15 Feb 14 – How do you feel about the Comcast-Time Warner Cable merger?

Home Forums The Poll Discussion 15 Feb 14 – How do you feel about the Comcast-Time Warner Cable merger?

This topic contains 8 replies, has 8 voices, and was last updated by Christian Christian 3 years, 11 months ago.

Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)
  • Author
  • #1948
    Nick Francesco
    Nick Francesco

    Which one do you think is worse?



    I cannot really answer the question. If there was a “I dislike this pending development.” answer, I would check that. But to say that I am horribly depressed would not just be right. And I certainly do care. Hopefully the deal will not be allowed to happen and if it is, hopefully Chuck Shumer will stick his nose onto things as he usually does to keep an eye on what Comcrap does re: usage caps, etc.

    While we are on the subject, please feel to read Phil’s Stop the Cap article on this…




    I agree…I’m angry but not depressed. Reading others w/ Comcast service on DSL Reports, I hate the idea that my Internet service might now become usage based (instead of flat rate). This is not so long after having bought a Roku 2 XD and a year of Amazon Prime. I also wonder if anything is going to happen with the channel lineup, as in, if the NTSC transmissions will be eliminated thus making my MythTV obsolete.

    • This reply was modified 3 years, 11 months ago by  RChandra.


    More consolidation of an alleged non-monopoly (BS!). Everyone seems to be complaining about two companies right now due to their outrageous prices or other: Verizon and Time Warner.

    I find it extremely hard to believe another media King is going to come in and save the day.

    I pretty much hate Google too, but I beg kindly to the media Gods: “Google Fiber Please.”



    This can only be bad for consumers. In addition to usage based billing, Comcast has also played with the idea of restricting DNS traffic so that you can’t run your own DNS server to escape their redirect “service” or advertising scheme in reality.

    I hope the government blocks it.

    Either way, though, usage based billing is coming. It is simply not reasonable for the streaming content industry (Netflix & the like) to expect another industry (Internet carriers) to pay their product delivery costs, as they do now. The carriers have to pay for the infrastructure construction costs to carry that traffic somehow.

    If it was up to me, I’d have it so that every carrier who handles Netflix/etc. traffic, from their own uplink provider(s) to the ISP that handles the last mile to the subscriber’s location bills Netflix for carrying it. Netflix can pass the cost on to their customers. If Netflix won’t pay up, the carrier would simply stop carrying Netflix’s traffic. Problem solved.


    Someone is gonna loose an eye.



    Well, I suspect that some type of a usage charge will eventually hit all of us. I can’t really fault that IF it is done fairly.

    Like your electric service — you would pay a minimal amount for the meter and such, and then a charge for how much you use.

    The problem is, so far, where there have been charges for the amount of data transferred — it has been grossly high. If I understand it correctly, the cost of a Gb to an ISP is in the order of a few pennies — maybe 2 or 3 cents per Gb. But, the user ends up paying over a dollar a Gb.

    And, I’m not sure why I should be paying for the endless stream of hacking attempts that make it to my router, but silently get dropped. And, I should be able to ‘read the meter’ so I know what’s going on — not just taking my ISP’s word for something.


    I agree with all the other comments.

    It’s not that Netflix itself is getting something for free, rather Netflix users don’t fit the assumptions their internet providers made about data usage. Even though we’ve never explicitly paid for data, there was always a hidden assumption that we’d use the full speed of our connections for less than a tenth of a percent of the time. That allowed internet providers to squeeze thousands of users onto a modest upstream connection.

    Since streaming is more of a continuous usage, internet providers must pay for a much faster upstream connection (more data) to handle the consolidated traffic. Since their costs have increased, it’s the internet providers’ responsibility to figure out how to pass those costs onto customers. One fair way to do that is to charge per usage.

    As someone else mentioned though, any time you change the pricing method it’s a prime opportunity for a price increase. Those of you who frequent the Wegmans chicken wing bar might remember when it was priced per quantity. When we switched to per weight, the price jumped because we knew it would be difficult for customers to compare with the old price.


    Carriers already get paid for every bit of data that flows through their tubes. Trying to charge Netflix multiple times for the same thing would be like paying for shipping at Amazon and when the UPS truck shows up the driver says he won’t give you the package unless you pay him too. When people talk about Netflix being subsidized, I think what they mean is how, without usage based pricing, those who aren’t subscribed to Netflix are subsidizing the broadband costs for those who are.

Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Comments are closed.