halfband
Premium
join:2002-06-01
Huntsville, AL
| reply to JTRockville
Re: Watchdogs: Cable gouges broadband users
said by JTRockville  :
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
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.
said by JTRockville :
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.
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.
--
Registered Bandwidth Offender #40812 |
|
halfband
Premium
join:2002-06-01
Huntsville, AL
| reply to degauss1
said by degauss1 :
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.
Good point, but oddly enough, I think that it would be legal do it.
said by degauss1 :
Comcast has f'd up on the marketing side by 'penalizing' people that don't use Comcast CATV and that IS predatory.
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.
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.
I can only conclude the following from this:
1)Comcast thinks cable broadband is superior enough to DSL to withstand the extra charge.
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.
3) or both of the above.
--
Registered Bandwidth Offender #40812 |
|
DonLibes
Premium,ExMod 2001
join:2003-01-19
| reply to halfband
said by halfband :
said by JTRockville :
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.
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.
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. |
|
JTRockville
Data Ho
Premium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD
clubs:
 ·LINGO
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·surpasshosting
 ·Verizon FIOS
| reply to MikeDz3$
said by MikeDz3$ :
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.
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. said by MikeDz3$ :
Now it's too late.
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 wouldn't cause prices to skyrocket to cover the payments, despite financial analysis to the contrary, and despite consumer protests.
That's why I quoted the gross profit margin of 50%. While investors might focus on the net, I don't want to hear any CRAP about how the debt is a problem from the regulators. THAT'S 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. said by MikeDz3$ :
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.
I've written OOL several times! They never reply though...
Before another cable company comes to town MikeDz3$ , 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).
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. |
|
JTRockville
Data Ho
Premium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD
clubs:
·LINGO
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·surpasshosting
·Verizon FIOS
| reply to halfband
said by halfband :
said by degauss1 :
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 $1.50 that's predatory pricing.
Good point, but oddly enough, I think that it would be legal do it.
Even if you were the only candy store in town? |
|
DonLibes
Premium,ExMod 2001
join:2003-01-19
| reply to JTRockville
said by JTRockville :
said by MikeDz3$ :
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.
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. said by MikeDz3$ :
Now it's too late.
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 wouldn't cause prices to skyrocket to cover the payments, despite financial analysis to the contrary, and despite consumer protests.
That's why I quoted the gross profit margin of 50%. While investors might focus on the net, I don't want to hear any CRAP about how the debt is a problem from the regulators. THAT'S 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.
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. |
|
halfband
Premium
join:2002-06-01
Huntsville, AL
| reply to JTRockville
said by JTRockville :
Even if you were the only candy store in town?
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.
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.
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?
--
Registered Bandwidth Offender #40812 |
|
cbrain
join:2000-05-21
Silver Spring, MD
·VoicePulse for Bus..
·Verizon FIOS
 ·Comcast
·Future Nine Corpor..
·VoiceStick
| said by halfband :
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?
Great point!
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.
Can I get you to invest in this over build? |
|
cbrain
join:2000-05-21
Silver Spring, MD
·VoicePulse for Bus..
·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast
·Future Nine Corpor..
·VoiceStick
|  reply to DanB
Is it in the public interest to have phone lines and coax to every residence?
Does the "first in" or primary provider have an advantage over a new provider?
Has a government entity given special consideration to the first provider or its successor in each market?
Does this consideration warrant some obligation?
Does the consumer have the choice in any of these services they do in other consumer products or services?
If Comcast were completely unregulated, would service be better or prices lower?
Is the current bundled pricing a reasonable discount or aimed at slowing satellite providers?
Would you be better off without a franchise authority or some cable regulation? |
|
mj
@tci.com
| reply to AthlGrond
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.
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! |
|
halfband
Premium
join:2002-06-01
Huntsville, AL
| reply to cbrain
said by cbrain :
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.
Can I get you to invest in this over build?
You may have it there. Hmmm, a fly in the capitalist ointment. Isn’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?
--
Registered Bandwidth Offender #40812 |
|
Cliff
join:2002-02-27
Gaithersburg, MD
|  reply to DonLibes
said by DonLibes :
... Comcast blew a ton of hot air prior to the merger. Most of it was on the topic of how the seemingly insurmountable debt wouldn't cause prices to skyrocket to cover the payments, despite financial analysis to the contrary, and despite consumer protests. ...
That's a good point. I went to those same hearings and Comcast promised that, both verbally and in writing, to our LFA. ...
Just like when all the tobacco industry executives went before congress, raised their right hand and swore that tobacco was not addictive.
Well, if our leaders buy it, it must be so. |
|
Cliff
join:2002-02-27
Gaithersburg, MD
| reply to halfband
said by halfband :
You may have it there. Hmmm, a fly in the capitalist ointment. Isn’t that what got standard oil chopped up into pieces?
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! |
|
degauss1
join:2001-07-02
Hillsboro, OR
·ViaTalk
·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast
·Axvoice
| 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. |
|
Zorglub
join:2000-11-18
Fremont, CA | Degauss,
Keep it up! If enough of us leave, they might have to rethink their strategy!! |
|
Combat Chuck
Too Many Cannibals
Premium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA
| reply to JTRockville
kinda a day late but...
said by JTRockville :
Your price went up by 33% and you've got no complaint?!?!? Sheesh Combat Chuck - you're an ideal customer.
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.
said by JTRockville :
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?
No bundle that I'm aware of; not saying there isn't but if there is they hide it well.
--
So it begins. |
|
Zorglub
join:2000-11-18
Fremont, CA | reply to DanB
That's it. I got DSL. It works. Bye bye Comcast. |
|
Combat Chuck
Too Many Cannibals
Premium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA | What speeds are you getting for your $30.00 per month?
--
So it begins. |
|
dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
| reply to aTmFan
[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]
--
You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth |
|
Zorglub
join:2000-11-18
Fremont, CA
| reply to Combat Chuck
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.
Actually, I might go to a $35 plan that should be around 1000/140. |
|
