Response?</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Time-Warners-Response-21583826</link>
<description><![CDATA[Matt posted : I wonder what Time Warner's response in Raleigh will be? Will they just provide more downstream, or will they finally increase upstream speeds too?]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Time-Warners-Response-21583826</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2008 09:59:35 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>

