Time Warner Cable Learns From Negative Attack Ads In battle against AT&T U-Verse and Verizon FiOS Ad Age explores how Time Warner Cable (TWC) is taking aim at AT&T and Verizon by taking a page out of the negative political attack ad playbook. Their new ads and website feature Comedian Mike O'Malley, and jab Verizon on things like complicated billing and the occasional dug up azaleas. Like political ads, truth is also sometimes optional; the cable company often blurring the line between last mile and core network fiber. But TWC chief marketing exec also touches on how they've tried to avoid Comcast's rep for poor service among the media and blogs by keeping their eye on customer satisfaction: The blogosphere is strong, and people's tolerance for terrible service is low. When we survey our customers, its very clear they're pleased. They're even reasonably tolerant of stuff not working. But unfortunately with Comcast Must Die, it's probably they're being picked on because of their size but particularly there might've been a threshold crossed. In our case we haven't crossed that threshold and certainly must not.
|
  Anonymous_AnonymousPremium
join:2004-06-21
127.0.0.1
kudos:2
4 edits | FREE HD------IS not free that will Cost you 160$ of hidden fees
sattalite may charge 100$ for hd for one year
but TWC say it's free from them
BUT when you pay for that HDbox it's 16$/ a month = over 192$ per year | |
|  | | | Re: FREE HD------IS not free All companies have hidden fees such as franchise fees ect... | |
| | | | It's free HD programming genius, not hardware. | |
| | |  JTM1051Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-08
Moorpark, CA
kudos:1 | Re: FREE HD------IS not free said by Steve Mehs:It's free HD programming genius, not hardware. Not just "hardware". Its $5.50/month for the Digital receiver (or $6.50/month HD DVR) and remote, plus $10.00 service fee per month.
The thing is, TWC's main cable pricing ads I've seen (mailers and online) only states "Free HDTV Local Channels" -- there's no "*" thereafter to indicate anything additional is required. Hence by TWC's ads I can see why people would be think that the "Free HDTV Local Channels" would be free.
Only until you get deeper into the cable pricing you'll see the additional costs to get the "Free HDTV Local Channels":
| |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | |  DogfatherPremium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA
2 edits | Re: FREE HD------IS not free
$10 is only for asterisked DVR HW options |
If you have a standard HD receiver you don't pay the $10. | |
| | | | | Anonymous_AnonymousPremium
join:2004-06-21
127.0.0.1
kudos:2 Reviews:
 ·RoadRunner Cable
·Comcast
 ·Time Warner VOIP
| Re: FREE HD------IS not free said by Dogfather:Read it again. That's for DVR services. Just like TiVo charges $12.95 for DVR service, Time Warner charges $10.00 per month for DVR service. DVR is not HD and DVR Service is not hardware. If you have a standard HD receiver you don't pay the $10. in this area it's 16$ permonth for HD DVR | |
| | | | | |  dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 | Re: FREE HD------IS not free said by Anonymous_:said by Dogfather:Read it again. That's for DVR services. Just like TiVo charges $12.95 for DVR service, Time Warner charges $10.00 per month for DVR service. DVR is not HD and DVR Service is not hardware. If you have a standard HD receiver you don't pay the $10. in this area it's 16$ permonth for HD DVR here its 18 a month then the fees to make it work are extra then the cableco slush fund fee[aka gateway fee]
--
When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee | |
|
| | | said by Anonymous_:that will Cost you 160$ of hidden fees sattalite may charge 100$ for hd for one year but TWC say it's free from them BUT when you pay for that HDbox it's 16$/ a month = over 192$ per year $100 on sattalite gets you hbo, stars , sho , max , and tmc | |
| | fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | .. so tell us.. if you were to purchase your own HD capable box, or DCR TV.. how much would that cost? About $400 for the box and about the same for the TV.
SOME providers do charge for an HD tier and I think that's plain flat wrong. You're already paying for the programming. To be charged for an HD tier is to be paying the bill to upgrade their system.. again, that's wrong in my book. Those upgrades should come from subscriber fees.
Some providers only charge for the hardware which is where my main point comes in. Comcast, for example, charges just for the box. The basic HD Box fee is about $7 on top of the standard converter. Divide $7 per month into what you'd pay to purchase your own equipment and I think it's a bargain. Not to mention, THEY maintain, repair, or replace the equipment if it goes bad, AND when something new comes out, there's no upfront cost to replace it either.
Some people don't care and would rather own but others see the value in renting/leasing so it's choice.
Further, your $16 a month also includes the basic box rental fee which you'd pay for anyway, so you have to be fair and subtract that from your $16/month and $192/yr comparison. And, isn't the $16 per month price also the DVR box which is Box+DVR+HD? | |
| | | | | Re: FREE HD------IS not free Some people prefer to own as in the case of those with Tivo boxes but they do have to rent either 1 or 2 cable cards.
I wish I could have gotten HD channels from Comcast without a box using my TV tuner but all I got were the locals which Comcast seemed to want to move every couple of months for some reason. | |
|
| dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 | said by Anonymous_:that will Cost you 160$ of hidden fees sattalite may charge 100$ for hd for one year but TWC say it's free from them BUT when you pay for that HDbox it's 16$/ a month = over 192$ per year Same on cox. the stuff the fees for the "free hd" into box rentals.
--
When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee | |
| | | Reviews:
 ·Sprint Mobile Br..
| Re: FREE HD------IS not free said by dvd536:said by Anonymous_:that will Cost you 160$ of hidden fees sattalite may charge 100$ for hd for one year but TWC say it's free from them BUT when you pay for that HDbox it's 16$/ a month = over 192$ per year Same on cox. the stuff the fees for the "free hd" into box rentals. Bright house charges you the fee for the digital box and if you upgrade it to HD the fee doesn't change...
--
Any unauthorized copying or distribution of the opinion above constitutes stupidity and you should probably be punished
| |
|
| | '... Customer satisfied with TWC service ...' That is one big lie.
As bad as TWC saying that they have deployed fiber for more than 10 years.
Not crossing a threshold?
There are many anti-TWC websites on the Internet.
This representative of TWC is living in his employer's fantasy world. | |
| | Anonymous_AnonymousPremium
join:2004-06-21
127.0.0.1
kudos:2 Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
·Comcast
·Time Warner VOIP
| Re: '... Customer satisfied with TWC service ...' said by dasdeqe :
That is one big lie.
As bad as TWC saying that they have deployed fiber for more than 10 years.
Not crossing a threshold?
There are many anti-TWC websites on the Internet.
This representative of TWC is living in his employer's fantasy world.
if you want FTTH
it will cost you to run a fiber line
about 5k to 10k
then you will have fiber from TWC | |
| | fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | Um, TWC HAS been deploying fiber for over 10 years.
There is plenty of crap to go around on both sides. Verizon is implying "our service is fiber" as to insinuate that the other providers don't use fiber which is not necessarily true.
TWC is saying they deploy fiber which is true. Their fiber runs to the node and concerts to coax for the last 1,000 feet.
Also, there are plenty of anti-NameTheProvider sites out there. For every provider, there is a group of people that hate them. (ie: comcastsuck, verizonsucks, etc) | |
| | | wev567
join:2006-02-25
Pittsburgh, PA | Re: '... Customer satisfied with TWC service ...' said by fiberguy:Um, TWC HAS been deploying fiber for over 10 years. And the telcos have had major fiber deployments since the 1970s. So where is the innovation? Verizon is advertising their FiOS as having fiber that the cablecos don't have. There is no time in a 30 second commercial to explain all the complexities of how the systems work. Not perfect, but certainly more fair than implying that your network is built exactly the same as your competitors when it's not. If your network can do the same things, then sell those benefits. | |
| | | | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 Reviews:
 ·Verizon Online DSL
·Comcast
| Re: '... Customer satisfied with TWC service ...' Easy FiOS commercial:
1. With FiOS we run a superfast fiber optic connection to your house.
2. With cable, they run a fiber connection too...maybe...to 1,000 or more feet away! *sad trombone*
3. You share that FiOS connection with a few hundred people, so sometimes it gets very sloooow.
4. With Verizon, you share a connection, but it's with just 32 people, and that connection is over 16 times the speed of cable!
5. So what do you want? Fiber waaaaay over there, or fiber right here, from the nation's most reliable network?
That should fit into a 30 second ad. If not, definitely a 60 second one. Billing issues, yes, but I'd rather spend time on the phone correcting the bill for 20 mbps symmetric than paying about the same price per month, with a call every once in awhile, for 8/2 service. now if I was looking at an ncapped cable cnnection (like OOL's Boost) I might stick around lnger on cable, but the crap that current cable customers in most places have to put up with just doesn't cut it. | |
| | | | | | | Re: '... Customer satisfied with TWC service ...' said by iansltx:I'd rather spend time on the phone correcting the bill for 20 mbps symmetric than paying about the same price per month, with a call every once in awhile, for 8/2 service. Not me. Calling at least once a month, every month, would get old very fast...like after the first month. I despise dealing with billing problems. | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | I think you messed up on #3  and I don't know why Verizon doesn't come out with commercials like that =/. | |
|
| | | fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | here's the thing..
Commercials are designed to reach a broad group of people, ie: broadcasting. I hear what you're saying in your post, but I'm going to counter you. The fact that WE are even here talking is pointless. Verizon has reached you. you KNOW about Verizon and FiOS already. You also know what you need to about Cable service, right?
... job done. You are no longer necessary to either of them until and unless you purchase. The fact that you know about their technology, this particular ad has served it's purpose to you.
With that, there really is no need to discuss. Consumers will purchase a service on more than one item alone. You could pump out 1gb sym service and it won't open the flood gates of customers to your phone banks. Different strokes for different folks. Some of the things people care about are:
.. Customer service
.. Established relationships
.. Product offerings
.. Reliability
.. Billing issues
.. The name of the provider itself
.. Ease of dealing with a company
.. Trust
.. Perceived value
.. Technology offered
.. Price
... and none in any particular order. I'm sure there are many more reasons too.
And HOW they should advertise.. there is never a one size ad fits all. All a commercial is designed to do is grab someone's attention in order to generate a phone call to the customer service lines, or a hit to their website. Likewise, some people here still believe that a commercial is also designed to tell the entire story of what the service is going to give you.. 30 seconds or 60 seconds is not enough... in fact, I don't think a 30 minute info-mercial would work. I mean in that case, you'd have all commercials sounding like these designer drugs.. the announcer would say the name of the drug, some happy smiles, and the rest would be an announcer reading the TOS to some happy music to make it sound good. | |
| | | | | | | Re: '... Customer satisfied with TWC service ...' They should just end the thread here. Nail on Head fiberguy.
--
mdlt | |
|
| |  kamm
join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY | said by fiberguy:Um, TWC HAS been deploying fiber for over 10 years. There is plenty of crap to go around on both sides. Verizon is implying "our service is fiber" as to insinuate that the other providers don't use fiber which is not necessarily true. TWC is saying they deploy fiber which is true. Their fiber runs to the node and concerts to coax for the last 1,000 feet. Also, there are plenty of anti-NameTheProvider sites out there. For every provider, there is a group of people that hate them. (ie: comcastsuck, verizonsucks, etc) Except it's BS as their fiber does not go to the last mile, nor the all the backbone.
Stop spreading BS, please.
--
[BQUOTE=[user=bicker]]Waaaa waaaa waaaa. You just want what you want and don't care to factor in what is right or true. Your perspectives are un-American, and deserve far more ridicule than I'm prepared to pile on them.
[/BQUOTE] | |
| | | | | | Re: '... Customer satisfied with TWC service ...' said by kamm:said by fiberguy:Um, TWC HAS been deploying fiber for over 10 years. There is plenty of crap to go around on both sides. Verizon is implying "our service is fiber" as to insinuate that the other providers don't use fiber which is not necessarily true. TWC is saying they deploy fiber which is true. Their fiber runs to the node and concerts to coax for the last 1,000 feet. Also, there are plenty of anti-NameTheProvider sites out there. For every provider, there is a group of people that hate them. (ie: comcastsuck, verizonsucks, etc) Except it's BS as their fiber does not go to the last mile, nor the all the backbone.Stop spreading BS, please. What? Are we supposed to take your word for it? | |
| | | | | kamm
join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY | Re: '... Customer satisfied with TWC service ...' said by redhatnation:said by kamm:said by fiberguy:Um, TWC HAS been deploying fiber for over 10 years. There is plenty of crap to go around on both sides. Verizon is implying "our service is fiber" as to insinuate that the other providers don't use fiber which is not necessarily true. TWC is saying they deploy fiber which is true. Their fiber runs to the node and concerts to coax for the last 1,000 feet. Also, there are plenty of anti-NameTheProvider sites out there. For every provider, there is a group of people that hate them. (ie: comcastsuck, verizonsucks, etc) Except it's BS as their fiber does not go to the last mile, nor the all the backbone.Stop spreading BS, please. What? Are we supposed to take your word for it? What? Are we supposed to take his word for it?
--
[BQUOTE=[user=bicker]]Waaaa waaaa waaaa. You just want what you want and don't care to factor in what is right or true. Your perspectives are un-American, and deserve far more ridicule than I'm prepared to pile on them.
[/BQUOTE] | |
| | | | | | fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | Re: '... Customer satisfied with TWC service ...' I'll take my word over it any day over your POC statements. You are so full of yourself it's not even funny.
First off, if you knew ANYTHING about what was being talked about, you'd crawl back into your hole and STFU.
For ANY advanced cable system to work today, the entire system is at least a hybrid fiber/coax system.
Second, no where in the advertisement does TWC say they run fiber to the home.
So, with that, why don't you take your head and put it back up your place where you grow mushrooms.. troll. | |
|
1 edit | Why don't they advertise the limits they are "testing" I can't wait to see those adds......
Somehow I doubt we ever will.. | |
| | mrvid
join:2007-06-19
Levittown, NY
4 edits | difference between reliable system and non reliable by design.. Make no mistake, I am not a fan of TWC cause it seems it always takes a ton of competition for them to upgrade their system. TWC, however, must be fairly reliable by design cause the years I lived in NYC, and friends I know that have TWC who live in NYC find them to be very reliable. It hardly, if ever, goes down; thats is important to me if my phone is going to be working off of it. Bear in mind though.
Verizon is very reliable too and now their in NYC, my experience in the past was pretty much both companies being pretty much equally reliable so it will be interesting to see how they battle for customers. | |
|
| | occasional dug up azaleas my foot Just after Verizon's contractors were done lighting up my street, burying fiber in the utility easement, my neighbor alerted me to a lagoon forming in my front yard. Turns out some sprinkler PVC was damaged during the work.
I was ready to give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that they didn't know they had damaged the pipe, until I discovered the PVC wasn't just damaged, it was missing. They had taken a 4-foot section of PVC with them, including a sprinkler head, and hadn't bothered to tell anyone.  | |
|
| |
|
|
