Time Warner To Test New Tiered Pricing For Web Service

[babylonsister]

Net users vent frustration at Time Warner
Sunday, April 5
( updated 8:15 am)
By Joe Killian
Staff Writer


GREENSBORO — Sue Polinsky had the first cable modem in Greensboro.

Back in the late 1990s, when the Web designer found she needed more Internet speed than a telephone or DSL line could provide, she was happy to pay a premium. She’s been a Time Warner Cable customer ever since — even upgrading to the business-class service to run her company, Tech Triad, from home.

But when she got wind of Time Warner’s plan to begin monitoring and capping how much data its Greensboro customers use, she said it could be summed up in one word.

“Greed,” Polinsky said. “That’s all it is.”

Time Warner has chosen the Triad area as one of four test markets for its new tiered pricing system. In the fall, new customers and those at the end of their contracts will get new plans that treat their Internet use much like cell-phone use. The company will begin charging users for all the data transmitted over their cable lines — everything from Web pages to photos, songs and videos.

The plans range from $29.95 to $54.90 a month and will limit usage to five, 10, 20 or 40 gigabytes of data per month. Going over those caps will cost $1 for each gigabyte.

more...

http://www.news-record.com/content/2009/04/04/article/net_users_vent_frustration_at_time_warner

[BlooInBloo]

1. FUCK THEM.

EDIT: Also, it should be referred to as "internet service".

[imdjh]

5. Well said. I am so sick of these bloodsuckers

When I bought Roadrunner when it was first offered, it was $29.95 and it was wide open. Now that's the price for Roadrunner Lite.

Years ago, when AOL was king and I didn't even know that WiFi or broadband existed, as much as I like to support American companies, I predicted that some Japanese company would put up a satellite and beam internet directly into American homes at a flat rate. Actually, I hoped for it. I wanted to see AOL killed by a foreign company that provided better service at a better rate.

I'm still hoping for it. But now I'm hoping for a company to come in and kill Roadrunner. Wide open internet at a low flat rate.

I would unlock my Airport and let others use it for free, but I really don't want to be sitting here when my speakers start blaring music because some kid two houses away wants to see if he can play his iTunes through my speakers.

[Javaman]

10. I hate time warner with the white hot intensity of a thousand burning suns.

I hope they burn on a slow spit.

I am so waiting for T-Mobile to have internet service. It's supposed to be launched soon. When they do, I'm jettisoning timewarner in a heartbeat.

[imdjh]

11. How will that work?

If I get T-Mobile the signal will come in from outer space to my Airport and then go to my computer? Or it will go directly to my computer, and my computer will only use Airport to run the remote speakers and printer?

[Javaman]

20. I have T-mobile at home. it's wifi for my phone.

I don't know the exact tech behind it, but it would work via the wifi I have now.

[NC_Nurse]

24. My first thought too.

TWC sucks.

[barbtries]

32. yep

fuck the motherfuckers. i'm ready to get off the tw train.

[WeDidIt]

2. Time to switch carriers if that's their tack.

No need when otehrs don't do that.

[NeedleCast]

3. Others will likely follow if this is successful

[Kalyke]

6. If everyone dumps it, it won't be successful.

[TreasonousBastard]

8. Just where are they going to go?

[imdjh]

12. Especially when Verizon wireless unlimited isn't really unlimited?

Apparently those friends we all have who have those snazzy little devices sticking out of their USB only enjoy Verizon wireless unlimited because they are on grandfathered corporate service contracts. Real people buy the "unlimited" and then get slapped around for usage.

[WeDidIt]

22. Go DSL

That's what I'd do if my carrier decided to take that route.

I'd drop 'em in a New York minute.

[KharmaTrain]

4. This Isn't New...

10 years ago, I owned a very busy website and was charged up the behind for what the company called "Bandwidth" and "download charges". I was getting charged for every graphic a person downloaded, every time they refreshed a page and a ton of hidden charges. It got so obtrusive I shut down the site and sued the ISP...trying to get them to justify how they came up with their charges (which went from around $150 a month to over $1,200)...they stonewalled. Less than six months later, we learned the ISP had filed for bankruptcy...it was only then that we learned the real game. The company had over-leveraged itself and was trying to raise money fast by milking its customers...pure and simple. They could do it and did. Customers were notified about rate changes on their invoices and few took time to read it...and got a big surprise when their charges went through the roof. In the end, the company that purchase the assets of the ISP settled with all of us (25 different companies) and refunded nearly a years worth of fees to get the lawyers off their backs.

Let Time/Warner play their short-sighted games...hopefully there's a competitor who will gladly take the business. The one thing I've seen in too many years of playing in cyberland, those who try to exploit it always end up losing.

[TreasonousBastard]

7. Before the usual screaming and yelling, it would be interesting...

to know just how much it costs them to upgrade their service to handle the terabytes of video and other stuff people are moving over the intertubes now. There are high density areas where cable simply doesn't have the bandwidth to handle it all and upgrades are necessary. replacing all that copper with fiberoptics can't be cheap.

Since there's rarely much competition for cable or broadband, franchises are granted by towns, counties, or whatever localities and, like any utility, the numbers should be public before the rates are set.

[Lance_Boyle]

9. it doesn't cost them anything - taxpayers funded it years ago

TW and the others have MILES of dark fiber they won't light up so they can make their "scarcity" argument. It's COMPLETE bullshit.

[TreasonousBastard]

15. Interesting theory, but the point is to...

prove it and bring it up at the franchising meetings, regulatory hearings...

You know for a fact that any unused spectrum is simply held back to keep the price up? There's no possibility that there are huge back end costs in securely moving that much data around? They had this neat deal with Charter to buy lots of Lucent cable and equipment, but that was almost 10 years ago and there have been lots of changes in financing and technology.

[Statistical]

23. All cable companies went hybrid coax 2 decades ago

Digital cable, Video on Demand, Cable internet, Cable Phone Service ALREADY require an upgraded infratructure.

I was a cable install tech for a couple years.

The existing cable network can handle about 20mbps. DOCSIS system (used by EVERY cable company) uses a single cable channel to provide up to 38Mbps.

The entire coax system supports frequency from 5Mhz to 1Ghz or 950Mhz of RF bandwidth. Using QAM256 that is about 6Gbps (6000Mbps).

Now that is for everything cable TV, internet, phone, VOD, etc.

Right now analog cable wastes about half of that bandwidth. Removing analog cable channels and going 100% digital will allow for:

about 150 channels in HD or 600 channels in SD or so combination.
about 100 unique VOD streams
about 8 channels bonded (304Mpbs) shared internet per node.
phones service to every household.

Now that is the CABLE NETWORK. The flip side of the coin is the cable companies cost to buy bandwidth from an internet provider.
The connection to the internet.

Large bandwidth users (like cable companies) don't pay per GB they pay based on the 95% but if they did their cost would be about
$0.02 per GB.

$0.02 per GB and they are charging $1.00 (nice 5,000% markup).

[imdjh]

13. "franchises"

I don't know how it works elsewhere. Around here it was commonly understood that Time Warner had an exclusive franchise with the city of South Pasadena, in other words, we're screwed. But when this came during the election, the incumbent said that there was no such exclusive agreement and never had been. It was simply that other companies had yet to serve the area.

I keep getting stuff from FIO acting like it's coming soon to a pole near me.

[TreasonousBastard]

16. Yeah, they have the exclusive right to string cable...

on the phone poles and bring it to your house. This doesn't affect the phone company, satellite TV or internet, or anything else that isn't a new wire on the pole, but it does mean whoever gave them that right has the right to regulate them.

"It depends" whether or not cable internet is covered under the same rules as cable TV.

[RoyGBiv]

25. $20 - $100 per home

That's about what it costs. The wide variance depends on what's already there or not there and how difficult it is to work the geography of the area.

But, $20 - $100 per home is chicken feed in this business.

Forgot link:

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/03/the-cost-to-offer-the-worlds-fastest-broadband-20-per-home/

[peacetalksforall]

14. Time-Warner? That means their will be conservative and neo-conservative

exemptions. And they already know who is who. It's in the Poindexter database.

[X_Digger]

17. Dog, I wish I could get FiOS. *sigh* n/t

[ccharles000]

18. That sucks I live in Greensboro and have Time Warner.

x(

[babylonsister]

19. Are there any other service providers you can switch to? That

does suck.

[ccharles000]

21. maybe this new thing won't last long.

We just got TW and don't want to change after having it for only three months.

[Why Syzygy]

26. Cable is NOT faster than DSL. Those folks should go back to DSL

and kick TW where the party meets marty. Bell South rises again!

[sarcasmo]

27. GREED.

[walldude]

28. Get an outdoor wifi antenna

free internet. From anywhere in your city.

[blueclown]

29. That is illegal.

[walldude]

30. Well then... pay the money.

[nc4bo]

31. This is the plan for all ISPs. Sucks don't it?! nt