baineschile
2600
Premium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI | Its back off the shelf
We all know that their plan will be back off the shelf and re-accounced in the coming months.
I just hope their caps will be more reasonsable (100gig+), not 5-40. |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
2 edits | said by baineschile  :We all know that their plan will be back off the shelf and re-accounced in the coming months. I just hope their caps will be more reasonsable (100gig+), not 5-40. They would be smart if they kill the caps altogether & move to a sliding consumption model that charges more the more you use. And then structure the fees so that average users pay the same they are paying now; very light users pay less(good PR value); and the hogs pay a lot more. End result is the same revenue with a good upside potential as more users use the connection for video.
LOL. I should be charging the cable companies for these ideas. They need a change in their marketing and business plans. »Some observations
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
swhx7
Premium
join:2006-07-23
Elbonia
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to baineschile
Agreed. The problem is, there's nothing constraining them to be reasonable.
Is there competition in the cable business in any market in the USA today? And for internet, most cities have at best a cable monopoly and a telco monopoly.
Without competition, they will probably keep the tiers and caps so low that substantial fractions of the userbase will be paying overages or having to restrain internet activity. The solution is public ownership of the "last mile" and a larger number of companies competing to provide service to each household or business. |
|
hamburglar_
join:2002-04-29
Columbus, OH
·WOW Internet and C..
| said by swhx7 :Is there competition in the cable business in any market in the USA today? And for internet, most cities have at best a cable monopoly and a telco monopoly. Yes, there is. Here in Columbus, Ameritech built a cable system using their right-of-way back in the '90s, called Americast. It is completely separate from the Time Warner and Insight plants and they overlap with both in the metro. Once Ameritech (now ATT) decided they weren't a cable operator, they sold it to another company »www.wowway.com We are one of the lucky markets with another choice. |
|
Tim Warner Cable
@rr.com | reply to baineschile
Check out what Time Warner Cable customers are saying in REAL TIME at »twitter.com/twcsucks. It ain't pretty. |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| said by Tim Warner Cable :Check out what Time Warner Cable customers are saying in REAL TIME at » twitter.com/twcsucks. It ain't pretty. Real good cross section of TWC users - only those that go to twcsucks. No skewing of results there - LOL.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
| reply to TKJunkMail
said by TKJunkMail : And then structure the fees so that average users pay the same they are paying now; very light users pay less(good PR value); and the hogs pay a lot more. End result is the same revenue with a good upside potential as more users use the connection for video. Well, I don't think any users will pay less, if they get an ARPU dent, that CEO is out of there and the stock gets sell ratings from Craig Moffett.
50 MB has to be the lite tier so grandma checking her email is going to go over the limit for the lite tier. |
|
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
| reply to hamburglar_
said by hamburglar_ :said by swhx7 :Is there competition in the cable business in any market in the USA today? And for internet, most cities have at best a cable monopoly and a telco monopoly. Yes, there is. Here in Columbus, Ameritech built a cable system using their right-of-way back in the '90s, called Americast. It is completely separate from the Time Warner and Insight plants and they overlap with both in the metro. Once Ameritech (now ATT) decided they weren't a cable operator, they sold it to another company » www.wowway.com We are one of the lucky markets with another choice. In Connecticut, Americast was just outright abandoned, I wish RCN bought the plant back in the day, but I guess SBC couldn't allow a competitor to their internet and phone services. |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
2 edits | reply to patcat88
said by patcat88 :said by TKJunkMail : And then structure the fees so that average users pay the same they are paying now; very light users pay less(good PR value); and the hogs pay a lot more. End result is the same revenue with a good upside potential as more users use the connection for video. Well, I don't think any users will pay less, if they get an ARPU dent, that CEO is out of there and the stock gets sell ratings from Craig Moffett. 50 MB has to be the lite tier so grandma checking her email is going to go over the limit for the lite tier. Marketing analysts and the accountants could structure the fees so that the chance of a dropping ARPU are close to zero. And then you get the customer on slowly increasing costs so that they will hardly notice. That reduces the chance of them jumping ship to a low probability - especially since the other companies will likely adopt this winning strategy. No competition on price to worry about.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
Pizz
Hi
join:2000-10-27
Astoria, NY
 ·Verizon Online DSL
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to baineschile
Let them try this usage model in a FIOS competition area, they'll bleed customers like flies. You think Verizon isn't reading into this, and waiting to unleash a very comical ad campaign? Look what they've been doing to Cablevision.
If the board of directors had any insight and fully capable people, they'll fire these inept bafoons, and hire people who embrace technology, not curb it.
Best thing I've ever did, was dump the shit that's Road Runner. Only a matter time before i leave the shit-stain inept ridden TWC.
--
The more you talk, the less you listen. |
|
neowulf
join:2000-10-20
Port Orange, FL
| reply to TKJunkMail
So pretty much metered billing, exactly how is that any different then what they were offering?
The problem is who defines who the hog is? The cable company? They already made it quite clear they think anything over 40gigs a month would be considered insane amount of data for the average user.
If the cable company wants metered billing so bad, then they are going to have to be heavily regulated like any metered service, something they don't want, and spend millions a year lobbying against.
I think the real problem is that they are a cable company before they are a internet service provider. They are trying to protect the outdated business model, when à la carte is what people want, and you can find online now. You don't have to subscribe to some over inflated package of 50 channels you will never watch just for the one or two they stick in the package you watch all the time.
That is really what this is all about, I don't even think they care if they make more from the metered billing aspect, and if they do that is just the gravy on top, as long as it keeps people from being able to watch online video. Being Time Warner prohibits operators to sell channels which stand alone it sort of points to the fact they think à la carte is not a profitable business model and are doing everything in their power to make sure consumers don't have that choice online either. |
|
hottboiinnc
ME
join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
·Time Warner Cable
·buckeye cable
| reply to patcat88
Americast was sold off when Ameritech merged with SBC. SBC is the one that didn't want in the cable business. But what do you know. They're back at it again.
WOW should expand their areas and actually make use of their network instead of just staying where Ameritech built out. |
|
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
·Comcast
| reply to TKJunkMail
said by TKJunkMail : And then you get the customer on slowly increasing costs so that they will hardly notice. That reduces the chance of them jumping ship to a low probability - especially since the other companies will likely adopt this winning strategy. No competition on price to worry about. So, your suggestion is they treat their customers like the "boiling frog": don't turn up the heat (charges) to high all at once or they'll jump out; turn up the heat (charges) slowly, and before they realize it, they will be cooked (fleeced)!
as far as "No competition on price to worry about", it's more like "no competition to worry about". |
|
hottboiinnc
ME
join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
·Time Warner Cable
·buckeye cable
| reply to Pizz
LOL. It's only a matter of time that VZ does the same thing. They're watching and they have something planned. Also what happens if areas that are serviced by VZ doesn't get FiOS they're screwed either way huh?
VZ isn't all what it's cracked out to be. Their own CTO said last year he was interested in caps. |
|
Pizz
Hi
join:2000-10-27
Astoria, NY
·Verizon Online DSL
·RoadRunner Cable
| said by hottboiinnc :LOL. It's only a matter of time that VZ does the same thing. They're watching and they have something planned. Also what happens if areas that are serviced by VZ doesn't get FiOS they're screwed either way huh? VZ isn't all what it's cracked out to be. Their own CTO said last year he was interested in caps. The difference between caps from VZ and TWC is. VZ isn't in the business of TV, while TWC is. VZ will cap higher, while TWC will cap lower (as you've seen).
Also i don't think VZ will cap at all, because they're number 1 competitor at the moment OOL, doesn't plan on doing it.
--
The more you talk, the less you listen. |
|
baineschile
2600
Premium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI | reply to hamburglar_
There may be a "cable" monopoly in many cities, but there isnt a "video provider" monopoly anwhere. The dishes are everywhere in the US, and more and more areas have cable overbuilds (like WOW) and telco TV (FiOS and UVerse) |
|
baineschile
2600
Premium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI
·Comcast
 ·magicjack.com
·Verizon Wireless B..
| reply to neowulf
said by neowulf :I think the real problem is that they are a cable company before they are a internet service provider. They are trying to protect the outdated business model, when à la carte is what people want, and you can find online now. You don't have to subscribe to some over inflated package of 50 channels you will never watch just for the one or two they stick in the package you watch all the time. Cable cannot choose to do a-la-carte. There are comm companies that own multiple networks (the recent Viacom/TWC fight comes to mind) that dont let cable buy single networks. So, if one of these companies owns a populat channel (Nickelodeon) and ALSO another not-so-popular-channel they want to sell the cable companies (Water Poloing Horses), cable has to buy ALL channels the other companies want to sell them.
That cost, of course, is passed onto the consumer. There are a lot of niche channels out there that people would pay for, but the price per channel would be expodential as opposed to what is now). |
|
hobgoblin
Sortof Agoblin
Premium
join:2001-11-25
Orchard Park, NY
clubs:
| reply to Pizz
"VZ isn't in the business of TV, while TWC is. VZ will cap higher, while TWC will cap lower (as you've seen)."
Of course they are....Its what they have been spending billions of dollars on over the last few years!
They will be next to cap.....for sure!
Hob
--
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds."
- Ralph Waldo Emerson
|
|
k1ll3rdr4g0n
join:2005-03-19
Homer Glen, IL
| reply to nasadude
said by nasadude :said by TKJunkMail : And then you get the customer on slowly increasing costs so that they will hardly notice. That reduces the chance of them jumping ship to a low probability - especially since the other companies will likely adopt this winning strategy. No competition on price to worry about. So, your suggestion is they treat their customers like the "boiling frog": don't turn up the heat (charges) to high all at once or they'll jump out; turn up the heat (charges) slowly, and before they realize it, they will be cooked (fleeced)! as far as "No competition on price to worry about", it's more like "no competition to worry about". We don't like change, so TW and others could have easily gotten away with this if they just eased it in (ie high caps BEFORE the recession, then during the recession they can use the "excuse" "due to economic times we have to lower the caps" which of course we all knew would be BS but they could get away with it.) But when you mix stupidity and greed all you get is a badly run business. But now that TW has screwed up any possible chance of a per-use model, I really doubt they are going to try it again. TW has proven that this is NOT what customers want, no matter what they say or do. |
|
Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO | reply to TKJunkMail
Well they found that website somehow didnt they?
It's not like it was advertised on TWC homepage or anything. |
|
