dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
110
88615298 (banned)
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness

88615298 (banned)

Member

True

I have 30 Mbps internet from Charter. I could get 100 Mbps but I'm not paying $110 a month for it. Even if it was only $10 more than what I was paying now I wouldn't do it. What am I going to do on 100 Mbps let alone 1 Gbps?

What do people actually want. Well some would like faster upload. I'm fine with the 4Mbps upload I currently get but I do understand why many would like to see more symmetrical service.

How about no caps? Which I get TWC doesn't have. Once again I have never gone over the caps but seriously they have been around 250-300 GB for 4 years now on most ISPs. So if they insist on keeping them then time up them and not just by 50 GB.

Oh here's another one how about letting have access to stuff like WatchESPN without having to have cable. yeah know that's more's ESPN fault but if all these companies were to tell ESPN to go f--k itself unless they can offer it to internet only customers ESPN would capitulate. Same thing with HBOGo.

HBO says it doesn't want to make the cable companies mad or deal with billing or hosting. Fine let the ISPs handle it. If Charter can bill me for HBO they can bill me for HBOGo stand alone. Let Charter get a cut of the money like they do with regular HBO. Win-win for all.
jasondean
join:2009-08-28
Brooklyn, NY

jasondean

Member

Think about the way ESPN and HBO structure their deals. The watch anywhere apps are paid for by the fees paid by the cable companies (who negotiated that into their contracts). It's a mutual benefit to both ESPN and the cable provider to not allow the network to allow direct access. The cable companies would be ticked off if you could bypass them and would likely affect their relationships (and bottom lines). What irks me is that the cable companies are starting to charge "sports tier fees" on top of everything yet I can't watch my RSNs on my phone, iPad or laptop outside my house. YES Network actually charges a separate fee for that privilege yet ESPN has that essentially written into their contract. It's time the industry realized people are just not watching the way our grandparents did and most people have lives outside the house.

As for the speed issue, it will never change until there is true competition. Why invest if there's no return. Everyone here has it right that consumers won't pay ridiculously and unjustifiably high prices for gigabit speeds but if they did offer it at reasonable price and lower the price on their slower tiers, I guarantee you many customers will sign up for faster speeds.

Someone else said it best, "We'll tell you what speeds you want!"