Comcast to Obtain Time Warner Cable for $45.2 Billion

35

Comments

+ Add a Comment
avatar

elbowhero

unfortunately, offering tv channels a la carte is not profitable due to licensing fees, etc.

avatar

Ghost XFX

Hell no, it shouldn't be allowed. Didn't they stop AT&T from buying out T-Mobile not long ago? Why would they allow this to go down? The whole damn thing is just shady. Nobody should be for this.

avatar

QuikWgn

Because AT&T and T-Mobile are national carriers and compete for the same customers. TWC and Comcast do not serve the same areas so there is no reduction in competition.

avatar

EKRboi

As a TW subscriber I am really dreading this and hoping it is put to a stop.. but as others have said they are not technically in direct competition so I am not holding my breath. Also isn't Comcast one of the providers known for stupid data caps? Im honestly not sure what I use on average for any given month because I don't bother to look. Ill look next time I pay it, I assume its on there if I download the whole invoice.

C'mon google fiber! I just read $120 for gigabit up/down + HD tv? yes please. I am paying more than that for 30/5 + HDDVR with no "premium" channels.

avatar

QuikWgn

Comcast dropped their nationwide caps quite some time ago. There are only a couple small markets where they are currently testing some alternative arrangements.

http://arstechnica.com/business/2012/05/comcast-suspends-data-caps-for-now/

avatar

Enigmatistical

Why is Comcast wasting their time and money on such a pointless merger? I suspect as soon as Googles' gigabit fiber is widely available all these cable companies will be bankrupt in less than a year.

avatar

QuikWgn

Kansas and Utah (both states that have cities with Google Fiber) are both in the process of passing laws to prevent Google or other companies with the same type of plan from setting up any networks in the future.

http://consumerist.com/2014/01/30/kansas-legislature-wants-to-stop-any-other-kansas-cities-from-getting-google-fiber/

http://www.govtech.com/network/Utah-Bill-Would-Kill-Network-Infrastructure-Expansion.html

avatar

Enigmatistical

Another indication of profit being more important than the people it's squeezed from. An entity as powerful as Google though? I think we have a chance...
That said, if congress actually allows some iteration of an anti-compete clause, I'm done with this country.

avatar

FrancesTheMute

Would be nice if the FCC would re-classify ISPs before this merger goes through.

avatar

QuikWgn

This is not a "monopoly" in the regulatory sense. They do not currently overlap in their service areas so there is no effective decrease in competition. As far as "ignoring the midwest" you obviously do not know how these companies operate. Since they are not "national carriers" and are regional carriers, they must be granted a franchise agreement by the city/county government in order to legally offer services in a given location.

Even though it was struck down in court TWICE, the traditional legal "monopoly" threshhold was a 30% market share. Even though it is no longer in effect, they have already agreed to divest subscribers to stay under this 30% marketshare threshhold. Also they are bound by the NBC universal acquisition to mantain a net neutrality standard through 2018 which would include the Time Warner assets once acquired. This differs significantly from the AT&T/T-Mobile merger regulatory intervention as those companies were in direct competition for the same customers nationally.

avatar

LatiosXT

Comcast claims that running an ISP gets more expensive every year.

I want an itemized list of expenditures to back up that claim. Anything that doesn't make sense I'll assume the is the CEO's paycheck.

EDIT: Either way, the problem I'm seeing is the Internet is a commodity (if you will) that's so ingrained in our modern lives that it needs to be regulated, much like electricity, water, and other municipal resources.

But nope. Telecom companies got to the politicians first.

avatar

Enigmatistical

Well. Said. Period.

avatar

Obsidian

This will be approved as part of a back-end deal with the government to allow more invasive spying. Systems will be in place under the guise of "insuring internet fairness" because this will be the warranted and logical cry from the public. While those systems will certainly be able to measure bitrate, throttling and the like, they will primarily be used for tracking.

If this deal doesn't go through, it will likely still force the government to act to insure internet is a regulated space like phone service had been considered decades ago.

Either way, this will be bad for consumers, and quite possibly internet freedom. (Merits of VPN will become more prevalent.)

I have Comcast, for over a decade now. Most of the time it's actually been good as long as I never have to call them for anything, and maintain my own network hardware. Anecdotally my Netflix streaming has slowed down in the last 2 weeks, bringing bitrates that only allow for standard definition streams to be seen in pixelated and buffer-lagged states. I suspect Comcast, but have no proof.

For the most part the internet speed is incredible, download video drivers in seconds, Steam software and updates are very close to the speeds claimed by my ever-increasing bill.

Like many others, I'm concerned that if Comcast is playing dirty right NOW due to the recent Net Neutrality ruling, what happens when they also own 90%+ of the network access in the country?

avatar

Shalbatana

NOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!! AAARRRGGGHHHHHH!!!!

Help me regulatory committee, you're my only hope.

avatar

beatyas

All I want is a publicly available IP address with all service ports open, at a reasonable price, and no per-port throttling.
Is it really that hard?

avatar

severnia

nope, not hard at all. how deep are your pockets? reasonable might be open to interpretation, but get yourself a business connection - T1, T3/DS3, or OC type connection for $500/Month and up (very quickly up). but hey, at least it will be symetrical!

avatar

Scatter

I'll be honest, the product that Comcast provides has been outstanding in my opinion. The internet is ridiculously fast and I rerely experience outages.

However... their prices are equally ridiculous and tend to go up every year, sometimes multiple times per year. Comcast's big gimmick is discounted bundles. They offer a bundle at a discount for a limited time and when that time is up their prices increase. A lot. but when you call them they're view is that their prices didn't increase, my discount just expired.

There's something wrong with pricing when it costs the same to have expanded cable and three premium channels as it does to have expanded cable and only one premium channel. The way they package things there's really no way to call and cancel channels to reduce your monthly price unless you want to give up all premium channels.

I really hope that the government takes another look at this and ultimately decides to regulate the industry. There was just a really interesting story on Consumerist showing how Netflix streaming speeds has mysteriously decreased over the years.

http://consumerist.com/2014/02/11/netflix-streaming-speeds-getting-worse-for-comcast-and-verizon-fios-customers/

avatar

beatyas

Careful...

You said something that is logical and made sense... On the Internet. Therefore, the feds will seek you out...

avatar

tony2tonez

Great I went from the 2nd worst TV/ISP service in NYC to worst service in corporate America.

I guess Comcast never heard of AOL, lol.

avatar

NoCtrl

Just what we need, a bigger comcast. Speak out while you can.

http://act.freepress.net/sign/consol_comcast_twc/?source=slider

avatar

COGNAK

Here's to continued $90 monthly bills for mediocre internet for the next 10 years. The US price per speed point is a joke. Is IPTV a piece of the puzzle?

avatar

yammerpickle2

I think you have that wrong. You can look forward to price increases until you have a $150 dollar a month bill for the next ten years.

avatar

satanforaday

I cant wait to see, I have 50/5 and i am paying 65 right now... I don't want this deal to go through then a cap kicks in.... I don't want that at all...

avatar

FrancesTheMute

Comcast isn't enforcing caps right now, at least not on mine. On my account page it says they have a 250GB cap but they're not currently being enforced and haven't been in the over year and a half that I've been with Comcast.

avatar

satanforaday

I cant wait to see, I have 50/5 and i am paying 65 right now... I don't want this deal to go through then a cap kicks in.... I don't want that at all...

avatar

satanforaday

I cant wait to see, I have 50/5 and i am paying 65 right now... I don't want this deal to go through then a cap kicks in.... I don't want that at all...

avatar

Innomasta

Midwest checking in! Not my problem :P

avatar

spokenwordd

Yeah... I'm pretty sure Comcast the largest ISP will completely ignore the midwest after acquiring Time Warner the 2nd largest ISP. You're totally safe

avatar

Innomasta

Thanks for taking a joke.

avatar

glpeter90

What's good for Comcast is good for America !

avatar

vrmlbasic

I can only hope that it will be sooner than ~50 years before NBC/Comcast goes bankrupt and that there won't be any bailout to save them.

("What's good for GM is good for America!")

avatar

Mikey109105

Oh look, another cable monopoly. Why am I not surprised?

avatar

vrmlbasic

The Comcast evil empire grows larger.

With all the support that Comcast gives the current Administration I find it inconceivable that it would ever do anything that would actually harm Comcast. Besides, Comcast has years of practice keeping its monopolies.

avatar

spokenwordd

As if this beast needed any more meals... Please congress draft a bill that would give us cable carrier freedom so competition can actually enter into the picture no matter where you live. Why cable/ISP service is region locked is just crazy

avatar

bjoswald

And the fat get fatter...