Comcast extends data caps

[Donut417]

1 minute ago, Tellos said:

Company does but regulations mean we cannot impose priceso n them they still negotiate with us. As per the rules of the acquisition.

To my understanding the only rules Comcast had for their acquisition was they provide Poor people with internet for a cheap price . 

 

NBC is a OTA channel. Like all OTA channels they can impose retransmission fees. Considering every provider raises rates yearly, Id imagine Comcast can charge what ever they want. If the provider doesn't like the price, well, then they dont get NBC content. SO Comcast makes money with NBC, then they make money when you do have Cable with data caps/Unlimited plans. They also make money with their streaming service (Peacock) which also eats data, so a potential to double dip there.  Then they make money when they license their content out to other providers. ON top of the yearly price increases, sometimes twice a year. 

 

Im pretty sure if Comcast wanted, they could murder someone and no one would bat an eye. 

 

 

[Vishera]

On 11/26/2020 at 4:39 PM, Donut417 said:

Quote

According to the internet service provider, 95% of its customers don't hit the 1.2TB-a-month threshold.

Quote

Then there is no need to cap it...

They contradict themselves.

[Donut417]

2 minutes ago, Vishera said:

Then there is no need to cap it...

They contradict themselves.

As stated above. Its not about capacity its about revenue. The reason 95% dont hit the cap is because they are careful like me. The rest either pay for overages or pay for unlimited data. We had less than 200 Gigs of data left this month. If Comcast didnt raise the cap from 1TB to 1.2TB we would have been over on our usage. 

[Tellos]

25 minutes ago, Donut417 said:

To my understanding the only rules Comcast had for their acquisition was they provide Poor people with internet for a cheap price . 

 

NBC is a OTA channel. Like all OTA channels they can impose retransmission fees. Considering every provider raises rates yearly, Id imagine Comcast can charge what ever they want. If the provider doesn't like the price, well, then they dont get NBC content. SO Comcast makes money with NBC, then they make money when you do have Cable with data caps/Unlimited plans. They also make money with their streaming service (Peacock) which also eats data, so a potential to double dip there.  Then they make money when they license their content out to other providers. ON top of the yearly price increases, sometimes twice a year. 

 

Im pretty sure if Comcast wanted, they could murder someone and no one would bat an eye. 

 

No we have to pay NBC/universal still

25 minutes ago, Donut417 said:

 

 

[Vishera]

Just now, Donut417 said:

As stated above. Its not about capacity its about revenue. The reason 95% dont hit the cap is because they are careful like me. The rest either pay for overages or pay for unlimited data. We had less than 200 Gigs of data left this month. If Comcast didnt raise the cap from 1TB to 1.2TB we would have been over on our usage. 

I can't believe that in the United States you have data caps...

In every country i have ever been to Internet was unlimited,even in the middle east.

I am pretty sure that some areas in Asia and Africa have limited plans,but in the United States?!

[Donut417]

2 minutes ago, Tellos said:

No we have to pay NBC/universal still

I didnt say they were Comcast only channel. They however are 100% owned by Comcast. The merger happened several years ago. Look it up. Like any OTA provider they can make ridiculous price increases, which cable/satellite companies pay OR they pull the channels. Currently Dish and Direct TV are going thru a retransmission dispute. Comcast could cause that if they wanted. 

[Bombastinator]

31 minutes ago, Vishera said:

Then there is no need to cap it...

They contradict themselves.

They don’t.  They don’t contradict themselves at least.  Remember the Apple thing where they halved the fee for 95% of the developers but took a less than 5% cut in fees total.  It remains possible that a tiny percentage of the user base is using up most of the bandwidth. That one needs to be proven though. 

[Donut417]

21 minutes ago, Vishera said:

I can't believe that in the United States you have data caps...

In every country i have ever been to Internet was unlimited,even in the middle east.

I am pretty sure that some areas in Asia and Africa have limited plans,but in the United States?!

There are areas of the US where there are NO Wired Broadband providers. You either are on LTE  or a WISP if your lucky. Or you on satellite internet. 

[Bombastinator]

24 minutes ago, Vishera said:

I can't believe that in the United States you have data caps...

In every country i have ever been to Internet was unlimited,even in the middle east.

I am pretty sure that some areas in Asia and Africa have limited plans,but in the United States?!

It’s an issue.  The claimed rationale is it fights scammers. How true that is is unknown to me.  It might be interesting to compare nations of similar size and population density.  Canada, Mexico, and Russia come to mind.  China perhaps though it’s got major geographical, population, and governmental differences that could change things.   Data caps aren’t everywhere.  They generally only occur in unregulated monopoly situations. Sadly there are a lot of those.

[Vishera]

2 hours ago, Donut417 said:

There are areas of the US where there are NO Wired Broadband providers. You either are on LTE  or a WISP if your lucky. Or you on satellite internet. 

I thought that the United States paid ISPs to built the required infrastructure and provide service in rural areas.

I heard about it a few times throughout the years.

[AnonymousGuy]

4 hours ago, Vishera said:

I thought that the United States paid ISPs to built the required infrastructure and provide service in rural areas.

I heard about it a few times throughout the years.

...it's complicated.  Yes in theory but in practice ISPs are scummy and take the money to lay fiber and instead just enable shitty DSL and push for 1Mbps to be considered "high speed" so they fulfilled their requirements.  Or in some places they just didn't do anything after taking the money and basically say "well come sue us".

[Donut417]

7 hours ago, Vishera said:

I thought that the United States paid ISPs to built the required infrastructure and provide service in rural areas.

I heard about it a few times throughout the years.

The government gives the IPS's tax breaks and money. They just pocket it and move on. My boss has no wired broadband where he lives. All wired providers stop a mile from his home. Its pretty well known that if you live out in BFE you get nothing in terms of internet. 

[Vishera]

3 hours ago, Donut417 said:

The government gives the IPS's tax breaks and money. They just pocket it and move on. My boss has no wired broadband where he lives. All wired providers stop a mile from his home. Its pretty well known that if you live out in BFE you get nothing in terms of internet. 

Isn't misappropriation of funds a crime?,the money was entrusted to the ISPs for a purpose,pocketing the money is a misappropriation.

[Donut417]

1 hour ago, Vishera said:

Isn't misappropriation of funds a crime?,the money was entrusted to the ISPs for a purpose,pocketing the money is a misappropriation.

Was Congress stealing from the social security a crime? Did anyone go to jail?

[charlie_root]

On 11/26/2020 at 11:50 AM, RotoCoreOne said:

This is so dumb, if “95% of the customers dont hit 1.2tb” then why implement a data cap? That’s some bs lol

My guess is that the 5% who do hit this data cap use an absolutely shockingly huge amount of data. I'm no fan of data caps or government-protected ISP monopolies, but that would be the only reason they would do this for such a small subset of users.

[Donut417]

1 minute ago, charlie_root said:

My guess is that the 5% who do hit this data cap use an absolutely shockingly huge amount of data. I'm no fan of data caps or government-protected ISP monopolies, but that would be the only reason they would do this for such a small subset of users.

More like they are feeling the strain of cord cutters. People are sick of high cable bills. So they cancel service. Comcast has to make up that revenue else where. 

[Vishera]

34 minutes ago, Donut417 said:

Was Congress stealing from the social security a crime? Did anyone go to jail?

The United States should enforce all laws,and not selectively enforce them,corrupting the system by doing so.

[RotoCoreOne]

5 hours ago, Vishera said:

The United States should enforce all laws,and not selectively enforce them,corrupting the system by doing so.

This has been an issue since the enactment of the constitution. Strict vs loose interpretations and I imagine it'll never be solved because every politician will abuse it for their own ends.

[Tellos]

On 12/3/2020 at 4:48 PM, Donut417 said:

I didnt say they were Comcast only channel. They however are 100% owned by Comcast. The merger happened several years ago. Look it up. Like any OTA provider they can make ridiculous price increases, which cable/satellite companies pay OR they pull the channels. Currently Dish and Direct TV are going thru a retransmission dispute. Comcast could cause that if they wanted. 

I work for the company I am rather aware of what's going on.

[Donut417]

6 minutes ago, Tellos said:

I work for the company I am rather aware of what's going on.

For some one who works for them you dont know a lot. 

 

Quote

Comcast era (2011-present)[edit]

Main article: Acquisition of NBC Universal by Comcast

 

10 Universal City Plaza in 2015 after Comcast acquired GE's remaining stake in NBC Universal. Notice the wording on the top of the building changed. The Comcast headquarters can be seen at Universal Studios Hollywood.

On December 3, 2009, after months of rumors, a deal was formally announced in which Comcast would buy a stake in NBC Universal from GE.^[34] Under the agreement, NBC Universal would be controlled with a 51% stake by Comcast and GE would retain the remaining 49%. Comcast paid $6.5 billion cash to GE. The deal includes a provision under which Comcast must contribute $7.5 billion in programming including regional sports networks and cable channels such as Golf Channel, Versus, and E! Entertainment Television. GE used some of the funds, $5.8 billion, to buy out Vivendi's 20% minority stake in NBC Universal.^[34] Under the terms of the deal, Comcast reserves the right to buy out GE's share at certain times, and GE reserves the right to force the sale of their stake within the first seven years.^[34][35] Vivendi completed the initial transaction on September 27, 2010, selling a $2 billion stake to GE (approximately 7.66%).^[36]

U.S. regulators approved the proposed sale on January 18, 2011 with conditions. Comcast would have to give up NBC control over online video site Hulu, and ensure NBC Universal programming is available to competing cable operators.^[37] The company unveiled a new logo designed by Wolff Olins, which replaced a logo featuring the NBC peacock and an invocation of the Universal Pictures globe, with a wordmark. The company would began to stylize its name in CamelCase as "NBCUniversal" rather than "NBC Universal", to reflect the unity of its two main divisions.^[38][39]

On January 26, 2011, Vivendi sold its remaining shares in NBC Universal to GE, giving GE complete control of the company ahead of the completion of the sale of 51% of the company to Comcast on January 28, 2011.^[40] Comcast and GE formed the joint venture holding company NBCUniversal, LLC. NBC Universal, Inc. became a wholly owned subsidiary of the holding company and was renamed as NBCUniversal Media, LLC on January 29, 2011.^[41]

Comcast had planned to buy out GE's 49% stake over the following seven years, but ownership of NBCUniversal remained split at 51–49% for two years, until the February 12, 2013 announcement that Comcast intended to complete the $16.7 billion purchase early, all at once. The sale was completed on March 19, 2013.^[39][42][43]

The corporation on July 19, 2012 formed the NBCUniversal News Group with the NBC News, CNBC, and MSNBC divisions.^[44]

 

Via Wikipedia

Quote

2010

The Age of Comcast

Comcast completed its acquisition of NBCUniversal in January 2011. The years since have seen an unprecedented level of investment in the company’s core businesses, a clear sign that Comcast is committed to making NBCUniversal a global leader among media and entertainment companies.  

via NBCuniversal.com 

 

Because Comcast has own NBC for a while. 

 

 

 

 

[Tellos]

9 hours ago, Donut417 said:

For some one who works for them you dont know a lot. 

 

 

Because Comcast has own NBC for a while. 

 

 

 

 

I stated we own them if you bothered to read.

[Donut417]

I know this is an old thread but I wanted to provide an update/ 

 

https://corporate.comcast.com/stories/were-giving-our-northeast-customers-more-time

 

The North East gets a stay of execution for another year. Caps wont be happening until 2022. 

 

I personally think its BS, but what ever. 

[Bombastinator]

1 minute ago, Donut417 said:

I know this is an old thread but I wanted to provide an update/ 

 

https://corporate.comcast.com/stories/were-giving-our-northeast-customers-more-time

 

The North East gets a stay of execution for another year. Caps wont be happening until 2022. 

 

I personally think its BS, but what ever. 

We’ll see if anything happens in 2024. Since 1980 there has been this thing with corporations where if they want to do something abusive to consumers they do it during a red administration, and if the administration changes they pull delaying tactics hoping the problem will outlive the administration.  Only if the administration gets re-elected do they settle.  My suspicion is this particular one was set up assuming a reflection of the previous administration.  With a change in power structure it vanishes.  It may reappear again in 4 years, but I doubt much will be seen until then.

[Donut417]

2 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

We’ll see if anything happens in 2024. Since 1980 there has been this thing with corporations where if they want to do something abusive to consumers they do it during a red administration, and if the administration changes they pull delaying tactics hoping the problem will outlive the administration.  Only if the administration gets re-elected do they settle.  My suspicion is this particular one was set up assuming a reflection of the previous administration.  With a change in power structure it vanishes.  It may reappear again in 4 years, but I doubt much will be seen until then.

Nothing will happen. Even during the Title 2 days Comcast had data caps. The people of the Northeast just cried like little babies. So Comcast decided to give them time to cope with the data caps. If it were me, I would have just issued them in January and just said tough shit. Because the rest of their network is capped. 

 

The fact is Comcast had data caps in the mid 2000's. They dont give a shit. Regardless they will make money. Regardless idiots will choose them over better alternatives for stupid reasons. Because in the end most people dont understand anything about the internet and differences between cable, DSL and Fiber. Or you got the people like me where its Comcast or LTE. Between the two even with the data caps, Comcast is the better choice. We are currently averaging 1 TB of data now. Used to be 700 Gigs. 

[wamred]

Yeah, the bad thing about it is data caps are completely fake. They are just arbitrary numbers that ISPs use. It is infuriating.