dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
51
majortom1029
join:2006-10-19
Medford, NY

1 recommendation

majortom1029

Member

hmm

They don't have to compete on speed as long as they compete on price. IF they make the 115/35 tier cheaper then they can get back some customers .

They also have the optimumwifi which they said gets a lot of use. Until Verizon and att go back to unlimited wireless data optimum wifi will be a big plus to a lot of people. Something Verizon doesn't have.
UofMiamiGrad
Premium Member
join:2001-02-03
Syosset, NY

1 edit

UofMiamiGrad

Premium Member

said by majortom1029:

They don't have to compete on speed as long as they compete on price.

Problem is CV is doing neither & that is why they are losing some internet subscribers. 9,000 net loss this past quarter alone compared to 1,000 gain the year prior in the same quarter.

Interesting article in today's WSJ for those that have access to it: »online.wsj.com/articles/ ··· 07273466
majortom1029
join:2006-10-19
Medford, NY

majortom1029

Member

Yes they are. Fios is $49.99 a month for the first year, cablevision is $39.95 for the first year. in the second year fios goes to $69.99 a month and cablevision goes to $49.95 a month for the second year.

That's for each services base package straight from their website.
UofMiamiGrad
Premium Member
join:2001-02-03
Syosset, NY

UofMiamiGrad

Premium Member

said by majortom1029:

Yes they are. Fios is $49.99 a month for the first year, cablevision is $39.95 for the first year. in the second year fios goes to $69.99 a month and cablevision goes to $49.95 a month for the second year.

That's for each services base package straight from their website.

Per the WSJ article I linked, no that are not price matching when it comes to triple play. And it is the reason they lost video, internet and phone subs:

"Cablevision chalked up the decline to a $70-a-month triple-play offer by FiOS. Cablevision, by contrast, has opted to hold the line on pricing. Average revenue per user was higher than expected in the quarter thanks to that discipline and recent broadband and video price increases. Operating margins rose smartly from a year earlier."

From Zacks.com, »www.zacks.com/stock/news ··· her-arpu

"In the reported quarter, the company lost 28,000 video subscribers, 9,000 high-speed data subscribers and 7,000 voice subscribers."

IMO they better start competing on price or they will continue to bleed customers, unless they want higher profit margins with less subs. Considering Wilt says they are not responding speed wise at the moment, they may want to start on price, especially on the triple play.
tmc8080
join:2004-04-24
Brooklyn, NY

1 edit

tmc8080 to majortom1029

Member

to majortom1029
I don't see CV offering 15/5 as standalone for under $40 anymore. Feel free to post some ads. Base price for standalone is $49 - $59 range. $60 - $70 for Verizon (25/25)

BTW, I think talk is talk.. If CV loses lots of customers over symmetrical, of course they are obligated to do something (offer docsis 3.1 speeds finally and/or cut prices). I don't think a few thousand more WIFI hotspots are going to do the trick. They decided to upgrade 50mbit subs to 101mbits for a reason.. and it wasn't to fatten the bottom line (retention), that's for sure.

What CV did with the upgrade was offer it for free in a customer's price lock period and then jack up the rate by as much as $20. This is what likely future upgrades will entail. However, when customers see their prices go up, they will be knocking on the competitor's door to see if they have a better price. What's Verizon going to say? No!?Customers tend to look at price first, and QOS second (with SOME exceptions for really bad experiences) at least in broadband. You can bet that how customers have been prevented from streaming video could factor into the choice made too (or whether you were one of the LAST on the list to get the upgrades, pfft!).

BTW, buried in the fine print, after 25 months, regular ool balloons to $59.95:

Offer for new residential customers subscribing to Optimum Online only. 1 modem/router per household. As of the 13th month Optimum Online will be billed at $49.95. As of the 25th month, Optimum Online will be billed at regular rate of $59.95. Install fee applies for professional installation.
majortom1029
join:2006-10-19
Medford, NY

majortom1029

Member

I got the info from the pricing section of cablevisions website

"New customers subscribing to Optimum Online only

$39.95/month for the first year
Free Smart Router, an $80 value lets you connect every device in your home to the internet wirelessly, easily and securely.
"

»www.optimum.com/home-int ··· cing.jsp
tmc8080
join:2004-04-24
Brooklyn, NY

tmc8080

Member

I could be wrong, but I remember OOL basic moving up to $49.95 around the time of the 50 to 101mbit [free] upgrades. Many O'Customers would end up paying $55 a month instead of $45. Perhaps two $10 rate increases was too much, but they were reacting to Verizon's outrageous price increases across all products and services. I wonder how many got to keep ultra 101 paying $55 a month as a loyalty thing-- which would now cost about $95.

I remember higher rates in 2013 because I was paying about $65 a month for 50mbits (first year at $45 when OOL was $29.95 base *2012ish was the end of the $29.95 promo) when it was called boost for $15 more a month-- but set to the off promotion (year 2) of $49.95 made it $65. That's was brought me to Verizon until 2015. Net savings of $10 a month for 2 years with higher fluff, especially on the upload.

I think ultra 101 @ $55-$60, not an additional $40 (about 50-60 cents per megabit downstream) would keep plenty of customers out of Verizon's hands for a while even with asymmetrical down around 35-40 mbits. It would beat FIOS 75/75 hands down-- at $95, FIOS is back on the table.

snsr
join:2008-05-29
00000

snsr to majortom1029

Member

to majortom1029
said by majortom1029:

They also have the optimumwifi which they said gets a lot of use.

I'm very happy with my home OOL service (fastest connection I've ever had), but the no-additional-charge Optimum wifi is a joke. It's almost always slower than my phone's regular GSM/LTE connection (AT&T) and, more importantly, it injects advertisements into the HTML requests I make.