- Status
gamerk316
Glorious
- Jul 8, 2008
- 13,340
- 186
- 44,840
to Turas: a lot of towns where I live have to give permission to set up a cable franchise; Verison was blocked by Cablevision for a long time here in NY (and now, FIOS is stealing tons of Cablevision customers).
We already got TWC to cave once (100GB), now is the time to continually attack on all fronts. Make it clear you are dropping their service (even if you don't suscribe), and force this to come to an end before it starts. If not, within a few years, we will have the same access as Australlia.
We already got TWC to cave once (100GB), now is the time to continually attack on all fronts. Make it clear you are dropping their service (even if you don't suscribe), and force this to come to an end before it starts. If not, within a few years, we will have the same access as Australlia.
I don't have an option to not use TWC in Austin currently (no FioS) without moving. What I can do is cancel the rest of my cable services and just keep the internet. They are raising my price, and in these hard times (cough), I have to compensate and make important choices.
mustwarnothers
Distinguished
- Mar 19, 2009
- 73
- 0
- 18,630
The thing that pisses me off most with these big corporations is that in most situations, a price is determined by supply and demand. The fine medium of what the provider will offer a good or service for, and what the consumer realistically and consistently pay.
But nowadays, it's more like "Charge the consumer the highest amount possible, for as long as possible, before they realize they SHOULD be paying less".
A good example was when I switched Insurance companies, from Progressive to Geico.
I found an incredibly cheap policy at Geico, and purchased it. When I went to cancel my Progressive insurance, the representative did everything in his power to persuade me to stay (which is fine, understandable).
I was re-quoted with Progressive nearly 25% less than I was actually paying currently, with the exact same driving record, exact same car, no new discounts for my age.
When I asked the rep from progressive "Explain to me why I wasn't ALREADY paying this 25% discounted amount" he had absolutely zero answer, and in a long string of euphemisms basically explained that I was paying that amount because I didn't notice that it could be cheaper.
If Time Warner can prove to the public that their Infrastructure costs are high enough to warrant needing to nickel and dime their customers, outside of the monthly costs, then I'll gladly reevaluate my opinion.
Until then, they are just another bloodsucking company squeezing more out of their customers, with no change in quality of service.
But nowadays, it's more like "Charge the consumer the highest amount possible, for as long as possible, before they realize they SHOULD be paying less".
A good example was when I switched Insurance companies, from Progressive to Geico.
I found an incredibly cheap policy at Geico, and purchased it. When I went to cancel my Progressive insurance, the representative did everything in his power to persuade me to stay (which is fine, understandable).
I was re-quoted with Progressive nearly 25% less than I was actually paying currently, with the exact same driving record, exact same car, no new discounts for my age.
When I asked the rep from progressive "Explain to me why I wasn't ALREADY paying this 25% discounted amount" he had absolutely zero answer, and in a long string of euphemisms basically explained that I was paying that amount because I didn't notice that it could be cheaper.
If Time Warner can prove to the public that their Infrastructure costs are high enough to warrant needing to nickel and dime their customers, outside of the monthly costs, then I'll gladly reevaluate my opinion.
Until then, they are just another bloodsucking company squeezing more out of their customers, with no change in quality of service.
Greatwalrus
Distinguished
- Feb 3, 2009
- 108
- 0
- 18,680
[citation][nom]roofus[/nom]Dont be too glad. Comcast will be doing the same thing. They are quietly watching and see how it goes. They certainly do not care about a bad image per say but will be watching to see if TWC customer base shrinks to see how they proceed.[/citation]
Good point. It will be interesting to see how other ISP's respond. That is what I am worried about. It would be great if everyone with TWC would switch if they can. It will set a good example of failure for other ISPs to want to avoid.
Good point. It will be interesting to see how other ISP's respond. That is what I am worried about. It would be great if everyone with TWC would switch if they can. It will set a good example of failure for other ISPs to want to avoid.
RazberyBandit
Distinguished
- Dec 25, 2008
- 2,303
- 0
- 19,960
I live in NC. Upon looking into Cable providers in the area and discovering only Time Warner, I immediately sought out a national provider that might simply source to Time Warner. Guess who does? EarthLink. Yes, I'm connected to TW's network, but as an EarthLink subscriber, I'm contracted with them, not TW.
If TW decides to go through with it, they're up for a serious fight. I know for sure they'll lose plenty of high-usage customers. Just in case Earthlink customers like myself are forced to accept any such usage limits TW imposes, maybe I should see check the availability and rates of U-Verse just to be safe.
In all fairness, the first thing I want to see with the cap proposal is the price plan. If for ~$50 a month all you get is their "best" 10Mb/512k line combined with a 40GB limit, they just made people's decision easy - No thank you!
Limits are crap, plain and simple. With ISPs using webmail more and more, people will be charged for the bandwidth used to access their ISP's site and read each email. Every bit and byte of data going over the line is being tracked, including ads on webpages, port scans, etc. For people to actually be charged for traffic when their PC might actually be under attack without their knowledge is absurd. Further, TW's entire network is in need of an overhaul. It's time to actually step-up in DOCSIS technology, TW... to get the 1.0 modems the hell out of circulation and FULLY update ALL your technology to DOCSIS 2.0 sometime this decade already... Damn! 3.0 is upon us, and they haven't even fully implemented 2.0! Maybe they think this is the way to fund it... I dunno. But, if indeed they do believe this is how to fund such upgrades, then maybe they should just go the hell ahead and implement it so all their customers can leave them rotting in the sun.
I just found an interesting article:
http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Politicians-Oppose-Time-Warner-Cable-Meters-101790
To summarize, a NY State Representative stated he would actually propose a bill to the NY State Senate to prohibit metering in the state. Another official called TW's plan "neither realistic nor reasonable."
I really miss the 20Mb/2Mb deal I had with RCN when I lived near Philadelphia. I miss the service, too.
If TW decides to go through with it, they're up for a serious fight. I know for sure they'll lose plenty of high-usage customers. Just in case Earthlink customers like myself are forced to accept any such usage limits TW imposes, maybe I should see check the availability and rates of U-Verse just to be safe.
In all fairness, the first thing I want to see with the cap proposal is the price plan. If for ~$50 a month all you get is their "best" 10Mb/512k line combined with a 40GB limit, they just made people's decision easy - No thank you!
Limits are crap, plain and simple. With ISPs using webmail more and more, people will be charged for the bandwidth used to access their ISP's site and read each email. Every bit and byte of data going over the line is being tracked, including ads on webpages, port scans, etc. For people to actually be charged for traffic when their PC might actually be under attack without their knowledge is absurd. Further, TW's entire network is in need of an overhaul. It's time to actually step-up in DOCSIS technology, TW... to get the 1.0 modems the hell out of circulation and FULLY update ALL your technology to DOCSIS 2.0 sometime this decade already... Damn! 3.0 is upon us, and they haven't even fully implemented 2.0! Maybe they think this is the way to fund it... I dunno. But, if indeed they do believe this is how to fund such upgrades, then maybe they should just go the hell ahead and implement it so all their customers can leave them rotting in the sun.
I just found an interesting article:
http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Politicians-Oppose-Time-Warner-Cable-Meters-101790
To summarize, a NY State Representative stated he would actually propose a bill to the NY State Senate to prohibit metering in the state. Another official called TW's plan "neither realistic nor reasonable."
I really miss the 20Mb/2Mb deal I had with RCN when I lived near Philadelphia. I miss the service, too.
"Hobbs posed, “When you go to lunch with a friend, do you split the bill in half if he gets the steak and you have a salad?”"
wow so I am gonna order salad yet pay steak price that makes since. I can already say I am bright house and if they decided to make this switch also I will be looking for a new carrier I wonder how long Comcast and TWC can last capped with fios around the corner and the possiblity of new wireless companys (due to Digital switch over)
wow so I am gonna order salad yet pay steak price that makes since. I can already say I am bright house and if they decided to make this switch also I will be looking for a new carrier I wonder how long Comcast and TWC can last capped with fios around the corner and the possiblity of new wireless companys (due to Digital switch over)
I see strong truths in a lot of these posts. I'm with charter atm. U-verse & Fios type services are not yet available.
Semi unrelated, I read that AT&T will be notifying potential pirates like Charter does now. I guarantee I will not be paying for residential connections if business models sync to this. I already can't afford $45/mo just for internet.
GOOGLE!!!! PLEASE SAVE US!
*I wonder if there is a way to "Hack" wireless connections, acquire login/password using a walk-thru & various Linux tools/utilities?
[citation][nom]jshumate[/nom]The sole reason for the cap is to preserve the cable companie's market share in direct to home entertainment. More and more streaming content is becoming available from netflix, hulu, tv network websites, etc. and is being delivered right through cable's pipelines. Obviously they don't want consumers to have an alternative to cable tv service. So they just slap some cost barriers on that content under the guise of fair usage policy.[/citation]
Semi unrelated, I read that AT&T will be notifying potential pirates like Charter does now. I guarantee I will not be paying for residential connections if business models sync to this. I already can't afford $45/mo just for internet.
GOOGLE!!!! PLEASE SAVE US!
*I wonder if there is a way to "Hack" wireless connections, acquire login/password using a walk-thru & various Linux tools/utilities?
[citation][nom]jshumate[/nom]The sole reason for the cap is to preserve the cable companie's market share in direct to home entertainment. More and more streaming content is becoming available from netflix, hulu, tv network websites, etc. and is being delivered right through cable's pipelines. Obviously they don't want consumers to have an alternative to cable tv service. So they just slap some cost barriers on that content under the guise of fair usage policy.[/citation]
Like everyone else here, I find it simply astonishing that people in charge can be so freaking out of touch with what they are in charge of. I guess nobody at TWC paid attention to the outrage that came when Comcast introduced the *250GB* cap.
"40GB for $55 after years of unlimited for the same price!"
--cue Public Outcry--
"....okay, how about 100GB then for a (probably) much higher price??? There, that should take care of things!"
"40GB for $55 after years of unlimited for the same price!"
--cue Public Outcry--
"....okay, how about 100GB then for a (probably) much higher price??? There, that should take care of things!"
What a rip off they already charge lower prices for lower speed "salad" usage, ie 775k cap, 10mg cap, 16mg cap and more for "steak" speed broadband, so now they r going to cap speed and amount so low that you can't download any games without getting %ucking overage charges like a cell phone bill!!!!
This is bad news for sites like Direct2drive.com because I will have to buy games from local stores because I wont have room for 20g game downloads with a cap.
This is bad news for sites like Direct2drive.com because I will have to buy games from local stores because I wont have room for 20g game downloads with a cap.
Supertrek32
Distinguished
- Nov 13, 2008
- 442
- 0
- 18,780
If TWC wants to provide different tiered services based on consumption, that's fine, BUT THE SERVICE AT THE CURRENT PRICE SHOULD NOT CHANGE. Add in lower tiers that have bandwidth caps, and I'm fine with it - add a bandwidth cap to the current major tier, and we've got a serious problem.
You know what I hope happens to TWC if they decide to implement a bandwidth cap? A rival company that doesn't have caps swoops in a steals a major chunk of market share.
These bandwidth caps are only aggrevating customers, deteriorating service, and is only showing how greedy the company really is.
Compared to what we already pay, the amount of expenses they pay to maintain the service is negligible - they're already making gobs of money off us, now they want to make us pay more if we want to continue using our service as we already are. Profiteering gluttons.
I sincerely hope TWC changes their mind, or a competitor sees a brilliant opportunity and makes them pay for putting more pressures on customers in a time when they're already stressed by terrible economic conditions.
You know what I hope happens to TWC if they decide to implement a bandwidth cap? A rival company that doesn't have caps swoops in a steals a major chunk of market share.
These bandwidth caps are only aggrevating customers, deteriorating service, and is only showing how greedy the company really is.
Compared to what we already pay, the amount of expenses they pay to maintain the service is negligible - they're already making gobs of money off us, now they want to make us pay more if we want to continue using our service as we already are. Profiteering gluttons.
I sincerely hope TWC changes their mind, or a competitor sees a brilliant opportunity and makes them pay for putting more pressures on customers in a time when they're already stressed by terrible economic conditions.
truehighroller
Distinguished
- Oct 1, 2006
- 608
- 0
- 18,980
Stop the Cap, notes that Democratic New York State Representative Eric Massa is coming out in opposition to Time Warner Cable's metered billing plan, which the company announced last week would be expanding into the Rochester, NY market later this year. The plan involves caps as low as 5GB per month, and overage charges of $1 per additional gigabyte. Massa is drafting a bill that would prohibit this kind of metered billing, and issued a statement via his website condemning Time Warner Cable's decision:
[10936 bytes]
"Internet access is as essential to our economy as water is to our survival. With limited choices in broadband providers, and virtual monopolies in many market areas, I view this as nothing more than a large corporation making a move to force customers into paying more money. I firmly oppose capping internet usage and I will be taking a leadership role in stopping this outrageous, job killing initiative."
Massa complains that the "ill-conceived" plan will simply result in higher broadband bills for middle-income families. Meanwhile, Consumer Affairs notes that in Austin, another city targeted by Time Warner Cable's expanding trial, Austin Mayoral candidate Lee Leffingwell is also coming out against the trials. From a statement posted to his campaign website:
"I'm obviously concerned about the impact this plan would have on individuals and families, who would have to begin to monitor their Internet use. The new pricing system would have a significant impact on anybody who uses the Internet to watch videos, download music, movies, or television shows...If Time Warner believes that is has no choice but to introduce usage caps, I would call on them to propose caps that are realistic and reasonable. The usage caps proposed in their new plan are neither realistic nor reasonable."
Well flipping said right there and awesome find @ RazberyBandit!
[10936 bytes]
"Internet access is as essential to our economy as water is to our survival. With limited choices in broadband providers, and virtual monopolies in many market areas, I view this as nothing more than a large corporation making a move to force customers into paying more money. I firmly oppose capping internet usage and I will be taking a leadership role in stopping this outrageous, job killing initiative."
Massa complains that the "ill-conceived" plan will simply result in higher broadband bills for middle-income families. Meanwhile, Consumer Affairs notes that in Austin, another city targeted by Time Warner Cable's expanding trial, Austin Mayoral candidate Lee Leffingwell is also coming out against the trials. From a statement posted to his campaign website:
"I'm obviously concerned about the impact this plan would have on individuals and families, who would have to begin to monitor their Internet use. The new pricing system would have a significant impact on anybody who uses the Internet to watch videos, download music, movies, or television shows...If Time Warner believes that is has no choice but to introduce usage caps, I would call on them to propose caps that are realistic and reasonable. The usage caps proposed in their new plan are neither realistic nor reasonable."
Well flipping said right there and awesome find @ RazberyBandit!
wikiwikiwhat
Distinguished
- Dec 4, 2008
- 148
- 0
- 18,690
It is bad for the economy. A lot moves over the internet nowadays. I do understand that hey want to stop piracy but is killing your own business worth it. If their are alternatives people will go to that or either we just won't use it. Case in point, high gas prices...People started using hybrids or more Public Transportation and demand for gas declined.
Time Warner, let me put it to you this way. If your customers walk out on you, they might as well walk out on Cable TV because if internet is worth the trouble you are putting them through then neither is cable TV.
Quit taking steps backwards and start moving forwards. Or give up all together.
Time Warner, let me put it to you this way. If your customers walk out on you, they might as well walk out on Cable TV because if internet is worth the trouble you are putting them through then neither is cable TV.
Quit taking steps backwards and start moving forwards. Or give up all together.
Supertrek32
Distinguished
- Nov 13, 2008
- 442
- 0
- 18,780
I encourage everyone concerned to contact Time Warner via email/telephone/etc. to complain. Just like with the Viacom mess, if enough customers complain they should see the error of their ways.
RazberyBandit
Distinguished
- Dec 25, 2008
- 2,303
- 0
- 19,960
Thanks truehighroller.
Another thing worth questioning is what will happen to people who end up using their TW cable combined with TW's VOIP service? Is TW going to tell people that because they used their telephone over their cable line that they went over their bandwidth limit doing so and force them to pay overage charges? If so, there's yet another reason to tell TW to go pound sand.
Does anyone really think the person who proposed this to the Board at TW really thought any of this crap through completely? I don't. I really don't.
If I were an actual TW customer, I would leave them right now just to avoid the potential headache later. Fortunately, I am not, as I stated earlier. I'm with EarthLink, but I am on TW's network and may have something to worry about, I don't subscribe to TW cable TV service as I have DirecTV, and I use Vonage because AT&T/BellSouth telephone and TW VOIP were both complete crap in dollar-for-dollar comparisons to Vonage.
I will be in touch with EarthLink very soon to find out if and/or how my service will be affected should TW decide to implement bandwidth metering in my area. If they say limits will be put into place, you can bet my last dollar I'll leave them, too.
Another thing worth questioning is what will happen to people who end up using their TW cable combined with TW's VOIP service? Is TW going to tell people that because they used their telephone over their cable line that they went over their bandwidth limit doing so and force them to pay overage charges? If so, there's yet another reason to tell TW to go pound sand.
Does anyone really think the person who proposed this to the Board at TW really thought any of this crap through completely? I don't. I really don't.
If I were an actual TW customer, I would leave them right now just to avoid the potential headache later. Fortunately, I am not, as I stated earlier. I'm with EarthLink, but I am on TW's network and may have something to worry about, I don't subscribe to TW cable TV service as I have DirecTV, and I use Vonage because AT&T/BellSouth telephone and TW VOIP were both complete crap in dollar-for-dollar comparisons to Vonage.
I will be in touch with EarthLink very soon to find out if and/or how my service will be affected should TW decide to implement bandwidth metering in my area. If they say limits will be put into place, you can bet my last dollar I'll leave them, too.
TWC doesn't give a rats ass about the consumer. As is stated in other comments, this is just a way for them to get their taste with the ever-growing demand for bandwidth in an online media rich society. The only reason for them to do this is to gain profit where profit can be made. They know the consumer will want more online content so they make profit where demand is high. The communication lines exist and the bandwidth is there, regardless of whether or not it is being used by their customers.
Also, usage in my home can vary greatly from month to month, depending on how much streaming video I watch. If I'm paying for 100 GB service and only use 20 GB for the month, am I going to see a refund for the 80 that I didn't use? Highly doubtful. If I pay for a lesser plan will I be paying at a premium for exceeding? You bet: $1/GB. Unless, of course, their 100 GB plan costs $100/mo when they finalize that.
It goes against all their other pricing plans. Look at their digital phone and TV service. You pay a flat rate for unlimited talk or unlimited TV watching, right? You even get unlimited "on-demand" non-pay per view content (which definitely consumes their precious bandwidth that they covet so greatly) I pay for both cable TV and Internet service from them, but I spend more of my free time playing online games than watching TV. What do I pay for TV? Digital package, HD, movie channels, etc...? $100/mo or so. Considering I watch 5-10 hours of TV or less per week just to catch my favorite shows on local stations and HBO, basically, I wouldn't mind seeing that cut down to $20. Is that out of the question? I thought I was paying based on how much I use the service...
Also, usage in my home can vary greatly from month to month, depending on how much streaming video I watch. If I'm paying for 100 GB service and only use 20 GB for the month, am I going to see a refund for the 80 that I didn't use? Highly doubtful. If I pay for a lesser plan will I be paying at a premium for exceeding? You bet: $1/GB. Unless, of course, their 100 GB plan costs $100/mo when they finalize that.
It goes against all their other pricing plans. Look at their digital phone and TV service. You pay a flat rate for unlimited talk or unlimited TV watching, right? You even get unlimited "on-demand" non-pay per view content (which definitely consumes their precious bandwidth that they covet so greatly) I pay for both cable TV and Internet service from them, but I spend more of my free time playing online games than watching TV. What do I pay for TV? Digital package, HD, movie channels, etc...? $100/mo or so. Considering I watch 5-10 hours of TV or less per week just to catch my favorite shows on local stations and HBO, basically, I wouldn't mind seeing that cut down to $20. Is that out of the question? I thought I was paying based on how much I use the service...
Hanin33
Distinguished
- Feb 13, 2009
- 388
- 0
- 18,780
as a long time (5 years) TW/RR customer, i will not tolerate any data cap at the rate i pay for their service. i will be following this story closely but as soon as i catch wind if their fascist ways taking hold in my area, i will be reviving my SBC DSL account. things are very very wrong when the supposed founders and innovators of the internet have some of the worst internet infrastructure and service costs in the world. fail on so many levels.
Great, so instead of lowering the price and enacting a cap for the basic salad guy, at his choice, in the the interest of fairness. we make the steak guy pay a premium by the ounce at, what was once, an all you can eat buffet. great move TW, even the freakin cell phone companies have unlimited data usage and there the biggest profit sharks of all.
mindless728
Splendid
- Jul 15, 2008
- 4,074
- 0
- 22,960
well, this sucks since im going to the Rochester area to go to RIT, so, i guess i will have to switch, and to think, i was actually enjoying their service, so, its not only 50/mo from me, but also 110/mo from my gf that they are losing
[citation][nom]jrnyfan[/nom]I never thought I would be saying this and forgive such blasphemy but...I'm glad I have Comcast over this stupidity from Time Warner. They have been screwing their customers since the days of dial-up AOL and I feel bad for the people caught in their web of lies because that is the only internet access they can have at a bearable cost or at all.[/citation]
Comcast caps to 250gb, what makes you think they won't cap any further? 250gb blows especially because they only give you warnings and threaten to discontinue your service if you continue to exceed it.
Comcast caps to 250gb, what makes you think they won't cap any further? 250gb blows especially because they only give you warnings and threaten to discontinue your service if you continue to exceed it.
I like how they say this but when we would like to pay for cable tv channels in this fashion we can't . I will cancel my road runner subscription. This is another example of non competition in this market and time warner is trying to rake in more $$$ out of its loyal users. Ppl should disconnect
I like how they say this but when we would like to pay for cable tv channels in this fashion we can't . I will cancel my road runner subscription. This is another example of non competition in this market and time warner is trying to rake in more $$$ out of its loyal users. Ppl should disconnect
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
Discussion What's your favourite video game you've been playing?- Started by amdfangirl
- Replies: 4K
-
-
AMD Ryzen 9 9950X vs Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Faceoff — it isn't even close- Started by Admin
- Replies: 54
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram