

nonamesleft

join:2011-11-07

Manitowoc, WI 1 recommendation nonamesleft Member Comcast only cable company in the near future? Wouldn't it be comcastic, if comcast was the only tv, phone, and Internet provider for the entire country? /sarcasm!



newview

Ex .. Ex .. Exactly

Premium Member

join:2001-10-01

Parsonsburg, MD 1 edit newview Premium Member Re: Comcast only cable company in the near future? quote: Coming Soon: The United States of Comcast

In George Orwells 1984, the world is divided into three totalitarian superstates, but in the world of broadband and cable television only a single company may soon reign supreme. Comcast announced today it has agreed to acquire Time-Warner, its largest and only significant competitor in the cable and broadband business.

»www.huffingtonpost.com/2 ··· 188.html This merger is exactly the opposite of a good National Broadband Plan for our future. Putting this much power in the hands of one company is dangerous. Putting this much power in the hands of Comcast is competition suicide. This merger WILL lead to less consumer choice, less diversity and much higher cable bills. There is no way this merger can conceivably be viewed as in the public interest.



Say NO to the Comcast / Time Warner Merger

»bit.ly/1gB0ULh



FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler

Tom.Wheeler@fcc.gov This merger is exactly the opposite of a good National Broadband Plan for our future. Putting this much power in the hands of one company is dangerous. Putting this much power in the hands of Comcast is competition suicide. This merger WILL lead to less consumer choice, less diversity and much higher cable bills. There is no way this merger can conceivably be viewed as in the public interest.Say NO to the Comcast / Time Warner MergerFCC Chairman Tom WheelerTom.Wheeler@fcc.gov

pandora

Premium Member

join:2001-06-01

Outland pandora Premium Member Re: Comcast only cable company in the near future? "No political appointees in an Obama-Biden administration will be permitted to work on regulations or contracts directly and substantially related to their prior employer for two years. And no political appointee will be able to lobby the executive branch after leaving government service during the remainder of the administration." - Barack Obama



Turns out, no political promise, or protest by the peasants is going to change the reality of this merger going through. Comcast is all set up. Well yes and no. There is reality, virtual reality and political reality. For example over at - » www.politifact.com/truth ··· bbyists/ we can read the reality -we read a political reality, which I prefer to think of as fiction, but others refer to alternately as lies or truth. Karl has posted the reality, and we discuss our opinions of all these things here in virtual reality.Turns out, no political promise, or protest by the peasants is going to change the reality of this merger going through. Comcast is all set up.

Rakeesh

join:2011-10-30

Phoenix, AZ Rakeesh Member Re: Comcast only cable company in the near future? To be honest, its easy for anybody to get their way with the current admin. All they have to do is personally offer Obama a barrel full of bananas and he'll give them whatever they want.



what_the

@comcast.net what_the Anon Re: Comcast only cable company in the near future? said by Rakeesh: To be honest, its easy for anybody to get their way with the current admin. All they have to do is personally offer Obama a barrel full of bananas and he'll give them whatever they want. What's that supposed to mean? Why don't you elaborate on that a little bit.

Rakeesh

join:2011-10-30

Phoenix, AZ Rakeesh Member Re: Comcast only cable company in the near future? said by what_the : What's that supposed to mean? Why don't you elaborate on that a little bit. It means exactly what it says. Obama takes bananas as a form of payment for bribes.



what_the

@comcast.net what_the Anon Re: Comcast only cable company in the near future? said by Rakeesh: said by what_the : What's that supposed to mean? Why don't you elaborate on that a little bit. It means exactly what it says. Obama takes bananas as a form of payment for bribes. Yes, but why? Why specifically bananas? It's your comment, so why don't you explain your reasoning?

pandora

Premium Member

join:2001-06-01

Outland pandora to Rakeesh

Premium Member to Rakeesh

said by Rakeesh: To be honest, its easy for anybody to get their way with the current admin. All they have to do is personally offer Obama a barrel full of bananas and he'll give them whatever they want. In terms of corruption Obama has lived down to most peoples worst expectations. However personally I wasn't thrilled with Bush I / II or Clinton. If Obama can avoid severe inflation / recession / impeachment, he'll be better than Carter, Nixon or Ford imo.



MovieLover76

join:2009-09-11

Cherry Hill, NJ ·Verizon FiOS

(Software) pfSense

Asus RT-AC68

Asus RT-AC66

MovieLover76 to newview

Member to newview

I agree that consolidation of the cable companies does mean less diversity in offerings on a national level, the lower the number of telcos that exist, the fewer opportunities to show up one provider as overcharging. Bigger cable companies equal companies with more lobbying power and is likely to increase rates over time, Overall I'm against the merger.



However customer choice is not affected, comcast and time warner don't compete directly. In the vast majority of places you only have one cable provider, we have comcast here. I can't choose Time Warner.



where I live it's Comcast or Verizon FiOS, so the merger wouldn't effect my choices.

biochemistry

Premium Member

join:2003-05-09

92361 biochemistry Premium Member Re: Comcast only cable company in the near future? Bring back Ma Bell, right Lover?



tshirt

Premium Member

join:2004-07-11

Snohomish, WA tshirt to newview

Premium Member to newview

A lot of people would like to see a consistant single wire high speed solution to every home, which implies consolidation at some point. and cable serves/passes something like 90% of homes, so it is the most likely medium to reach the most people the soonest.



Or would you prefer that the "dumb pipe" be run by a 3 letter agency of the federal gov't?



TAZ

join:2014-01-03

Tucson, AZ TAZ Member Re: Comcast only cable company in the near future? said by tshirt: Or would you prefer that the "dumb pipe" be run by a 3 letter agency of the federal gov't? Yes. Run the wire and let me decide what company to cross-connect to.



tshirt

Premium Member

join:2004-07-11

Snohomish, WA tshirt Premium Member Re: Comcast only cable company in the near future? said by TAZ: Yes. Run the wire and let me decide what company to cross-connect to.

However a private company has invested in building their own network over the years and will sell you limited access on it. Then you have to pay for the running of the wire in advance, and you (general public) have not done so.However a private company has invested in building their own network over the years and will sell you limited access on it.



TAZ

join:2014-01-03

Tucson, AZ TAZ Member Re: Comcast only cable company in the near future? said by tshirt: said by TAZ: Yes. Run the wire and let me decide what company to cross-connect to. Then you have to pay for the running of the wire in advance, and you (general public) have not done so. Sounds good, it will be cheaper than Comcast's ridiculous rates.



tshirt

Premium Member

join:2004-07-11

Snohomish, WA tshirt Premium Member Re: Comcast only cable company in the near future? said by TAZ: ... Good luck with that, let me know when you can assemble a majority of congress intent on building such a system, and a plan to finance it adequately to build, and complete it within your lifetime.



TAZ

join:2014-01-03

Tucson, AZ TAZ Member Re: Comcast only cable company in the near future? Oh I don't expect it to happen. Not with the idiots in Congress now.

Skippy25

join:2000-09-13

Hazelwood, MO 1 recommendation Skippy25 to tshirt

Member to tshirt

Shit... we have paid for that wire 1000 fold.

WhatNow

Premium Member

join:2009-05-06

Charlotte, NC WhatNow Premium Member Re: Comcast only cable company in the near future? And I am going to pay for it again and still be on coax. The only solution is many dumb pipe fiber companies not a big Fed program. When you get to big maintenance goes downhill.



newview

Ex .. Ex .. Exactly

Premium Member

join:2001-10-01

Parsonsburg, MD 1 recommendation newview to tshirt

Premium Member to tshirt

said by tshirt: Or would you prefer that the "dumb pipe" be run by a 3 letter agency of the federal gov't? SHOULD NOT look like ... and that's a Comcast controlled one, which this merger would portend. I'm uncertain what the future broadband infrastructure would look like, but I do know what itlook like ... and that's a Comcast controlled one, which this merger would portend.



tshirt

Premium Member

join:2004-07-11

Snohomish, WA tshirt Premium Member Re: Comcast only cable company in the near future? said by newview: I'm uncertain what the future broadband infrastructure would look like, but I do know what it SHOULD NOT look like ... and that's a Comcast controlled one, which this merger would portend.

NO ONE is forcing you to use comcast's/the existing cable network.



This is a transitional phase of getting a ubiquitous physical connection via investor driven private systems.



Then you and your friends should start building your own network.NO ONE is forcing you to use comcast's/the existing cable network.This is a transitional phase of getting a ubiquitous physical connection via investor driven private systems.



TAZ

join:2014-01-03

Tucson, AZ 2 recommendations TAZ Member Re: Comcast only cable company in the near future? Kind of difficult to do when them (& others) constantly bribe (sorry, I mean "donate") politicians to prevent that?



tshirt

Premium Member

join:2004-07-11

Snohomish, WA 1 edit tshirt Premium Member Re: Comcast only cable company in the near future? I didn't say it would be easy.

If you look back cable itself faced an equal or greater opposition from Ma Bell, the television networks, and CONSUMER groups, fearing too much control.

And they (Cableco's) had to pay dearly for franchises, 'Public benefits', RoW and content in order to build the networks which now provide CATV, and HSI to many millions of fairly* satisfied customers who otherwise would have ZERO access to most of these services.

* as with all "service" companies, consumers sometimes think it should be cheaper/better for their individual needs, without thought to the true costs.

Skippy25

join:2000-09-13

Hazelwood, MO Skippy25 Member Re: Comcast only cable company in the near future? Cable co's didnt pay anything when they started. What they did not receive in incentives was 100% paid for by their consumers.



They paid 0 in franchise fees, zero in content agreements and 0 in Public benefits. Just like when they are fined, they pay exactly $0 in that as ALL of it comes from their consumers and the tax base they get to siphon off of.

sonicmerlin

join:2009-05-24

Cleveland, OH sonicmerlin to tshirt

Member to tshirt

What? The cable companies had zero landline competitors when they rolled out their lines. They were extremely fortunate the DOCSIS standard enabled Internet over their lines and matured so well. A new competitor would face an entirely different, much more saturated and entrenched market than the cable companies did. Not to mention Comcast grew so large through consolidation, not through competition or excellence of service.



tshirt

Premium Member

join:2004-07-11

Snohomish, WA tshirt Premium Member Re: Comcast only cable company in the near future? said by sonicmerlin: They were extremely fortunate the DOCSIS standard enabled Internet over their lines and matured so well.

The also paid for franchise rights almost from the beginning in most places, not sure what tax base you think pays them anything though like every business tax laws do great influence the spending and growth. That wasn't just good fortune, Cable labs is owed by/funded by the cable industry specifically to develop DOSIS and other cable centric platforms. The cableco's have invested many millions to reach their current position.The also paid for franchise rights almost from the beginning in most places, not sure what tax base you think pays them anything though like every business tax laws do great influence the spending and growth.



newview

Ex .. Ex .. Exactly

Premium Member

join:2001-10-01

Parsonsburg, MD 1 recommendation newview to tshirt

Premium Member to tshirt

said by tshirt: Then you and your friends should start building your own network. THAT like they've prevented public broadband in 20 states.

»arstechnica.com/tech-pol ··· -states/ said by tshirt: NO ONE is forcing you to use comcast's/the existing cable network.



... at which point Comcast would more than likely start lobbying to preventlike they've prevented public broadband in 20 states.If I need broadband for business or school, for instance, and the only choice between using existing cable or having NO connection at all ... it is in fact being forced. When the only choices in your area are limited or nonexistent due to the ongoing efforts of the only remaining company offering service, then it is fact being forced.



tshirt

Premium Member

join:2004-07-11

Snohomish, WA tshirt Premium Member Re: Comcast only cable company in the near future? said by newview: ... at which point Comcast would more than likely start lobbying to prevent THAT like they've prevented public broadband in 20 states.

»arstechnica.com/tech-pol ··· -states/

If you look at what provo has actually cost Those taxpayers* in terms of borrowing costs and payments for a system they no longer own or control, you might not think Comcast's HSI charges are so bad.



*Many of whom have seen no direct benefit from it and quite a few of which don't even use the services if available. Did you read the restrictions? Most of them seem quite reasonable to protect taxpayers from the wild boondoggle of a few like Provo (think about how much homeowners gave up/will continue to pay for a system Sold for a second time for $1 to a private entity.If you look at what provo has actually cost Those taxpayers* in terms of borrowing costs and payments for a system they no longer own or control, you might not think Comcast's HSI charges are so bad.*Many of whom have seen no direct benefit from it and quite a few of which don't even use the services if available.



newview

Ex .. Ex .. Exactly

Premium Member

join:2001-10-01

Parsonsburg, MD newview Premium Member Re: Comcast only cable company in the near future? The only restrictions THIS taxpayer would like is a restriction from Comcast being able to attempt to sell this "bill of goods" to the other 30 States, and a rescission of the barriers from the existing 20 States.



You don't throw out the whole barrel for one bad apple.



tshirt

Premium Member

join:2004-07-11

Snohomish, WA tshirt Premium Member Re: Comcast only cable company in the near future? said by newview: The only restrictions THIS taxpayer would like is a restriction from Comcast being able to attempt to sell this "bill of goods" to the other 30 States, and a rescission of the barriers from the existing 20 States.

But don't come back and complain about the piecemeal patchwork of physical connections available nationwide. or the inconsistency of services offered, or the slowdown of investment in better systems. said by newview: You don't throw out the whole barrel for one bad apple.

Provo is just one example of a bad public investment. Then write YOUR letter to regulators and YOUR representatives suggesting that as a condition, or even totally opposing it if you choose. and if they agree to BLOCK this business deal. (a tougher task to justify then you seem to believe) you may get your way.But don't come back and complain about the piecemeal patchwork of physical connections available nationwide. or the inconsistency of services offered, or the slowdown of investment in better systems.Unfortunately, the past is littered with Broadband failures and muni's are well represented on the list of bad apples.Provo is just one example of a bad public investment.



newview

Ex .. Ex .. Exactly

Premium Member

join:2001-10-01

Parsonsburg, MD newview Premium Member Re: Comcast only cable company in the near future?



I've made my feelings known to the FCC and the DOJ, as well as supporting the Common Cause and FreePress initiatives, and also contacted my elected representatives to inform them as to the latest Comcast shenanigans. I will also continue to post links to those initiatives on discussion forums and social media so as to inform others. I do not profit from my actions other than to enjoy a better internet that the elimination of a further Comcast monopoly would bring. said by tshirt: Unfortunately, the past is littered with Broadband failures and muni's are well represented on the list of bad apples.

Provo is just one example of a bad public investment. I'm certain that if the playing field were level and Comcast lobbying efforts prevented from effecting the outcome, there would undoubtedly be MORE competition.I've made my feelings known to the FCC and the DOJ, as well as supporting the Common Cause and FreePress initiatives, and also contacted my elected representatives to inform them as to the latest Comcast shenanigans. I will also continue to post links to those initiatives on discussion forums and social media so as to inform others. I do not profit from my actions other than to enjoy a better internet that the elimination of a further Comcast monopoly would bring.... and you could add a Comcast/TWC merger to that list also ... as an example of a bad investment in the future of this nation's broadband service.



tshirt

Premium Member

join:2004-07-11

Snohomish, WA tshirt Premium Member Re: Comcast only cable company in the near future? said by newview: ... and you could add a Comcast/TWC merger to that list also ... as an example of a bad investment in the future of this nation's broadband service.

It is something that might require regulation, and any obvious conflicts might require terms and conditions by various agencies to close the deal.

they don't directly compete anywhere, and comcast already indicated willingness/desire to sell off 3million subs to limit themselves to 30million/33% of the homes passed (the closest to any law or regulation this might conflict with, already waved off by that agency)

By true consolation ie becoming the ONLY large Cable provider in some states they are much more likely to come under state regulation and have to provide a consistant product area-wide (regional) and come much closer to being regulated as the dumb pipe some want, which is impossible with multiple companies diverse plant and model methodologies let alone across media types. xDSL is never going to match the ability or footprint of D3 let alone D3.1+ , even if given an unlimited budget, wireless will always be bandwidth constrained,.

Fiber and HFC networks are the only reasonable contenders for the last mile (wireless may make a last 100' foot play in non high-density areas (most of the US footprint)as a strand to house solution ) and cable's big advantage is they are already almost everywhere, with raw fiber being almost nowhere.

hence a fully consolidated cable industry is the best chanse most of the US has for a single line solution within the next 10 years. whether it's single owned and highly regulated or bought out and becomes a quasi- gov't enterprise then, doesn't really matter at this point what is needed now is more investment and the scent of RoI drives investment. over or worse inconsistent regulation kills interest. That is an unknown, but it is not a public investment.It is something that might require regulation, and any obvious conflicts might require terms and conditions by various agencies to close the deal.they don't directly compete anywhere, and comcast already indicated willingness/desire to sell off 3million subs to limit themselves to 30million/33% of the homes passed (the closest to any law or regulation this might conflict with, already waved off by that agency)By true consolation ie becoming the ONLY large Cable provider in some states they are much more likely to come under state regulation and have to provide a consistant product area-wide (regional) and come much closer to being regulated as the dumb pipe some want, which is impossible with multiple companies diverse plant and model methodologies let alone across media types. xDSL is never going to match the ability or footprint of D3 let alone D3.1+ , even if given an unlimited budget, wireless will always be bandwidth constrained,.Fiber and HFC networks are the only reasonable contenders for the last mile (wireless may make a last 100' foot play in non high-density areas (most of the US footprint)as a strand to house solution ) and cable's big advantage is they are already almost everywhere, with raw fiber being almost nowhere.hence a fully consolidated cable industry is the best chanse most of the US has for a single line solution within the next 10 years. whether it's single owned and highly regulated or bought out and becomes a quasi- gov't enterprise then, doesn't really matter at this point what is needed now is more investment and the scent of RoI drives investment. over or worse inconsistent regulation kills interest.



Mr Guy

@charter.com Mr Guy to nonamesleft

Anon to nonamesleft

said by nonamesleft: Wouldn't it be comcastic, if comcast was the only tv, phone, and Internet provider for the entire country? /sarcasm! Yeah I mean right now we have 4 or 5 cable companies in our town competing for our business if there was only one things would change for the worse. Oh wait all we ever had was one. And if there were 20 major cable companies each town would still only have one cable company.



PlusOne

@comcast.net 1 recommendation PlusOne to nonamesleft

Anon to nonamesleft

said by nonamesleft: Wouldn't it be comcastic, if comcast was the only tv, phone, and Internet provider for the entire country? /sarcasm! Just like the old Ma Bell. Let it happen and then regulate it - just like in the 1930's.

pandora

Premium Member

join:2001-06-01

Outland pandora Premium Member Comcast gets by with a little help from it's friends ... Do you need anybody ... I just need somebody to love approve my acquisition.



goalieskates

Premium Member

join:2004-09-12

land of big goalieskates Premium Member the revolving door The revolving door is a continuing problem in government, and it seems to be getting worse instead of better.



I thought we were promised "business as usual" was going to end. Joke's on us - it did, only it went the other way. Like the old saying goes, promises were made to be broken.



As for Comcast, well, one would expect them to become a target for antitrust prosecution, but that was back when we were a nation of laws. Now we've just become Tammany Hall on a grand scale, where everything has its price.

Kearnstd

Space Elf

Premium Member

join:2002-01-22

Mullica Hill, NJ Kearnstd Premium Member Re: the revolving door As long as we allow money in lobbying we will always have this revolving door.



If everybody had to write a letter to their reps but no money at all was allowed I think the game would be different. After all "Citizen the Voter" writes a letter saying this is bad, To their senator it barely makes it beyond the secretary. A letter from Lobbyist Row arrives with a $10,000 check its in the fast lane to the senator's desk.

biochemistry

Premium Member

join:2003-05-09

92361 biochemistry Premium Member Re: the revolving door Can't beat the system. Have to join the system. Need some generous (rich) people to oppose this.



IPPlanMan

Holy Cable Modem Batman

join:2000-09-20

Washington, DC IPPlanMan Member Par for the course... The wheels were set in motion years ago.

This isn't a surprise to anyone. We all saw this coming from a mile away.



Now we've got a merger that's inevitable with some token divestures.



It's Comcastic!



why60loss

Premium Member

join:2012-09-20 why60loss Premium Member Well for once, I am glad the goverment is likely to stay out of the way. Time warner cable can stick it's $55 a month for just 15/1 up in the cloud.



Come Comcast give us 50/10 or even 20/4 for the same cost. We need to be saved from crime warner cable.



Let the buy out begin!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :



Packeteers

Premium Member

join:2005-06-18

Forest Hills, NY ·Verizon FiOS

·Charter

Asus RT-AC3100

(Software) Asuswrt-Merlin

Packeteers Premium Member Comcast bought NBC/Universal so buying TWCable, especially since their markets don't overlap, should be easy peasy once all the lawyers and lobbyist involved get paid enough.



remember it's nearly the same bureaucrats that let a distributor buy it's own content which it can now ration out to other distributors as it deems fit.



if bureaucrats did their job properly, instead of being paid shills for the industry - that NBC/Universal deal would have never happened in the first place.



I would rather Comcast buy TWCable, then had been originally allowed to buy NBC/Universal - as it's the lessor of the two evils.



fg8578

join:2009-04-26

San Antonio, TX fg8578 Member What is the solution? If you don't wanna hire experienced industry people to staff government agencies, where is that staff gonna come from?



Noah Vail

Oh God please no.

Premium Member

join:2004-12-10

SouthAmerica Noah Vail Premium Member Washington remains Washington, no matter who's making policy

If you happen to wonder how we got here, here's a reminder

and

who I feel is most responsible (it's us) spoiler . said by Candidate Obama : One year from now, we have the chance to tell all those corporate lobbyists that the days of them setting the agenda in Washington are over.



I have done more to take on lobbyists than any other candidate in this race - and I've won. I don't take a dime of their money, and when I am President, they won't find a job in my White House. Quote hosted at Web Archive because the original pages have been scrubbed of content.



Pinheads can argue technical accuracies on this one. By any meaningful measure though, this qualifies as a broken promise.



The point here isn't whether PotUS Obama is better or worse than anyone else who would be found worth of their party's nomination.



The point is we don't hold our elected officials accountable. That makes them susceptible to the handlers who remold them, after they win election.



As long as PotUS supporters (any party) keep their mouths meekly shut when their guy is barely recognizable as the candidate they elected, we'll continue to have the same person as PotUS, no matter who it is. Karl's assessment is dead on.If you happen to wonder how we got here, here's a reminderandwho I feel is most responsiblePinheads can argue technical accuracies on this one. By any meaningful measure though, this qualifies as a broken promise.The point here isn't whether PotUS Obama is better or worse than anyone else who would be found worth of their party's nomination.The point is we don't hold our elected officials accountable. That makes them susceptible to the handlers who remold them, after they win election.As long as PotUS supporters (any party) keep their mouths meekly shut when their guy is barely recognizable as the candidate they elected, we'll continue to have the same person as PotUS, no matter who it is.



Zenit

The system is the solution

Premium Member

join:2012-05-07

Purcellville, VA Zenit Premium Member In the grand scheme of things, it could be worse :/



They are not like lets say Verizon, whom has left a large percentage of its customer base with copper-ADSL2 maxing out at 3mbit on lines ranging from 20-70 years old.

FIOS is nice, but its not a majority of VZ footprint. The rest of VZs network sits pretty much abandoned, getting duct-tape/trash bag repairs to keep it hobbling along. They want out of wireline bad.



Comcast would be less bad if they would invest in improving customer support, rather than just hiking up rental fees and bills constantly. I know Mr. Robers wants a new Citadel to look over City 17 er Philadelphia, but it would make Comcast look less incompetent and evil by having a competent consumer-facing side. Even direct support here is going downhill.



We are getting Pa Cable. Hes like Ma Bell in size, but different. He doesn't have the same standards of quality of service and customer support, but hey, those died with the old lady in 1983. He also ignores rural markets unless forced to by contracts. His prices are unregulated too, bcuz free market murika mah freedomz.



My concern is price. They know they are the only provider with modern speeds for many people, and they will take advantage of it.



Which means people could go back to their incompetent lazy Telco DSL from the 90s, if the price hikes grow exponentially. Fast internet is fast, but slow internet is better than no money in your wallet + no internet.



Once the FCC Net-Neutrality agreement with Comcast (a condition of the CC-NBC merger) expires in 4 years, expect to see innovation murdered with throttling.



....I dont like the future. At all. 1 choice. Pay or nothing. Think of things this way. Even in regions with 0 competition, Comcast still upgrades and maintains its plant. They might be -evil- but there are worse providers out there.They are not like lets say Verizon, whom has left a large percentage of its customer base with copper-ADSL2 maxing out at 3mbit on lines ranging from 20-70 years old.FIOS is nice, but its not a majority of VZ footprint. The rest of VZs network sits pretty much abandoned, getting duct-tape/trash bag repairs to keep it hobbling along. They want out of wireline bad.Comcast would be less bad if they would invest in improving customer support, rather than just hiking up rental fees and bills constantly. I know Mr. Robers wants a new Citadel to look over City 17 er Philadelphia, but it would make Comcast look less incompetent and evil by having a competent consumer-facing side. Even direct support here is going downhill.We are getting Pa Cable. Hes like Ma Bell in size, but different. He doesn't have the same standards of quality of service and customer support, but hey, those died with the old lady in 1983. He also ignores rural markets unless forced to by contracts. His prices are unregulated too, bcuz free market murika mah freedomz.My concern is price. They know they are the only provider with modern speeds for many people, and they will take advantage of it.Which means people could go back to their incompetent lazy Telco DSL from the 90s, if the price hikes grow exponentially. Fast internet is fast, but slow internet is better than no money in your wallet + no internet.Once the FCC Net-Neutrality agreement with Comcast (a condition of the CC-NBC merger) expires in 4 years, expect to see innovation murdered with throttling.....I dont like the future. At all. 1 choice. Pay or nothing.

biochemistry

Premium Member

join:2003-05-09

92361 biochemistry Premium Member Sure Go ahead and approve the merger as long as Comcast agrees to service anybody within their territory who asks for it, rural or not.

AVonGauss

Premium Member

join:2007-11-01

Boynton Beach, FL AVonGauss Premium Member Regulatory I know the media is the media, but it truly amazes me how many keep claiming a "regulatory" issue. TWC and Comcast are not competitors except in a very few limited areas, there is no regulatory issue here or need for "White House" help. In fact, the government is likely to look fondly on a national provider with a healthy balance sheet available in more areas which they don't currently serve.



The "anti-trust" card is just as ludicrous in the context of the TWC merger deal as well. AT&T didn't get "broken up" due to being a national provider, it was done due to the way they conducted business. Comcast is far more likely to garner regulatory attention from recent actions such as the Internet promotion tied to CATV subscriptions than the TWC deal.



But to those that love regulation, fear not, I'm fairly confident Internet service will (relatively) soon become a much more highly regulated and taxed entity than it has been historically. This is partly due to capitalizing on a new source of tax revenue, but also acknowledging that it has become essential infrastructure.



anonomeX

@comcast.net 1 recommendation anonomeX Anon Does it really matter? Given the complete lack of any competition between cable companies now (or ever), will Comcast taking over any or all other cable companies have any effect whatsoever (good or bad)?



I say let Comcast consume them all. And then let's "nationalize" the cable infrastructure--take it all back as "public domain" [ha-ha]!

Skippy25

join:2000-09-13

Hazelwood, MO Skippy25 Member Re: Does it really matter? I am 100% with you on that.



tshirt

Premium Member

join:2004-07-11

Snohomish, WA tshirt to anonomeX

Premium Member to anonomeX

said by anonomeX : And then let's "nationalize" the cable infrastructure--take it all back as "public domain" [ha-ha]!

better yet buy it and pay the "the bones"(vital employees) to manage it (sort of PBS style, without the pledge breaks) almost, rather than steal it, buy it If Comcast (or any other) could get the national cable "grid" even halfway close to where the wholesale power grid is (both need more money and more work on the infrastructure) it would be well worth the price.better yet buy it and pay the "the bones"(vital employees) to manage it (sort of PBS style, without the pledge breaks)



FureverFurry

RIP Daphne: 3/12/05 - 6/19/12

Premium Member

join:2012-02-20

49xxx Zoom 5341J

ARRIS WBM760

Vonage VDV-21

FureverFurry Premium Member Comcast - the Standard Oil snake of the 21st century Comcast slithering around and munching up this, that and who knows what's next sure is like John D. Rockefeller and his Standard Oil. At least back then, we had a POTUS and congress who had some cojones to break up Rockefeller's trust.



Yeah, "the future is awesome" -- awesomely BAD for Comcast consumers IMHO. And I apologize to snakes for the analogy.