  vpokoPremium
join:2003-07-03
Boston, MA | Give it 5 years Then there will be no room for cable companies. As bandwidth increases, there's absolutely no reason why content has to be distributed through a local cable company. Maybe Britt's just being nicer to Netflix ahead of having to apply for a job there in a few years. | |
|
 | | | Re: Give it 5 years You still need a data connection. Cable companies will still get their money especially the ones that own the content you want to see. | |
|
| | vpokoPremium
join:2003-07-03
Boston, MA | Re: Give it 5 years Yup, they can make money as content owners, or they can make money as internet service providers (or both). What they won't be making money off of for too much longer is control of the head-end/last mile for distributing content. | |
|
| | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | Re: Give it 5 years They own the last mile and can squeeze it as much as necessary to maintain a presence as content distributors as well. | |
|
| | | As long at they cap there will be no alternatives because they are the gate keepers to other content providers. | |
|
| | vpokoPremium
join:2003-07-03
Boston, MA | Re: Give it 5 years I disagree; that's how it is now, it's not how it will be in 5 or 10 years. First, wireless will significantly erode the power of the last mile. Second, if cable pushes too hard, they will force legislation on themselves. Right now the whole net neutrality debate is very theoretical, but don't mess with America's entertainment. Congress never likes to get involved in these things, until it becomes politically expedient. | |
|
| | |  Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4 | Re: Give it 5 years said by vpoko:I disagree; that's how it is now, it's not how it will be in 5 or 10 years. First, wireless will significantly erode the power of the last mile.
Wireless, at double or more the price of wired. And with lower caps besides.
--
Record your speedtest.net results in DSLReports SpeedWave
»www.speedtest.net/wave/afe201cb84d45c88 | |
|
| | | | WHT
join:2010-03-26
kudos:3 | Re: Give it 5 years said by Romney2012:Wireless, at double or more the price of wired. And with lower caps besides.
Of course you are referring to cellular wireless, not WISP wireless. | |
|
| | | | | decifal
join:2007-03-10
Bon Aqua, TN
kudos:1 Reviews:
 ·Verizon Broadban..
| Re: Give it 5 years Amazing how much larger and wealthier companies have to cap to "preserve bandwidth, yet private smaller wisp/isp's are still uncapped and usually affordable... I just wish to hell one was near me, i'd subscribe in a heartbeat... Heck, I might even write the occasional love letter! | |
|
| | | | vpokoPremium
join:2003-07-03
Boston, MA | said by Romney2012:Wireless, at double or more the price of wired. And with lower caps besides.
No, I'm not talking about mobile wireless, I'm talking about fixed wireless and mesh networking. Think fiber to the node with WiFi for the last mile. Obviously the last mile monopoly isn't going to last forever. | |
|
| | | | | Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4 | Re: Give it 5 years said by vpoko:said by Romney2012:Wireless, at double or more the price of wired. And with lower caps besides.
No, I'm not talking about mobile wireless, I'm talking about fixed wireless and mesh networking. Think fiber to the node with WiFi for the last mile. Obviously the last mile monopoly isn't going to last forever. Wisps have been around for years. Why would you think that tech is going to explode in to relevance in the next 5-10 years?
--
Record your speedtest.net results in DSLReports SpeedWave
»www.speedtest.net/wave/afe201cb84d45c88 | |
|
| | | | | | vpokoPremium
join:2003-07-03
Boston, MA | Re: Give it 5 years It might not if cable companies don't push the issue, but if they start trying to decide that you can't have certain content because it competes with a revenue stream of theirs, people are going to want options. And the options are there. | |
|
| | | | | | Clear is roughly the same cost of wired internet in my town and there are no caps. | |
|
| etaadmin
join:2002-01-17
Dallas, TX
kudos:1 | Besides the absolutely necessary internet connection what can prevent the cable companies from owning netflix or a netflix clone?
I have and use netflix but if something better comes along I would switch. | |
|
| | vpokoPremium
join:2003-07-03
Boston, MA | Re: Give it 5 years said by etaadmin:Besides the absolutely necessary internet connection what can prevent the cable companies from owning netflix or a netflix clone? All the power to them. My point is that the days of cable companies having an advantage by virtue of having equipment near the subscriber's premises are numbered. | |
|
| | Just wondering "a move that if anything will make the "consumer experience" more cumbersome, complicated and expensive"
Just wondering.. I realize people love to see the future they love to see thousands of gigs going to every home that makes the billing today a future cash grab. But has anyone sited a study of increased revenue based on "overages" from existing caps? Even in the wireless data world?
The caps imposed today present a barrier that truly is rather high for usage *today* (admittedly not tomorrow). But the assumption is that the caps won't shift tomorrow. As the comparison often comes with text messaging.
I have a simple plan 500 text $5... Ok great. Today my option is $10 for Thousands... Now obviously I don't send thousands so they are making a cash grab but the limits and plans do shift.. obviously they shift with profits and everything else. I'm just wondering how often this same little jab will go around.
I'm really wondering.. how many people have had to pay the overage fee's? Or are just saying "despite the fact that it doesn't affect me I'm going to complain like it does".
Please don't flog me... I'm just asking 
and I do mean "large scale" not the random billing horror stories. | |
|
| | | Re: Just wondering "Thousands of gigs" are called terabytes. Most cable connections were easily able to transfer a few per month in "the future" of 10 years ago. | |
|
| | | | Re: Just wondering So your best response is to nitpick wording because I didn't say terabyte. And, to site possible usage over real usage. Thanks for the insight that yields nothing. I'll vote for you in your next election. | |
|
| | | | | Re: Just wondering I was pointing out that that amount of data is hardly exotic, with 2TB hard drives selling for $50. ISP caps are aimed at significant portion of real customers, as is Netflix's new option to ration resolution. | |
|
|  VanPremium
join:2009-07-08
New Orleans, LA | As you said, you may not hit the cap barrier today but tomorrow you just might. I used to hit my 2gb cap every month and I do NOT stream video or audio. I did a lot of email, browsing, games, etc....and to hit the cap was insane to me. The 2gb cap on my iPad was absolutely ABSURD. Heck, go to numerous forums for phone people (MacRumors, Android, etc..) and you see MANY if not most complaining about hitting their caps.
Hitting the caps on both landlines and wireless lines seems to become more and more prevalent ESPECIALLY with more movies going online.
Will the companies raise their caps? Doubt it. Why would they? They will want the overages and penalties for profit. These companies can continue with these idiotic statements of how "99% of the country dont come close to our gb cap" even though you can't find a blog or forum where somebody didnt hit it. | |
|
| | Netflix Streaming vs VOD It's a buffet vs. a la carte. It's that simple. Why pay for one movie when I can watch as many as I want for a flat monthly fee. Also, AFAIK, VOD is only for movies. Netflix streaming is also great for TV series and foreign movies.
If Cable Companies were *really* wanted to kill Netflix, they would:
1) build a website that can compete with Netflix
2) build a much better VOD library (with TV shows & foreign movies)
3) change VOD pricing from "a la carte" to a "buffet"
4) keep caps in place (I hate 'em, but it's their strategy here)
I believe cable is a better delivery platform (for pushing content down to users) than the internet anyway. So, the technology is there and has been there for awhile--they're just resting on their laurels. Unless, the Cable Companies at least implement something resembling #1 & #2, they'll keep losing money to Netflix, Apple, Amazon, etc. and I'll keep looking away from VOD.
Maybe more people need to subscribe to "Internet only" (no TV channels) cable connections?
As the saying goes...Netflix FTW!
--
Hope this helps... | |
|
| | | Re: Netflix Streaming vs VOD If cable companies were trying to kill Netflix by doing 1, 2 and/or 3, I don't think anyone would object. In fact, I'd *love* to see the cable companies competing with Netflix by providing a better service.
Unfortunately, the main reaction has been #4. They put caps in place to reduce the amount of video you can consume monthly via Netflix. Then they put overages in place to increase the price of a Netflix subscription. ("Sure it only costs $15 to Netflix but the overage fees just totaled $80. Let's cancel Netflix and just stick with the 'cheaper' cable TV.") When you're competing based on #4, people are going to object.
--
-Jason Levine | |
|
|  baineschile2600 ways to livePremium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI
 ·Comcast
 ·magicjack.com
| said by bbrkdub:It's a buffet vs. a la carte. It's that simple. Why pay for one movie when I can watch as many as I want for a flat monthly fee. Also, AFAIK, VOD is only for movies. Netflix streaming is also great for TV series and foreign movies.
If Cable Companies were *really* wanted to kill Netflix, they would:
1) build a website that can compete with Netflix
2) build a much better VOD library (with TV shows & foreign movies)
3) change VOD pricing from "a la carte" to a "buffet"
4) keep caps in place (I hate 'em, but it's their strategy here)
1. they do. its called pay tv. they just need to fix the pricing structure
2. most major tv providers have a huge vod library. i dont think foreign film is the make or break for most americans, but it would help if they had a wider variety of movies
3. they do. its called premium channels (hbo, cinemax, etc). again, the content is there, but the pricing model isnt
4. they will
so all in all, i agree with you, except that the peices are there, they just need to budge on the prices. as long as the tv providers own the pipes, and the content providers gets more $$ from them instead of netflix, netflix will always have companies trying to slow them down. | |
|
| | | | Re: Netflix Streaming vs VOD said by baineschile:1. they do. its called pay tv. they just need to fix the pricing structure
2. most major tv providers have a huge vod library. i dont think foreign film is the make or break for most americans, but it would help if they had a wider variety of movies
3. they do. its called premium channels (hbo, cinemax, etc). again, the content is there, but the pricing model isnt
4. they will I concur, but I think we're talking apples and oranges on #1. There's a reason I said build a competing website with Netflix, which would include:
*UI interaction (scroll over synopsis, ratings, browsing, add to queue)
*recommendations (based on what you've previously watched)
*movie queues (for DVD and streaming)
*account history (list previously watched movies)
This isn't done with Pay TV AFAIK, and their websites don't do this as well (my cable provider's website certainly doesn't do this).
--
Hope this helps... | |
|
| | rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO | Glad somebody finally called out the real issue. It isn't the UI experience, variety or even the "on demand" vs. pre-packaged and scheduled delivery. It's the fithin', foulin', fargin' PRICE!
In the 90s I dumped cable and went with satellite. Back then I was tired of paying nearly $50/month for cable when I could get the same thing from the dish for $19.95/month (anyone remember America's Top 40 from dish?). The satellite bill also didn't include all the nasty taxes, fees and regulatory bull (probably does now but back then...).
It truly was HALF THE PRICE. Was it a better experience? No. Was it more reliable? No. Was the guide better? Maybe. Was the variety better? No, actually fewer channels. IT WAS THE PRICE, IT WAS THE PRICE, IT WAS THE PRICE!
Why do people like Netflix? Because they already have HSI and for a very, very, very low monthly price, they get to watch all the content their HSI will permit. | |
|
| | mogamer
join:2011-04-20
Royal Oak, MI | said by baineschile:said by bbrkdub:It's a buffet vs. a la carte. It's that simple. Why pay for one movie when I can watch as many as I want for a flat monthly fee. Also, AFAIK, VOD is only for movies. Netflix streaming is also great for TV series and foreign movies.
If Cable Companies were *really* wanted to kill Netflix, they would:
1) build a website that can compete with Netflix
2) build a much better VOD library (with TV shows & foreign movies)
3) change VOD pricing from "a la carte" to a "buffet"
4) keep caps in place (I hate 'em, but it's their strategy here)
1. they do. its called pay tv. they just need to fix the pricing structure 2. most major tv providers have a huge vod library. i dont think foreign film is the make or break for most americans, but it would help if they had a wider variety of movies 3. they do. its called premium channels (hbo, cinemax, etc). again, the content is there, but the pricing model isnt 4. they will so all in all, i agree with you, except that the peices are there, they just need to budge on the prices. as long as the tv providers own the pipes, and the content providers gets more $$ from them instead of netflix, netflix will always have companies trying to slow them down. Point #4 is the reason why they can keep the first 3 points the way they currently are. Until everyone can get multiple choices for internet providers, this is the way it will stay. People say that wirelss is the future solution. But what happens if the people who own the local fiber are also the same people who provide the local cable/phone? They sure as hell won't let someone come in and steal their business voluntarily. | |
|
| | What consumers want Is he actually acknowledging that what consumers want is on 100% on demand content on 0% broadcast? Consumers don't want DVRs that have to be powered on all day long to record shows that are broadcast on rigid schedules. Loss of power or cable signal at home? No episode x for you. What a pain. The entire cable model is so yesterday. If they really "get" Netflix, they'll switch to 100% on demand content that will play back on any device without cable cards or loaned equipment.
Cable companies can't do that because they don't have the rights. Just look at the lawsuits over the iPad apps. Cable could focus on providing wicked fast Internet, something they can do. | |
|
| | | Re: What consumers want said by jgraessley :Is he actually acknowledging that what consumers want is on 100% on demand content on 0% broadcast? Consumers don't want DVRs that have to be powered on all day long to record shows that are broadcast on rigid schedules. Loss of power or cable signal at home? No episode x for you. What a pain. The entire cable model is so yesterday. If they really "get" Netflix, they'll switch to 100% on demand content that will play back on any device without cable cards or loaned equipment.
Cable companies can't do that because they don't have the rights. Just look at the lawsuits over the iPad apps. Cable could focus on providing wicked fast Internet, something they can do.
The internet/series of tubes isn't nearly big enough to deliver the equivalent of cable TV as an on-demand (Netflix like) service - delivering the same stuff to a lot of people at the same time is a lot of efficient, even if we don't watch much of it. | |
|
| | | | Re: What consumers want Yes it is.
My download bandwidth is twice the bitrate of a typical cable HDTV channel now. | |
|
| | rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO | I disagree. If they get rid of the all the frequency consumed by digital/analog video and use the entire spectrum for data, the cable companies should have all the last mile bandwidth they need. As long as they have FTTN, they should be set. Now someone needs to figure out a way to get all that content in their NOC so they don't have to buy terabits of bandwidth for it to travel half-way across the country. With today's ever increasing storage technology, I don't think this is beyond the realm of possibilities and it will only get cheaper. | |
|
 HBMaru Maru Mori MoriPremium
join:2011-06-21
00000
·Verizon Broadban..
 ·MegaPath
| Why bother? There is an easier way. The MSOs simply fight net neutrality so they can traffic shape competitors into the ground while at the same time implementing caps with massive overage fees to price Netflix out of the competition.
Actually offering a competing product that is more compelling is just hard work! | |
|
|
See 7 replies to this post |
|
VanPremium
join:2009-07-08
New Orleans, LA | If it were up to the Cable big men, Netflix would be a pay-a-hefty-amount-per-movie type deal
There is a reason they are so far behind the entertainment industry in general
It is an absolute joke | |
|
 IPPlanManHoly Cable Modem Batman
join:2000-09-20
Washington, DC
kudos:1 | Stick it to 'em Netflix... Netflix is a thorn in the side of the cable companies... I love it. | |
|
| | | Netflix is what cable should be !00% VOD I shouldn't have to worry to record the latest episode of my favorite show i pay my monthly bill the least you can do is have all the shows available so i don't miss out | |
|
| | | | Re: Netflix is what cable should be Cable doesn't have anything to do that, ask the content company that actually owns your favorite show to make it available on VOD and the cable company will do it.
There are many shows available on Cable VOD now to watch in case you miss them. But they are only there because the content provider allowed it, not because the cable company can just do whatever they want. | |
|
DrDrew
join:2009-01-28
Apple Valley, CA
kudos:6 | Waitin for TWC to make their Xfinity Online Wait till TWC rolls out their version of Comcast's Xfinity Online:
»www.xfinitytv.com
I'm sure TWCs iPad app is just to test the legal waters and tech needed. | |
|
 AD7BKPremium
join:2000-03-23
Havre, MT
·3Rivers Communic..
| Foot, Meet mouth. Mouth open up.. Foot insert yourself into Britt's mouth...
Have your crow too Glenn!!
Also while you're at it eat your hat too.
For shame he bad mouth Netflix (Yes it is better than Hulu Plus because we are not forced to watch ads!!!)
--
The following statement is true...
The preceding statement was false!!--George Carlin | |
|
KearnstdElf WizardPremium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | Caps and Overages.. Are why this CEO loves netflix, once he gets people willing to stomach metered service he knows that streaming will go from a threat to a cash cow.
well in the short term because people will cut back their streaming once they get charged $1000 for HSI.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
|
 redxiiPremium,Mod
join:2001-02-26
Sherwood, MI
·Clear Wireless
·Suddenlink
Host:
Broadband Tweaks
Suddenlink
ISDN
Fiber Optic
AOL Broadband
| Perhaps because of the BW controls.. They added this for US subs, Netflix is giving an inch and now ISPs are jumping with glee that they can start lowering their caps and tell people just to lower their video quality. If you don't want shitty streaming quality you have to pay up or catch that episode or series when it airs on TV.
--
Moe, I need your advice… See I've got this friend named Joey Joe-Joe... Junior... Shabadoo.. | |
|
VanPremium
join:2009-07-08
New Orleans, LA | As a side note, I love hearing CEO's discuss improving customer experience....translation: I need something to say and have actually nothing of substance to tell you all.
Still waiting for the first time a CEO actually goes into literal detail about this | |
|
|
|
