Comcast to Acquire Time Warner Cable

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
Originally Posted By: bubbatime
About to get rid of cable and just go to Netflix/Amazon Prime/Hulu/Bunny Ears. Would be way cheaper...


Those streaming services depend upon sufficient bandwidth to effectively stream their content. The worry here, at least in my perception, is two-fold:

1) a new cable conglomerate could institute data cap policies that would either limit your total monthly throughput or your MB/s bandwidth

2) a company that is against net neutrality, such as Comcast apparently, could limit bandwidth to services that historically consume the majority of it (such as streaming video services)

On top of it, unbundled Internet service from the same provider is more expensive.
 
If we were smarter, we would have forced the entities to un-bundle the pipes from the contents and would have insisted on different ownership of the respective companies. I suspect that is how it is done in the rest of the world.

Or better, just declare he internet infrastructure companies as public regulated utilities aka water or electricity and be done with it.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: redhat
We have basic cable on some TVs in our house (the old 0-99 analog tuner style). Maybe I'm thinking of something else, but didn't Comcast get rid of that and require all to have a set top box?


Yes and it's murderously complicated to set two timers for two shows on a non-cable DVR. You generally need a gizmo that shoots IR at the comcast decoder to change channels between recordings.

So this means get a CableCARD DVR (ha!) or rent their "free" DVR (easy!) then give the DVR back when you're sick of their outdated service (the plan they count on not happening.)

BTW, they have backdoors in the DVRs to 1) see what you watch and how many times and 2) erase recordings if the "content provider" asks. How do I know? It happened accidentally a few years ago.
 
Originally Posted By: Vikas

Or better, just declare he internet infrastructure companies as public regulated utilities aka water or electricity and be done with it.


This is the right answer: Make ISPs adhere to common carrier requirements. Of course, considering that nearly every single recent FCC chair has gone on to a cushy lobbyist or consultant job in the industry, it's very easy to predict which way the dominos will fall.

Prices will go up for customers. Service will remain terrible. Internet speeds within the U.S. will fall even further behind the rest of the world. High speed Internet availability will not get better. Content will be further squeezed by ISPs.

Unless net neutrality rules grow some teeth or our lawmakers grow some balls, it's not going to get better for consumers, only corporations.
 
Ideally that's true.

However, there is a certain advantage to being the incumbent. You can influence political leaders to make the rules favor the incumbent business.

The more we have calls for more regulation, the less likely is the scenario that you describe.

I'm not saying we don't need regulation. But understand that an environment replete with regulatory oversight benefits large, entrenched interests.

Not saying there are not niche markets out there. Just saying the scenario you describe will be less commone with more government interference in markets.

Originally Posted By: Pop_Rivit
Originally Posted By: gfh77665
Originally Posted By: Pop_Rivit


Nonsense. Every time competition goes out of business there are a several startups that take their place.


REALLY? How many "statrups" can realistically challenge ChinaMart?

What nonsense.


It's "startups" not "statrups". We were not discussing Wal-Mart, we were discussing Sears. They have two entirely different business models and business philosophies, so your analogy is rather senseless. But continuing your line of short sighted reasoning, at one time Wal-Mart was a startup and challenged the likes of retail behemoths such as Sears and K-Mart. Look where that stands today. And at one time (now pay attention because this is important), Richard Sears, a railroad station agent, started RW Sears by selling coal, lumber and watches as a side business. Within 6 years sales topped $400,000/year. Quite a sum in those days for a startup retail business.

And yes, if Sears were to go out of business their employees who elect to stay in retail would be absorbed by other retailers. The same thing happened when other large retailers went out of business; retailers such as Montgomery Wards, Woolco, Venture, Payless Cashways, CompUSA and a whole host of others.

The retail landscape is littered with retailers who have come and gone, and all of their employees found other jobs. I'm sure many stayed in retail; others used the opportunity to change careers. It's the nature of business; it has happened many, many times before and it will again happen many, many times in the future.

Originally Posted By: JHZR2

That's great but there is a vastly different reality these days.


That's a myopic viewpoint. I've heard the same thing said time and time again, yet somehow those of us who actually go out and start/run our own business' seem to be able to continue to be successful, even in the face of big competition.

The next big retailer won't beat Wal-Mart at their own game. The next big retailer will change the game and Wal-Mart won't be ready for it, just as Wal-Mart once changed the game and many other retailers weren't able to adapt.

Whenever there's a challenge, enterprising entrepreneurs will find a way to succeed despite the naysayers telling them they can't. True that some will fail, but most do well.
 
Originally Posted By: Pop_Rivit


It's "startups" not "statrups".


Thank you Pop_Rivit, for correcting my spelling. I always appreciate being critiqued by someone who has never misspelled a word, or committed a typo. Obviously, you are a perfect individual who has every right to judge.

Also, RE:

Originally Posted By: Pop_Rivit

...so your analogy is rather senseless. ...continuing your line of short sighted reasoning,


Additional humble thanks for pompously judging me, the "senseless and short sighted". Anyone of your immense intelligence and omniscient point of view is such a great benefactor to the senseless illiterates.
 
Originally Posted By: Pop_Rivit
Originally Posted By: gfh77665
Originally Posted By: Pop_Rivit


Nonsense. Every time competition goes out of business there are a several startups that take their place.


REALLY? How many "statrups" can realistically challenge ChinaMart?

What nonsense.


It's "startups" not "statrups". We were not discussing Wal-Mart, we were discussing Sears. They have two entirely different business models and business philosophies, so your analogy is rather senseless. But continuing your line of short sighted reasoning, at one time Wal-Mart was a startup and challenged the likes of retail behemoths such as Sears and K-Mart. Look where that stands today. And at one time (now pay attention because this is important), Richard Sears, a railroad station agent, started RW Sears by selling coal, lumber and watches as a side business. Within 6 years sales topped $400,000/year. Quite a sum in those days for a startup retail business.

And yes, if Sears were to go out of business their employees who elect to stay in retail would be absorbed by other retailers. The same thing happened when other large retailers went out of business; retailers such as Montgomery Wards, Woolco, Venture, Payless Cashways, CompUSA and a whole host of others.

The retail landscape is littered with retailers who have come and gone, and all of their employees found other jobs. I'm sure many stayed in retail; others used the opportunity to change careers. It's the nature of business; it has happened many, many times before and it will again happen many, many times in the future.

Originally Posted By: JHZR2

That's great but there is a vastly different reality these days.


That's a myopic viewpoint. I've heard the same thing said time and time again, yet somehow those of us who actually go out and start/run our own business' seem to be able to continue to be successful, even in the face of big competition.

The next big retailer won't beat Wal-Mart at their own game. The next big retailer will change the game and Wal-Mart won't be ready for it, just as Wal-Mart once changed the game and many other retailers weren't able to adapt.

Whenever there's a challenge, enterprising entrepreneurs will find a way to succeed despite the naysayers telling them they can't. True that some will fail, but most do well.



As someone who works retail (and trying to escape it), Pop is right one with this...this coming from me losing my job when one of the companies I worked for went out of business. You have to work in the field to see and understand it...or have a great understanding view as he does......
 
And man you guys are getting crabby lately....
lol.gif


It's got to be the cabin fever or something...
 
We have TWC but only for cable internet and digital home phone.
No cable. Never had.

Wonder how this is going to affect internet services...
Thoughts?
 
Originally Posted By: 97tbird
We have TWC but only for cable internet and digital home phone.
No cable. Never had.

Wonder how this is going to affect internet services...
Thoughts?


Simply put, will probably result in faster internet speeds (or at least faster upload) but possibly data caps in future.
 
Of the negative things out there on Comcast I am glad they do the following:

http://www.internetessentials.com/how-it-works

My wife's friend(single mom divorced awful situation) finally has internet for her kids and school. It is excessively expensive to get internet in many areas and it keeps poor areas poor with limited oppurtunities.
 
Originally Posted By: rjundi
Of the negative things out there on Comcast I am glad they do the following:

http://www.internetessentials.com/how-it-works

My wife's friend(single mom divorced awful situation) finally has internet for her kids and school. It is excessively expensive to get internet in many areas and it keeps poor areas poor with limited oppurtunities.


TWC does that too actually, or did for a while as a trial. Was last year iirc.
 
Originally Posted By: rjundi
It is excessively expensive to get internet in many areas and it keeps poor areas poor with limited oppurtunities.


So others subsidize these peoples' service? Comcast just built a 69 story tower; they're not giving up profit.

The problem is that these services are fundamentally excessively priced by these vendors. Overpriced. And poor people stay poor by wasting money on luxury items vs what is needed. We were perfectly happy with 768k DSL and somehow I could execute all my professional duties.

The question for programs like that becomes how much bandwidth is spent streaming movies and porn vs other more worthwhile endeavours.





On another note, the most tv we typically watch is during the Olympics. My wife wanted to watch curling, and was restricted because Comcast owns nbc and they restrict this to their paid subscribers now.

Cutting the cord will be difficult, when they play games like this. When they data cap like Nick R foresees, which I have no doubt they will to kill netflix, hulu, YouTube, etc., then it will get really nasty.

I don't have the time to be entertained by TV... I prefer internet while exercising or enjoying the outdoors.
 
Originally Posted By: rjundi
Of the negative things out there on Comcast I am glad they do the following:

http://www.internetessentials.com/how-it-works

My wife's friend(single mom divorced awful situation) finally has internet for her kids and school. It is excessively expensive to get internet in many areas and it keeps poor areas poor with limited oppurtunities.



There is nothing Charitable or altruistic about it, they are mandated by law to do so and the consumer pays for the majority of it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_in_the_United_States#Universal_Service_Fund
 
Yeah thing is, as more people cut the cord then I'll bet they hit and enforce this stuff in a more real way.

On one hand, no big deal, it's just business, on the other hand for what has become a necessity (not TV watching or movie streaming, but some semblance of net connectivity), playing games is not something I'm a fan of.
 
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Yeah thing is, as more people cut the cord then I'll bet they hit and enforce this stuff in a more real way.

Yup. They'll want to offset their lost cable TV revenue with increased internet access revenue. The moment you switch to watching content on-line, you'll bump up against the cap more easily and will be forced to either pay overages or upgrade to a more expensive internet plan.

Right now my data cap is 250 GB/month, and I don't come near it, but if I were to cut the cord, I can certainly see myself going over this cap.
 
If we are ever given a data cap, I will need to switch to business. We regularly go over 1TB of usage monthly, and that works out to some insane $200/mo for data overages alone. I hope it doesn't come down to that.

For what it's worth, we have zero issues streaming 1080p netflix on TWC, but was recently at a friends place in NJ who has comcast, and it took forever to load/buffer and refused to play in HD no matter what.
 
Wow, thats lots of videos if youre hitting 1TB. You must watch TV non-stop!

$200/mo for overages?!?!??!?
 
Well, me, my brother and sister and I watch a lot of anime, and 95% of it it has to be torrented since it's unavailable here in the US. And I always download the highest quality I can find which doesn't help. as we can be talking anywhere from 500MB to over 2GB per episode for high quality 1080p bluray encodes. My parents watch a lot of netflix when they are home, we all play video games, which can eat up a lot of data usage when downloading new games and stuff. We currently have no data cap with TWC, but if comcast implements their caps, they give you 300GB/mo, and then charge $10/50GB over you go. Which works out to a simply insane amount of money, hence why I'd just pay the $110/mo for the 50/10 business service if it came down to it.

TNORNQs.jpg


this is a slow month for us, my family is out of town, and I was out of town for a bit as well.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

OVERKILL
After 11 years the massive Ivanpah CSP plant is being phased out
Replies
15
Views
876
gfh77665
Skippy722
  • Locked
US Steel sold to Nippon
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
JavierH19
Bailes1992
MG ZS
2
Replies
31
Views
6K
Jetronic
slo town
Our trip to the 108th running of the Indy 500
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
Carmudgeon
Jackson_Slugger
Exxon, Total Poised to Win Stakes in Giant Qatar Gas Project
Replies
5
Views
1K
PimTac
Back
Top Bottom