Comcast Wants To Put Data Caps On All Customers Within 5 Years

[techbeck]

If you?re a Comcast customer living in one of the many states where they?ve imposed no real limits on bandwidth usage for the last few years? enjoy it while it lasts.

 

During an investor call today (link via Ars), Comcast executive VP David Cohen said that he predicts bandwidth caps (or, as ISPs prefer to put it, ?usage-based billing?) to be rolled out network-wide within the next 5 years or so.

 

The reason they haven?t done so already? They?re still working out exactly where they can cap things before they start getting phone calls ? that is, before people start calling up to cancel. Meanwhile, making things more complicated tends to scare people away, so they don?t want to just offer up multiple plans/tiers ? so before they make any changes, they need to find that plan that works for almost everyone

 

 

?I would also predict that the vast majority of our customers would never be caught in the buying the additional buckets of usage, that we will always want to say the basic level of usage at a sufficiently high level that the vast majority of our customers are not implicated by the usage-based billing plan.?

 

 

 

 

 

More....

http://techcrunch.com/2014/05/14/comcast-wants-to-put-data-caps-on-all-customers-within-5-years/

[Nick H. Supervisor]

You're going the wrong way, Comcast.

[daorbed9]

Thanks goodness we have three 1G fiber companies coming here.  I'll be glad to get rid of TWC/comcast.  Metered bandwidth is all about trying to get revenue back from losing TV subscribers.  It's wrong for them to charge such high prices for TV, cause people to want an alternative, then try to change the rules again because they do.  It's like the greed has no end.  Keep in mind most of these companies make tons of profit even with TV subscribers cancelling.

[Anibal P]

I'm content with my comcast service for now, I'll bail in a heartbeat if they implement any caps, I already pay them a good amount for the service, and Netflix/Google Music, caps are a deal breaker in my house

[MikeChipshop Member]

I can see a lot of customers leaving if they try that crap. 

It's just not how people use the internet any more.

[theyarecomingforyou]

Ridiculous. One-third of Americans have no choice when it comes to broadband providers, meaning that they simply have no choice but to put up with it. This is why you need a strong and effective regulatory authority to prevent consumers from being abused.

[Jason S. Global Moderator]

boycott, folks. boycott.

 

The Fed Govt is ruining competition in this country by allowing megacorporations to merge.

[macrosslover]

I can see a lot of customers leaving if they try that crap. 

It's just not how people use the internet any more.

well if you believe most articles, most people use their mobile devices for their internet and computer usage is dying.  So by that logic they shouldn't be fazed by Comcast introducing an internet plan that's already similar to what they already use on their tablets and phones.  In my opinion, when Comcast had their caps of 250 gigs per month, a few years ago, that IMO was more than enough for 90% of their users.  I don't consider myself a heavy torrent user, but between that, Netflix, MMOs, online gaming, etc the most that I ever used in a month was like 225 gigs, and that was one month in particular, where I downloaded a lot.  Usually I never used more than 100 gigs.  I know I'm a more data heavy user than the average user, most of us likely are, so if they did implement a cap with that much usage per month, it would be fine for me personally.

 

That said I hope Google fiber comes to Atlanta within those five years.  Even if they eventually impose a data cap, at least we'll have competition in this market again that AT&T does NOT provide at all against Comcast.

[trag3dy]

well if you believe most articles, most people use their mobile devices for their internet and computer usage is dying.  So by that logic they shouldn't be fazed by Comcast introducing an internet plan that's already similar to what they already use on their tablets and phones.  In my opinion, when Comcast had their caps of 250 gigs per month, a few years ago, that IMO was more than enough for 90% of their users.  I don't consider myself a heavy torrent user, but between that, Netflix, MMOs, online gaming, etc the most that I ever used in a month was like 225 gigs.    I know I'm a more data heavy user than the average user, most of us likely are, so if they did implement a cap with that much usage per month, it would be fine for me personally.

 

That said I hope Google fiber comes to Atlanta within those five years.  Even if they eventually impose a data cap, at least we'll have competition in this market again that AT&T does NOT provide at all against Comcast.

 

Yes and no. When people are home they use our internet connection on their phones. It's faster than mobile. 

 

But then we don't have comcast and it's looking like google fiber might be coming to our area in the next few years. Screw you comcast.

[Jason S. Global Moderator]

well if you believe most articles, most people use their mobile devices for their internet and computer usage is dying.  So by that logic they shouldn't be fazed by Comcast introducing an internet plan that's already similar to what they already use on their tablets and phones.  In my opinion, when Comcast had their caps of 250 gigs per month, a few years ago, that IMO was more than enough for 90% of their users.  I don't consider myself a heavy torrent user, but between that, Netflix, MMOs, online gaming, etc the most that I ever used in a month was like 225 gigs, and that was one month in particular, where I downloaded a lot.  Usually I never used more than 100 gigs.  I know I'm a more data heavy user than the average user, most of us likely are, so if they did implement a cap with that much usage per month, it would be fine for me personally.

 

That said I hope Google fiber comes to Atlanta within those five years.  Even if they eventually impose a data cap, at least we'll have competition in this market again that AT&T does NOT provide at all against Comcast.

that's not the point. it's the principle of it.

[+Kyle Subscriber¹]

Comcast is the worst. Sadly I have to use them because they are a monopoly in my area.

[+therealDamien Subscriber¹]

would this effect side companys like brighthouse?

[Nagisan]

As a current TWC customer, this saddens me. My household is very bandwidth heavy, with four people who play online games, two of which also spend hours a day on Youtube, and they all also stream Netflix....throw in some Windows updates occasionally on 5 computers and it adds up quickly. Looking at my router, it's pretty common for us to go up to 250-300 GB/month.

 

Currently don't have any caps but we may be forced to go to the much smaller competition in this area given the TWC/Comcast merge.

[+Kyle Subscriber¹]

 

boycott, folks. boycott.

 

The Fed Govt is ruining competition in this country by allowing megacorporations to merge.

 

I don't think our government is prepared to take on megacorperations.

 

Boycotting is only effective if a majority of people participate; and sadly the people who understand the repercussions of these mergers are a minority.

[Jason S. Global Moderator]

Currently don't have any caps but we may be forced to go to the much smaller competition in this area given the TWC/Comcast merge.

When this eventually sweeps Comcast they'll spout some rhetoric about how it's going to actually improve your service. How? they wont explain, but it's enough psychological babble to make people shrug their shoulders and deal w/ it. That's the problem. People put up w/ crap and get steamrolled all the time

 

Also, since i have TWC, our bill goes up every single year for absolutely no reason. I've looked into companies such as Wow!, and they were actually a few dollars more than TWC. That's a pretty sad business model if you ask me. I'll gladly switch, though, when TWC inevitably imposes some data cap or "pay for what you use" model.

 

Remember, these data caps are good for you!

 

 

 

I don't think our government is prepared to take on megacorperations.

 

Boycotting is only effective if a majority of people participate; and sadly the people who understand the repercussions of these mergers are a minority.

 

hey. gotta spread the boycotting 'seed' somehow, right? Americans do not do this enough. They just let companies run over them b/c "that's the way it is".

 

Our government is the one that allows these megacorporations to exist in the first place. Someone is saying "hmm, this company is absolutely gigantic and hurts competition and the free market, but, eh, i'll let it slide."

[Anibal P]

 

 

 

I don't think our government is prepared to take on megacorperations.

 

And boycotting is only effective if a majority of people participate; and sadly the people who understand the repercussions of these mergers are a minority.

 

 

Not that hard really, step 1, declare all ISPs as common carriers, step 2, make illegal any and all contracts at city and state level that allow local monopolies,also strike down any laws prohibiting local ISPs to be created, step 3, come out and say that there will be no allowing of mergers between competitors, and yes despite the illegal monopolies the still are competitors. 

 

I'm fairly sure that other than the super rabid anarchists, even my fellow Libertarians can see these uses of Federal power as a net gain for the public they are supposed to serve

[+Kyle Subscriber¹]

Our government is the one that allows these megacorporations to exist in the first place. Someone is saying "hmm, this company is absolutely gigantic and hurts competition and the free market, but, eh, i'll let it slide."

Well Google is gigantic, hurts competition and the free market. So is Microsoft. Do we want to control them too? 

 

You can't pick and choose what companies to control just because they are introducing pricing that is unfavorable. Too much government interference is a bad thing, and too little is worse. It's a fine line to walk.

[msr714]

I live in a suburb of Kansas City, Missouri, where Google Fiber is spreading like wildfire - they've been laying cable around my neighborhood and we're supposed to be up and running sometime in June-July.  If Google Fiber expands to more cities like they say they're going to, then providers like Comcast and Time Warner will have to rethink this strategy, since with Google Fiber there are no caps and you get 1Gb up and 1Gb down, no restrictions.

[spenser.d]

It sounds bad, but if it's like Charter I don't think it'll be an issue.  Charter doesn't advertise a data cap, but if you read the fine print, you get something like 250GB/month and then you're considered an excessive user. Can't remember what they say happens at that point though. Never been an issue and we stream movies/videos/tv/etc and download videogames on Xbox One and whatnot so it's not like we're not using a ton of data.

 

I doubt it'll be anything that'll interfere with 99.9% of users, but you never really know with these companies.

[Hurmoth]

hey. gotta spread the boycotting 'seed' somehow, right? Americans do not do this enough. They just let companies run over them b/c "that's the way it is".

 

Our government is the one that allows these megacorporations to exist in the first place. Someone is saying "hmm, this company is absolutely gigantic and hurts competition and the free market, but, eh, i'll let it slide."

The problem is there's too many people in the US for a boycott to actually work because megacorporations have so many locations. I've often thought about a boycott and how it might work today and honestly, against a megacorp, it just won't work well enough to send a strong enough message.

 

In this case, it is almost guaranteed not to work because there's so little competition in the marketplace and both parties controlling our governments (federal and state) are to blame for this. I don't mean to necessarily take this into a political debate, but this is a political debate because of inept government to actually govern for the people and not for the almighty dollar.

 

But because of little to no competition in the ISP market, boycotting Comcast means you won't be getting any internet at all for some people. I only have one ISP in my area and they absolutely suck, Verizon. I live in an area where they introduced DSL about a decade ago and we're still stuck at between 3 and 7 Mbps and that's on a good day and I pay nearly $50 a month for that because of no competition.

 

And then we've got these stupid states passing laws banning municipal internet service because the state law makers are getting big campaign donations from megaisps, not giving one crap about the people and their needs.

 

As much as I hate to say it, the future sure does look an awful lot like what it does in Continuum. Do 'We the people' even matter anymore?

[Hurmoth]

It sounds bad, but if it's like Charter I don't think it'll be an issue.  Charter doesn't advertise a data cap, but if you read the fine print, you get something like 250GB/month and then you're considered an excessive user. Can't remember what they say happens at that point though. Never been an issue and we stream movies/videos/tv/etc and download videogames on Xbox One and whatnot so it's not like we're not using a ton of data.

 

I doubt it'll be anything that'll interfere with 99.9% of users, but you never really know with these companies.

If it is only an issue with .1% of their customers, then why is it even a concern for Charter? That .1% isn't really affecting anything then.

 

Even the cable industry has admitted data caps have nothing to do with congestion: http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130118/17425221736/cable-industry-finally-admits-that-data-caps-have-nothing-to-do-with-congestion.shtml

 

Former FCC boss Michael Powell told a Minority Media and Telecommunications Association audience that cable's interest in usage-based pricing was not principally about network congestion, but instead about pricing fairness... Asked by MMTC president David Honig to weigh in on data caps, Powell said that while a lot of people had tried to label the cable industry's interest in the issue as about congestion management. "That's wrong," he said. "Our principal purpose is how to fairly monetize a high fixed cost."

 

Broadband Reports notes: Except the argument that usaged pricing is about fairness has been just as repeatedly debunked. If usage caps were about "fairness," carriers would offer the nation's grandmothers a $5-$15 a month tier that accurately reflected her twice weekly, several megabyte browsing of the Weather Channel website. Instead, what we most often see are low caps and high overages layered on top of already high existing flat rate pricing, raising rates for all users. Does raising rates on a product that already sees 90% profit margins sound like "fairness" to you?

[McKay]

Kicking up a huge stink works better than a boycott IMO. Even better if going public about it.

[Jason S. Global Moderator]

I doubt it'll be anything that'll interfere with 99.9% of users, but you never really know with these companies.

What they'll probably do, however, is impose caps at different payment levels, like cell phone data plans. So if your grandma doesnt know what a bit is, the company will ask her "well do you just surf the internet and check your email? i think the 20GB/mo plan will be good for you" "oh, so you like to watch netflix and game online? well i think you'll be best off w/ the 250GB plan for $499/mo" /s

[Hurmoth]

Kicking up a huge stink works better than a boycott IMO. Even better if going public about it.

I tend to agree. While not exactly the same thing, but look at Microsoft at the backlash they've taken from Windows 8 and XBOX One and how they've backtracked on so many things. Whether the decision to backtrack brought about what's best for those products is still up for debate, I give Microsoft credit for at least listening to customers and making an effort to strike a balance between those who hated the products for whatever reason and those who liked the ideas MS implemented originally.

 

 

Enough negative press, and enough awareness will get a company's attention. In fact, look at the backlash Tom Wheeler has gotten for his net neutrality ideas and you can see that being loud and outspoken is sometimes better than attempting a boycott.

 

Reminds me of an episode of Frasier where his three member fanclub held a rally at City Hall and the reporter says, ""What if they held a rally and nobody came?" I sort of feel like a boycott would end up the same way  :/

[+LogicalApex MVC]

I tend to agree. While not exactly the same thing, but look at Microsoft at the backlash they've taken from Windows 8 and XBOX One and how they've backtracked on so many things. Whether the decision to backtrack brought about what's best for those products is still up for debate, I give Microsoft credit for at least listening to customers and making an effort to strike a balance between those who hated the products for whatever reason and those who liked the ideas MS implemented originally.

 

 

Enough negative press, and enough awareness will get a company's attention. In fact, look at the backlash Tom Wheeler has gotten for his net neutrality ideas and you can see that being loud and outspoken is sometimes better than attempting a boycott.

 

Reminds me of an episode of Frasier where his three member fanclub held a rally at City Hall and the reporter says, ""What if they held a rally and nobody came?" I sort of feel like a boycott would end up the same way  :/

 

No, MS backtracked because they were getting hit in the pocketbook (lower sales). Companies will ignore bad press if their top line isn't affected...

Kicking up a huge stink works better than a boycott IMO. Even better if going public about it.

Never have and never will. Companies will only respond to bad press when it has a direct affect on their top line revenue. If people complain without direct action then the companies will ignore the complaints as their bank account tells them whether people really care.

 

You can bet, if Comcast is successful with this it will roll across the ISP territory in the US. Consumers need to push back hardcore to scare ISPs into line, but I doubt they will as it is very challenging to explain this issue to non-technical users.