Charter tells FCC consumers want data caps

[mr moose]

16 minutes ago, Kawaii_Desu said:

That is a LOT harder than you would think.  I was doing some research because I thought about moving to the other coast and I did some checking on who is the internet provider in the area I was looking and and you guessed it the only provider in that area was Charter as well.  The major companies are A LOT harder to escape than you'd think.

There was a study done in the US not long ago looking at how many options consumers had for internet, it was some like 2 providers for 87% of the population. 

 

I'll see if I can find it.

 

EDIT: here it is, basically if you more than 25Mb/s you only have 2 choices.

This is 4 years old though I doubt much has changed.

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/08/us-broadband-still-no-isp-choice-for-many-especially-at-higher-speeds/

 

[Izineth]

1 hour ago, SoulTribunal said:

The fact that they have the gall to say consumers enjoy data caps... either they are seriously out of touch with reality or they just as crooked as this paints them to be.

 

No one earnestly enjoys being limited in such a fashion, they make do. Especially considering how the internet is becoming more and more a necessity like water or electricity for a household.

 

Hmm I wonder what a power cap would be like? Could you imagine? The power at home just goes out suddenly and you get a message "You've used your 200kWH for the month, If you wish to be reconnected the rate is $15 for 50kWH".

Exactly.  But the bullshit the big ISP's are trying to push to get people to agree to caps is "If George down the street uses 3TB of data and Sally uses 15GB why should Sally pay the same amount as George?"  So they're trying to get people to agree to caps under the fake guise that they will save money by agreeing to this shit.  And then they shovel the drivel to the government that people want caps and it allows innovation and all that shit...  Its all a crock of shit and its all in pursuit of greed.

[Izineth]

1 minute ago, mr moose said:

There was a study done in the US not long ago looking at how many options consumers had for internet, it was some like 2 providers for 87% of the population. 

 

I'll see if I can find it.

 

 

This may be technically true but in a sense not true.  Because if you have either 500mbps cable or 128k DSL... is that REALLY a choice?  And I would also assume that a good portion of the rural population has either DSL or Cable as one choice not both and the second choice is satellite in its current form such as wild blue or hughesnet isn't really a valid choice.

[Tellos]

10 minutes ago, Kawaii_Desu said:

Exactly.  But the bullshit the big ISP's are trying to push to get people to agree to caps is "If George down the street uses 3TB of data and Sally uses 15GB why should Sally pay the same amount as George?"  So they're trying to get people to agree to caps under the fake guise that they will save money by agreeing to this shit.  And then they shovel the drivel to the government that people want caps and it allows innovation and all that shit...  Its all a crock of shit and its all in pursuit of greed.

Ironically this is because basic networking is not taught, everyone thinks their sharing bandwidth, well yes but not where you think. I am not sapping off my neighbors internet if their Comcast customers. I  am however sharing a node and possibly a pedistool. These choke points got limits to how much they can handle thats where it all shrink up eventually. So its easy with this and many myths about networks and ISPs for some ISPs to make up bullshit. Helps congress is made up of people who don't understand GPS.

[mr moose]

2 minutes ago, Kawaii_Desu said:

This may be technically true but in a sense not true.  Because if you have either 500mbps cable or 128k DSL... is that REALLY a choice?  And I would also assume that a good portion of the rural population has either DSL or Cable as one choice not both and the second choice is satellite in its current form such as wild blue or hughesnet isn't really a valid choice.

See edit, I found the article.  you are right, you have plenty of choice when you have shit speeds and only 1 or 2 choices at usable speeds.

 

 

[Izineth]

1 minute ago, Tellos said:

Ironically this is because basic networking is not taught, everyone thinks their sharing bandwidth, well yes but not where oyu think. I am not sapping off my neighbors internet if their Comcast customers. I  am whoever sharing a node and possibly a pedistool. These choke points got limits to how much they can handle thats where it all shrink up eventually. So its easy with this and many myths about networks and ISPs for some ISPs to make up bullshit. Helps congress is made up of people who don't understand GPS.

Exactly its also where a lot of phone companies lie to people in fake marketing as well.  Frontier for example just loves to tell you how their 6mbps DSL is soooooo much better than your gigabit cable because with DSL you have your own dedicated line that isn't shared with the rest of your neighborhood.

[Izineth]

4 minutes ago, mr moose said:

See edit, I found the article.  you are right, you have plenty of choice when you have shit speeds and only 1 or 2 choices at usable speeds.

 

 

Yup the internet is just getting to heavy for low speed options to be viable anymore.  Far too much javascript, tracking scripts, advertisements etc.

ALSO that's another HUGE point.  Advertisements and stuff, there is SO MUCH crap on websites these days that uses up data.  If you're on a limited connection it is NOT fair that you do NOT get to chose what your data is spent on.  Advertisements and all that other shit counts against that data limit as do things like acknowledgement packets and shit like that too. 

 

Things like adblock and stuff only helps so much because it does NOT work on all devices and some of them still load the data they just don't display it.

Without a way to have super strict control on what goes over your connection it's not in ANY way fair.

[Tellos]

4 minutes ago, Kawaii_Desu said:

Exactly its also where a lot of phone companies lie to people in fake marketing as well.  Frontier for example just loves to tell you how their 6mbps DSL is soooooo much better than your gigabit cable because with DSL you have your own dedicated line that isn't shared with the rest of your neighborhood.

These myths however don't come from the companies initially they come from consumers who dream up conspiracies on stuff. The companies sometimes pick up on it playing on fears. Now I wont claim I am unbias here as stated I work for one of the major ISPs. Fact is people also got themselves here by picking the perceived best and so a company grew larger. Until it could acquire others  I really think if we want changes to ISPs we need to first recognize that if you want what europe has the government MUST spend trillions to buy upgrade and expand the networks. You have to then accept you will if treated like a utility be given a single ISP. Utilities in the US don't typically go free market they go government assigned/awarded regional fiefdoms. example I cannot get away from my country electric company now matter how ass they are many times.

[straight_stewie]

As an aside, if I were reviewing this, I would automatically rule against them because of the line:

Quote

While Charter sees value in providing its service without data caps or UBP and has no plans to change that practice, Charter reasonably seeks the same flexibility that all of its competitors and peers have to manage data usage.

By their own admission, they've already willingly chosen to not go ahead and impose data caps at this time,  and therefore, they do not need to be granted the ability to choose to impose data caps at this time.

[Izineth]

1 minute ago, Tellos said:

These myths however don't come from the companies initially they come from consumers who dream up conspiracies on stuff. The companies sometimes pick up on it playing on fears. Now I wont claim I am unbias here as stated I work for one of the major ISPs. Fact is people also got themselves here by picking the perceived best and so a company grew larger. Until it could acquire others  I really think if we want changes to ISPs we need to first recognize that if you want what europe has the government MUST spend trillions to buy upgrade and expand the networks. You have to then accept you will if treated like a utility be given a single ISP. Utilities in the US don't typically go free market they go government assigned/awarded regional fiefdoms. example I cannot get away from my country electric company now matter how ass they are many times.

This is SLOWLY changing.  Some states are starting to de-regulate utilites.  Which allows you pick who provides the electricity in the background.  So for example if you have an electric company called "Mega Power Inc." That is the power company for your area,  But you get the choice of like say three different providers.  so say Mega power wants $0.25 per KWH, Provider 2 wants $0.15 per KWH and Provider 3 wants $0.10 You still have an account with Mega Power your bill says Mega Power on it but you can tell them you want power from Provider 3.  So what happens is Mega Power delivers the power to your house and then Provider 3 feeds what you used back into Mega Power's grid and you get charged the $0.10 per KWH cuz you chose to get your power from Provider 3.

[Tellos]

Just now, Kawaii_Desu said:

This is SLOWLY changing.  Some states are starting to de-regulate utilites.  Which allows you pick who provides the electricity in the background.  So for example if you have an electric company called "Mega Power Inc." That is the power company for your area,  But you get the choice of like say three different providers.  so say Mega power wants $0.25 per KWH, Provider 2 wants $0.15 per KWH and Provider 3 wants $0.10 You still have an account with Mega Power your bill says Mega Power on it but you can tell them you want power from Provider 3.  So what happens is Mega Power delivers the power to your house and then Provider 3 feeds what you used back into Mega Power's grid and you get charged the $0.10 per KWH cuz you chose to get your power from Provider 3.

Thata back to having a handful of options again. Hell I got more than most still doesint solve it if nobody wants to spend money to expand like my isp/employer does.

[Master Disaster]

One thing I learned relatively recently is that (here in the UK at least) whenever you see those "78 out of 100 agreed" qualifiers on an advert it basically means nothing since it's technically not against the rules for them to ask 300 people then take 78 of them that are favourable and 22 that aren't then throw the other 200 in the bin and say they asked 100 people. The important thing is the word "only", if it's says something like 78 out of 100 chances are it means nothing, if it says something like we asked only 100 people and 78 agreed then it must be true that they asked 100 people.

 

It's a little off topic I know but I found it interesting that they can get away with that these days.

[Izineth]

If Charter was SMART about this they would use NOT having caps as an advantage.  They would market it as choose us because we don't have caps and everyone else does and they all suck!  We know how a modern connected world uses more data than ever before and you shouldn't have to worry about micro managing your data!

 

I don't even care that Charter's prices are non competitive and a bit more expensive because NOT having data caps is important to me and has value to me.

 

Btw, Charter if you chose this strategy and continue to not have caps you're welcome and it was easy to figure out I'll tell you where to send the check. 

 

Quote

There is also evidence that some consumers—either those who do not consume a lot of data and/or those who are looking for a lower-cost plan—may want a service where prices are based on the amount of data used...

This is 100% BULLSHIT.  How about instead of predatory bullshit caps and or usage based billing why don't you just offer say a 25mbps plan WITH NO CAP for a lower price??  Not everyone wants 100/400/1000 mbps.  So instead of being anti-consumer just provide a slower plan on a reduced price.  Its not rocket surgery...  Doing this is a win for everyone, the person looking for a lower cost plan gets it, and everyone else gets what they want too and you still make money without looking like an ass.

[RejZoR]

Who on earth would want a data cap? Like, I want to know who are these people so I can smack them in the face. I haven't had data cap on landline internet for like 18 years. It doesn't matter how hard I use it, it'll go with full speed. Sure it's "only" 100/10, but it'll do that consistently if I use it for 1 day in a month or every single day of a month at 100Mbit every single day, 24/7.

[Izineth]

There's also the solution of for the people who don't use much data and are wanting a better deal just give them hotspot on the cellphone plan.

Since most people have a cellphone (okay I know not everyone does...) Charter offers mobile service now simply convince them to migrate to your cell service and offer hotspot as an option!

 

The bottom line is there are SO MANY different ways to give people who want a lower price and don't use much data what they want without screwing over everyone else and being anti-consumer with caps and usage based billing BS.

[Tristerin]

Charter is what I have, and not once have I said I want a data cap.  I wonder where they get their data?  Probably pulled it out of a cap.

[Beerzerker]

If they get what they want, betcha they'll do a special limited time offer that comes with a "Not-so-complimentary" tube of Anal-EZ because you're gonna need it.
Then you find out there isn't enough of it..... The hard way.

[Donut417]

4 hours ago, suicidalfranco said:

Fiber connection with speed up to 1Gbps

Reaches deep down the country side

We do have Gigabit over here via Fiber. Its just not everywhere yet. 

 

And the US country side and the European one is two different things. We have states that are bigger than most European countries. The population density in our country side is probably a lot less than in many European nations. ISP's need incentive to drop fiber, and low population density which causes little to no profit does not provide incentive. 

[mr moose]

For all those wondering which people sauid they want a data cap,  I have a list here:

 

The CEO's:

daughter, wife, son 1,son2, cousin, brothers 1 and 2,  all the immediate relatives, and their spouses.

 

All the people directly related to the board, and first 3 tiers of management.

 

That's at least 100 people, so if they ignore the other 24,999,900 customers that's almost 100% of their customers that want data caps.

 

I don't know about you guys, but it's quite the compelling case if you ask me.

[TetraSky]

Stopped reading at this point because it was obviously just an ISP lying through their teeth to justify their bullshit, as usual.

Quote

"Contrary to Stop The Cap's assertion [in an FCC filing] that consumers 'hate' data caps, the marketplace currently shows that broadband service plans incorporating data caps or other usage-based pricing mechanisms are often popular when the limits are sufficiently high to satisfy the vast majority of users," Charter told the FCC.

Now I don't know about Charter, but if they are anything like the ISPs in my area, it means they have "cheap" plans with data caps and expensive plans that are "unlimited".

Knowing how little option people have in the US in terms of ISPs... When they literally don't offer any other plans in your area than a data capped plan, of course it's going to be "popular". Same can be said about "unlimited" plans, when they are so ridiculously more expensive compared to a data capped plan, it doesn't mean consumers are "happy" with it. It just means they are forced to choose a cheaper plan with data caps because there's no alternative in their area or because the alternative is prohibitively more expensive.

[steelo]

We had Charter (Spectrum) for a few years because it really was the only option. Let me tell you, this isp was spawned by Satan himself. They are currently under investigation (in Lexington, at least) for absurdly flaky service and equally poor customer support. People complained mainly about not receiving speeds anywhere near what they were promised, shady billing practices and technicians who would take a week to come out to fix problems.

 

We are one of the lucky states where the former Governor realized just how bad Charter is and encouraged competition to come in. We now have fiber service with double the speeds and it is $10 cheaper than Spectrum per month. Pretty much everyone I know dumped them as soon as fiber became available.

[steelo]

2 hours ago, Tristerin said:

Charter is what I have, and not once have I said I want a data cap.  I wonder where they get their data?  Probably pulled it out of a cap.

What data??? LOL

 

They made this crap up to try to convince the FCC to let them screw over their customers. Nobody in their right mind want data caps...why do you think cellular service carriers boast so hard about 'no data caps' 

 

People do not want limits on services.

[Doobeedoo]

Ahaaha data caps in 2020. What's that. Yikes! 

[paddy-stone]

Remember the old "fair use" policy hidden in ISPs terms and conditions? even though they said "unlimited data"?

 

Glad that no longer applies on most ISPs plans here in the UK at least. I would regularly get those letters like 10-15 years ago when I was downloading around 500GB+ per month on average, this was when I was on between 2-8Mbps. We didn't get 70-80Mbps plans until about 10 years ago IIRC.

I don't even know how much I use nowadays, there's no way to check unless you look at the modem/router. Actually just checked and have this

Quote   Data Transmitted/Received: 32.2 GB / 783.7 GB   32.2 GB / 783.7 GB

 

That's about 2-3 weeks worth IIRC. Includes my xbox game updates etc too, for 2x xbox systems.

 

[Franck]

15 hours ago, spartaman64 said:

whether one uses 10GB a month or 1.2TB

1.2 TB holy crap. Here the lowest i could find is rodgers at 160$ extra for 50 gb so 3,840$ per month for 1.2 TB.