 brianiscool
join:2000-08-16
Miami, FL | NIce try Comcast No total control of the cable market for you :P | |
|
 | 
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
2 edits | Re: NIce try Comcast said by brianiscool  :No total control of the cable market for you :P The FCC will more than likely raise that cap allowing Comcast to continue to grow.
»ibc.broadcastnewsroom.com/articl···d=108698
FCC adopted a new limit that stopped a cable operator from growing above 30% of pay-TV subscribers.
But a federal appeals court in March 2001 tossed out the 30% subscriber cap and returned the matter to the FCC for further review.
In recent weeks, FCC chairman Kevin Martin has expressed interest in reviving the cable-ownership issue, either as a standalone matter or as part of the broader media-ownership debate. --
--
My BLOG
My Web Page | |
|
| | brianiscool
join:2000-08-16
Miami, FL | Re: NIce try Comcast When will Microsoft or Google launch their cable company? | |
|
| | | 
jtudor
Xm 60's On 6 Freak
Premium,MVM
join:2002-12-07
Morganton, NC | Re: NIce try Comcast Charter was founded by one of the original Microsoft partners, but I don't know if he is still involved in ownership.
--
Best of luck
"Do, or Do not, there is no try!" Yoda
| |
|
| | | Zyniker
Zyniker
Premium
join:2004-12-25
Anaheim, CA
| I do not believe that Microsoft has much interest in actually acquiring such businesses (or, less likely, creating them). Microsoft seems to prefer providing the software to run such endeavors... 
--
The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible worlds, the pessimist fears this is true. | |
|
| | | | gpancner
join:2001-09-27
Nine Mile Falls, WA | Re: NIce try Comcast Keep growing Comcast!
Having put up with Mediacom for 2 years I sure wish Comcast was here. | |
|
| iluv2fish1
join:2007-03-04
Cape Coral, FL | What is fair is fair. Let everyone compete on the same level. Don't punish Comcast because of success. | |
|
Loker
Premium
join:2004-07-11
Fargo, ND
clubs:
| Silly This was put in place to stop a huge monopoly like Ma Bell. I do not think that is possible now with all the converging technologies in the video arena so I agree with sentiment this should be raised or gotten rid of.
When more competition comes in and it turns out Comcast has a better service for less money (just an example before anyone else starts saying its never gonna happen) are they going to have to start turning people away when they think they hit 30% of the market?
If that does happen does that mean other companies not governed by the ownership limits will not have to worry about being very competitive in price because the cable company can not take on any more consumers?
--
"While preceding your entrance with a grenade is a good tactic inQuake, it can lead to problems if attempted at work." -- C Hacking | |
|
| 
Titus Pullo
I came, I saw, I slept
join:2004-06-26
 ·Embarq
| Re: Silly said by Loker :When more competition comes in and it turns out Comcast has a better service for less money (just an example before anyone else starts saying its never gonna happen) are they going to have to start turning people away when they think they hit 30% of the market? I won't say it's 'never going to happen' but my choice of providers isn't growing and I don't see it likely to do so. Not to mention that what Comcast wants is the ability to avoid any competition by consuming the consumer space in question. Once you do that you've created a complete entry barrier to any competition.
Not all regulations are bad things. They may be bad for a particular business once that business hits a wall that the regulation builds, but turning a word (in this case 'regulation') into a pejorative is an old tactic that should be duly noted.
OT: Someone, someday, is going to have to ante up and explain how consolidation (takeovers, mergers, buyouts) and increased market share from less oversight and regulation equals more competition, because so far that math isn't adding up for me.
--
Salary Ratios (Top-tier CEOs : firms' employees): Britain, 24:1; France, 15:1; Sweden, 13:1; United States, 475:1 .:. see you in the eye of the needle. | |
|
| 
Fatal Vector
join:2005-11-26
| "This was put in place to stop a huge monopoly like Ma Bell. I do not think that is possible now with all the converging technologies in the video arena so I agree with sentiment this should be raised or gotten rid of."
The same old song. This same basic rationalle has been used by broadcasting conglomerates and you see the mind numbing wasteland that broadcast radio and TV has become. The so called "converging technologies get more and more suitable for a monopoly as they converge.
In the end, it will be the mega corp with the most money that wins, like allways. Money talks and bullshit (like the concerns of you and I) walks. Greed and population growth will be the eventual downfall of our society. | |
|
| 
Obliteration
Premium
join:2005-09-18
Somewhere
| said by Loker :This was put in place to stop a huge monopoly like Ma Bell. I do not think that is possible now with all the converging technologies in the video arena so I agree with sentiment this should be raised or gotten rid of. When more competition comes in and it turns out Comcast has a better service for less money (just an example before anyone else starts saying its never gonna happen) are they going to have to start turning people away when they think they hit 30% of the market? If that does happen does that mean other companies not governed by the ownership limits will not have to worry about being very competitive in price because the cable company can not take on any more consumers? Well, there must certainly be high barriers into the television and high speed Internet market. Comcast racks in huge profits and yet nobody else wants to compete? I call BS and raise you a high entry barrier.
HSI in Chicago, IL is dominated heavily by Comcast due to DSL limitations and nobody else competing.
RCN is so small in Chicago it can be deemed insignificant. I asked the condo if they allowed RCN to be received. Answer was no, Comcast had bought them out and they had bought the neighbors(side building) and other neighbors. I went and asked, it is not an assumption.
--
"The constitution is just a goddamn piece of paper."-George W. Bush, Nov. 2005 | |
|
RideRed
Vista needs a popup blocker for Vista
Premium
join:2005-06-18
USA
| No thanks Providing crap overpriced service to 30% of the market is enough. There is nothing to be gained by exposing the other 70% to the same crap service.
--
There's only 10 types of people in this world. Those who understand binary, and those who don't. | |
|
| 
Camelot One
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-21
Sarasota, FL
clubs:
| Re: No thanks I don't understand how the 30% cap helps a single consumer. Sure a guy in Florida may have a different cable company than here in Austin, but each of us still only have the 1 company. There is absolutely no cable competition anywhere that I've heard of. (I don't count Satellite as a cable competitor anymore than I count cell phone companies as competition for POTS)
--
AMD X2 4800+ @2700Mhz/ MSI K8N Neo 4 Platinum SLI/ 4x 1024Mb Corsair XMS PC4000/ WD 74Gb Raptor/ PNY 7800GTs SLI/ Antec 550 True Control/Custom water cooler | |
|
| |
RideRed
Vista needs a popup blocker for Vista
Premium
join:2005-06-18
USA
2 edits | Re: No thanks It's not so much dealing directly with a customer as it put them in control of what the customer sees to the point they can make or break a distributor. Having that much power, Comcast can levy their influence against broadcasters, stop their channels from being aired, etc.
They become too big of an influence in the marketplace.
For example, let's say you're the Spice Channel and Comcast has a hang up about pron. If Comcast runs 50% of the market and says no to you, it could preclude you from doing business at all as there may not be enough "yes" people left to make a profit. Comcast (if they had a huge market share) could be in the position of determining what programmers stay in business or not.
If Comcast is only 30% of the market, a provider like Spice has the other 70% + DBS to market their products to.
It's an anti-trust issue not for consumers but for those companies who do business with cable and DBS providers like Comcast.
A big Comcast is bad for everyone.
--
There's only 10 types of people in this world. Those who understand binary, and those who don't. | |
|
| | mglunt
join:2001-09-10
Fredericksburg, VA
 ·Verizon FIOS
| said by Camelot One :There is absolutely no cable competition anywhere that I've heard of. (I don't count Satellite as a cable competitor anymore than I count cell phone companies as competition for POTS) I don't agree that Sat is not a competitor to Cable. I just think that the FCC should put a stop to companies like Comcast charging $15 more for people getting HSI without cable TV. I remember when it was $5 then jumped to $15 and opening that bill. I switched to DSL because it put Comcast and DSL at the same price back then (of course DLS is half that now).
In addition to that, Verizon is moving on their FIOS TV. So for me, I can get either dish company, Verizon FIOS, or Comcast. I went from DTV to Verizon because the price was about $10 less a month. | |
|
| | |
RideRed
Vista needs a popup blocker for Vista
Premium
join:2005-06-18
USA
| Re: No thanks I had started out with ATTBi who didn't charge extra. When Comcast bought them out, I just suddenly saw a 30% price hike on my Comcast HSI bill. Now that Time Warner bought our local cable system from Comcast, the bill dropped $10 and service has improved significantly (which is strange since I'm sure it's the same people working there, the same wires in the ground). It's just a culture of greed and the customer is always wrong at Comcast.
--
There's only 10 types of people in this world. Those who understand binary, and those who don't. | |
|
| | | | phaqu
join:2005-05-26
Marietta, GA | Re: No thanks I hear you on that. When comcast bought att here, my bill got split up and I was getting charged about an extra $70/ mth . They didnt last long with me. | |
|
| | | | |
RideRed
Vista needs a popup blocker for Vista
Premium
join:2005-06-18
USA
| Re: No thanks They did the same thing with my neighbor. He had the top tier with ATTB for $73/mo and CC kicked it up to nearly $90 because they pulled some channels off and put them on their own tier and also raised his equipment rates. Now he says his $73 bill is nearly $110 beforce Time Warner took over, more than a 33% increase in just a few years. Since Time Warner took over rates have dropped quite a bit. I know my HSI is far cheaper with Time Warner than it was with Comcast.
--
There's only 10 types of people in this world. Those who understand binary, and those who don't. | |
|
| | | | 
Kylemaul
Lovin' My Firefox 1.5.x
Premium
join:2001-03-30
North Port, FL
clubs: | Not surprised that your service is better. Concast didn't give a flying forking pigs arse about their employees, let alone their customers. Which was a majority of the reason I left them so long agooooooo...... | |
|
chemaupr
join:2005-06-06
Alexandria, VA
| MAX OUT Well Comcast, if you are getting close to max-out your growth potential in the TV area, you might need to start looking closer to other business areas.
but the excuse of phone companies and various upstarts getting into the TV business... that is only one of the many reasons to cap you. If you have more control it would be even harder for them to compete. | |
|
| Jamuka
join:2005-06-06
| Re: MAX OUT said by chemaupr :Well Comcast, if you are getting close to max-out your growth potential in the TV area, you might need to start looking closer to other business areas. but the excuse of phone companies and various upstarts getting into the TV business... that is only one of the many reasons to cap you. If you have more control it would be even harder for them to compete. Harder for them to compete? why? If you have a better product for a better price then it really shouldn't be harder for you now should it? And that's basically what it all boils down to - Price. | |
|
| | chemaupr
join:2005-06-06
Alexandria, VA
| Re: MAX OUT When one company has control of a market they can kill competition with price, even if they lose money in the short run. Not because they have a better product, just because they CAN. The biggest your market share the longer you can resit and fight competition. And even if they loose some market share well they still have a pretty big size.
Comcast sees a threat in two areas here. First growth, they do not have more room and that does not goes good with investors. And the second, competition can eat from that "capped" market. | |
|
| 
Cabal
Premium
join:2007-01-21
Boston, MA
| said by chemaupr :Well Comcast, if you are getting close to max-out your growth potential in the TV area, you might need to start looking closer to other business areas. I'd agree if those weren't artificially imposed limitations by the government. There's no reason to hold back competition now that the same TV and data is coming down fiber and copper to people's homes. | |
|
bigjimc
join:2003-04-21
Middleboro, MA
| Refigure the formula If you were to re-figure the formula to calculate 30% of possible pay subscribers versus 30% of actual pay subscribers, plus take all of the TV providers (including Verizon) and consider all of their STATEWIDE license possible subscribers then Comcast or others could serve additional subscribers.
The best part is that Verizon would not go after statewide licenses because they would be afraid to all comcast a larger foot hold.
--
Just my 2 cents...Flame Lightly... | |
|
N3OGH
Bear patrol must be working like a charm
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
·Verizon FIOS
·Verizon Online DSL
| Cool pic choice, Karl In case anyone was wondering, the picture next to the headline in this story is the now under construction Comcast Center in Philadelphia, PA.
When completed, it will be the tallest building between New York and Chicago.
The concrete core structure has all ready surpassed the height of 1 Liberty place (previously Philadelphia's tallest structure).
Comcast doesn't own the building, but they are the largest single lease holder, hence they get their name on the door...
PS, I HOPE they put an observation level on this baby, the views (and photographs) will be just too awesome to imagine.
--
FCC, PLEASE KILL THE MERGER BEFORE THE MERGER KILLS SATRAD! | |
|
|
RideRed
Vista needs a popup blocker for Vista
Premium
join:2005-06-18
USA
| Re: Cool pic choice, Karl said by N3OGH :In case anyone was wondering, the picture next to the headline in this story is the now under construction Comcast Center in Philadelphia, PA. When completed, it will be the tallest building between New York and Chicago. The concrete core structure has all ready surpassed the height of 1 Liberty place (previously Philadelphia's tallest structure). Comcast doesn't own the building, but they are the largest single lease holder, hence they get their name on the door... PS, I HOPE they put an observation level on this baby, the views (and photographs) will be just too awesome to imagine. Yeah, but if you're a Comcast customer they sent you a nastygram if you reach the 20th floor and will cancel your service if you get to the 30th. When you ask them about it they'll tell you simply to cut your altitude by about 1/2.
--
There's only 10 types of people in this world. Those who understand binary, and those who don't. | |
|
| | |
| |
| 
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| said by N3OGH :The concrete core structure has all ready surpassed the height of 1 Liberty place (previously Philadelphia's tallest structure). Couple that with the Eagles' dumping Garcia and the Curse of Billy Penn is once again confirmed.
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk. | |
|
|
| iluv2fish1
join:2007-03-04
Cape Coral, FL
·Comcast
| Re: Get ready for regulation Comcast... SillyBoy....The reason that Embarf and company are getting there buts kicked is not because Comcast does not want to
play by the rules....Comcast sets the standard.
The Phone Companies are yesterdays news and everyone knows it. Should Comcast charge every user that hooks up to a
Comcast cable modem and charge them a sur-charge eg. Vontage, SunRocket, Packet8, Linksys wireless router etc.
Comcast is using the Sprint long distance lines and are paying for that service. Do you want to double charge Comcast? I bet you do but that is illegal. | |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
·AT&T Southeast
| No Reason Why should Comcast be limited to 30% of the potential market? That's an absurd limitation that will hurt competition more than help. Except for very rare situations, CATV providers do not compete with CATV providers, so capping Comcast's (or any provider for that matter) potential market share is not helping anyone. | |
|
|
See 10 replies to this post |
|
edsgh
@optonline.net | Everything's On Sale! That's because as soon as the FCC lifts that limit Comcast is going to buy the other 73% of cable companies. They would probably get away with it too since Verizon and AT&T are getting into the TV business. So much for true competition. | |
|
| 
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| Re: Everything's On Sale! said by edsgh :
That's because as soon as the FCC lifts that limit Comcast is going to buy the other 73% of cable companies. I doubt they'd buy Charter consdiering thier debt alone is $19 BILLION. That's approximately $3000 worth of debt per subscriber. | |
|
|
|
See 6 replies to this post |
|
inurenegade
join:2006-06-11
Wilmington, DE | if i wanted communism... if i wanted communism i can move to china at least the products there are cheaper i mean hell all we get are these god damn monopolies who are never willing to push the envelope
GTFO comcast all u do is monopolize everything! | |
|
raye
Premium
join:2000-08-14
Orange, CA
| This is what happens when you have no R&D It seems that the standard way for all companies to grow these days is through aquisition. In the past their has always been a healthy mix of growth by aquisition and growth by technology/product development. Companies like Comcast should have enough critical mass of subscribers at this point to fund enough R&D to bring some balanced growth, as well as increase subscribers in their existing markets.
With the FCC deadlocked and little support for this in the Legislative Branch, this will probably not go anywhere IMHO. | |
|
CLEVELTECH
join:2006-12-21
02107 | NO Comcast should NOT be allowed to own everything. Look at MA Bell and good riddance to that. | |
|
| bigjimc
join:2003-04-21
Middleboro, MA | Re: NO MA Bell is almost back....LOL | |
|
| Aleck79
join:2003-07-23
College Station, TX | agreed | |
|
TelecomJunky
Premium
join:2005-12-12
Kansas City, MO | Let 'em If the FCC and FTC don't see any problem with a duopoly in telecom, why not in cable?
--
-----»hotcarl.diaryland.com | |
|
|
Loker
Premium
join:2004-07-11
Fargo, ND
clubs:
| Re: Let 'em said by TelecomJunky :If the FCC and FTC don't see any problem with a duopoly in telecom, why not in cable? because the cable companies are out to hurt the consumer while the phone companies are out to help the consumer!
Look at Verizon they are bringing us all FTTH! they are not doing it for themselves they are doing it for the consumer!
[/sarcasm]
--
"While preceding your entrance with a grenade is a good tactic inQuake, it can lead to problems if attempted at work." -- C Hacking | |
|
| | RoCJester
join:2006-12-20
Pottstown, PA | Re: Let 'em Wow... all I can say is wow. | |
|
| iluv2fish1
join:2007-03-04
Cape Coral, FL
·Comcast
| FCC over-stepped its bounds.
"In 1992, the FCC tweaked its cable-ownership regulations in response to a law passed by Congress. Concerned that cable networks would have too few distribution outlets if there was insufficient competition among cable providers, the FCC ruled that a cable company could serve no more than 30 percent of homes passed by cable companies in the US. Later that decade, the FCC changed its measurement metric, deciding to drop the homes-passed measurement and decreeing that no single cable operator could serve over 30 percent of all cable subscribers in the US."
Congress pass a law for the first standard....but the FCC then over stepped its bounds by creating another law (without Congress approval).
Who do you think you are FCC? | |
|
|
|
See 9 replies to this post |
|
GhostDoggy
join:2005-05-11
Duluth, GA
| Force open markets First, require all cable providers to open their data networks (e.g. broadband portion) to independent ISPs. That way it offers non-cable/telco competition on the service-side. This is a consumer benefit.
Second, make a requirement that every municipality in the USA franchise a minimum of two cable providers. This would be a direct-competition from other cable companies. While arrangements can be made between two cable companies sharing the same physical network, it is not a requirement. As such, an unshared deployment would yield two distinct networks from the cable industry. | |
|
|
|
|
Comcast Fights Ownership Limits
·
·