<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule">

<channel>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users in Comcast HSI</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r6426060</link>
<description></description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Wed, 02 Dec 2009 00:12:25 EDT</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Dec 2009 00:12:25 EDT</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6623501</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/792887"><b>rjean99</b></A> : Well, as far as *I* am concerned they are a monopoly because I have no other reasonable "consumer" oriented broadband options in my area.  I'm too far from a CO to get DSL.  I have satellite TV.  Not only have they raised my price to punish me for not being a cable TV subscriber, their service has been getting worse lately - they advertise "great for online gaming" and yet when I sit down to play my favorite games, I'm getting pings as high as 1000ms!!!!  I have tried to resolve the problem through normal channels, but it's not getting me anywhere.  I'm starting to get furious.  Not a monopoly!?!? Ha!!!<br>I too got here from @Home->AT&T<br><br><I>[text was edited by author 2003-04-20 23:52:22]</I><br><br><i>[text was edited by author 2003-04-20 23:52:48]</i><br>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6623501</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 20 Apr 2003 22:18:22 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6594878</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/243978"><b>Zorglub</b></A> : That actually would be quite funny if they increased the price to $60 for everybody.  I'd like to see how many ppl would still defend Comcast then...]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6594878</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2003 14:07:58 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Perspective from an ex-Comcast cableTV subscriber</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6592687</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/486895"><b>newview</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  mikedz4 <A HREF="/useremail/u/799167"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>Now if you guys fuss enough they'll just make everyone pay $60/month for internet . . . <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I think that this is exactly what Comcast has planned. By consistently referring to the $42.95 per month price as a discount, Comcast implies that actual price is $57.95 a month, and can "discontinue" the discount at any time, and everyone's price goes up. The very word discount implies a reduction from the full or standard amount of a price. Those of you who are currently paying the $42.95 per month price are living on borrowed time and at the whim of Comcast for a dramatic price increase once Comcast determines they've brought enough satellite defectors "back into the fold".<br><br>By asking the FCC & the FTC to investigate their pricing policy, as Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) has done, and with the harsh light of the <A HREF="http://www.consumersunion.org/telecom/cable-price.htm">Consumers Union</A> on them, Comcast may ultimately be forced to set the $42.95 price as standard pricing for ALL Comcast customers . . . not just the ones who subscribe to both. Raising the price NOW to the $57.95 price point would CERTAINLY draw undesired media and possibly Federal attention on Comcast.<br><small>--<br> <A HREF="http://drebbelstraat20.dyndns.org/~mvdwege/misc/spamrules.html">The Rules of Spam</A> | <A HREF="http://www.spamlaws.com/state/md.html">Maryland's New Anti-Spam Law</A><BR>Where are we going? And what's with the hand basket? </small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6592687</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2003 08:50:49 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Perspective from an ex-Comcast cableTV subscriber</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6592494</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/799167"><b>mikedz4</b></A> : comcast is not going to change their policies ok. Either bite the bullet and pay the $58/month for internet, sub to cable tv, or go elsewhere. Everyone else does this too. Time Warner,cox,etc they all charge you extra if you don't have cable tv so just take it in stride. Now if you guys fuss enough they'll just make everyone pay $60/month for internet and imagine the fuss then. Comcast would go bankrupt cause they would lose all their internet subscribers.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6592494</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2003 07:59:59 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Perspective from an ex-Comcast cableTV subscriber</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6592420</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/486895"><b>newview</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  PaulHikeS2 <A HREF="/useremail/u/781115"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR> <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  newview <A HREF="/useremail/u/486895"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR> <br>Am I not a Comcast cable customer when I sign up for Comcast HSI only? <br> <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br>No, you're not. You're a Comcast HSI customer. Cable is television. Nothing more. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>{sarcasm}<br>Oh . . . so there are tier levels of customers now, huh? With the HSI customers being of the lower class and subject to higher fees? That explains a lot.<br>{/sarcasm}<br><small>--<br> <A HREF="http://drebbelstraat20.dyndns.org/~mvdwege/misc/spamrules.html">The Rules of Spam</A> | <A HREF="http://www.spamlaws.com/state/md.html">Maryland's New Anti-Spam Law</A><BR>Where are we going? And what's with the hand basket? </small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6592420</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2003 07:32:38 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Perspective from an ex-Comcast cableTV subscriber</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6591807</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/781115"><b>PaulHikeS2</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  newview <A HREF="/useremail/u/486895"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR> <br>Am I not a Comcast cable customer when I sign up for Comcast HSI only? <br> <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br>No, you're not. You're a Comcast HSI customer. Cable is television. Nothing more.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6591807</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2003 02:25:31 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6589178</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/608446"><b>parasonic</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  J D McDorce <A HREF="/useremail/u/549697"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>Maybe it would smooth some feathers if Comcast offered this to their existing non-CATV Internet subscribers. ;-)<br><br><SMALL>This is a <I>new Comcast customer</I>, satellite receiver turn-in promotion</SMALL> <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Techs probably have every room in the house with its own HU and IRD<br><small>--<br>"We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile. We are the Borg." 3.333GHz CRUNCH! CRUNCH!</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6589178</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2003 20:57:20 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Perspective from an ex-Comcast cableTV subscri</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6588830</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/549697"><b>J D McDorce</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  newview <A HREF="/useremail/u/486895"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>And they should go on to further disclaim that non-cableTV subscribers would incur the $15.00 a month penalty, similar to the comcastonline.com site.<br> <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Or at least provide a link to the appropriate page on the comcastonline site.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6588830</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2003 20:19:37 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Perspective from an ex-Comcast cableTV subscriber</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6588080</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/486895"><b>newview</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  hello123454 <A HREF="/useremail/u/577380"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>Comcast advertises the $57.95 for nontv-subscribers here - &raquo;<A HREF="http://www.comcastonline.com/code/howmuch.asp?.=" >www.comcastonline.com/code/howmuch.asp?.=</A>. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> . . . but NOT on comcast.com,<br>where most prospective subscribers would visit.  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>quote:</SMALL><HR><SMALL> Price for 1.5Mbps/256Kbps Comcast High-Speed Internet service is $42.95 per month for Comcast cable customers. Equipment fees not included in monthly service charge. Prices do not include applicable taxes or franchise fees. Pricing, content, and features may change and may vary by area. Call your local Comcast office for restrictions and complete details about service, prices, and equipment in your area. Pricing and service offerings displayed on this site are for residential customers only. Commercial and business pricing and service offerings differ. Prices do not include local tax, franchise or installation fees. Prices are subject to change. &raquo;<A HREF="http://www.comcast.com/Products/Internet_Details.html?LinkID=21" >www.comcast.com/Products/Interne&middot;&middot;&middot;inkID=21</A> </SMALL><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><B>"Price for 1.5Mbps/256Kbps Comcast High-Speed Internet service is $42.95 per month for Comcast cable customers.</B><br><br>Am I not a Comcast cable customer when I sign up for Comcast HSI only? Do I not have a Comcast cable feeding my home if I subscribe to Comcast HSI?<br><br>This is misleading and should read "Price for 1.5Mbps/256Kbps Comcast High-Speed Internet service is $42.95 per month for Comcast cableTV subscribers."<br><br>And they should go on to further disclaim that non-cableTV subscribers would incur the $15.00 a month penalty, similar to the comcastonline.com site.<br><small>--<br> <A HREF="http://drebbelstraat20.dyndns.org/~mvdwege/misc/spamrules.html">The Rules of Spam</A> | <A HREF="http://www.spamlaws.com/state/md.html">Maryland's New Anti-Spam Law</A><BR>Where are we going? And what's with the hand basket? </small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6588080</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2003 19:08:57 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Perspective from an ex-Comcast cableTV subscriber</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6587798</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/577380"><b>hello123454</b></A> : Comcast advertises the $57.95 for nontv-subscribers here - &raquo;<A HREF="http://www.comcastonline.com/code/howmuch.asp?.=" >www.comcastonline.com/code/howmuch.asp?.=</A>.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6587798</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2003 18:46:19 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Perspective from an ex-Comcast cableTV subscriber</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6587724</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/486895"><b>newview</b></A> : Comcast is rapidly losing subscribers to better, cheaper satellite TV providers. Their core business of cableTV access provider is threatened.<br><br>Comcast "punishes" their defectors to satellite by hitting them with a $15.00 a month penalty for not subscribing to their inferior cableTV service in addition to their HSI. Comcast disguises this "penalty" as a discount to the customers that have both cableTV and HSI, very possibly in an attempt to avoid antitrust, monopolistic and predatory pricing charges.<br><br>In realty the service is <B>ADVERTISED</B> at $42.95 a month . . . NOT the $57.95 a month <A HREF="http://www.computeruser.com/news/03/04/11/news2.html">Comcast spokesman Tim Fitzpatrick touts as being competitive</A>. If $57.95 is so competitive, why is that not the advertised price, Tim? Why not take it a step further and advertise it at $39.95 a month, but you have to pay for a modem rental each month?<br><br><B>It is IMPOSSIBLE to get a bill for $42.95 from Comcast.</B><br><br>Nowhere on their website does it advertise the $57.95 price and describe a discount criteria. There is no disclaimer that if you do not subscribe to their cableTV service (at varying prices depending on where you live) you will incur a $15.00 a month penalty. You have to find this out on your own by calling your local cable office, or just wait and be surprised on you first bill. The varying basic cable prices are also <B>NOT</B> advertised, and are <B>WIDELY</B> varying from lows of a few dollars to a high of $20.00. Comcast also fails to tell you that once you subscribe to cableTV, the local franchise fees , (in my case, about $5.00 per month) kick in (not applicable with satellite), oftentimes bringing your total package pricing higher than HSI with comparable satellite packages. At the very least, this is misleading . . . and skates extremely close to false advertising.<br><br>Also, there is no incentive for local Cable Franchise Committees to look into lowering basic cable fees, since the franchise fees are actually based on those fees . . . .the higher the basic cable prices, the more you pay on franchise fees. <B>What's to prevent collusion with Comcast to raise basic cable fees in order to fill local coffers?</B><br><br>Comcast is attempting to force cableTV subscription down the throats of satellite subscribers on the pretext of "discounts" in order to bolster sliding cableTV sign-ups, and make their stock appear stronger than it really is.<br><small>--<br> <A HREF="http://drebbelstraat20.dyndns.org/~mvdwege/misc/spamrules.html">The Rules of Spam</A> | <A HREF="http://www.spamlaws.com/state/md.html">Maryland's New Anti-Spam Law</A><BR>Where are we going? And what's with the hand basket? </small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6587724</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2003 18:39:28 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6587543</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/129458"><b>KrK</b></A> : There's a difference.<br><br>In your example, people get a price break for buying more.<br><br>In the Comcast example, people get penalized and charged a higher rate for daring to use the competition.<br><br>It's not 'bundling discount' but "Charge anyone who uses a competitor double"<br><br>   The simple solution is to not ban bundling but allow the consumer to designate which service is the primary or secondary service to then, and the low price is always on the primary.<br><small>--<br>"When the day comes that anyone can bend our country’s laws and lawmakers to serve selfish, competitive ends, that day democratic government dies" -- Preston Tucker, 1948 (Yep, it's dead.)</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6587543</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2003 18:20:40 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6586419</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><b>JTRockville</b></A> : Here's an ad <I>without</I> small print. Granted, the info is old (Jan '03), but there's no mention of an additional fee for non-CATV subscribers in the Washington Post <A HREF="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/technology/personaltech/isp2003_cable.htm"><U>Cable ISP Directory</U></A>. As far as I know, the current policy of requiring basic service to get CHSI at the "advertised" rate was in effect at the time the prices were updated. <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  J D McDorce <A HREF="/useremail/u/549697"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>Maybe it would smooth some feathers if Comcast offered this to their existing non-CATV Internet subscribers. ;)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I think it would smooth some feathers if Comcast just offered CHSI @ the "advertised" price of ~40/mo to non-CATV Internet subscribers.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6586419</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2003 16:11:42 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6586184</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/243978"><b>Zorglub</b></A> : I like the small print: Comcast will remove your satellite dish, and may or not keep it...  Man, that'd piss me off a little bit, but that's just me!]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6586184</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2003 15:41:28 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6584926</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/624188"><b>vic102482</b></A> : Comcast sux I am furious of their increase in pricing.:(<br><br>Sorry to echo, but I am furious. I have no other choice.<br><small>--<br>I tie a rope around my penis and jump from a tree, don't you wanna grow up to be just like me!!!!</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6584926</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2003 13:14:45 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6518267</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/549697"><b>J D McDorce</b></A> : Maybe it would smooth some feathers if Comcast offered this to their existing non-CATV Internet subscribers. ;-)<br><br><SMALL>This is a <I>new Comcast customer</I>, satellite receiver turn-in promotion</SMALL><div class="borderless"><TABLE WIDTH=95% align=center border=0 CELLPADDING=4"><TR><TD ALIGN=CENTER VALIGN=CENTER BGCOLOR=#FFFFFF nwrap COLSPAN=3 WIDTH=100%><A HREF="/speak/slideshow/6518267?c=326482&ret=L2ZvcnVtL3I2NDI2MDYwLnhtbA%3D%3D"><IMG class="apic" BORDER=0 TITLE="577700 bytes" WIDTH=600 HEIGHT=372 SRC="/r0/download/326482.thumb600~a3586b8ecf4dd4caab37b089513adce9/comcastad.jpg/thumb.jpg" ALT="Click for full size"></A></TD></TABLE></div>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6518267</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 08 Apr 2003 21:45:24 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6512991</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/243978"><b>Zorglub</b></A> : real world speeds of 330/140 for 392/126 in theory.  The download is a lot slower than my old cable but the upload is the same.  My cable upload used to be all over the place, going from 90 to 226 and being mostly in the 120-140 range.  Basically, for what I do, it works fine.  My wife can surf the net while I play on line, and this is perfect.<br><br>Actually, I might go to a $35 plan that should be around 1000/140.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6512991</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 08 Apr 2003 12:16:10 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6510162</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/377729"><b>dvd536</b></A> : [RANT]I dont know about TN but here in AZ it was on sale for .99 01/01/03 to 02/28/03. IMHO they arent worth anymore than that and REFUSE to pay more than 99 cents for a burger when theres at most 50 cents worth of ingredients in them. also notice how 'small' the big mac has gotten? its like the size of a kiddie burger now[/RANT]<br><small>--<br>You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6510162</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 08 Apr 2003 00:19:18 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6510101</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/525402"><b>Combat Chuck</b></A> : What speeds are you getting for your $30.00 per month?<br><small>--<br>So it begins.</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6510101</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 08 Apr 2003 00:11:51 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6509244</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/243978"><b>Zorglub</b></A> : That's it.  I got DSL. It works.  Bye bye Comcast.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6509244</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 07 Apr 2003 22:40:27 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6464246</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/525402"><b>Combat Chuck</b></A> : kinda a day late but...<br> <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  JTRockville <A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>Your price went up by 33% and you've got no complaint?!?!? Sheesh  Combat Chuck <A HREF="/useremail/u/525402"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> - you're an ideal customer.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>Don't get me wrong, I'm not happy the price is going up.  But the alternative is still not as good a value as Comcast HSI.<br><br> <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  JTRockville <A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>You have the choice of Sat TV + DSL broadband, right? I'm sort of clueless when it comes to DSL pricing, cuz it's moot for me, but doesn't DSL offer a bundle with phone service that includes broadband? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>No bundle that I'm aware of; not saying there isn't but if there is they hide it well.<br><small>--<br>So it begins.</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6464246</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2003 21:44:59 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6463191</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/243978"><b>Zorglub</b></A> : Degauss,<br><br>Keep it up!  If enough of us leave, they might have to rethink their strategy!!]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6463191</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2003 20:13:39 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6463086</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/422177"><b>degauss1</b></A> : So the Comcast SNAFU machine rolled over me today...I am an ATTBI legacy customer...  I have digital cable, phone and ultralink (PRO?) service.  Since my market has no competition in Comcasts eyes, they, in their infinite wisdom saw fit to discontinue my 1 year contract for multi-service discounts.  This raises my bill $15/mo on top of the rate hike.  Not only did they raise my bill, they didn't even have the balls to give me written notice.  My wife was holding out and sticking with Comcast because of the bundles...now she's pissed and saying what about that WISP thingy?  For the same dough we fork out to Comcast I can get the full monty with dish or directv, a wireless T1 and POTS for the phone.  Looks like Comcasts days are numbered in my house. ]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6463086</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2003 20:02:41 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6461738</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/592393"><b>Cliff</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  halfband <A HREF="/useremail/u/639017"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR> You may have it there.  Hmmm, a fly in the capitalist ointment.  Isn&#146;t that what got standard oil chopped up into pieces?  <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>And John D. was never the only provider of oil.  He was the dominant provider.  I'll bet he would take pride in the market share of any Comcast market!]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6461738</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2003 17:43:11 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6461570</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/592393"><b>Cliff</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  DonLibes <A HREF="/useremail/u/755850"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR> ... Comcast blew a ton of hot air prior to the merger. Most of it was on the topic of how the seemingly insurmountable debt <B>wouldn't</B> cause prices to skyrocket to cover the payments, despite financial analysis to the contrary, and despite consumer protests. ...<br><br></BLOCKQUOTE>That's a good point.  I went to those same hearings and Comcast promised that, both verbally and in writing, to our LFA.  ... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Just like when all the tobacco industry executives went before congress, raised their right hand and swore that tobacco was not addictive.  <br><br>Well, if our leaders buy it, it must be so.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6461570</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2003 17:23:31 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6461105</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/639017"><b>halfband</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  cbrain <A HREF="/useremail/u/160346"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>But the very month this new company completes their new network, Comcast decides to lower the price of internet to the unbundled level.  Strictly in the interest of customer relations.<br><br>Can I get you to invest in this over build? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>You may have it there.  Hmmm, a fly in the capitalist ointment.  Isn&#146;t that what got standard oil chopped up into pieces? So what are the laws against large corporations selling services below cost to eliminate competition?<br><small>--<br>Registered Bandwidth Offender #40812</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6461105</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2003 16:31:14 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6460919</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/0"><b>anon</b></A> : The words we all hate to here, any cable provider is just that, a provider. How can cable companies be a monopoly? You said that it meant "sole provider of a good and/or service. Cable companies are not sole providers, ever heard of a satelite dish? And how is it the cable companies can be held responsible for your local phone service not being able to provide you DSL? Sounds kinda backwards to me.<br><br>But of course, complain about the cable companies that spend millions to provide you a service and then complain that it costs you to much, if its that big of a deal stop whining and make a stand, go back to dial-up! ]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6460919</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2003 16:10:00 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6459888</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/160346"><b>cbrain</b></A> : Is it in the public interest to have phone lines and coax to every residence?<br><br>Does the "first in" or primary provider have an advantage over a new provider?<br><br>Has a government entity given special consideration to the first provider or its successor in each market?<br><br>Does this consideration warrant some obligation?<br><br>Does the consumer have the choice in any of these services they do in other consumer products or services?<br><br>If Comcast were completely unregulated, would service be better or prices lower?<br><br>Is the current bundled pricing a reasonable discount or aimed at slowing satellite providers?<br><br>Would you be better off without a franchise authority or some cable regulation?]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6459888</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2003 14:12:43 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6459606</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/160346"><b>cbrain</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  halfband <A HREF="/useremail/u/639017"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR> This begs the question, if 1800/256 internet is worth about $58 a month, why are there not more providers lining up to provide competition to comcast.  They could easily team with satellite to undercut comcasts price.  Are the economics of broadband, that bad? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Great point!  <br><br>But the very month this new company completes their new network, Comcast decides to lower the price of internet to the unbundled level.  Strictly in the interest of customer relations.<br><br>Can I get you to invest in this over build?]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6459606</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2003 13:34:03 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6459408</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/639017"><b>halfband</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  JTRockville <A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>Even if you were the only candy store in town? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Yes.  Now if you were the only candy store in the state the state may step in to regulate it in the interest of the consumer.  That is unless the FCC (federal candy commission) over rides the states ability to do so.  Or if you are the only store in town, and it is not legal for another candy store to be in town.<br>The capitalist version of this is that the candy store will either keep prices low enough that no other store can make a profit moving into town.  If they try and get too greedy the high profit margin will attract other stores to town.<br>This begs the question, if 1800/256 internet is worth about $58 a month, why are there not more providers lining up to provide competition to comcast.  They could easily team with satellite to undercut comcasts price.  Are the economics of broadband, that bad?<br><small>--<br>Registered Bandwidth Offender #40812</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6459408</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2003 13:03:50 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6459107</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/755850"><b>DonLibes</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  JTRockville <A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR><BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  MikeDz3$ <A HREF="/useremail/u/785829"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>If you didn't like comcast's prices you should have wrote the fcc,doj and your senators NOT TO APPROVE THE MERGER WITH ATT BROADBAND.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I not only wrote, but I sat down in front of a TV camera and mic, and spoke for 3 minutes, at every given opportunity. <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  MikeDz3$ <A HREF="/useremail/u/785829"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>Now it's too late.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I don't believe so. Comcast blew a ton of hot air prior to the merger. Most of it was on the topic of how the seemingly insurmountable debt <B>wouldn't</B> cause prices to skyrocket to cover the payments, despite financial analysis to the contrary, and despite consumer protests.<br><br>That's why I quoted the gross profit margin of 50%. While <I>investors</I> might focus on the net, I don't want to hear any <B>CRAP</B> about how the debt is a problem from the <I>regulators</I>. <B>THAT'S</B> what it's too late for. If the debt gets in the way of progress, or fair pricing, then the testimony given by Comcast, at the same hearings I spoke at, was a lie.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>That's a good point.  I went to those same hearings and Comcast promised that, both verbally and in writing, to our LFA.  It may be appropriate to ask our financial analysts to calculate whether there would be a difference between our current rates and what the rates would be had the merger not taken place.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6459107</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2003 12:25:41 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6459012</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><b>JTRockville</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  halfband <A HREF="/useremail/u/639017"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR> <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  degauss1 <A HREF="/useremail/u/422177"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR> I don't think you get the point completely.  Margins aside, using your candy store analogy.  If I own a candy store and buy the candy at $.45 and sell it to people that go to my wife as their dentist for $1.00 but sell it to the people that go to some other dentist for $1.50 that's predatory pricing. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Good point, but oddly enough, I think that it would be legal do it.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Even if you were the only candy store in town?]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6459012</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2003 12:13:24 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6459002</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><b>JTRockville</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  MikeDz3$ <A HREF="/useremail/u/785829"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>If you didn't like comcast's prices you should have wrote the fcc,doj and your senators NOT TO APPROVE THE MERGER WITH ATT BROADBAND.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I not only wrote, but I sat down in front of a TV camera and mic, and spoke for 3 minutes, at every given opportunity. <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  MikeDz3$ <A HREF="/useremail/u/785829"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>Now it's too late.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I don't believe so. Comcast blew a ton of hot air prior to the merger. Most of it was on the topic of how the seemingly insurmountable debt <B>wouldn't</B> cause prices to skyrocket to cover the payments, despite financial analysis to the contrary, and despite consumer protests.<br><br>That's why I quoted the gross profit margin of 50%. While <I>investors</I> might focus on the net, I don't want to hear any <B>CRAP</B> about how the debt is a problem from the <I>regulators</I>. <B>THAT'S</B> what it's too late for. If the debt gets in the way of progress, or fair pricing, then the testimony given by Comcast, at the same hearings I spoke at, was a lie. <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  MikeDz3$ <A HREF="/useremail/u/785829"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>I urge everyone to do as i did and email every cable company you can to see if they are interested in coming to your city.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I've written OOL several times! They never reply though...<br><br>Before another cable company comes to town  MikeDz3$ <A HREF="/useremail/u/785829"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>, they've got to negotiate a franchise agreement. My jurisdiction has gone that far with a competitor. We've got a franchise with both Comcast and Starpower (RCN).<br><br>Unfortunately, even a successfully negotiated franchise agreement is no guarantee the competitor will overbuild. We have very good intentions of fostering competition. It just ain't happenin' tho.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6459002</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2003 12:12:06 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6458792</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/755850"><b>DonLibes</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  halfband <A HREF="/useremail/u/639017"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR><BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  JTRockville <A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>It's been alleged, around these parts anyway, that Comcast gives out "specially priced offers" only in competitive areas. So yes, I do believe their intention is to make even more $$$ where they have no competition.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>That's the part I was missing.  I was under the impression that all areas had the same internet fee structure, and that special offers were similar regardless of competition.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Comcast is also required to post all special offers on their web site but according to our LFA, Comcast is not doing that.  The LFA encourages people who get special offers to send them to the LFA because it's really hard for the LFA to find out when Comcast is doing this when such offers only go to a small group of people.  PS: The LFA said they already knew about the chocolate remotes :-) so they don't want copies of your chocolate bars and back massagers.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6458792</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2003 11:41:46 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6458658</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/639017"><b>halfband</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  degauss1 <A HREF="/useremail/u/422177"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR> I don't think you get the point completely.  Margins aside, using your candy store analogy.  If I own a candy store and buy the candy at $.45 and sell it to people that go to my wife as their dentist for $1.00 but sell it to the people that go to some other dentist for $1.50 that's predatory pricing. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Good point, but oddly enough, I think that it would be legal do it.<br>  <br> <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  degauss1 <A HREF="/useremail/u/422177"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>Comcast has f'd up on the marketing side by 'penalizing' people that don't use Comcast CATV and that IS predatory. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I accept that it is a predatory practice, I just  found it interesting that we accept the same practices from the burger joints more easily even in areas where Comcast has completion.   I think you are right when you say much of it is semantics, again at least in the competitive areas.<br><br>What I find strange is that comcasts pricing in competitive areas makes Comcast internet only/satellite tv more expensive than many DSL/satellite tv combinations.  They must have considerable faith that customers will pay so much extra to keep Comcast broadband over DSL when they stay with satellite, or that customers will stay away from satellite to avoid the extra charge.<br>I can only conclude the following from this:<br>1)Comcast thinks cable broadband is superior enough to DSL to withstand the extra charge.<br>2)Comcast cable digital TV is close enough in price and performance to satellite tv to keep customers from choosing satellite and paying the extra charge for internet.<br>3) or both of the above.<br><small>--<br>Registered Bandwidth Offender #40812</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6458658</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2003 11:21:59 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6458546</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/639017"><b>halfband</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  JTRockville <A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>But the suggestion that Comcast should discontinue broadband service in non-competitive areas would hurt their financials, no matter which measurement you look at: gross profit margin, net profit margin, free cash flow, and probably many others. I skipped basic economics, so toss a clue if I'm off-base here<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br>I think you got it.  Unless comcast is selling internet service in your area at a loss, leaving the area would negatively impact the bottom line net revenue.<br><br> <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  JTRockville <A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>It's been alleged, around these parts anyway, that Comcast gives out "specially priced offers" only in competitive areas. So yes, I do believe their intention is to make even more $$$ where they have no competition.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>That's the part I was missing.  I was under the impression that all areas had the same internet fee structure, and that special offers were similar regardless of competition.<br><small>--<br>Registered Bandwidth Offender #40812</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6458546</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2003 11:07:11 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6455427</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/785829"><b>MikeDz3$</b></A> : before i get slammed for my post I want to make clear that I do not agree with microsoft's or comcast's pricing strategies but the fact remains we are stuck with these two companies. The courts have ruled in microsoft's favor and will almost surely rule in comcast's favor as well. I urge everyone to do as i did and email every cable company you can to see if they are interested in coming to your city. So far out of cox,time warner,wide open west,and rcn only wide open west replied saying:<br>"Thank you for your note and the interest in our services.  We are continually monitoring the areas we serve and evaluating new oppportunities.  I'm not aware of any current plans to build out in your area, however I will be sure to pass this along to the appropriate individuals that make those decisions for future consideration.  <br> <br>Thanks again for your email"]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6455427</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2003 23:30:03 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6455195</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/785829"><b>MikeDz3$</b></A> : the fact is comcast isn't going to change anything. So basically all this fuss is basically for not. The point is comcast is in the game to make money. If you want broadband bad enough you will pay the $60/month. If you didn't like comcast's prices you should have wrote the fcc,doj and your senators NOT TO APPROVE THE MERGER WITH ATT BROADBAND. Now it's too late. Look at microsoft. They got off free basically. Microsoft is bigger than comcast and basically owns the operating system market yet our courts decided they are NOT a monopoly. The same will happen with comcast. If Microsoft isn't a monopoly then comcast surely isn't. So basically either pay up or leave.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6455195</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2003 23:00:41 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6453755</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/422177"><b>degauss1</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  halfband <A HREF="/useremail/u/639017"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR> <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  degauss1 <A HREF="/useremail/u/422177"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>Now then, if they were to charge the same rate for subscribers and offer a multi-service discount backing out the extra cash as a line item, then the discount philosophy would apply.  They don't present it that way...so they open themselves to this kind of criticism.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Is this just another case of bad marketing by comcast.  They are not doing anything different than Bellsouth, or Burger King, but the action has been deemed a &#147;predatory practice.&#148;<br><br>...<br><br>If I follow your argument correctly (and I may not): <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>I don't think you get the point completely.  Margins aside, using your candy store analogy.  If I own a candy store and buy the candy at $.45 and sell it to people that go to my wife as their dentist for $1.00 but sell it to the people that go to some other dentist for $1.50 that's predatory pricing.  The fact is, it costs me the same for the candy bar and other expenses no matter where you go for dental work.  Comcast has f'd up on the marketing side by 'penalizing' people that don't use Comcast CATV and that IS predatory.  It costs Comcast the same to provide internet whether you take the CATV services or not.  If it didn't, why don't they charge more for the Digital Phone services if you don't buy CATV?  The key difference here is that by charging a higher price for internet only than one would pay for internet AND basic CATV reduces the likely-hood that someone is going to go for satellite TV bacause they pay more for the ISP services and the price advantage for satellite at that point is minimized.  If you know economics, you should also know predatory business practices too.  It should be clear that the way they present it to the market leave this interpretation to occur.  Now lets say that they charged everyone $58 up front for internet and gave a multi service discount to lower the internet price to the rate most pay now, the interpretation would be that as a valued customer, you get a discount and your Burger King value meal analogy would apply.  Granted, it's all semantics but that is the point here...]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6453755</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2003 20:47:00 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6450576</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><b>JTRockville</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  halfband <A HREF="/useremail/u/639017"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>JT,<br>While those 50% gross profit margins look impressive it is the bottom line, net margin, that counts to investors (sorry :() until Comcast can get the debt load down.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>True enough. But the suggestion that Comcast should discontinue broadband service in non-competitive areas would hurt their financials, no matter which measurement you look at: gross profit margin, net profit margin, free cash flow, and probably many others. I skipped basic economics, so toss a clue if I'm off-base here. <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  halfband <A HREF="/useremail/u/639017"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>Since Comcast charges the same prices in both monopoly position and competitive position areas, are you assuming that Comcast is sacrificing some business in the competitive areas hoping that they will make even more in the sole provider areas?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>It's been alleged, around these parts anyway, that Comcast gives out "specially priced offers" only in competitive areas. So yes, I do believe their intention is to make even more $$$ where they have no competition.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6450576</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2003 15:46:26 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6450387</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/639017"><b>halfband</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  degauss1 <A HREF="/useremail/u/422177"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>Now then, if they were to charge the same rate for subscribers and offer a multi-service discount backing out the extra cash as a line item, then the discount philosophy would apply.  They don't present it that way...so they open themselves to this kind of criticism.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Is this just another case of bad marketing by comcast.  They are not doing anything different than Bellsouth, or Burger King, but the action has been deemed a &#147;predatory practice.&#148;<br><br>JT,<br>While those 50% gross profit margins look impressive it is the bottom line, net margin, that counts to investors (sorry :() until Comcast can get the debt load down.  <br>[ For those who have not had basic economics, if I own a candy store and get my snickers bars for 55 cents and sell them for a dollar, I have a 45 cent gross margin.  But if rent, utilities, taxes and transportation eat up 44 cents for each candy bar my net is only 1 cent.]  If the bottom line margins in cable broadband were really that good, companies would be tripping all over each other trying to provide service.<br><br>If I follow your argument correctly (and I may not):<br>Since Comcast charges the same prices in both monopoly position and competitive position areas, are you assuming that Comcast is sacrificing some business in the competitive areas hoping that they will make even more in the sole provider areas?<br>It would be interesting to know how the higher internet only rate affects the subscriber levels in competitive areas where users can switch to DSL/satellite. <br><small>--<br>Registered Bandwidth Offender #40812</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6450387</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2003 15:27:31 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6448727</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/422177"><b>degauss1</b></A> : <br>Bottom line is that Comcast are making business decisions to eliminate the debt they incurred by the purchase of ATTBI.  While I may not like the small increases, the practice of charging more to non-CATV-subscribers is a predatory practice.  Now then, if they were to charge the same rate for subscribers and offer a multi-service discount backing out the extra cash as a line item, then the discount philosophy would apply.  They don't present it that way...so they open themselves to this kind of criticism. ]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6448727</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2003 12:29:24 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6448622</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/554081"><b>gharney</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  DonLibes <A HREF="/useremail/u/755850"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR> <br><br>The bottom line is that JT's statement earlier was true, <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>which was?<br><br> <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>quote:</SMALL><HR> she provided valid references, <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>which is what i asked for, yes.<br><br> <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>quote:</SMALL><HR> and you're just looking for a way out of admitting she had a good point <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>that comcast makes money?<br><br> <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>quote:</SMALL><HR> That appears to be your tactic to my statements as well regarding the issue of whether Comcast is a monopoly. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>they arent.<br><i>[text was edited by author 2003-04-01 12:33:53]</i><br>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6448622</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2003 12:19:26 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6448604</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/755850"><b>DonLibes</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  gharney <A HREF="/useremail/u/554081"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR> <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  JTRockville <A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR> As a telecommuter, I find residential broadband to be an essential tool. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>if it is that essential, you would want something with SLA's. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Indeed, that's part of why her community passed Bill 28-02.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6448604</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2003 12:16:40 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6448585</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/755850"><b>DonLibes</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  gharney <A HREF="/useremail/u/554081"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR> <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  JTRockville <A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR><A HREF="http://www.hoovers.com/quarterlies/4/0,2167,13034,00.html"><U><B>LAST THREE QUARTERS IN FY02: </B>Q2 <B>50.1%</B>, Q3 <B>49.5%</B>, Q4 <B>49.5%</B></U></A>. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>It is important to note some real world figures here;Comcast's NET profit margin was -2.2% <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Nonetheless, JT's observations are important.  It's easy to get from a gross profit margin of 50% down to a negative net profit margin.  Comcast's debt servicing, their practice of paying stratospheric executive salaries, and their "contributions to the community" are good examples of why customers pay twice the price what it actually costs Comcast to provide the service.  So while it's correct to say Comcast isn't turning a profit, it's also extremely misleading as to what's really going on.<br><br>The bottom line is that JT's statement earlier was true, she provided valid references, and you're just looking for a way out of admitting she had a good point and had proved her case.  That appears to be your tactic to my statements as well regarding the issue of whether Comcast is a monopoly.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6448585</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2003 12:13:39 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6448573</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/243978"><b>Zorglub</b></A> : [QUOTE= billybagoil <A HREF="/useremail/u/698441"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>]so Zorglub you equate hsi to healthcare?  yea that makes sense.  i wonder how people like you function in the real world.  do you also need the government to regulate your toilet paper prices?  bottom line is the market sets the price.  if it is to much people won't buy it and they will go back to dialup or isdn.  hsi is not a right, it is a luxury(Something inessential but conducive to pleasure and comfort). <br><br>Where did you see that I was equating cable to healthcare?  With all due respect, I'm not following your logic.  <br>Even in a monopoly environment, the market sets the price, albeit higher than in a competitive market.  As for the luxury analogy, if we were buying only goods that are truely necessary, most of our economy would crumble.  We wouldn't be buying SUV, we'd be driving Ford Focus, we would not have big screen TV, but still be watching B&W 19" screens, and I could go on and on.<br><br>Bottom line, Comcast is acting like a monopoly.  While it's not the end of the world, it's still worth being noted.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6448573</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2003 12:11:40 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6448474</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/554081"><b>gharney</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  JTRockville <A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR> As a telecommuter, I find residential broadband to be an essential tool. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>if it is that essential, you would want something with SLA's.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6448474</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2003 12:00:24 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6448426</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><b>JTRockville</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  billybagoil <A HREF="/useremail/u/698441"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>hsi is not a right, it is a luxury(Something inessential but conducive to pleasure and comfort). <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> billybagoil <A HREF="/useremail/u/698441"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> used the term "inessential", but regulators use the term <B><I>essential</I></B> when talking about broadband. <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by <A HREF="http://ftp.fcc.gov/Speeches/Martin/Statements/2002/stkjm204.html"><U>FCC Commissioner Kevin J. Martin</U></A>:</SMALL><HR>Encouraging the deployment of broadband services to all Americans should be a national priority. Such services are essential to the economy of the 21st century, dramatically reducing the costs of exchanging information and allowing previously local businesses to serve the world. Broadband services are especially important to rural America, providing business, educational, and healthcare opportunities to remote parts of the country. I am hopeful that, just as rapid developments in telecommunications and technology have driven much of this nation&#146;s economic growth in recent years, broadband deployment will lead to a new period of growth. I thus believe that all levels of government should work to eliminate barriers to infrastructure investment and to accelerate broadband deployment.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by <A HREF="http://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/mc/council/2002news/factsheetcable.html"><U>MCMD Bill 28-02 FAQ</U></A>:</SMALL><HR><B>Q: Why are cable-modem service requirements so important?</B><br>A: The Internet has become an essential tool in business and in many individual&#146;s lives. Cable modems are by far the most common way of getting high-speed, broadband Internet access. Reliable broadband access will encourage telecommuting to reduce traffic and improve workers&#146; quality of life. It will help promote education, commerce, and employment. Montgomery County has one of the highest levels of computer use anywhere in the world. As the home of many high-tech employers, such as the National Institutes of Health, a thriving biotech industry, and several key media and communications companies, our community is more dependent than most on the wide availability of reliable broadband Internet access.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>As a telecommuter, I find residential broadband to be an essential tool.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6448426</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2003 11:55:10 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6448003</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/554081"><b>gharney</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  JTRockville <A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR><br><br><A HREF="http://www.hoovers.com/quarterlies/4/0,2167,13034,00.html"><U><B>LAST THREE QUARTERS IN FY02: </B>Q2 <B>50.1%</B>, Q3 <B>49.5%</B>, Q4 <B>49.5%</B></U></A>. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>It is important to note some real world figures here;<br><br>Comcast's NET profit margin was -2.2%]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6448003</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2003 11:11:18 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6443182</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/641112"><b>nshulga</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  gharney <A HREF="/useremail/u/554081"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR> <br><br>internet access is not a utility.<br><br>there is nothing stopping another cable company from coming in and overbuilding.<br> <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>Oh, yeah? Ask RCN about expanding into Philadelphia area..]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6443182</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2003 22:54:25 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6443148</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/698441"><b>billybagoil</b></A> : so Zorglub you equate hsi to healthcare?  yea that makes sense.  i wonder how people like you function in the real world.  do you also need the government to regulate your toilet paper prices?  bottom line is the market sets the price.  if it is to much people won't buy it and they will go back to dialup or isdn.  hsi is not a right, it is a luxury(Something inessential but conducive to pleasure and comfort).]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6443148</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2003 22:50:04 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6442943</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/585162"><b>triske</b></A> : Help me Please????? can I order a White Casle with no Bun Please??]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6442943</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2003 22:30:27 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6442686</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/657640"><b>mig288</b></A> : Mabee not A monopoly but they sure are the only game in town and DSL is not available here either..so..Monopoly mabee not...Soul provider YEP YEP..We need something more options in NJ. Having 2 Cable co's would be pretty cool. How about Optimum online vs Comcast I wonder how many would switch lol ........Hrm....]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6442686</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2003 22:06:17 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6441220</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/755850"><b>DonLibes</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  gharney <A HREF="/useremail/u/554081"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR> <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  Zorglub <A HREF="/useremail/u/243978"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>Comcast is the only residential broadband provider in most areas, like a monopoly. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>not a monopoly. comcast does not have exclusive control.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Maybe not where you live, but they sure do where I live.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6441220</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2003 19:53:46 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6440987</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/554081"><b>gharney</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  Zorglub <A HREF="/useremail/u/243978"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>Comcast is the only residential broadband provider in most areas, like a monopoly. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>not a monopoly. comcast does not have exclusive control.<br><br> <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>quote:</SMALL><HR> Comcast increases prices like a monopoly. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>using your faulty logic then every company would be a monopoly.<br><br> <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>quote:</SMALL><HR> It looks like one, <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>it doesnt<br><br> <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>quote:</SMALL><HR> it behaves like one, <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>it doesnt<br><br> <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>quote:</SMALL><HR> hmmm... it might be one! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>its not.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6440987</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2003 19:31:35 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6440936</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/243978"><b>Zorglub</b></A> : Comcast is the only residential broadband provider in most areas, like a monopoly.<br><br>Comcast increases prices like a monopoly.<br><br>It looks like one, it behaves like one, hmmm... it might be one!]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6440936</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2003 19:27:17 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6440058</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><b>JTRockville</b></A> : Your price went up by 33% and you've got no complaint?!?!? Sheesh  Combat Chuck <A HREF="/useremail/u/525402"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> - you're an ideal customer.<br><br>You have the choice of Sat TV + DSL broadband, right? I'm sort of clueless when it comes to DSL pricing, cuz it's moot for me, but doesn't DSL offer a bundle with phone service that includes broadband?]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6440058</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2003 18:00:24 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6440001</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/554081"><b>gharney</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  JTRockville <A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>* sigh *<br><br>That's it. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>another one gives up when the facts prevail over fiction.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6440001</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2003 17:53:45 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6439934</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/525402"><b>Combat Chuck</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  JTRockville <A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>This objection was raised by ex-ATTB'ers, whose price of a monopoly service was increased by 33% because they do not also purchase a competitive service.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>So, my price went up 33% as well.  They raised the price, it's still competitive.<br><br> <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  JTRockville <A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>In areas where there's competition: you can choose the discounted bundle of competitive services that best suits your needs.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>No I can't; no one else offers a TV/HSI service bundle.  If I want sat. I have to either double up services or pay the higher price.<br><br> <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  JTRockville <A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>In areas where there's no competition: you get raped by inflated individual pricing if you don't submit to the demands of the monopolist. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>Nope, the higher price isn't inflated it's actually <B>below</B> market price, for what you're getting.  The profits they're making have nothing to do with it, there is no law (nor should there be) that limits what profits a company can make.<br><br>You do realize that if you get your way you will be discouraging the rollout of new services into previously unserviced areas.  Why would a company roll out a service<br>that may be considered a monopoly when they get punished for doing so.<br><SMALL>--<br>So it begins.</SMALL><br><i>[text was edited by author 2003-03-31 17:48:47]</i><br>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6439934</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2003 17:45:59 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6439768</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><b>JTRockville</b></A> : * sigh *<br><br>That's it. I'm going to experiment with the ignore feature. Usually, I encourage opposing viewpoints (like those of  Combat Chuck <A HREF="/useremail/u/525402"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> et al) because I enjoy reading different perspectives.<br><br>I've not found anything you've ever contributed to a discussion useful, interesting, or knowledgeable. Bye bye  gharney <A HREF="/useremail/u/554081"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>. Can't say it's been nice.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6439768</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2003 17:26:46 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6439711</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/554081"><b>gharney</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  JTRockville <A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>I didn't reply because you offered no new information. The subscriber is not stealing a signal, because a signal was ordered, installed, and <br>billed. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>as i have explained to you, and have provided you references that support my explanation;<br>the subscriber is stealing because he is receiving something he is not paying for (as he even admitted). passive theft is stealing.<br><br> <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>quote:</SMALL><HR> Comcast followed proper procedures, but refuses to block the non-requested channels, which they are required to do. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>and yet again as i have explained to you this has no relevance as what you cited is in regards to content. please go back to the thread and pay attention to the details and links that i have supplied you.<br><br> <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>quote:</SMALL><HR> Back to the topic. Still think Comcast wants to lose all those digits from their quarterly bottom line? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>still? where in my post have i said that i think comcast wants to lose or not lose?]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6439711</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2003 17:20:07 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6439579</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><b>JTRockville</b></A> : I didn't reply because you offered no new information. The subscriber is not stealing a signal, because a signal was ordered, installed, and billed. Whether or not the cable company used proper procedures couldn't possibly be determined by the subscriber unless a copy of procedures were publicly available. A logical conclusion for the subscriber, since the requested services were installed, would be that Comcast followed proper procedures, but refuses to block the non-requested channels, which they are required to do.<br><br>Now...<br><br>Back to the topic. Still think Comcast wants to lose all those digits from their quarterly bottom line?]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6439579</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2003 17:05:15 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6439421</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/554081"><b>gharney</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  JTRockville <A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>aight,  gharney <A HREF="/useremail/u/554081"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>. I'll humor you, even though you've never backed up any of your statements with facts <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>really? show me. im still waiting for a reply from you on how you think that passive theft is not theft. the ball was left in your court, you chose not to reply.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6439421</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2003 16:49:19 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6439202</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><b>JTRockville</b></A> : aight,  gharney <A HREF="/useremail/u/554081"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>. I'll humor you, even though you've never backed up any of your statements with facts:<br><br><A HREF="http://www.hoovers.com/quarterlies/4/0,2167,13034,00.html"><U><B>LAST THREE QUARTERS IN FY02: </B>Q2 <B>50.1%</B>, Q3 <B>49.5%</B>, Q4 <B>49.5%</B></U></A>.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6439202</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2003 16:24:12 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6438853</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/554081"><b>gharney</b></A> : you made the claim.<br><br>you back it up.<br><br>dude.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6438853</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2003 15:44:04 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6438747</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><b>JTRockville</b></A> : Go ho the data yourself dude.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6438747</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2003 15:31:08 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6438722</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/554081"><b>gharney</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  JTRockville <A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>I didn't  gharney <A HREF="/useremail/u/554081"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>. Comcast collects double what the costs are, hence their 50% profit margin. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>really?<br><br>citations please.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6438722</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2003 15:27:53 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6438663</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><b>JTRockville</b></A> : I didn't  gharney <A HREF="/useremail/u/554081"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>. Comcast collects double what the costs are, hence their 50% profit margin. The absence of all that "free cash flow" would be quite troublesome.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6438663</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2003 15:19:43 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6438442</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/554081"><b>gharney</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  JTRockville <A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR> Even if only 20% of 'em receive broadband, that figure has lots of digits. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>dont forget the expense of providing the service. there are a lot of digits in that as well.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6438442</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2003 14:54:08 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6438371</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><b>JTRockville</b></A> : This objection was raised by ex-ATTB'ers, whose price of a monopoly service was increased by 33% because they do not also purchase a competitive service.<br><br>In areas where there's competition: you can choose the discounted bundle of competitive services that best suits your needs.<br><br>In areas where there's no competition: you get raped by inflated individual pricing if you don't submit to the demands of the monopolist.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6438371</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2003 14:44:40 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6438179</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/525402"><b>Combat Chuck</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  JTRockville <A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>Competition keeps pricing fair. Without competition, something else is needed to constrain prices.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>All prices below are for 15147 zip code and 412 area code.<br><br>Comcast HSI (1500/256): about $60.00 ($0.04 per kbps download)<br><br>Speakeasy DSL (1500/128): about $60.00 ($0.04 /kbps download)<br>(and I only get 1 email address, if I want 2 it goes up to $70.00)<br><br>Verizon DSL(768/128): about $50.00 ($0.06 /kbps download)<br><br>Stargate DSL (768/128): about $50.00 ($0.06 /kbps download)<br>or (1500/384): about $80.00 ($0.05 /kbps download)<br><br>------------------------<br>Clearly in competitive areas comcast has the lowest price for the service it offers with very few exceptions (those mainly being government subsidised competitors and it's not really fair to compare the two until the gov't sponsored ones show a sustained profit for several years).  Yet somehow they are offering you an unfair price, solely because there isn't competition in your area?<br><br>If two houses are 20ft apart; one can get dsl the other can't and has no other options should the one who can't get a lower price?  What would be that lower price?  What would they base it on?  They can't base it on competitive areas because then their price would go up because....<br><br>Currently freemarket pressures are setting the price of broadband in competitive areas to around 4.5 cents per kbps, you're paying less than that in noncompetitive areas; it's not any more unfair for you to pay that in a monopoly area than it is for me to pay it in a competitive area.<br><br>BTW: the government doesn't regulate monopolies (or they aren't supposed to) until it can be shown that they are using that monopoly status to unnaturally inflate prices, which they obviously aren't doing if you look at what everyone else is paying.<br><br>You (referring to those who want the government to regulate Comcast HSI just because they offer HSI where no one else will or can) are mistakenly equating your dissatisfaction that the price went up, with anticompetitive practices on Comcasts part.<br><SMALL>--<br>So it begins.</SMALL><br><i>[text was edited by author 2003-03-31 14:22:57]</i><br>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6438179</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2003 14:20:26 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6436463</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><b>JTRockville</b></A> : Competition keeps pricing fair. Without competition, something else is needed to constrain prices.<br><br>If you want to whine about it  Combat Chuck <A HREF="/useremail/u/525402"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>, go right ahead. That's your choice. And though I'll probably never agree with you, I encourage you to become an advocate for consumers in any situation you find unfair. <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  Combat Chuck <A HREF="/useremail/u/525402"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>If I were Comcast and this goes thru I would just stop offering HSI in noncompetitive areas.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Think Comcast's financials could survive the "free cash flow" hit? I don't know about other jurisdictions, but our franchise covers 200k installed subscribers. Even if only 20% of 'em receive broadband, that figure has lots of digits. And we're not the only non-competitive area in the country.<br><br><I>Added:</I><br>If Comcast did yank my broadband, I'd yank their coax off my property faster than you can say: Satellite TV.<BR><SMALL><br><i>[text was edited by author 2003-03-31 10:35:01]</i><br>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6436463</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2003 09:48:22 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6436205</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/755850"><b>DonLibes</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  Combat Chuck <A HREF="/useremail/u/525402"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>You can't punish comcast because they moved HSI into an area competitors won't go into; which is what you want to do even if you don't realize it realize it or not.  If I were Comcast and this goes thru I would just stop offering HSI in noncompetitive areas.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>You should realize that Comcast is already treated differently.  For instance, in Montgomery County (where JT resides), Comcast is subject to rate regulation while Starpower (a much, much smaller cable franchisee) is not.  This is just one of several mechanisms the county is using to encourage competition.<br><br>Is Comcast being penalized?  In a sense, yes.  Is Comcast a de facto monopoly?  Yes.  Should Comcast be treated differently?  Yes, and the local government is already doing so.  Is Comcast leaving or withdrawing service in noncompetitive areas?  On the contrary, they're trying harder than ever to win over customers.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6436205</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2003 08:52:38 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6435066</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/525402"><b>Combat Chuck</b></A> : So what you want is a government mandated discount solely because you live in a monopoly area.<br><br>If that happens are you then going to agree with me when I start whining about that not being fair?<br><br>You can't punish comcast because they moved HSI into an area competitors won't go into; which is what you want to do even if you don't realize it realize it or not.  <br><br>If I were Comcast and this goes thru I would just stop offering HSI in noncompetitive areas.<br><br><SMALL>--<br>So it begins.</SMALL><br><br><i>[text was edited by author 2003-03-31 01:18:00]</i><br>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6435066</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2003 01:13:00 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6431616</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/639017"><b>halfband</b></A> : Actually I thought it had to do with government regulation, line sharing and all making it economically unattractive, but point taken.<br><small>--<br>Registered Bandwidth Offender #40812</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6431616</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 30 Mar 2003 18:14:27 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6429823</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/549697"><b>J D McDorce</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  halfband <A HREF="/useremail/u/639017"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>The only reason Comcast has a monopoly position (Not the whole monopoly, just the position JD :)) for HSI in most areas is because the telcos or another cable company do not want to invest in the build out of the area.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>This falls into the area of <I>economic barriers to entry</I>.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6429823</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 30 Mar 2003 14:04:57 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6429682</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><b>JTRockville</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  halfband <A HREF="/useremail/u/639017"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR><BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  DonLibes <A HREF="/useremail/u/755850"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR> But you have a choice of broadband providers.  It is in communities where there is no choice that's the problem.  Just because you're not being abused doesn't mean other people aren't. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> But our HSI pricing is the same as areas without other internet competition.  How are they abusing a monopoly position?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>In your area,  halfband <A HREF="/useremail/u/639017"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>, Comcast is not abusing their monopoly position because they don't have one.<br><br>In my area...<br>If we want broadband, we have one choice: Comcast. We have choices for video: dish or cable. The practice of tying a discount of a monopoly service (broadband) to the purchase of a competitive service (video) is unfair and anti-competitive. They are using their monopoly on broadband to squeeze out competition for video.<br><br>Comcast's pricing may be consistent nationwide, but the market is not.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6429682</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 30 Mar 2003 13:45:56 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6428383</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/554081"><b>gharney</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  DonLibes <A HREF="/useremail/u/755850"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR> Or are you saying that even in communities without choice, you wouldn't consider Comcast a monopoly? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>correct]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6428383</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 30 Mar 2003 10:15:22 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6427945</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/160346"><b>cbrain</b></A> : Imagine Comcast's methods and conduct remained constant but they sold cars, donuts, clothing, or computers.  <br><br>Would you purchase any of these products from Comcast?<br><br>What is the profit margin of Dell, CompUSA, GM, Ford, Duncan &#133;?]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6427945</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 30 Mar 2003 08:33:15 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6427898</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/639017"><b>halfband</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by RONADYCKS:</SMALL><HR>THE POINT IS, <br><br>YOU CAN CHOOSE BETWEEN A BIG MAC OR A WHOPPER.<br><br>I CAN ONLY GET THE BIG MAC AND THEY F*CK ME KNOWING THAT.  <br><br>SO YOU SEE, AT LEAST YOU GET TO CHOOSE WHICH HAMBURGER YOU WANT..<br><br>COMPRENDE'? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Yes, But your gonna hate this:<br>They are not charging you more for your Big Mac in places where you cant get a whopper, so how are you being treated different than someone in an area with a burger king.<br>and<br>Shouldn't you be complaining to burger king that you cant get a whopper in your area and not complaining that mickyD built near you and that they are able to sell you a big mac?<br><small>--<br>Registered Bandwidth Offender #40812</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6427898</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 30 Mar 2003 08:19:55 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6427858</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/639017"><b>halfband</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  DonLibes <A HREF="/useremail/u/755850"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>No one is faulting Comcast for that.  They are faulting Comcast for being abusive with their monopoly.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> The only reason Comcast has a monopoly position (Not the whole monopoly, just the position JD :)) for HSI in most areas is because the telcos or another cable company do not want to invest in the build out of the area.  If HSI is so profitable capitalist economics dictate that other providers will appear in time.  <br><br> <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  DonLibes <A HREF="/useremail/u/755850"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR> But you have a choice of broadband providers.  It is in communities where there is no choice that's the problem.  Just because you're not being abused doesn't mean other people aren't. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> But our HSI pricing is the same as areas without other internet competition.  How are they abusing a monopoly position?  <br><br>Is it the difference in cable TV price that you consider abuse or the star power accusations about contractors?  Some of the MD bundle pricing (wasn&#145;t there a $99 for everything) looks better than I can get here.<br><small>--<br>Registered Bandwidth Offender #40812</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6427858</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 30 Mar 2003 08:11:24 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6426852</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/0"><b>anon</b></A> : THE POINT IS, <br><br>YOU CAN CHOOSE BETWEEN A BIG MAC OR A WHOPPER.<br><br>I CAN ONLY GET THE BIG MAC AND THEY F*CK ME KNOWING THAT.  <br><br>SO YOU SEE, AT LEAST YOU GET TO CHOOSE WHICH HAMBURGER YOU WANT..<br><br>COMPRENDE'?]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6426852</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 30 Mar 2003 00:56:40 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6426576</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><b>JTRockville</b></A> : I'd never want to deprive you of your complete meal, J D. And I hope you never encounter predatory pricing of monopolistic services that are tied to the purchase of competitive services. But I also hope that if you do, lady justice tips her scale in your favor.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6426576</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 30 Mar 2003 00:10:16 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6426557</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><b>JTRockville</b></A> : Losses? We're talking about a company that has a<br><br><B><I>FIFTY PERCENT PROFIT MARGIN</I></B><br><br>There are no "losses" to ride out!!!]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6426557</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 30 Mar 2003 00:08:04 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6426434</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/525402"><b>Combat Chuck</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  JTRockville <A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR> That's true, J D. But some strategies, like bundling burgers with fries and soda, that are acceptable in competitive circumstances, are considered no-no's under monopolistic circumstances. In other words...<br><br><B><I>It's ok to treat customers like sh!t, but only if they have a choice</I></B>. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>You'd have to prove that they were actively trying to eliminate competition with their discount.  And the only way I can see that happening (other than in a goofy California court) is if you could prove that they have many more people in HSI "monopoly" areas than competitive areas (such that they could ride out the losses in competitive areas on the profits from monopoly areas) , or you could find a paper trail stating they were attempting such.<br><small>--<br>So it begins.</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6426434</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 29 Mar 2003 23:50:40 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6426060</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/549697"><b>J D McDorce</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  JTRockville <A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>That's true, J D. But some strategies, like bundling burgers with fries and soda, that are acceptable in competitive circumstances, are considered no-no's under monopolistic circumstances.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Maybe the next time I stop at the Burger King in a Service Plaza on the Pennsylvania Turnpike (westbound, west of Pittsburgh), I'll tell them that they can't sell me a combination meal for less than the price of the individual items :)]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6426060</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 29 Mar 2003 23:01:31 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6425937</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><b>JTRockville</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  J D McDorce <A HREF="/useremail/u/549697"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>One case would be a frequent poster to this forum who's only option for High Speed Internet is Comcast, as she cannot get DSL, Wi-Fi, or even a T1.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I'd think you were talking about <B><I>ME</I></B> J D, except I can't get <A HREF="http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,5490868~root=alt,other~mode=flat"><U>powerline broadband</U></A> either! <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  J D McDorce <A HREF="/useremail/u/549697"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR><B>However</B>, even in those cases where Comcast has a localized monopoly on High Speed Internet services, it would be extremely difficult to show that Comcast is using that status to gouge its customers. Why? Comcast's published policy for High Speed Internet is consistent throughout all of the areas that they service throughout the United States.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>That's true, J D. But some strategies, like bundling burgers with fries and soda, that are acceptable in competitive circumstances, are considered no-no's under monopolistic circumstances. In other words...<br><br><B><I>It's ok to treat customers like sh!t, but only if they have a choice</I></B>.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6425937</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 29 Mar 2003 22:48:37 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6425753</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/549697"><b>J D McDorce</b></A> :  Net192 <A HREF="/useremail/u/353713"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> - thanks for the link.  Here's where I make enemies of friends, while continuing the same relationship with others. ;-)<br><br> <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by &raquo;<A HREF="http://www.investorwords.com/cgi-bin/getword.cgi?3112:" >www.investorwords.com/cgi-bin/ge&middot;&middot;&middot;gi?3112:</A></SMALL><HR><B>monopoly</B><br>A situation in which a single company owns all or nearly all of the market for a given type of product or service.  This would happen in the case that there is a barrier to entry into the industry that allows the single company to operate without competition (for example, vast economies of scale, barriers to entry, or governmental regulation). In such an industry structure, the producer will often produce a volume that is less than the amount which would maximize social welfare.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>The question is, for High Speed Internet service (which this thread was originally based on), does Comcast have a monopoly?  On a macro level, no.  Looking at Comcast, as a whole, their High Speed Internet service falls into the definition of Oligopoly that  Net192 <A HREF="/useremail/u/353713"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> previously provided.  However, on a micro level, there are cases where Comcast High Speed Internet does have a monopoly with regard to High Speed Internet service.  One case would be a frequent poster to this forum who's only option for High Speed Internet is Comcast, as she cannot get DSL, Wi-Fi, or even a T1.  In her direct area, Comcast owns the market (largely due to <I>barriers to entry</I>, as contained within the definition above).<br><br><B>However</B>, even in those cases where Comcast has a localized monopoly on High Speed Internet services, it would be extremely difficult to show that Comcast is using that status to gouge its customers.  Why?  Comcast's published policy for High Speed Internet is consistent throughout all of the areas that they service throughout the United States.  Are you a Comcast CATV customer?  $42.95 per month.  Need a modem?  That's $3.00 per month extra.  You don't subscribe to Comcast's CATV?  $57.95 per month (also $3.00 per month extra if you have a modem).  Want Pro?  $95.00 per month.  It doesn't matter if Comcast High Speed Internet is all you can get or if you have a choice of Internet from two different cable companies and a couple of different flavors of DSL.<br><br>Does it suck to have to pay $15.00 per month extra for CHSI if you don't want Comcast's CATV?  You bet.  But in the words of author (amongst other things) Richard Marcinko, <I>I will treat you all alike - just like sh!t.</I>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6425753</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 29 Mar 2003 22:22:56 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6423994</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/486895"><b>newview</b></A> : In Wicomico County, Maryland . . . basic cable is $19.00.<br><br>Let's see, if I went back to Comcast CableTV . . . <br><br><SMALL>$19.00 Basic cable<br>$39.95 HSI (I own my modem)<br>---------<br>$58.95 to Comcast<br><B>+$5.00 FRANCHISE FEE</B> (since I have basic cable)<br>---------<br>$63.95 = ACTUAL COST OF COMCAST BASIC CABLE & HSI</SMALL><br><br>What I pay - $54.95 per month for HSI<br><br><B>No thanks, Comcast.<br>I'll eat your $15.00 more per month predatory price gouging until the FCC drags your a** into court. I hope you are made  to pay back EVERY dime.</B><br><small>--<br> <A HREF="http://drebbelstraat20.dyndns.org/~mvdwege/misc/spamrules.html">The Rules of Spam</A> | <A HREF="http://www.spamlaws.com/state/md.html">Maryland's New Anti-Spam Law</A><BR>Where are we going? And what's with the hand basket? </small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6423994</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 29 Mar 2003 18:39:08 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6423098</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/733981"><b>crazeetxn</b></A> : My two-cents....<br><br>I couldn't be happier WITH the bundled savings.  W/O their cable tv- HSI something like $56...WITH their cable TV, HSI-$39.99...lets see, $39.99 + $9.99, 50 bucks...ok, slight savings, BUT since I have DIRECTV, I also get my local channels.  DIRECTV + LOCAL CHANNELS + HSI = ONE HAPPY CUSTOMER :) <br>  I don't see where COMCAST is becoming a monopoly.  A monopoly is more less a company that owns/runs everything.  There are other options out there.  Maybe not for everybody, but that's the nature of the beast.  My parents live in the country.  Sprint is the only phone service that services their area...they now have DSL via Earthlink.  If that's considered a monopoly, then someone needs to include Sprint on the court order.  However, being of sound mind and body that they are, I'm sure if the service became too much to pay, they'd simply discontinue it.<br><br> My thing is, if you already have cable TV, what's the problem with switching to THEIR service.  You've got it anyway, you're just gettin' from another source.<br><SMALL>--<br>Crazee...WinXP Pro, 933/512mb Ram..</SMALL><br><i>[text was edited by author 2003-03-29 16:36:21]</i><br>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6423098</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 29 Mar 2003 16:34:16 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6422176</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/353713"><b>Net192</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  gharney <A HREF="/useremail/u/554081"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR> <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  fuzydice <A HREF="/useremail/u/266399"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR> They're a monopoly, <br> <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>they are far from a monopoly.<br><br>unless of course you are using your own definition which differs from the real world definition. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><B>Oligopoly</B>...A market dominated by a small number of participants who are able to collectively exert control over supply and market prices.<BR> (&raquo;<A HREF="http://www.investorwords.com/cgi-bin/getword.cgi?3404" >www.investorwords.com/cgi-bin/ge&middot;&middot;&middot;cgi?3404</A>)<BR><br>Either way, they're just as big and ugly as a monopoly.  Those who have a choice between cable and DSL are the exception, not the rule.  For us that have only one choice, Comcast is a virtual monopoly that uses it's dominant market position to exploit consumers.  Why should someone be forced to pay for a product they dont want, pay-TV, to get broadband internet?  This is not like the McD's analogy where I can walk across the street to BK and get a similar product at a competitive price without the happy toy. :)]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6422176</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 29 Mar 2003 14:37:02 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6421767</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><b>JTRockville</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  halfband <A HREF="/useremail/u/639017"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>You were right about some areas of Alabama having competition. While I have the option of two cable internet providers, bellsouth DSL and some of the other DSL carriers, Comcast pricing is no different here than anywhere else.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>The pricing for basic cable varies DRASTICALLY by region. In many places - and I'm of the impression it's in MOST places - Comcast is the sole provider of residential broadband. Bundling a monopolistic service with a competitive service is coercion, imo.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6421767</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 29 Mar 2003 13:41:34 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6421423</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/785829"><b>MikeDz3$</b></A> : he considers isdn and dialup as a choice. I mean it is a choice of internet access but the point most people here is they want broadband and dialup and isdn/satellite aren't broadband. Dsl,wireless and cable are broadband.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6421423</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 29 Mar 2003 12:51:44 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6421196</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/755850"><b>DonLibes</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  gharney <A HREF="/useremail/u/554081"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR> <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  DonLibes <A HREF="/useremail/u/755850"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR> They are faulting Comcast for being abusive with their monopoly. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>they are wrong because there is no monopoly in comcast's case. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>You may have a choice for residential broadband but that doesn't mean everyone does.Or are you saying that even in communities without choice, you wouldn't consider Comcast a monopoly?]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6421196</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 29 Mar 2003 12:15:42 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6420587</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/554081"><b>gharney</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  DonLibes <A HREF="/useremail/u/755850"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR> They are faulting Comcast for being abusive with their monopoly. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>they are wrong because there is no monopoly in comcast's case.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6420587</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 29 Mar 2003 10:51:02 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6420559</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/755850"><b>DonLibes</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  halfband <A HREF="/useremail/u/639017"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>Lots of barriers, but none are insurmountable.  You can&#146;t fault Comcast because they invested in running HSI to an area and the local Telco or another cable provider did not.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>No one is faulting Comcast for that.  They are faulting Comcast for being abusive with their monopoly. <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>quote:</SMALL><HR>You were right about some areas of Alabama having competition.  While I have the option of two cable internet providers, bellsouth DSL and some of the other DSL carriers, Comcast pricing is no different here than anywhere else.  The other cable provider offers bundle discounts for tv, internet, and phone, the more you get, the more the discount.  Bellsouth offers a DSL discount if you get the premium phone service,  there is no discount for basic phone service.  Basic phone service is mandatory to get DSL.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>But you have a choice of broadband providers.  It is in communities where there is no choice that's the problem.  Just because you're not being abused doesn't mean other people aren't.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6420559</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 29 Mar 2003 10:46:27 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6420186</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/639017"><b>halfband</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  JTRockville <A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>Looks to me like there are lots of barriers.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Lots of barriers, but none are insurmountable.  You can&#146;t fault Comcast because they invested in running HSI to an area and the local Telco or another cable provider did not.  <br>You were right about some areas of Alabama having competition.  While I have the option of two cable internet providers, bellsouth DSL and some of the other DSL carriers, Comcast pricing is no different here than anywhere else.  The other cable provider offers bundle discounts for tv, internet, and phone, the more you get, the more the discount.  Bellsouth offers a DSL discount if you get the premium phone service,  there is no discount for basic phone service.  Basic phone service is mandatory to get DSL.<br><small>--<br>Registered Bandwidth Offender #40812</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6420186</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 29 Mar 2003 09:44:32 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6419580</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/486895"><b>newview</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>quote:</SMALL><HR><SMALL> The Consumer Federation of America and the Consumers Union asked the Justice Department and the Federal Trade Commission to investigate whether the steep discounts offered when customers purchased both services constituted anticompetitive tying or predatory pricing.<br><br>"If there were ever a candidate for an investigation of predatory pricing under the antitrust laws, this would be it," said Mark Cooper, research director for the Consumer Federation of America. "Even if the government concludes that the price is not predatory in the classic sense, it must be deeply concerned about anticompetitive tying." </SMALL><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Predatory pricing is a just and accurate description of the current Comcast method of doing business. Customers who have had enough, and defect to satellite TV services are forced to pay higher HSI fees or retain the basic cable, and pay THAT fee, in order to keep the current ADVERTISED prices.<br>It is impossible to get a bill from Comcast for $42.95 a month.<br><br>I welcome this investigation and encourage everyone who is paying higher fees due to not subscribing to their basic cable to file a complaint with the FTC. &raquo;<A HREF="http://www.ftc.gov/" >www.ftc.gov/</A><br><br>&raquo;<A HREF="/forum/remark,6305111~root=comcast~mode=flat">About the Comcast is King news</A><br><small>--<br> <A HREF="http://drebbelstraat20.dyndns.org/~mvdwege/misc/spamrules.html">The Rules of Spam</A> | <A HREF="http://www.spamlaws.com/state/md.html">Maryland's New Anti-Spam Law</A><BR>Where are we going? And what's with the hand basket? </small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6419580</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 29 Mar 2003 06:53:20 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6417662</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/755850"><b>DonLibes</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  Combat Chuck <A HREF="/useremail/u/525402"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>I do agree that they are using HSI to get cable customers, but that in and of it self is not unfair nor illegal.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Ok, you're entitled to your opinion.  Hopefully the FTC and DOJ will respond and tell us whether you're right or not.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6417662</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 28 Mar 2003 22:36:37 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6415086</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/525402"><b>Combat Chuck</b></A> : My understanding is that you're saying Comcast is using it's HSI monopoly to force customers into going with cable.  Right?<br><br>My thoughts are that:<br><br>Cable TV has competition from sat. everywhere thus no real monopoly.<br><br>Comcast HSI has competition in some areas (I would argue most per capita, but would like to see some numbers if anyone has them).  And because they are acting the same in both areas, they aren't using HSI as leverage unfairly.<br><br>I do agree that they are using HSI to get cable customers, but that in and of it self is not unfair nor illegal.<br><small>--<br>So it begins.</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6415086</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 28 Mar 2003 17:41:46 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6410435</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/755850"><b>DonLibes</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  Combat Chuck <A HREF="/useremail/u/525402"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>The problem is that Comcast HSI has competition in many areas (And I would bet that there are more potential customers in areas with HSI competition than without).  Their policies are set system wide for both areas.  How can they be abusing a monopoly in the areas without competition when their policies are set the same in areas with competition.  The only way it could be even marginally considered abuse is if the discount was only offered in areas without competition.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>When I said "areas", I meant product areas, not geographical areas.  Sorry for the confusion.<br><br>I maintain what I said before, the leverage they are using to force customers to buy cable TV (or pay as if they did) when they buy broadband is what is considered anti-competitive.  I agree with you it's not abusive in geographical areas where there are choices for broadband but you can't use that as an excuse to say then it can't be abusive in areas where they have the de facto monopoly.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6410435</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 28 Mar 2003 08:39:07 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6409306</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><b>JTRockville</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  gharney <A HREF="/useremail/u/554081"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>there is nothing stopping another cable company from coming in and overbuilding.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Sez YOU  gharney <A HREF="/useremail/u/554081"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>. RCN's testimony before the United States Senate Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Antitrust, Business Rights, and Competition has 28 pages full of reasons. <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by <A HREF="http://judiciary.senate.gov/oldsite/te040401rjc.pdf"><U>Robert Currey, Vice Chairman RCN Corporation</U></A>:</SMALL><HR>The new entrant has no captive subscribers; no initial revenue and enormous start-up expenses such as securing the local franchise. This latter process alone generally takes six months to a year. Local franchise authorities usually attempt to secure as high a price as possible for granting a franchise and typically require high standards of proof of a franchise applicant&#146;s financial and operational experience and capability. Multiyear construction commitments are normally required. Accordingly, the potential competitor must earmark funds, purchase long lead time items, enter into programming commitments, hire hundreds of employees in each market, and, most important, fight for each subscriber because the local citizens who want cable service are probably already customers of the incumbent. To use a well-worn metaphor, the lowhanging fruit has been picked. Installing fiber optic or coaxial cable throughout a community can cost tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars per mile. As a result, it has generally been thought that competitive MVPD service based on construction of a second local broadband distribution network is not sustainable financially and there has been relatively little of it, either before passage of the Telecom Act of 1996, or thereafter.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Looks to me like there are lots of barriers. <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  billybagoil <A HREF="/useremail/u/698441"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>its not your right to have affordable high speed internet service. please stop asking your babysitter, the government, to help you get cheap internet service.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I didn't have to ask! <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by <A HREF="http://ftp.fcc.gov/Speeches/Martin/Statements/2002/stkjm204.html"><U>FCC Commissioner Kevin J. Martin</U></A>:</SMALL><HR>Encouraging the deployment of broadband services to all Americans should be a national priority. Such services are essential to the economy of the 21st century, dramatically reducing the costs of exchanging information and allowing previously local businesses to serve the world. Broadband services are especially important to rural America, providing business, educational, and healthcare opportunities to remote parts of the country. I am hopeful that, just as rapid developments in telecommunications and technology have driven much of this nation&#146;s economic growth in recent years, broadband deployment will lead to a new period of growth. I thus believe that all levels of government should work to eliminate barriers to infrastructure investment and to accelerate broadband deployment.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Perhaps,  gharney <A HREF="/useremail/u/554081"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>, you should share your views with FCC Commissioner Martin. It looks like he thinks there are barriers too.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6409306</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 28 Mar 2003 01:21:12 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6409200</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/243978"><b>Zorglub</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  billybagoil <A HREF="/useremail/u/698441"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>if you think it costs too much go back to dial up. you people make me sick. if you dont have cable you are not gonna die. you remind me of the people complaining about drug prices being to high. its not your right to have affordable high speed internet service. please stop asking your babysitter, the government, to help you get cheap internet service.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>I hope you feel better man.  Should we infer from your posting that dying ppl don't have a right to seek treatment if they can't afford it?  <br>You're right, I don't know why we have a government.  Why do we know the FDA, the FCC after all?  Let the biggest guy win!  Yee ha!]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6409200</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 28 Mar 2003 01:02:01 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6408731</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/698441"><b>billybagoil</b></A> : if you think it costs too much go back to dial up.  you people make me sick.  if you dont have cable you are not gonna die.  you remind me of the people complaining about drug prices being to high.  its not your right to have affordable high speed internet service.  please stop asking your babysitter, the government, to help you get cheap internet service.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6408731</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2003 23:54:11 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6408677</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/525402"><b>Combat Chuck</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  DonLibes <A HREF="/useremail/u/755850"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>... One such issue is that when you buy broadband, they force you to buy another of their products (or pay a higher price) - the other product being TV where they have competition (from satellite).  To use their monopoly to undercut their competition in another area this way is considered abuse of their monopoly<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>The problem is that Comcast HSI has competition in many areas (And I would bet that there are more potential customers in areas with HSI competition than without).  Their policies are set system wide for both areas.  How can they be abusing a monopoly in the areas without competition when their policies are set the same in areas with competition.  The only way it could be even marginally considered abuse is if the discount was only offered in areas without competition.<br><br>And if you're going for the anti-competitive pricing route:  I think you would have to show that they were actually losing money on customers with HSI and cable, relying on their larger assets to ride out the losses hoping DTV and Dish Network die off first.<br><SMALL>--<br>So it begins.</SMALL><br><i>[text was edited by author 2003-03-28 00:13:57]</i><br>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6408677</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2003 23:46:59 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6408507</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/554081"><b>gharney</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by IH8TCOMCAST:</SMALL><HR>While Comcast may not be a monopoly in the purest sense of the word, face it, they have a monopoly on the coax to your house. Other utilities MUST provide outside access to their phone or power lines to your house, not cable. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>internet access is not a utility.<br><br>there is nothing stopping another cable company from coming in and overbuilding.<br><br> <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>quote:</SMALL><HR> Prove me wrong gharney...... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>you havent made a case to begin with.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6408507</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2003 23:23:42 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6407989</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/549697"><b>J D McDorce</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  AthlGrond <A HREF="/useremail/u/621958"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>My understanding was that AT&T built up in areas where other forms of HSI were already available.  (may sound counter-intuitive but they did manage to get bought out by Comcast.) I was assuming that Comcast was the same. (but they may have a better business model.)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>While I have very limited knowledge of the ex-TCI areas of (the former) AT&T Broadband, MediaOne (at least in areas that I am familiar with) was pretty indiscriminate regarding the locations where they had their high speed internet built out.  Comcast was (and is) pretty much the same way - working toward the goal that <I>if you can get our cable, then you can get our High Speed Internet</I>.  Sometimes I get the impression that Comcast believes that there is no other form of High Speed Internet than Comcast High Speed Internet. :)]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6407989</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2003 22:31:22 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6407602</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/755850"><b>DonLibes</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  Combat Chuck <A HREF="/useremail/u/525402"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>In all seriousness, my question to all of you who think that regulation is needed now, what evidence do you see that comcast is abusing it's "monopoly status" short of there being no competition in some areas?<br><br>Essentially the only evidence that comes to mind is that the price went up.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Actually, there are a few issues but the price hikes themselves aren't one of them - for the very reasons you state.  One such issue is that when you buy broadband, they force you to buy another of their products (or pay a higher price) - the other product being TV where they have competition (from satellite).  To use their monopoly to undercut their competition in another area this way is considered abuse of their monopoly.<br><br>I'm not a lawyer (obviously) but that's my layman's understanding of this particular issue.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6407602</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2003 21:59:56 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6404835</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/621958"><b>AthlGrond</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  JTRockville <A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR> <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  AthlGrond <A HREF="/useremail/u/621958"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>I am aware that there is not competition everywhere. (There isn't everywhere in Denver too) But as I said in most places there is. (in most places where Comcast provides HSI)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I don't know what kind of coverage CHSI has, but a recent study published by the <A HREF="http://pinkhamgroup.com/"><U>pinkhamgroup</U></A> shows that <A HREF="http://www.broadband-daily.com/sample_pdf/DSL_Q4_01_STATE.pdf"><U>over 60% of folks in Alabama</U></A> are beyond 18k cable feet from a CO. The study was done for all states, but only Alabama is shown in the free sample. I assume national DSL coverage doesn't vary too wildly from Alabama. Since there aren't that many places where Comcast has a cable competitor (oddly, I think Alabama is one of the exceptions), what leads you to believe there's competition in "most" places? Judging from the data I've found, I'd say there's NO broadband competition in most places. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>My understanding was that AT&T built up in areas where other forms of HSI were already available.  (may sound counter-intuitive but they did manage to get bought out by Comcast.) I was assuming that Comcast was the same. (but they may have a better business model.) <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>quote:</SMALL><HR><BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  AthlGrond <A HREF="/useremail/u/621958"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>BTW I get the same deal in the area with competition that you do without, though I'll be they try harder to keep me as a customer through better service and maintenance. (though I didn't get a bribe package like you did ;))<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>awwwwww, I'll share. Want the chocolate remote? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Hehe, not really. But thanks for offering, its the thought that counts! :)]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6404835</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2003 17:41:40 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6404620</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/525402"><b>Combat Chuck</b></A> : In all seriousness, my question to all of you who think that regulation is needed now, what evidence do you see that comcast is abusing it's "monopoly status" short of there being no competition in some areas?<br><br>Essentially the only evidence that comes to mind is that the price went up.  The price went up on a lot of stuff over the last couple years.  Comcast/ATTBI's increases were system wide (the price is similar both where they're the only provider and where there's much competition), and they are actually still price/bandwidth lower than most other providers (last time I checked Speakeasy was over $60.00 for 768/256 in my area).  I believe the only place where they are significantly higher is where there are government entities offering broadband and in those cases it's hard to tell what the actual cost is because it's spread over the taxpayers in one form or another.<br><br>You can call it extortion (which I guess it technically is) or you can call it a discount (which it also technically is); the end result is the same and comcast wasn't the one who put forth the E word.<br><SMALL>--<br>So it begins.</SMALL><br><i>[text was edited by author 2003-03-27 17:20:37]</i><br>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6404620</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2003 17:19:39 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6403975</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/755850"><b>DonLibes</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  J D McDorce <A HREF="/useremail/u/549697"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>Things would be much cleaner if Comcast were to state that the <I>standard rate</I> for their internet service is $57.95 with a $15 discount for CATV subscribers.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I agree with you - but it doesn't change the debate because $15 is so close to the actual price of the lowest cable tier - meaning they are indeed forcing you to buy cable TV service in order to get their broadband product.  Now if they reduced the discount to say $5 which is <B>below</B> anyone's lowest cable tier, then I think they'd be in the clear to go ahead and offer the bundling discount without being deemed abusive of their monopoly.<br><br>By the way, for people looking for a technically correct phrase to describe Comcast in an area in which they are the only provider of broadband, I recommend you call Comcast a "de facto monopoly".  Even Comcast doesn't argue with that phrasing.  ]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6403975</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2003 16:03:42 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6403693</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><b>JTRockville</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  AthlGrond <A HREF="/useremail/u/621958"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>I am aware that there is not competition everywhere. (There isn't everywhere in Denver too) But as I said in most places there is. (in most places where Comcast provides HSI)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I don't know what kind of coverage CHSI has, but a recent study published by the <A HREF="http://pinkhamgroup.com/"><U>pinkhamgroup</U></A> shows that <A HREF="http://www.broadband-daily.com/sample_pdf/DSL_Q4_01_STATE.pdf"><U>over 60% of folks in Alabama</U></A> are beyond 18k cable feet from a CO. The study was done for all states, but only Alabama is shown in the free sample. I assume national DSL coverage doesn't vary too wildly from Alabama. Since there aren't that many places where Comcast has a cable competitor (oddly, I think Alabama is one of the exceptions), what leads you to believe there's competition in "most" places? Judging from the data I've found, I'd say there's NO broadband competition in most places. <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  AthlGrond <A HREF="/useremail/u/621958"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>BTW I get the same deal in the area with competition that you do without, though I'll be they try harder to keep me as a customer through better service and maintenance. (though I didn't get a bribe package like you did ;))<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>awwwwww, I'll share. Want the chocolate remote?]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6403693</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2003 15:32:10 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6403067</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/445048"><b>odog</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  J D McDorce <A HREF="/useremail/u/549697"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR> <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  odog <A HREF="/useremail/u/445048"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>want DSL? you have to get a dial-tone capable copper pair... while it is completely possible and is done in some circumstances.  try calling up the phone company for DSL without a dial-tone line, and they will tell you it's a requirement.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>One difference (which may not be directly relevant to the monopoly discussion) is that having <I>a dial-tone capable copper pair</I> for currently common ADSL has always been a requirement.  Much of the current <I>churn</I> (at least with what we are currently seeing in this forum) is that the additional cost for non-CATV subscribers is directly related to the change of ownership from AT&T to Comcast for an existing cable internet connection.<br><br>Things would be much cleaner if Comcast were to state that the <I>standard rate</I> for their internet service is $57.95 with a $15 discount for CATV subscribers. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>agreed.<br><br>i was just trying to draw the parallel between the phone company not even giving you the option to seperate the products.  want DSL get a dail-tone phone line, want cable internet pay more.<br><small>--<br>disclaimer: my opinions are my own, my employer is not responsible.</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6403067</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2003 14:18:09 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6402960</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/549697"><b>J D McDorce</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  odog <A HREF="/useremail/u/445048"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>want DSL? you have to get a dial-tone capable copper pair... while it is completely possible and is done in some circumstances.  try calling up the phone company for DSL without a dial-tone line, and they will tell you it's a requirement.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>One difference (which may not be directly relevant to the monopoly discussion) is that having <I>a dial-tone capable copper pair</I> for currently common ADSL has always been a requirement.  Much of the current <I>churn</I> (at least with what we are currently seeing in this forum) is that the additional cost for non-CATV subscribers is directly related to the change of ownership from AT&T to Comcast for an existing cable internet connection.<br><br>Things would be much cleaner if Comcast were to state that the <I>standard rate</I> for their internet service is $57.95 with a $15 discount for CATV subscribers.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6402960</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2003 14:07:23 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6402157</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/0"><b>anon</b></A> : While Comcast may not be a monopoly in the purest sense of the word, face it, they have a monopoly on the coax to your house. Other utilities MUST provide outside access to their phone or power lines to your house, not cable.<br><br>For you Comcast shills it's also not a "price break" for purchasing a bundle. Who's prices got lowered? The BEST you can do is stay even. It's a predatory practice to force dish owners to cable. They want to force you to get ALL services eventually through the coax (voice, data, TV) because they have total control of the line.<br><br>The few cable companies in the U.S. are nothing but modern day "robber barons" like the railroads in the late 1800's.<br><br>Prove me wrong gharney......]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6402157</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2003 12:22:48 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6402058</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/243978"><b>Zorglub</b></A> : This all goes back to the "is Comcast a monopoly" debate.  I've stated before that I believe that Comcast is a pseudo or quasi (pick the word you like most) monopoly in many places where they are the only broadband residential provider (as in high speed for $40-50 a month).  Of course, you'll find ppl on this board stating that 56k or T1 are perfect substitutes to cable broadband, and therefore nobody should bitch about it.<br><br>Well, believe what you want, and let's see what comes out of this.  More than likely, nothing will happen, and Comcast will go on his merry way ripping customers off.  I'm just hoping that at some point new technologies will come along to break the cable monopoly, but that's still years away.<br><br>In the meantime, happy bundling!]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6402058</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2003 12:10:05 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6402022</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/621958"><b>AthlGrond</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  JTRockville <A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>I guess things are different in Denver,  AthlGrond <A HREF="/useremail/u/621958"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>. In Rockville 20852, between Rock Creek Park and the CSX line, that's simply not true. There is no <STRIKE>choice</STRIKE> competition for broadband services at my location.<br><br>&#8226;DSL at 19,300 cable feet? Please provide a link!<br>&#8226;Wireless? <A HREF="http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6257313~root=dslalt~mode=flat"><U>Not in Rockville!</U></A><br>&#8226;other services? I'm all ears. But I've already ruled out:<br>&#8226;Powerline - I'm iso trials, but there are <A HREF="http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,5490868~root=alt,other~mode=flat#6120196"><U>none in Rockville</U></A>.<br>&#8226;Satellite - Last time I checked, the only offering was a telco return.<br><br><I>Edit:<br>I changed "choice" to "competition". In fact, I do have a "choice". I can remain at the mercy of whatever torture Comcast decides to bestow on its customers, or I can regress to technology of the last millennium.</I><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I am aware that there is not competition everywhere.  (There isn't everywhere in Denver too)  But as I said in most places there is. (in most places where Comcast provides HSI)<br><br>Obviously in some area's Comcast is a monopoly for HSI too. (well obvious to you and me anyway)<br><br>BTW I get the same deal in the area with competition that you do without, though I'll be they try harder to keep me as a customer through better service and maintenance. (though I didn't get a bribe package like you did ;))<br><br>FYI Some satellite systems allow for uplink via the dish, but the usually problems with satellite systems still apply. (not all that fast, expensive and high latency)]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6402022</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2003 12:06:01 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6401896</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/445048"><b>odog</b></A> : want DSL? you have to get a dial-tone capable copper pair... while it is completely possible and is done in some circumstances.  try calling up the phone company for DSL without a dial-tone line, and they will tell you it's a requirement.<br><br>with many people using their cellphone for everything.... would object to getting another $25 tacked on their $25 on their DSL biil for phone service when they don't need it.<br><SMALL>--<br>disclaimer: my opinions are my own, my employer is not responsible.</SMALL><br><i>[text was edited by author 2003-03-27 11:52:05]</i><br>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6401896</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2003 11:49:30 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6401621</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><b>JTRockville</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  AthlGrond <A HREF="/useremail/u/621958"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR>The economic one applies to Comcast providing cable service in most places. (in the vast majority of the places where they provide cable service they are the only available provider) They are not a monopoly for high speed internet access in most areas however, since DSL, wireless, and other services are available those areas that Comcast sells high-speed internet service.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I guess things are different in Denver,  AthlGrond <A HREF="/useremail/u/621958"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>. In Rockville 20852, between Rock Creek Park and the CSX line, that's simply not true. There is no <STRIKE>choice</STRIKE> competition for broadband services at my location.<br><br>&#8226;DSL at 19,300 cable feet? Please provide a link!<br>&#8226;Wireless? <A HREF="http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6257313~root=dslalt~mode=flat"><U>Not in Rockville!</U></A><br>&#8226;other services? I'm all ears. But I've already ruled out:<br>&#8226;Powerline - I'm iso trials, but there are <A HREF="http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,5490868~root=alt,other~mode=flat#6120196"><U>none in Rockville</U></A>.<br>&#8226;Satellite - Last time I checked, the only offering was a telco return.<br><br><I>Edit:<br>I changed "choice" to "competition". In fact, I do have a "choice". I can remain at the mercy of whatever torture Comcast decides to bestow on its customers, or I can regress to technology of the last millennium.<br><br><SMALL></I><br><br><i>[text was edited by author 2003-03-27 11:30:05]</i>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6401621</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2003 11:16:14 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6401596</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/785829"><b>MikeDz3$</b></A> : the government isn't gonna do anything. The justice department and the fcc both approved this merger with little or no restrictions on comcast. The fcc chair has always turned down requests to regulate the cable industry and to let it flourish on its own. Therefore i don't think anything will change. If anything they will raise the rates for everyone and make everyone pay $60/month and they will see all the 2.5million subscribers leave because they don't see paying $60 for lowband high speed internet service(1.5/256).]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6401596</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2003 11:12:55 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6401397</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/573391"><b>JTRockville</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  gharney <A HREF="/useremail/u/554081"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR> <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  fuzydice <A HREF="/useremail/u/266399"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR> They're a monopoly, <br> <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>they are far from a monopoly.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Comcast by legal definition in most cases is <B><I>technically</I></B> not a monopoly. But I wouldn't say they're "far" from it.<br><br>In the overwhelming majority of locations, Comcast enjoys the benefits of offering a unique service, which is in high demand, without competition. So they can behave like an <B><I>unregulated monopoly</I></B>.<br><br>Sure, Comcast can justify their behavior by splitting legal hairs. Every move, disclaimer, and price hike they make is entirely within the law. But the result is the same.<br><br>Many people feel they're being ripped off and bullied, and they're downright angry about it.<BR><SMALL><br><i>[text was edited by author 2003-03-27 11:56:30]</i><br>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6401397</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2003 10:41:37 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6401393</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/621958"><b>AthlGrond</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  gharney <A HREF="/useremail/u/554081"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR> <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  fuzydice <A HREF="/useremail/u/266399"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR> They're a monopoly, <br> <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>they are far from a monopoly.<br><br>unless of course you are using your own definition which differs from the real world definition. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>/rolls eyes<br><br>Fact is there are multiple definitions for monopoly. (please consult your dictionary to confirm, as I will not argue this point)<br><br>The economic definition is "The sole provider of a good or service", and this is by far a more "real world" definition than most others.  (since when this condition is encountered people tend to suffer due to price, innovation, offerings, etc. problems)<br><br>The economic one applies to Comcast providing cable service in most places. (in the vast majority of the places where they provide cable service they are the only available provider) They are not a monopoly for high speed internet access in most areas however, since DSL, wireless, and other services are available those areas that Comcast sells high-speed internet service.<br><br>gharney likes to use the legal definition of monopoly, saying that by law Comcast can't keep competition out of the areas in which they operate.  And he is correct in that regard.  His is a real-world definition, but it is not the only one.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6401393</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2003 10:40:58 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6401332</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/530591"><b>Chronometon</b></A> : : Why am I being forced to pay so much more <br>: for the same service I've always gotten just<br>: because I don't subscribe to cable TV service?<br><br>Exactly. This goes beyond a simple bundling of services. <br><br>Where it crosses the line is that now Internet+Basic Cable TV is CHEAPER than Internet alone. I see no way to interpret that as anything but predatory. <br><br>You literally have to PAY MORE to *avoid* taking the CATV service along with the Internet service.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6401332</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2003 10:29:24 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6401281</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/787939"><b>rody_4O</b></A> : asking for a investigation and anything coming from the investigation is 2 dif. things.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6401281</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2003 10:20:58 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6401279</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/481467"><b>somebodeez</b></A> : Comcast is the only <I>cable</I> company in my area. There simply are not any other <I>cable</I> services around here. This is a <U>fact</U> that can not be denied no matter how badly some try to sugar coat it, twist words - whatever. This <I>is</I> the "real world".<br><br>Evidently, according to an article I read some where around here (can't find it now)Comcast only cuts prices in the very few areas where there is another <I>cable</I> company. <br>So if Comcast only considers other <I>cable</I> companies competiton and since there are no other <I>cable</I> companies around here and because of that I have to pay a higher price than what the customers get to pay in those few areas where they have a choice in <I>cable</I> companies, Comcast is a monopoly in my book.<br><br>Please note, I did not state whether I am happy with Comcast or not, did not voice complaints or praise. Just wanted to get my 2 cents in about this monopoly stuff :)<br><br><br><i>[text was edited by author 2003-03-27 10:23:23]</i><br>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6401279</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2003 10:20:45 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6401250</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/787939"><b>rody_4O</b></A> : so what. NOTHING WILL CHANGE]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6401250</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2003 10:16:01 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6401014</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/554081"><b>gharney</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>said by  fuzydice <A HREF="/useremail/u/266399"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>:</SMALL><HR> They're a monopoly, <br> <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>they are far from a monopoly.<br><br>unless of course you are using your own definition which differs from the real world definition.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6401014</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2003 09:42:43 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6401005</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/791178"><b>mdford</b></A> : I'm really getting screwed by this new pricing.  When I signed up for @Home service, I was paying something on the order of $34.95/mo.  When AT&T Broadband took over, it jumped to $42.95.  Now, Comcast is taking over and it jumps to $57.95/mo!!<br><br>Why am I being forced to pay so much more for the same service I've always gotten just because I don't subscribe to cable TV service?]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6401005</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2003 09:41:01 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6400920</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/183609"><b>drugrep</b></A> : This is where bundled pricing has bit me in the arse.<br><br>Before Comcast bought AT&T, I was begging for a break since AT&T is my phone provider (local & long distance), cell provider, and was Internet provider.<br><br>Now, bundling is bad bad bad! ]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6400920</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2003 09:28:20 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6399983</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/617389"><b>Zoder</b></A> :  <BLOCKQUOTE><SMALL>quote:</SMALL><HR>I just hope to God that you people who really want this to land in a court realize what you are doing and the precident it could set should it land in a courtroom; the implications could quite possibly extend far, far beyond Comcast (everything from discounted airline tickets to toothpaste coupons to mcdonalds value meals to preferred credit card rates could be affected).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><br><br>Based on the article it looks like they are questioning whether Comcast has a monopoly and if so, are abusing their monopoly power to extort customers who don't subscribe to their television service.  Since antitrust law only applies to monopolies I doubt any decision against Comcast, if they are proven to be a monopoly, would have an effect on the other industries you mentioned.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6399983</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2003 04:10:45 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6399705</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/525402"><b>Combat Chuck</b></A> : But thats not what they're going to get.<br><br>What they're going to get is a court set precident that companies that bundle services are extorting customers that choose not to take advantage of bundle pricing, and thus no more bundled pricing or anything that looks like bundled pricing on anything, anywhere.<br><br>Contrary to popular belief, regulation is not the holy grail of dealing with pseudo-monopolies.  It's going to end in medeocre service or no service at all should comcast decide that it's not profitable to provide service under the regulation, and nobody picks up where they left off.<br><br>I might agree with you that regulation is needed if the price was way higher in areas where Comcast is the only provider, or if the price was significantly higher than other options such as DSL; but quite frankly neither of those are true at this point in time.<br><small>--<br>So it begins.</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6399705</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2003 02:26:45 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6399652</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/756481"><b>aTmFan</b></A> : Quick question.....<br><br>How is Comcast or any other cable company any different than say SBC or McDonald's or any other for-profit company for that matter? They all charge a lower rate/price if you BUNDLE services/products. So why doesn't anyone bitch and moan about the tremendous difference in getting a Big Mac at $3.29 or whatever the hell it costs nowadays or $3.99 with a fries and a drink??(Someone probably has written Micky D's about this I'm sure! Is there a Hamburgerreports.com???)I can see it now!<br><br>McDonald's Price Gouging the Big Mac only people!! <br><br>"This is some kind of scam. I want my Big Mac to be just a cheap if I only want that one thing. Who cares if I can get fries and a drink for .70 more. I want fair pricing, damn that Hamburglar! Ripping me and the other Big Mac only people off...I am writing the Hamburger Franchising Authority!! This is illegal. Burger King has the Whopper on sale, how come I can't buy a Whopper on this side of the road.......IT'S A DAMN BURGER MONOPOLY!!!"<br><br>Why doesn't anyone cry about SBC or any other phone service charging more for a DSL connection if you don't have phone service through them?<br><br>sorry..... [getting off soapbox]  :o<br><br>aTmFan]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6399652</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2003 02:15:49 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6399603</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/266399"><b>fuzydice</b></A> : its a form of regulation for the cable industry ppl are seeking. it needs regulation otherwise comcast can do anything they want from not providing any service to raising rates as high as numbers can go (infinite?). They're a monopoly, they <B>need</B> government regulation.<br><small>--<br>[referring to the RIAA...] These guys buy congress people like M&Ms</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6399603</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2003 02:05:33 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6399463</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/525402"><b>Combat Chuck</b></A> : I just hope to God that you people who really want this to land in a court realize what you are doing and the precident it could set should it land in a courtroom; the implications could quite possibly extend far, far beyond Comcast (everything from discounted airline tickets to toothpaste coupons to mcdonalds value meals to preferred credit card rates could be affected).<br><br>And the irony is that should you get your way, you're not even going to get the lower price, they're just going jack everybody up to the higher price.<br><small>--<br>So it begins.</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6399463</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2003 01:40:54 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6399025</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/549697"><b>J D McDorce</b></A> : They'll probably get real upset if they go to &raquo;<A HREF="http://www.comcastonline.com/code/howmuch.asp?.=" >www.comcastonline.com/code/howmuch.asp?.=</A>. and see the cost for non-CATV customers as $57.95 versus the $56.95 that they have been bouncing around ;-)<br><br>A discussion on this topic can be found here: &raquo;<A HREF="/shownews/27080">Bundling an Antitrust Violation?</A><br><br><SMALL>I wonder how many takers they have for their $139 cable modems?</SMALL>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6399025</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2003 00:34:18 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6397651</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/699513"><b>DanB</b></A> : Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users <br>Consumer groups call for an antitrust probe into cable companies that charge people more for broadband access if they don't sign up for a television package.<br><br>&raquo;<A HREF="http://news.com.com/2100-1034-994276.html" >news.com.com/2100-1034-994276.html</A>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6397651</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2003 22:13:24 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
