Search:  

 
 
   News
newer
story category Comcast Is Simply Getting Huge
Quarter additions down slightly but still impressive
10:00AM Wednesday Nov 04 2009 by Karl Bode
tags: business · cable · Comcast
Tipped by JSRoman See Profile
Comcast issued their third quarter earnings this morning, which indicate that while growth has slowed slightly at the cable giant, the money continues to roll in thanks to a combination of rate hikes and customers adding additional services. The company recorded a quarterly profit of $944 million, up from $771 million one year earlier. The company added 361,000 net broadband subscribers and 375,000 VoIP net customers, lower than predicted growth on both fronts but still respectable in the eyes of Wall Street investors.

Respectable might be an understatement, given Comcast's quarterly broadband subscriber additions were more than double the combined total of Qwest, AT&T and Verizon on the quarter.

On the TV front, Comcast showed some impact from Verizon FiOS and AT&T U-Verse, losing a whopping 595,000 basic cable subs, only partially offset by an addition of 463,000 digital video subscribers. But Comcast video customers paid, on average, $66.84 a month — a total that's up 3% from 2008. Combined average revenue per subscriber for video, phone and Internet customers was $117, up 5.6%.

Unless you include AT&T's 3G customers, Comcast is now the largest broadband ISP in the nation. They're also the largest cable company, and given they just beat back a government-imposed restriction that would have capped their growth at 30% of all pay TV customers, the sky's the limit. Comcast is also now the third largest phone company. Collectively, they service 46.8 million voice, data and TV customers. This is of course all before the company acquires NBC Universal -- a deal that's expected to be wrapped up in short order.

Is there such a thing as Comcast getting too big?

Related:
  1. Comcast Still Fighting FCC Throttling Sanction
  2. Comcast Bandwidth Meter Still A No Show
  3. Comcast, NBC Deal Almost Complete
  4. Comcast Hints At Layoffs
  5. Comcast Slammed For Non-Existent Throttling Changes
  6. Comcast TV Everywhere WILL Work Outside The Home
  7. Comcast Website Hackers Indicted
  8. Vivendi In Way Of Comcast's NBC Desires
Forums » Comcast Is Simply Getting Huge
view: topics flat text 
Post a:

kapil
The Kapil

join:2000-04-26
Chicago, IL

Too Big To Fail?

One company should not be allowed to control this much of the nation's infrastructure.

They own phone lines, broadcasting infrastructure, content broadcast over that infrastructure (soon to get even larger with the acquisition of NBC), Internet backbone.

With the FCC unwilling to regulate industries under its purview or provide any cohesive form of oversight of them, Congress needs to step in and do something before Comcast becomes one of those proverbial companies deemed "too big to fail".
--
»www.VoIPTrunk.com

PhoenixDown
-- Wants FIOS
Premium
join:2003-06-08
Fresh Meadows, NY
clubs:

Re: Too Big To Fail?

I was going to post that! you beat me to it darn you!!
--
~ Insert a Funny Sig Here ~
iansltx

join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
·Comcast
·Qwest.net
·magicjack.com
·BeeCreek Communica..
·Sprint Mobile Broa..

THey don't own any phone lines. True, some areas an't get any other broadband than Comcast but that's a different problem.

Now the content side of things is a whole other ballgame, however infrastructure-wise Comcast should be allowed to grow as big as it wants by purchasing MSOs. Overbuilders OTOH might be an antitrust deal.
Lazlow

join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO

Re: Too Big To Fail?

I think you are splitting hairs to say they do not own any phone lines. They do keep their phone product on their backbone as much as possible and Comcast's backbone is huge. The same goes for any of the other large ISPs(and Google).
iansltx

join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
·Comcast
·Qwest.net
·magicjack.com
·BeeCreek Communica..
·Sprint Mobile Broa..

Re: Too Big To Fail?

You could say that of Clear as well...they have ClearVoice with their VoIP service. Doesn't really matter; voice service at this point is at pretty much commodity status. There are enough companies fighting for your money most of the time taht this isn't a big deal.

Also, Comcast built their own network. No government subsidies. So they can do with it what they want, though they shouldn't be allowed to have a monopoly in any area if someone else wants to build the infrastructure.

wifi4milez
Big Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace

join:2004-08-07
New York, NY
·Verizon FIOS
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·RoadRunner Cable
·BroadVoice

Re: Too Big To Fail?

said by iansltx See Profile :

Also, Comcast built their own network. No government subsidies. So they can do with it what they want, though they shouldn't be allowed to have a monopoly in any area if someone else wants to build the infrastructure.
I agree with your statements.

TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast

said by iansltx See Profile :

they shouldn't be allowed to have a monopoly in any area if someone else wants to build the infrastructure.
They don't as a matter of law. Any municipality in the US can OK competitors to Comcast. There are no exclusive franchise deals that prohibits over-builders - that is against the law.
iansltx

join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
·Comcast
·Qwest.net
·magicjack.com
·BeeCreek Communica..
·Sprint Mobile Broa..

Re: Too Big To Fail?

Then we're good to go then. Comcast is the second-fastest MSO in the U.S. (behind Cablevision) in terms of internet speeds, their national network is solid, their digital voice product is fine...not sure about TV though since I've never paid for my own TV service from anyone.

kapil
The Kapil

join:2000-04-26
Chicago, IL

Re: Too Big To Fail?

said by iansltx See Profile :

Then we're good to go then.
Aah. Yes. The hallmark of the average American..."if I have mine, the rest of you can go to hell".

There is more at issue than just YOUR internet speed or phone line. The nation's infrastructure is crumbling. A handful of companies have bought their way on to the tallest mountain top and are now shooting at anyone who dares question them.

We're sorely lacking in broadband deployment and connecting the masses. In the "information economy" this stuff matters. There is a direct co-relation between why a 100 year old copper loop that's been depreciated down to $0 for decades costs more than it ever did and why India and China is kicking our ass. But there's far many of your type who look at their cable modem, judge that all is well, and go back to sleep until the next tea party.
--
»www.VoIPTrunk.com
iansltx

join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
·Comcast
·Qwest.net
·magicjack.com
·BeeCreek Communica..
·Sprint Mobile Broa..

Re: Too Big To Fail?

I'm not saying that there shouldn't be competition in the broadband market. I'm not saying that Congress should be at the beck and call of large corporations. However what I AM saying is that Comcast isn't AT&T, they didn't take money from the government to build infrastructure, they don't have a monopoly on anything and they shouldn't be punished for their success.

Do I want my internet bill to be lower? Absolutely! Do I want a faster connection? Yup. However breaking up Comcast or limiting its growth isn't the way to do that, at least from an infrastructure standpoint. As a content company, I'll grant that things are getting iffy.
dfxmatt

join:2007-08-21
Evanston, IL
Actually, if you take into account their 50% throttling, they're WAY slower than 2nd fastest.
iansltx

join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO

Re: Too Big To Fail?

Wait what?

I've actually never been throttled on Comcast. Awhile back I thought I was, then realized that if you max out your upstream you kill your connection naturally...

kapil
The Kapil

join:2000-04-26
Chicago, IL

said by TKJunkMail See Profile :

said by iansltx See Profile :

they shouldn't be allowed to have a monopoly in any area if someone else wants to build the infrastructure.
They don't as a matter of law. Any municipality in the US can OK competitors to Comcast. There are no exclusive franchise deals that prohibits over-builders - that is against the law.
Aah. But we both know that's not how it plays out in reality.

1. MSOs induce the municipality into structuring the contract in a way that makes an overbuilder competitor highly unlikely.

2. Let's not forget the state-level franchises the telco-tv guys have been fighting (and winning) for that, by and large, make the local franchise agreements and local control and regulation of cable companies irrelevant.

The battle is over. The public, the consumer lost. With the current administration and the anti-big guy winds around the country there may just be one more fight left that can turn the tables...otherwise it may (and probably is) already be too late.
--
»www.VoIPTrunk.com
iansltx

join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO

Re: Too Big To Fail?

Who are you proposing for competition?
openbox9

join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
·AT&T Southeast

said by kapil See Profile :

1. MSOs induce the municipality into structuring the contract in a way that makes an overbuilder competitor highly unlikely.
How so? I'd venture a guess that the bigger issue is the cost entailed in overbuilding which prevents market entry, not contractual issues with municipalities.
said by kapil See Profile :

2. Let's not forget the state-level franchises the telco-tv guys have been fighting (and winning) for that, by and large, make the local franchise agreements and local control and regulation of cable companies irrelevant.
Would state-wide franchises not make it easier for over builders to move into markets?
hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH

Re: Too Big To Fail?

In Ohio the state wide deal makes it easier. Pay $2,000 to the State submit you proposal and off you go building when approved. The thing is getting the $$$$ to build.

rawgerz
In Debt we trust
Premium
join:2004-10-03
Grove City, PA
·Verizon Online DSL
·Sprint Mobile Broa..

said by TKJunkMail See Profile :

They don't as a matter of law. Any municipality in the US can OK competitors to Comcast. There are no exclusive franchise deals that prohibits over-builders - that is against the law.
It can't be that simple, hardly anything is. Every area I've researched so far, for whatever reason, has just one choice in cable. Be it TWC, Comcast, RCN, ect.
Isn't that why Philly got excited to have Fios TV in the city, because all they had was Comcast?

How about this, what's *your* alternative to Comcast?
--

You can't make all the people happy all of the time. But it should be common sense to shoot for the majority.

TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast

Re: Too Big To Fail?

said by rawgerz See Profile :

How about this, what's *your* alternative to Comcast?
Dish & DirectTV for TV and Verizon DSL & a couple of fixed wireless outfits for internet.

rawgerz
In Debt we trust
Premium
join:2004-10-03
Grove City, PA

Re: Too Big To Fail?

Yes, that proves my point. Most everyone has only one choice in cable TV.
hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH

Re: Too Big To Fail?

no they don't. Dish and DirecTV are BOTH considered an option. That would leave 2 other options besides your local cable company.
sonicmerlin

join:2009-05-24
Cleveland, OH

Re: Too Big To Fail?

Those are not direct competitors because of the0 extra hardware required, making it impractical for anyone living in apartments or dense, urban areas.
AJR

join:2009-03-18
Alabaster, AL

said by rawgerz See Profile :

It can't be that simple, hardly anything is.
No...It is that simple.

Over the past 15 years or so, I've lived in 7 different cities across two states and I've yet to see a franchise agreement that prevented an overbuilder from offering service.

NOCMan
Verizon Fios User
Premium
join:2004-09-30
Flower Mound, TX
Actually the FCC tried, the courts beat them back. So yes congress needs to do something.

Only problem is that they're too busy cashing checks sent to them from Comcast.
hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
Then we should make ATT and VZ give up their backbone as well? after all they control too much as well.

kapil
The Kapil

join:2000-04-26
Chicago, IL

Re: Too Big To Fail?

I agree. Backbone/infrastructure companies should either be publicly owned or not allowed to compete in the retail marketplace. Retail companies should all be on a level playing field....unlike the current clusterfuck where a handful of companies have bought their way into a monopoly position in both the wholesale and retail markets.

There would be no net neutrality debate if AT&T didn't think it had leverage...which it does because it not only controls the backbone, but also the pipe into your home.
--
»www.VoIPTrunk.com

baineschile
2600
Premium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI
·Comcast
·magicjack.com
·Verizon Wireless B..

Re: Too Big To Fail?

said by kapil See Profile :

Retail companies should all be on a level playing field....unlike the current clusterfuck where a handful of companies have bought their way into a monopoly position in both the wholesale and retail markets.
Capitalism.

kapil
The Kapil

join:2000-04-26
Chicago, IL

Re: Too Big To Fail?

said by baineschile See Profile :

Capitalism.
I think the word you're looking for is Greed. Or Lobbying. One of the two...but it certainly isn't capitalism.
--
»www.VoIPTrunk.com
iansltx

join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
·Comcast
·Qwest.net
·magicjack.com
·BeeCreek Communica..
·Sprint Mobile Broa..

Re: Too Big To Fail?

Nope. It's capitalism. Maybe a bit rampant but still capitalism. The government is actually too big for capitalism to work at its best, evinced by companies who are able to get the playing field tilted by paying off a few folks. That sounds to me like the government has too MUCH power, not too little.

Also, there's PLENTY of competition on the backbone. It's the middle and last miles where people tend to be (but aren't always) screwed.
sonicmerlin

join:2009-05-24
Cleveland, OH

Re: Too Big To Fail?

This is such a ridiculous claim. Basically you want to throw the baby out with the bath water. European countries have equally strong, if not stronger governments and ensure a higher quality of life for the vast majority of their citizens.

The reality is that our government has too many ties with big business. If there were little to no government big business would have nothing to worry about. There would be no one to slap them down or control them.

What we need is a reform of the system that currently businesses to contribute to and influence political campaigns.
hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
·Time Warner Cable
·buckeye cable


1 edit
And who would own this backbone if it was owned by the Public? The FCC? LMAO! Look at what the Gov't thought they could do with a postal system and a train system! Both are a POS and do not operate effectively and do nothing but cost more $$$$$$

Also if it wasn't for companies like Comcast many people wouldn't have options for Internet. Many Phone Companies (ATT/SBC being one) didn't offer service in many cities until the cable companies came in. The city where i'm orginally from was one. Local Cable Co didn't. SBC didn't want to said there where no plans... TWC took over the city rebuilt everything, the day after RoadRunnerw as available SBC had DSL. And we were all told NO DSL would ever be available.

MadMANN
Premium
join:2005-08-19
·Comcast

Since nobody remembers, let me help...

The Bell's were supposed to have wired the country up for fiber about 15 years ago. Here's an example:

Verizon (at the time was Bell Atlantic) was given money from the Pennsylvania taxpayers in 1995 so that they would be the pioneers of broadband. They were to wire the entire state with a fiber system that would be able to deliver the best video/data/voice services. Instead, they never built and used that money to pay bonuses to their own executives, while upgrading some of their system to support a whopping 786k high speed dsl connection. Had they actually done what they were supposed to do, they would be the evil Comcast-like company that would be giving you nightmares at night and people would be begging the likes of Comcast to build in their areas because of the big bad monopoly telco.

Since the Bell's squandered their fortunes given to them by Ma Bell and the government of this country, they are now scrambling to stay alive by having to use their own money to build the fiber system everyone was dreaming of then. In the meantime, Comcast built their empire from the ground up with no financial help from the government and right now has the large infrastructure because they earned it.

Whether you like it or want to admit it or not, it is capitalism at work here. Everyone screams for government intervention in these matters and then when they do intercede, the people find out that they got more (or a lot less) than what they bargained for.

Let the market regulate itself. If Comcast is the evil monpolistic empire that you claim they are, they will feel it. The Bell's did.

baineschile
2600
Premium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI
Microsoft controls 85% of the operating software fos business. Is that too big?

UVerse and FiOs over the next few year will cut down Comcast's numbers; we just have to wait to see how much.

kapil
The Kapil

join:2000-04-26
Chicago, IL

Re: Too Big To Fail?

said by baineschile See Profile :

Microsoft controls 85% of the operating software fos business. Is that too big?

UVerse and FiOs over the next few year will cut down Comcast's numbers; we just have to wait to see how much.
That's not a fair comparison. Microsoft doesn't STOP you from loading a different OS on a machine. But if you want an alternate ISP, you most likely only have one option...two if you're lucky.

Also, since you bring up Microsoft, the government DID in fact step in to prevent anti-competitive business practices....and the lawsuit dragged on and on...when GWB came into power, his business-friendly USDOJ found the quickest way out of litigation.

But, please, don't let facts get in the way of your talking points.
--
»www.VoIPTrunk.com
hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
·Time Warner Cable
·buckeye cable

LMAO @ U-Verse and FiOS. Especially with VZ just sold your state and a shit load of others. ATT isn't an actual "real" product that can compete with cable. Cable can turn around and offer Fiber in cities in under a month maybe two at the most while it would take ATT a whole rebuild - again- before they could even think about offering Fiber Optic. --- Look at Sprint's WiMAX compared to LTE. Let's see who's going to win.
JPL
Premium
join:2007-04-04
West Chester, PA
·Verizon FIOS

Re: Too Big To Fail?

said by hottboiinnc See Profile :

LMAO @ U-Verse and FiOS. Especially with VZ just sold your state and a shit load of others. ATT isn't an actual "real" product that can compete with cable. Cable can turn around and offer Fiber in cities in under a month maybe two at the most while it would take ATT a whole rebuild - again- before they could even think about offering Fiber Optic. --- Look at Sprint's WiMAX compared to LTE. Let's see who's going to win.
You mean that a net loss of nearly 600,000 video customers in one quarter isn't a sign of them getting their tails kicked? Wow. Come to the Philly suburbs, and you'll see that 'fake' company, Verizon, killing Comcast in their own back-yard. Of all the people that I know - co-workers, friends and family - a vast majority are FiOS customers. It's not even close. Also, my wife and I are shopping for a new house - looking to stay in the area, but upgrade. We've seen dozens of houses so far - we've been at this for over a year. One thing that I note when I walk into a house - which TV provider do they use. Without question, FiOS is on top. Comcast comes in a distant second, followed by DirecTV, and then Dish.
chronoss2009

join:2008-09-23
250 GB cap vs before not having it hrm wonder if the price gouging makes them money.......

See 9 replies to this post

FastiBook

join:2003-01-08
Newtown, PA
If ccast fails (which it all ready does hah;)) i'll swim on over to fios tv.

- A
--
LETS GO METS!
Mordhem
Love it, Hate it.

join:2003-07-10
Baltimore, MD
·Comcast

They don't own phone lines, its VoIP you moron & Second they have competition from satellite, phone company's & now even wireless. So as for their growth you can blame that on the phone company unwillingness to upgrade their 200 year old copper phone network. Comcast continuously upgrades their network wile the phone company's cry about it and try to get laws passed to compete with the cable giant with out needing to go by the same rules.

You more or less sound like a bell lobbyist.
--
"Thats Daddy Comcast to you Ma'bell." "I love TV but god dam don't burn my house down" "Comcast subscribers have been giving local new channels high ratings watching Verizon set peoples houses on fire" "Now Thats TV"

kapil
The Kapil

join:2000-04-26
Chicago, IL

Re: Too Big To Fail?

I see what you did there. You called me a moron to make yourself sound smarter and prove your point. Good job!

When I say "phone line", I don't mean an actual copper pair going into a subscriber's home....I mean the actual phone connection, the dial tone...regardless of whether it's circuit switched or packet.

Also, Bell? What is this, the 60's?
--
»www.VoIPTrunk.com
Automate

join:2001-06-26
Atlanta, GA

Their size will help Clear

Comcast's size will be a factor in the success of Clear.

Z80
1 point 77
Premium
join:2009-08-31
Amerika


1 edit

Price is king, not speed and triple play gets adds

Price is king and these cable triple play deals (here TWC runs a $99 deal typically) are attractive. Also out here Verizon has taken a number of price increases on their services including data which puts them on par with cable competitors.

Speed IMO is more about a PR game; being able to say you have the fastest service even though most people don't give a crap. Looking at DSLR/Archive shows that FiOS subs stick for the most part to the cheapest tiers. Even when FiOS offered the 5/2, it got the bulk of subscribers, again using DSLR/Archive as a guide.

And so long as their checks to Congress clear, they will continue to grow.

See 10 replies to this post
optemino

join:2009-10-13
Patterson, CA

haha

if they keep going at this pace, they're going to end up like the American Telephone & Telegraph company *AT&T* and gonna have to split into baby "comcast"

bad comcast, bad boy.... sit!
Der_Idiot

join:2008-02-10
Norwood Young America, MN

Re: haha

^ I concur. I smell the Monopoly hammer in the works. Probably wont swing for a long time though due to the FCC being bribed (lobbied) and overall lazy.

ScottMo
Premium,MVM
join:2000-12-15
Stony Brook, NY

Re: haha

"Monopoly"? How? There are several viable alternatives for everything Comcast sells: TV, interweb, phone, content. Just being the largest cable operator & the largest ISP in and of itself doesn't make Comcast a monopoly. Its not like Comcast can dictate a higher price regardless of the market, they're offering the Triple Play @ $99/mo for the first year. For most people that's a great deal.

Big (=| Monopoly
optemino

join:2009-10-13
Patterson, CA

Re: haha

when you acquire a major network that millions of people watch, that hundreds of providers offer, that is billed to consumers, it is not fun knowing that comcast will have in its power to block distribution if it really felt like it.

I'll admit, $99/mo does sound good, but why do i want to pay $79 for digital TV if dish/directv will give me more for the same price.

the only thing that i like about comcast is HSI, everything else is crud on a stick *pricing wise*

Clever_Proxy

join:2004-05-14
Chicago, IL
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Midwest
·Comcast Formerly ..


1 edit
I'm not too sure about this. My services have been rock solid. Everytime I call for billing or support, I got an American rep. The price is reasonable. They finally seem to be doing something right, at least in my area.

EDIT: Fixed my Engrish

Van
Premium
join:2009-07-08
Washington, DC

Re: haha

Agreed. I was very satisfied with my Chicago Comcast service last year. I couldn't speak to an English speaking support agent but I rarely had problems

Richard B
Fur It Up

join:2007-06-22
Portland, OR
·Comcast

Size doesn't matter except to Politicians.

It is wrong to arbitrary put limits on size of companies. We will get along just fine. I Politician really care about competition the would put an end to the franchising mob style racket, show no favoritism to any company or, and let all competitors come and build.

SLD
Premium
join:2002-04-17

Why?

Why oh why can't these corporations just be satisfied with great profitability? Why is endless growth always the goal - it always results in problems.

Rob
In Deo speramus, God Bless the USA
Premium
join:2001-08-25
Kendall, FL
·Comcast

Re: Why?

said by SLD See Profile :

Why oh why can't these corporations just be satisfied with great profitability? Why is endless growth always the goal - it always results in problems.
Because of investors. Investors want a bigger and bigger return.
--
CheckSite.us | YourIP.us | Reverseip.us

ScottMo
Premium,MVM
join:2000-12-15
Stony Brook, NY

Because if a company stands pat, its a stationary target. Keep moving, keep growing and the company stays afloat. Get complacent, stagnate, be "satisfied" with your market share and a newer, hungrier, leaner company takes your lunch and you become IBM.

TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast

said by SLD See Profile :

Why oh why can't these corporations just be satisfied with great profitability? Why is endless growth always the goal - it always results in problems.
Comcast returns only 2.4% thru dividends and stock repurchases to their investors. A truly pathetic return. So Great Profitability isn't there. And they pay 3.4% to their lenders. Again not a great return.

And the growth is needed to increase value of assets and drive the stock price up. Without that stock price increase the investors are only getting 2.4%. Only if the stock price rises will people invest in Comcast and provide the capital needed for infrastructure improvements.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page

iansltx

join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO

Re: Why?

Correction: acquisitions, not infrastructure improvements. Comcast has plenty of money from its customers for infrastructure.

espaeth
Digital Plumber
Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
·voip.ms
·Vitelity VOIP
·Callcentric
·VoiceStick
·ViaTalk
·Comcast
·Embarq

Re: Why?

said by iansltx See Profile :

Correction: acquisitions, not infrastructure improvements. Comcast has plenty of money from its customers for infrastructure.
Not to pull off things like Project Cavalry. Showing greater profits improves the stock price, but it also improves the position of companies seeking financing to undertake large infrastructure projects.
tmc8080

join:2004-04-24
Floral Park, NY

cable monopoly breakup

comcast should be broken up into bits as they have customers in all three time zones already.. (coast to coast). at&t still flies under the radar until they actually build their network of uverse.. then they are just as guilty of being too big of a monopoly. if the federal government is too stupid to see the handwriting on the wall with what these companies are doing, then it will be up to each state public utility commissions to assert jurisdiction over how these companies provide service in coordination with state attorney's generals!

this is in part why lots of incumbents LOST their jobs this election season. welcome to the unemployment line schmucks!

See 8 replies to this post

Rate_hike

@pacbell.net

It's rate hike time again, and I am stunned

I got my yearly announcement yesterday, I cannot describe my surprise. After the introductory:
"We at Comcast want to provide the best customer experience that yada, yada, yada" it went on to say there would be NO increase in the price of video, internet or voice service (already stunned), but that some installation, rental and service fees would be changing. Lo and behold, more than 90% of the changes listed were reductions. This is not the Comcast I know and despise, keep this up and I may not have to jump to Fios as soon as it's available
iansltx

join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO

Re: It's rate hike time again, and I am stunned

Now THAT is impressive. Wish they would do that retrograde motion on my internet bill; right now I'm on-promo but the bill went up a couple bucks several months ago.

powerspec88
Premium
join:2007-03-11
Harrisonville, MO

So who is the number 1 and 2 ISP?

Anyone know?

Rick
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-06
Waterbury, CT
clubs:

Why is it that Comcast gets termed

"utterly massive"...

when they're still only half the size of Verizon...

and 1/4 the size of AT&T?

(as ranked by market capitalization)

AT&T= 151 Billion
Verizon= 82.8 Billion
Comcast= (even after these utterly massive gains this quarter..
41.2 Billion
--
The Coyote captured the RR! Roadrunner Rick is now Comcastic!

See 6 replies to this post
iansltx

join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO

That's a lot of profit...

With that kind of profit Comcast could buy Time Warner Cable at its market capitalization just by saving up four years' worth of its profits. That's pretty crazy.

cypherstream
Looking forward to the future of things.
Premium,MVM
join:2004-12-02
Reading, PA
clubs:


2 edits

So this is why we don't have advanced features?

We don't have advanced video/set top features because they don't need it right? I mean with that much profit, who needs to add a few million more in there right?

No cable box app store, no twitter or facebook on TV, no transparancies / windows aero style DVR UI effects, no multi room DVR, no programming dvr from your mobile phone, no sharing dvr content to the PC or vice versa....

It's because they don't even need to do any kind of innovation. They just cover such a large area, large enough to get customers who have no other choice in broadband and/or cable TV. Saturate enough area and your good to go. Heck maybe they should buy out more cable companies. It seems like it's all about how much real estate you have, not how many features you offer.
jus10

join:2009-08-04
Sterling, VA
·Comcast

Re: So this is why we don't have advanced features?

How about ala cart channels so I drop the 99.9999998% of the useless ones? How about letting me drop the limited basic cable and just have HSI at a real savings (now it is the same price if I drop it or not even though I don't have my TV hooked up to their TV services). How about improving tech support and customer relations so ComcastSteve isn't the only guy in the company creating positive feelings towards the company. How about website improvements to eliminate the stupidity (ok, a flash requirement for the Fastest Fast page ... seriously? It's a webform to ask me my zip code). How about lowering rates and improving coverage?

I've completely given up on Comcast's TV service (even though I still have to pay for it). Everything now comes via iTunes or in Red Envelopes of Goodness. My world is a better place for it.
yabos

join:2003-02-16
Ingersoll, ON
Half the stuff you're talking about is either in private beta or will be in 2010(rDVR, TV widgets). Comcast takes forever to roll anything out completely.

cypherstream
Looking forward to the future of things.
Premium,MVM
join:2004-12-02
Reading, PA
clubs:

Re: So this is why we don't have advanced features?

Two good articles on cable's crappy hardware/software.

»www.techcrunch.com/2009/10/08/ca···-better/

»www.businessinsider.com/time-for···e-2009-3
jnemesh

join:2008-04-30
Kenmore, WA

outrageous profit, with network congestion

How on EARTH can Comcast claim network congestion and limited bandwidth while at the same time reaping such huge amounts of cash for their shareholders??? If they had network issues and were broke, that would be one thing. However, with profits of this magnitude, Comcast should be permanantly barred from EVER claiming that they do not have the resources to offer unlimited broadband access (AT ADVERTISED SPEEDS!!!) 24/7 without caps!

I am sick and tired of unbridled capitalism at the expense of the consumer. It is time for all of us to STAND UP and WRITE CONGRESS to make sure that there is a proper balance between the rights of US THE CONSUMER and the ISPs and their ilk.

(SERIOUSLY, if you haven't written your congressman yet, DO IT NOW! Posting on forums is all well and good, but a letter to your congressman [or congresswoman!] will do a lot more good!)
brianiscool

join:2000-08-16
Miami, FL

well

Comcast is not large as AT&T and this is great. It will cause more competition.
beavercable

join:2008-05-11
Beaverton, OR

Give us 10 years and you'll be part of us.

Comcast, Skynet, The borg.......resistance is futile.

K2NNJ

join:2004-05-06
Caldwell, NJ

Re: Give us 10 years and you'll be part of us.

After BO gets done taking over healthcare, news media, internet will be next on his kill list. Anything that even remotely resembles the free enterprise model will be seized by the WH.

Elections have consequences people.

Gerald Ford

@motorola.com

Re: Give us 10 years and you'll be part of us.

"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have"
-Gerald Ford

You voted for him, you fix it.

jeffscott

join:2008-08-19
Atlanta, GA

1 edit

Comcast is simply getting huge

You would think a company this large and with seemingly unlimited resources would be more proactive in expanding their HD content...more HD On Demand is NOT the same as more HD channels...they are excruciatingly slow here in Atlanta...
ebubman

join:2002-01-17
Enola, PA

will they charge us more?

gee, do ya think that comcast will charge us more?

jeffscott

join:2008-08-19
Atlanta, GA

Re: will they charge us more?

As far as their charging more..I'd say a BIG yes to that!...I'd be willing to fork over more if they would get on the ball with the HD expansion!..U-Verse offers about 3 times as many HD channels as I can currently receive with Comcast..

lastmilesane

@omcastbusiness.net

Last Miles

I believe nobody offering Services over infrastructure should be allowed to own that infrastructure and furthermore pretend that they are opeing up that infrastructure to Services competitors. It should go to every SP for the same pricing. Interconnecting to allow that via public or private pipes is what it is and part of the Cost of doing Business. This should be the case for all forms...Cable, Telco, and Wireless. Only then is there a fair and level playing-field that actual business models can be built upon. Until then, its a stacked-deck and only paying end-users suffer the hard consequences.

trucster01

@comcast.net

"...like a bank!"

I just went into my local Comcast place to return the DVR that I was paying entirely too much to rent. As I went into the customer enterance I was met by 1.25 inch thick BULLET PROOF glass that was between myself and the ladies on the other side of the desk. I had to give her the reciever thru a double door contraption that was built into the enclosure.

..it's the kind of thing that makes you go "Hmmmm"?!

guyver01
In Brightest Day

join:2001-01-04
Littleton, CO
clubs:

Re: "...like a bank!"

said by trucster01 :

As I went into the customer enterance I was met by 1.25 inch thick BULLET PROOF glass that was between myself and the ladies on the other side of the desk. I had to give her the reciever thru a double door contraption that was built into the enclosure.

..it's the kind of thing that makes you go "Hmmmm"?!
lol you read the hate and venom spewed towards CSR's on this and other forums, and you wonder why comcast csr's need to be protected behind bullet proof glass?
Forums » Comcast Is Simply Getting Huge


Friday, 27-Nov 10:50:49 Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo | feedback | contact
over 10 years online! © 1999-2009 dslreports.com.