dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
40365

Racerbob
Premium Member
join:2001-06-24
Webster, NY
·Frontier FiberOp..

2 edits

Racerbob

Premium Member

Look out...tiered pricing and monthly caps coming !

This sucks. Lord, 40 GB a month limit for $54.90 ?? While Comcast has 250 GB for what price ? Look out fello Rochesterians. This is what the lack of competition does for us. And crappy Frontier is supposed to be having their own very restrictive caps.

»www.businessweek.com/tec ··· analysis
albundyhere
join:2000-10-26
New York, NY

albundyhere

Member

just threaten to cancel the service...you dont get what you pay for anyways with TWC. this just makes you pay even more. Their loss is your gain.

Racerbob
Premium Member
join:2001-06-24
Webster, NY
·Frontier FiberOp..

Racerbob

Premium Member

said by albundyhere:

just threaten to cancel the service...you dont get what you pay for anyways with TWC. this just makes you pay even more. Their loss is your gain.
Right. And they will tell us all to cancel.. because they know how bad Frontier DSL is and we will come running right back to RR. Going to have to severely limit our internet usage here. My son games on ps3 and the wife and myself spend enough time on the net and I occasionally download large files and stream music, You Tube and other stuff too.
older dog
Premium Member
join:2005-06-09

1 edit

older dog to albundyhere

Premium Member

to albundyhere
said by albundyhere:

just threaten to cancel the service...you dont get what you pay for anyways with TWC. this just makes you pay even more. Their loss is your gain.
Frontier has a 5 gig per month cap. Cancel and go where?
Regulation is needed.

Smith6612
MVM
join:2008-02-01
North Tonawanda, NY
·Charter
Ubee EU2251
Ubiquiti UAP-IW-HD
Ubiquiti UniFi AP-AC-HD

1 edit

Smith6612 to Racerbob

MVM

to Racerbob
Sorry to hear about that Mazakman. The last I checked though, like in the case with the Texas trials, didn't they have to talk you into moving to a newer package that is supposably "cheaper" and "faster" but came with the caps but yet old accounts were grandfathered? But sorry to hear that for anyone getting capped. Right now even Frontier still has yet to announce rolling out their caps (was talking to a local tech who said that the plans for capping are actually on hold), as I've been hammering away at both of my DSL connections for the past week (more like the past year) and not a peep from either ISP. In March, I probably did close to 500GB total split up throughout the two lines.

OhHeckNoo
@rr.com

OhHeckNoo to Racerbob

Anon

to Racerbob
So does this mean if I ever move and get an account actually under my name that I would be forced into one of these? Forget that crap I'm moving to an area with U-verse!

Smith6612
MVM
join:2008-02-01
North Tonawanda, NY

Smith6612

MVM

Might as well find a Verizon area. AT&T is talking about caps too...

Racerbob
Premium Member
join:2001-06-24
Webster, NY

Racerbob

Premium Member

Note...they won't do this in Buffalo where Verizon is the competition.
older dog
Premium Member
join:2005-06-09

older dog to Smith6612

Premium Member

to Smith6612
You mean to actually enforce the cap.
The cap has been in the TOS for some time now.
Get locked in to one of Frontiers contracts and you could have a major surprise coming.

Tos
A reasonable amount of usage is defined as 5GB combined upload and download consumption during the course of a 30-day billing period.
From »www.frontier.com/5GB/

mikeurl
join:2002-06-26
united state

mikeurl to Racerbob

Member

to Racerbob
I wonder if the NYC government would prevent them from doing that here.

RDF
@rr.com

RDF

Anon

I hope so because if they force us use cap i will find another ISP than TWC.
61999674 (banned)
Gotta Do What Ya Gotta Do
join:2000-09-02
Here

61999674 (banned) to Racerbob

Member

to Racerbob
At some point ALL ISPs will have caps, after a while of this they will come out with a level that has no cap, just like dial-up did 10+ years ago(anyone remember the 150hrs deal?).

de
@rr.com

de to Racerbob

Anon

to Racerbob
Thankfully grande communication is in some parts of san antonio and even offers 20mb / 4mb service in fibre areas.

Hello Dish network / Vonage / Grande. All will end up cheaper than current TWC and probably more reliable with no overages or caps

Racerbob
Premium Member
join:2001-06-24
Webster, NY
·Frontier FiberOp..

Racerbob

Premium Member

There is one person in this forum who is local and who also is Time Warner's biggest supporter in this area and I am quite anxious to see his comments on this issue. 40 GB a month is too restrictive and furthermore, it is too expensive. If caps have to be put in place, they should at least try to model their plan after Comcast's ? I need to find out what people pay a month for Comcast ... 250 GB a month for how much ?

Smith6612
MVM
join:2008-02-01
North Tonawanda, NY

Smith6612 to older dog

MVM

to older dog
My contract with Frontier expired years ago, but I'm still on the same old plan as I've had for about 4 years. But of course I know about that TOS line as well as Time Warner not capping the Buffalo Division due to FiOS.
Champcar
join:2009-04-01

1 edit

Champcar to Racerbob

Member

to Racerbob
Well glad I finally canceled cable and started watching my shows on the internet, thankfully I didn't spend money on building a HTPC yet. I hate living in Rochester.
45612019 (banned)
join:2004-02-05
New York, NY

1 recommendation

45612019 (banned) to Racerbob

Member

to Racerbob
Well, Time Warner will be receiving a prompt cancellation phone call when they try this shit on me.

That's really all that needs to be said.

I'll probably rape the shit out of my connection first, though. Download 24/7 that month and upload 24/7 as punishment until they cut me off. I'd reckon I could manage over 5 terabytes of traffic in a month.
kingfisher
Premium Member
join:2007-07-17
Webster, NY

kingfisher to Racerbob

Premium Member

to Racerbob
Not welcome news at all. I have RoadRunner Turbo in Rochester and my router logged 16.13GB during the March calendar month. I do not download any music or video, so the referenced usage is all from surfing and software update activity. Obviously, if I was into music and video I would be screwed.

I am a fairly recent Rochester transplant and fortunately don't have family, acquaintances, real estate or employment locally that I place a great deal of value upon. I can move to a FIOS area if I choose. Frontier DSL is no alternative.
Monolith
join:2007-07-25
united state

Monolith to Racerbob

Member

to Racerbob
This is to close to home for me, Greensboro, N.C being one of the new test areas. I am in Raleigh area. If they put this crap in place for Raleigh I will drop them so fast for both internet and cable tv, as I have other options in this area without so a low cap. I don't have a problem with caps, but 40 GB, give me a break.

unknvoip
RIP goose
Premium Member
join:2006-07-25
Rochester, NY

1 edit

unknvoip to Racerbob

Premium Member

to Racerbob
I wonder if the anti-competitive angle has any legs here?

One could argue that caps are designed to keep people from competing video services (Netflix, Blockbuster and other download) that compete with cable and VoIP that competes with 'digital' phone.

Andrew Cuomo (NYS AG), you were all over the press with you BS anti-porn news a few months ago. Are you going to do anything about this?

davoice
join:2000-08-12
Saxapahaw, NC

davoice to Racerbob

Member

to Racerbob
I'm in the Greensboro market. Whee.

}Davoice

bop75
@rr.com

bop75 to Racerbob

Anon

to Racerbob
Just canceled my entire premium (pay channels) at 60 bucks per month and explained it was do to the upcoming caps in Rochester. Due to a number of trees along my southern property line, I cant cancel everything till Im sure satellite will work here. Road Runner will go the day the caps start.

unknvoip
RIP goose
Premium Member
join:2006-07-25
Rochester, NY

unknvoip

Premium Member

I will also be looking at reducing the cable bill. Especially after my package was increased a couple months ago with NO NOTICE.

They changed the billing cycle on the first bill so it wouldn't look so bad.

I hope they call to try to pimp 'digital' phone soon.

Zyzzyva100
@rr.com

Zyzzyva100 to Racerbob

Anon

to Racerbob
And I just canceled cable in favor of OTA HD and netflix on demand via my Tivo HD. Looks like I screwed. Where is the AG when the little guy is getting screwed. Forget AIG, I think we need to start bombarding cuomo's office with complaints about this. I get my phone and my tv via my broadband connection. How can this not be seen as anti-competitive in nature - especially seeing as how they are cherry picking the markets to do it in (where there is no other alternative). I have had unlimited cable internet since I was a freshman in HS (outside chicago), and I am now finishing up med school and look at how far back we will be going.

StevenB
Premium Member
join:2000-10-27
New York, NY
·Charter

StevenB

Premium Member

Just remember, 'those supporters' will say it's just a trial and nothing to be all worried about, cause it's just a trial.

You should write to your local congressmen/women - might not get too far, but least make them aware of this gouging. Cause plainly, thats all it is.

good luck fellow nyers =(
Dampier
Phillip M Dampier
join:2003-03-23
Rochester, NY

1 recommendation

Dampier to Racerbob

Member

to Racerbob
The entire matter is extremely depressing, not just for individual customers who are going to get slammed by this outrageous cap, but also for Rochester in particular which will now be in an extremely uncompetitive broadband backwater, saddled with a greedy cable company and a telephone company that has woefully lost touch with the times and is a shadow of its former self.

Telecommuters, home based businesses, large families, and those who are doing what everyone, including the cable company itself has encouraged people to do, use bandwidth, are now facing an absolutely enormous rate increase. If the current pricing models remain true, the rate customers pay now for standard RR service will bring a 20GB usage cap. To just double that to 40, you have to pay $15 more. Then, it's an outrageous $1/GB after that, for something that costs them around 10c.

These kinds of caps will inevitably eliminate most of the broadband video services, from Hulu and Joost to Netflix's set top box, Apple TV, Slingbox, and any other high bandwidth content that requires a broadband connection to deliver should these draconian caps go nationwide.

It's the equivalent of rationing the Internet.

I hate having to spend time on these kinds of battles, because all of these companies delivering these broadband products are not hurting for cash from their broadband divisions. Bandwidth costs continue to decline, not increase, as new technology and delivery mechanisms make it possible and easy to deliver the kinds of streaming and high bandwidth services now becoming available. Yes, there can be an initial investment expense from deploying some of the most robust delivery and distribution platforms, but not anywhere near the cost TW wants to saddle its customers with.

TW was already earning extra ancillary profits with their Turbo product, which becomes completely meaningless with these kinds of caps.

It's honestly unadulterated greed that drives these things. The video delivery business has become more competitive with additional price increases becoming more difficult to justify and an economy which makes shareholder return demands harder to deliver. So more profits will be requires from other divisions, and now they've settled on broadband as a cash cow, utterly destroying a working broadband model which has become more important for new business development and new markets.

Consumption based billing at fair prices is one thing, but there is nothing fair here. A maxed out tier of 40GB with overage fees of $1/GB at a $54.95 rate is a profit goldmine for anyone using between 40-100/GB a month, which is likely to be more and more common in most active Internet households with a mix of video watching, VOIP, video games, downloading, and browsing across multiple family members.

A 50GB household formerly paid $39.95. They will now pay $64.95.
A 75GB household formerly paid $39.95. They will now pay $74.95.
A 100GB household formerly paid $39.95. They will now pay $114.95.

Are these the "bandwidth hogs" TW will claim is costing them money, or just more and more average households who are using their Internet access in the ways RR itself markets.

And the other nonsense about how this "saves" people money who use less flies in the face of years of evidence those kinds of plans are barely, if ever marketed. And even most of those plans could see price hikes, and more importantly leave those on them at risk of severe penalties through overage charges for exceeding them. People on these lower tiers of service are there because of economic reasons. The impact of a run-up bill with overages is going to be a shell-shocker for most.

I'd also suggest that with a maxed out bundle at 40GB, TW's number crunchers have also considered the ever-increasing profit they will continue to earn as online applications consume more bandwidth year after year, making it more and more likely more of their customers will max out. There never is an "unlimited" plan available with these bandwidth cap plans.

BTW, Verizon FIOS has made it a point in their marketing to remind customers they do not have a usage cap, and that fact has made them a lot of new customers who do not want to worry whether they can watch one more episode of Benson on Hulu before exceeding their cap. If only Frontier were that smart. They are saddled with a technology limited DSL product that cannot compete on speed or consistency, and is more subject to technical faults. But they could strike marketing gold for the first time since their product was introduced to sell the fact they are NOT going to impose caps on customers. They can still quietly impose rational limits on outrageous usage (1TB a month and that sort of nonsense from servers, etc.), but they would score a huge advantage in a market with a cable modem product that is now effectively being rationed out. Would you switch to a lower speed provider with no ludicrous cap?

But Frontier's insanity knows no bounds, and instead they tried to impose a 5GB (!) cap on customers last summer that attracted sufficient negative press to have it temporarily suspended. Stupid. You can bet the cap issue will be revived again now that TW is talking about it.

Of course, these cities were chosen by TW not to get a representative or rational sample of the impact of a national bandwidth cap. That's because each of these selected markets is already saddled with caps or the likelihood of caps from the competition, so there is no downside to imposing their own. If they tried this in a Verizon FIOS area, customers would flee in seconds. They are doing this where they can get away with it.

Unfortunately for cities like Rochester, which are high technology comfortable, the residents are stuck because there simply is no viable competition. Clearwire has their own usage limits and an even poorer technology than DSL so wireless is out (and virtually all cellular providers have soft/hard limits themselves as well).

It's a very dark day for this community, with our only hope being a Verizon buyout of Frontier and progress towards a forward-thinking competitor which sees the long term benefits of deploying advanced technology which lets them deliver products and services in the future they can build revenue streams from and keep customer loyalty. TW wants a payday and will stick it to their customers again to get it.

And, by the way, should this company elect to exempt "preferred content providers" from their usage cap, that will open themselves up for a serious legal challenge and the political pandora's box of net neutrality: A backdoor way for major corporate interests to obtain de facto control of the marketplace by making independent competitors subject to usage caps that make funding those endeavors far more difficult.

StoptheCap! »www.stopthecap.com is getting reactivated after dealing with some of the Frontier crap from last summer. I absolutely will need help to make a difference with a much bigger company that is making these decisions from corporate headquarters and is not as impressed from local customer revolts.

de
@rr.com

de to Racerbob

Anon

to Racerbob
LOL ohh look they recommend on there website to use Road Runner Turbo to watch videos etc LMAO

»www.timewarnercable.com/ ··· ing.html
de

de

Anon

And lol -

Road Runner Turbo 15.0 Mbps with PowerBoost™

Our fastest Road Runner ever – giving you the speed you need for a super fast web experience. PowerBoost™ gives you an extra burst of speed when downloading big files, so videos, music and files go even faster than before.

Great speed without bandwidth = Genius

Zyzzyva100
@rr.com

Zyzzyva100 to Racerbob

Anon

to Racerbob
»www.oag.state.ny.us/onli ··· l_ag.jsp

Send a message to Cuomo. If enough people write in, maybe he will actually look into this. It wouldn't be the first time a NYS AG had stopped a business dead in their tracks when trying to screw the consumer.

Otherwise, anybody have any ideas if switching to earthlink would help, or do you think they will just pass on the bandwidth caps.

RR User
@rr.com

RR User to Racerbob

Anon

to Racerbob
I'm in the Raleigh/Durham area, and hearing the trials are now moving into this state has me ready to call in the moment it hits this area to cancel them and move to U-verse.

I just called them the other day to reduce my triple play bill down to $144... for the past 3 years I had been paying $186, and the last few months, nearly $200 a month after TW's recent rate hikes. Absolutely ridiculous, considering most all of NC is still on 7mb/*384*! or 10/*512*! With such a slow upload, I still feel like I'm using a broadband connection from a decade ago.

Just wondering though... do the stupid caps also apply to Earthlink service? since basically everywhere TWC operates you can also opt to get service though Earthlink. I can't imagine the caps would apply unless TW has the authority to completely change the level of service Earthlink provides it's customers... That too would pretty much be anti-competitive behavior.

The only way anything could ever be possibly done about this is by informing the public how much they are getting ripped off. The average person has no clue a gigabyte of bandwidth only costs a few pennies, not a $1. The only thing TW and other providers like them are doing is trying to brainwash the public into thinking bandwidth is an expensive and scarce resource, while TW reaps huge profits behind closed doors. The Oil companies have been doing the very same thing the past few years... see the trend? It goes on to cover just about every good and service you can think of, and now it's being applied to broadband, as if the massive profits the cable companies have been making are no longer enough to keep them happy. It's all about screwing the customer.