Massa opposes Time Warner cable fee increase
Last week, Stlo7 wrote about the proposed cable fee increase. The Fighting 29th covered it too. Today, on my way to work, I heard Eric Massa on NPR opposing this increase and here’s a little more from On Line Media Daily:
“This is an incredibly ill-conceived idea and a very repressive step backwards,” U.S. Rep. Eric Massa (D-N.Y.) said of the cable company’s plan. “At the very moment when access to digital information is at the heart of economic recovery, they’re going to go for corporate greed.”
Massa added that he is considering introducing legislation to rein in the company. “In many markets they are a monopoly and we are going to invoke every tool necessary to ensure they don’t proceed with this,” he said.
[snip]
Time Warner’s new model is similar to the tiered pricing systems used by many cell phone companies. For the initial test, which began last year in Beaumont, Texas, new Time Warner subscribers were offered a choice of four plans that allow them to download set amounts each month. The plans ranged from $29.95 a month for 5 GB to $54.90 a month for 40 GB. Those who exceed the allotment were charged $1 for each GB over the limit.
I, too, have no idea how much bandwidth I use (and frankly, don’t even understand what that means), but I can tell you that if my price were doubled, I would have to seriously curtail my time on the Internet.
So, thanks Eric. Stay on this one.
Related posts:
“I...
For much more info:
http://stopthecap.com/2009/04/07/breaking-news-rep-eric-massa-d-ny-condemns-time-warner-internet-cap-will-take-lead-role-in-opposition/
Ladkiddo don’t worry about a thing…the great Wizard of Time Warner will tell you how much bandwidth you use this summer to prepare you (isn’t that nice?) for how freakin high your new bill from them will actually be!
This will have a really bad effect on folks who use VOIP phones, those of the Deaf Community who use TTY over the internet, students who must fulfill research obligations, folks trying to utilize the internet for job searches…the list goes on…it will even hit grandparents who want to watch videos of their grandchildren who are far away!!! The only thing good about this is for those who want Time Warner’s pockets lined.
I was a beta tester for Road Runner…had it before anyone else…the promise of “Unlimited Bandwidth” was a huge selling point that made many folks sign up to begin with. Yes I know it has been around awhile…but excuse me if I am wrong…I thought the area was LOOSING in the population…not gaining. So if there are less folks here to use up the bandwidth why is the bandwidth availability even an issue?
Corporate greed strikes again…aren’t they learning anything??? Geesh!
What are the logistics here. I don;t think broadband is regulated in the same way as cable rates.
As a disabled T-W customer with sketchy mobility and on a tight budget, I live in the cyberworld and chew up scads of bandwidth. Inasmuch as I don’t feel like becoming a reclusive hermit who’s shut out of society, I get around by staying in touch online.
As a Canadian Mohawk living in the Rochester area, I import hundreds of megs from Canadian servers to do business and interact with my family and friends in the Land of Happy Socialists.
Have Canadian satellite TV service here, so yanking the T-W TV cable was no onerous loss. Not a bit. Things down here look very different from the north and in much sharper clarity, with far more choice and at the same price.
And since I’m in the boonies of 315, Verizon would be delighted to add DSL (or rumoured FiOS) to my monthly bill… so if T-W wants to fatten shareholder profits, I can still get 6623/415 Kbps down/up simply by using a different cable (www.dslreports.com – 14519).
Frontier is an anachronistic joke. Even back when I worked at RochTel in the early 80’s, the NY Tel crowd called us G-D Independents with Ernestine still manning the switchboard. From what I hear, only the name has changed.
Oh that’s just great! Why do all the posters at RT hate America?
This is another example of elite twinkle-toed liberal democrats who hate the free market system as they pursue their not so secret Obamanista quest to destroy America and establish a Europen style socialist state.
Massa is simply promoting a regulated entitlement society. What makes you think you are entitled to braodband? Did you make it? No! The corporations made it. If you don’t like it just turn your computer off.
Maybe you’d prefer that Castro give you some free Cuban bradband? What’s that you say? There is no free Cuban broadband! See?
So stop your bellyaching and be thankful there are corporations that know what’s best and give you your freedom.
Massa is the one who will stifle innovation as far as broadband access and use goes. TM is proposing charging the people who use the most bandwidth to pay the most. The people affected will be people downloading large amounts of video and music. It is not going to hurt job seekers or deaf people so there’s is no sense to fear mongering with the bleeding heart crap. This is how money is raised to improve services - for everyone! Competition will keep charges reasonable. If you don’t like TW’s rates, switch to someone else. If you counter that you have no other choices, you will if TW sets outrageous rates. Competition and free choice regulates prices far better and far more fairly than any government regulations.
If Massa wants to appear to be a “do-gooder” to justify his salary and get reelected, he should keep his nose out of things that are working just fine and work on the deficit spending that will strangle generations after generation of Americans. The government has screwed up enough - think bailouts, stimulus, TARP and subsidies.
No one has gun to your head forcing you to patronize TW, quit whining, act like an adult and exercise some self-responsibility instead of handing your life over to the government to run.
Right on Mike in WingnutNY, listen to these libs whine.
You would think that just because cable is a government subsidized and protected industry they think they have some sort of say about how they’re treated.
In many parts of the area there is no competition to TWC. Your free-market argument fails.
IF TW, in an area without competition, raises the rates too high, the incentive will be created for someone to compete with them. It is simple supply and demand working to equalize market values.
Right on MIKE! Who cares if these people live in areas that the government subsidized TW to be a sole provider. Do they think they have some kind of “right” to have a say in how these tax subsidized corporations operate.
Why everyone knows monopolies have always crumbled without government intervention under the pressure of powerless citizens.
Have these whiners been living under rocks? Don’t they know how overregualtion killed our economy and almost prevented cheap harmful consumer products from being sold in the United States?
There’s no reason why they and their kids can’t just shut off their computers and not keep up with the modern world.
Let’s make’em compete with other areas by resorting to the postal system and Encyclopedia Brittanica if they want to communicate and learn stuff!
Some of these socialists Obamanista’s will probably start to argue that broad band access is a public good guaranteed by that pesky constitutional clause about promoting the general welfare!
Not everybody gets to run their blogs of county servers, and get paid to do their job during the day with Cheryl while posting to the D&C and other blogs. Maybe if the world were truly equal pube, it would be fair.
Til then - whine away.
I believe there is a protest planned for the Mt Hope offices on the 18th.
1. Most if not all arguments about the magic of the market are bogus. The market is not a magic self-regulating entity. It is so only in the minds of some economists.
2. not only is there little if any competition, in the cable market the evidence we have shows that competition has not lowered prices. We call it oligopoly. Several large corporations corner the market and fix prices. Right now companies like TW and Verizon are among the beggest lobbyists in New York State,.
third aren’t cable companies something like utilities. I saw that idea in some of the local discussions of our access channel. Don’t they have public service obligations which go beyond pure market goods
@reelgreecer, you talk about lobbyists and hit on the real problem without realizing it. Lobbyists colluding with politicians does not equal free market competition. However, due to the government induced limited competition we do have, the price/value relationship has still managed to improve. I can get FIOS with 20 Mbps downstream and 5 Mbps upstream speeds for $59.95/month. That is much better than what was available 10 years ago.
As far as the market goes, no one claims it is magic, but it does operate on sound principles based on the laws of economics and human behavior. The result is far better than a government managed economy because the government has no financial risk when making decisions. Getting reelected is more important.
Mike
.
There are no such fixed or unchanging laws of human behavior. . Another economists fantasy.
Don’t be so sure.
Here’s one, no matter how many facts exist to prove otherwise, a right-wing die hard will continue to believe that free markets are based on sound principles and operate better than regulated economies.
But facts don’t exist to prove otherwise, so what’s your point? Speaking of regulated economies, what happened to the Soviet Union, the Roman Empire and the U.S. today? All failed or failing regulated economies. And please save the pejorative term “right wing” for someone who truly deserves it, it certainly doesn’t come close to describing me. I believe in freedom, whether it is in a fiscal or social context. The problem with right wingers and left wingers, like yourself, is that neither group is consistent with their values and only seek to impose their grand vision on others. All voluntary agreements between individuals, whether business or personal, should be permitted without any government interference as long as the action isn’t inherently damaging to others. Actions which cause damage can be addressed by laws which protect property and physical well being.
here is an interesting article from the website dslreports.com
There’s No Data To Prove Metered Billing Is Necessary
Journalists start crunching numbers, call Time Warner plan ‘obscene’
11:00AM Thursday Apr 09 2009 by Karl Bode
This week has seen Time Warner Cable CEO Landel Hobbs do a rather poor job as the company’s primary spokesman on the issue of metered billing, after the company announced last week they’d be expanding metered trials into four new cities later this year. Time Warner Cable’s PR people probably wish this story would just die, but it would appear the public, politicians and the media are only just getting warmed up.
Journalists are only just starting to crunch the numbers and seriously ask why an already very profitable company (see their 2008 10-K) needs to start charging consumers $1 per gigabyte. Especially when hardware and bandwidth costs are dropping, many costs are fixed, revenues from VoIP/TV/Ads/broadband are growing, and the cost of upgrading to DOCSIS 3.0 technology is relatively (particularly when compared to FTTH upgrades) inexpensive. Saul Hansell of the NY Times tries to pick Mr. Hobbs’ brain on the matter, and doesn’t have much luck:
I tried to explore the marginal costs with Mr. Hobbs. When someone decides to spend a day doing nothing but downloading every Jerry Lewis movie from BitTorrent, Time Warner doesn’t have to write a bigger check to anyone. Rather, as best as I can figure it, the costs are all about building the network equipment and buying long-haul bandwidth for peak capacity…Mr. Hobbs declined to react to my hypothesis about how costs are almost all fixed costs.
Time Warner Cable is repeatedly incapable and unwilling to offer up hard data that supports their claim that flat-rate billing is not “viable.” The company last week told us they will not release hard numbers, only their analysis of internal numbers. Except Hobbes’ analysis this week has been inconsistent and at times incoherent.
Earlier this week he insisted consumers wanted metered billing, despite obvious indicators to the contrary. In the Times he’s lost in sort of a public relations purgatory, trying to soothe investor worries by saying finances are fine, yet at the same time trying to tell consumers that they have to pay by the byte because the entire billing model the company’s currently built on is utterly unsound. At no time is supporting data (network or fiscal) introduced.
Meanwhile, Ars Technica crunches the numbers as well and finds Time Warner Cable’s new plan borders on “obscene.” Nate Anderson of Ars chimes in:
As TWC expands its test markets for the data caps, it offers plans with 5GB of monthly data transfer for $30. Plans with 40GB of data go for $55. The thinking here is that most customers currently use only 4GB per month or so, and offering those customers a cheaper rate is actually doing them a favor. . .But the only favors being done here are to TWC’s bottom line. That base rate works out to a truly jaw-dropping $6 per GB per month, and it’s so far out of line with competitors’ plans as to shock even the most cynical heart.
Granted these trials aren’t just about testing the back-end systems that make metered billing possible, they’re about perfecting the marketing message and collecting data that supports it. Rest assured that when Time Warner Cable actually gets around to releasing hard data of any kind — it will be data of the 21st century think tank variety — scrubbed and polished to only support Time Warner Cable’s position that metered billing is an essential (d)evolution.
Psst Mike…we’re in a depression.
Mike:
Among many stories this snip for an article on a coming ‘competition” bill in Wisconisn vs the actual effect on rates in Texas
“The 25-city Texas survey showed that, with the exception of introductory temporary discount rates designed to attract new customers, “rates in Texas did not decrease but, in fact, increased,” said Margaret Somereve, president of the Texas Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors.
“Eventually, the introductory rates expire and subscribers pay the published rate,” which has steadily gone up in many cities, said Somereve, who works for the city of Farmers Branch, a community of 27,500.
Cable TV rate increases that resulted in Texas will also occur here, said Barry Orton, a University of Wisconsin-Madison telecommunications professor working for local governments that have fought the bill. Those governments would lose the right to issue cable TV franchises, which allow communities to oversee local cable service and to gain revenue from the providers.”
May i offer you a bridge i own in brooklyn
“The people that really believe that cable rates will go down probably also think that gasoline will someday sell for $2 a gallon again,” Orton said. “In the last 30 years, cable rates have only gone down once, in 1993-’94.” (emphasis added)
RG,
Didn’t you read Mike WNT, what happened to the US is exactly the same as what happened to Rome and the Soviet Union.
There’s your proof.
Yes, the US today is exactly the same as the Soviet Union. Our system of governemnt is just like the Soviets was. No panty waist congress, no independant judiciary full of activists judges, no siree Bob, none of that.
How can you argue with such iron clad evidence. Everyone agees that he reason we’re in a depression-that rivals the last Great Depression-is over regulation. Yes, the government over regulated guys like Bernie Madoff and look what happened. The obvious answer is to let more corporations do whatever they want.
Sit back and relax, they know best.
Otherwise, why we could be Romans!
The answer is to give individuals the ability to determine who is providing the best value . . .you still don’t grasp the benefits of freedom.
“. . .you still don’t grasp the benefits of freedom.”
No I get it, you sir don’t grasp the benefits of reality.
To compare the US with the Soviet Union or ancient Rome is indicative of an inability to make a reasoned argument based on the facts of the matter at hand. Wake up MikeWNT, the corporations don’t care about providing the best value, they care about making the greatest profit. Stop being such a sheepeople. Think for yourself man!
And if you can’t think for yourself, try readjusting the foil in your helmet, you might be able to get better reception and get a clear picture of reality.
Fact: TW is basically a government enabled monopoly.
Fact: Government enabled monopolies limit our choices.
Fact: The Soviet Union was loaded with government enabled monopolies.
Fact: The economy of the Soviet Union failed, in part because of the government enabled monopolies.
Fact: Our economy is failing, in part because of government enabled monopolies.
Conclusion: The analogy between the U.S. and the Soviet Union is valid.
to equate the market choices (not always free ones) of consumers with freedom is a very impoverished notion of freedom
You’ll have to explain how that relates to my comments. I have never attempted to equate “not always free” market choices with freedom. I guess you threw in the word “impoverished” because it has many letters and you felt it would lend an air of credibility to your assertion.
After those Soviet Union remarks you are hardly in a position to criticize the crediblity of others.
What do you mean?
“The answer is to give individuals the ability to determine who is providing the best value . . .you still don’t grasp the benefits of freedom.”
Then really, MIWNY, what are you trying to say here? I interpreted it the same way that RG did.
Companies like TW currently benefit from being a Government created corporate monopoly, that is a phenomena that was prevalent in the Soviet Union. The long term solution is not more regulation. Instead, I advocate that the government stop enabling the monopolistic growth so individuals have real, meaningful, free market choices. Those are the type of choices that prove to be beneficial in the long run because competition is always available as a great equalizer.
Here in Buffalo I abhor TW’s business model and switched to DirecTV. Next month I will be switching to FIOS. FIOS would have been an option much sooner if Verizon didn’t have to wait for local municipalities to approve the service.
BTW, thanks for asking about a clarification. I am not trying to advocate for one party over another, just the most practical way to make improvements for everyone.
[...] oh, monopolies can do that. Metering usage for a network whose costs continually go down. Congressman Massa came out very strongly against proposed plan. So did Congressman Dan Maffei. Both Massa and Maffei held town hall meetings and [...]