Time Warner Cable CEO Still Dreams Of Metered Future > What is happening?

What is happening?

reply to swintec
You're not addressing the fact that another company will try and litigate a community effort out of existence should no private provider want to step up.

Which is where most of these "corruption" allegations come from.

If you don't want to do business in my town, fine. But if you try to sue to town for starting its own, then the CEO of said company should be strung up with the intestines of his litigating attorney.
--
They vilify us, the scoundrels do, when there is only this difference, they rob the poor under the cover of law, forsooth, and we plunder the rich under the protection of our own courage.

reply to swintec
The reason for this line of thinking is because they spent less on their CAPEX last year than they did the year before despite serving hundreds of thousands more customers. This goes counter to their claim that they can't afford the additional expense to keep up with increased bandwidth demands.

Also, if the current trends continue then internet bandwidth needs only increase 40 - 60% per year. This is very manageable to keep up with and current spending levels should be able cover it.

humm last i checked TWC is a PUBLICLY TRADED COMPANY NOT PRIVATE

many dont understand that telco and cable alike make HUGE revenue via advertising

since many people are moving to internet video, they are losing and will continue to lose $$$$ in ad revenue.

telco and cable are at a cap of how much more money they can make a year without raising rates since this is a PUBLICLY TRADED COMPANY with $$$$ hungry investors demanding more profit every year.

a little off topic but i have 2 ways to pay for a universal health care plan--------

1. a $5.00 PER TRADE fee in any stock purchased, sold or traded!!!!!

2. or removing all medical industry out of "for profit"

reply to swintec
As a rule of thumb I am not ok with telling a company how much money it can make. In a vibrant capitalist market there are many companies competing for my business. However in the ISP arena I have 2 choices, local cable monopoly or local telephone monopoly. This is not a vibrant capitalist market.

We need to have 1-3 companies that own the last-mile lines and then completely separate ISPs that compete in a real capitalist market. Then we would have low prices, no unreasonable caps (probably no caps whatsoever) and no need to worry about net neutrality.

The reason for the separate companies that own the last mile is because this is a natural monopoly. We don't want or need 10 different companies running the exact same lines from their cable plant or DSLAM.

Other countries have taken our original idea from back in the 1996 Telecom Act and implemented it with great success. Look at France, they have 20+mbps Internet, VOIP phone and CableTV for around $38. You can't get just Internet or CableTV for that price around here.

reply to swintec
A few weeks ago a bunch of top CEOs were told how much money they could make per year. I'm generally against such a thing, but the other side of the coin is that many of these top companies are gaming their consumers and trying to game the system. I'm not sure where the happy medium is currently, but we're too far on the side of the corporations currently.

reply to bionicRod
The bigger question is does Applebee's, Outback, Macaroni Grill, Olive Garden, et all act in concert to extract too much money out of their consumer? Do they collectively price fix and act as a monopoly?