Comcast wants to rule the world?

MrPogi

Moderator, , Webmaster of Cache Free TV
Staff member
#1
Comcast wants you to have to go through them to watch TV or use the internet, and they will buy out any company - NBC/Universal, Time Warner, etc - and any / all FCC commissioners to make it happen.

No, I'm not joking.
 
Last edited:

dkreichen1968

Moderator
Staff member
#2
I actually don't see the proposed deal to be anticompetitive since Comcast and TWC don't compete against each other in any sphere. There will be just as much competition after the merger as there is now. The only difference will be that people's cable payments will be going to Comcast rather than TWC. The competition for Comcast/TWC is Verizon FiOS, AT&T U-verse, CenturyLink Prism, Google Fiber, Dish Network, and DirecTV. The telecoms have been growing and expanding while Comcast and TWC have been in serious decline (as far as video subscribers are concerned) for the past few years. CenturyLink is keeping its rollout of Prism conservative, but I'm seeing Comcast/TWC losing market share well into the future no matter what new X67 media centers they roll out. AT&T U-verse added 194,000 video customers and 630,000 internet customers just in the last quarter of 2013. Verizon FiOS added 92,000 video and 126,000 internet. CenturyLink added a record 26,000 Prism TV customers, while Comcast/TWC lost a total of 172,000 video customers. CenturyLink has only started their roll out, and Verizon is going to have a major marketing push when they roll out the VMS1100 media server later this year.
 
Last edited:

Fringe Reception

Super Moderator, Chief Content Editor
Staff member
#4
Orry,

"Cable TV" is dieing much as hard-wired telephone service has vanished. Compost refuses to allow their customers to selectively choose from a 'smorgasboard' and they insist on forcing their customers to PAY for channels they do not want to receive.

My absurd (not true) examples are: The Monkey Grooming Channel (MGC) the Clam Diggers' Channel (CDC) or the Bigfoot Sighting Channel (BFC). Why would anyone ever pay a penny to see those channels?

Jim
 

MrPogi

Moderator, , Webmaster of Cache Free TV
Staff member
#5
I actually don't see the proposed deal to be anticompetitive since Comcast and TWC don't compete against each other in any sphere. / >>snip<<
No, they don't compete with each other. But it is anti-competitive because the cable business is not competitive to begin with! Your choice of pay TV and internet providers is limited by those that serve your geographical location, and the only real choice in many places is the local cable monopoly - ie, no choice.

When Comcast pushes this through the FCC by making short-term promises and giving cushy jobs to FCC commissioners, the only real "choice" for most people in 19 out of the top 20 markets in the USA for cable or internet will be Comcast.
 
#6
@Jim(Fringe)
For these channels:
The Monkey Grooming Channel (MGC) the Clam Diggers' Channel (CDC) or the Bigfoot Sighting Channel (BFC)

I'm wondering how the heck they make enough money to remain viable? Or, do you think the "producers" of each one simply run the channel from their garage :)

I do think the telecom landscape wrt TV/Internet providers will be very interesting to watch on how they merge/buyout/expand what is offered in what form over the coming years. Whichever way they go, I'm pretty sure we'll (the consumer) be paying more money for less quality of service though.
 

MrPogi

Moderator, , Webmaster of Cache Free TV
Staff member
#7
Is it coincidence that when I watched network news about this story, NBC's coverage of the story was not only least critical, but the shortest report?
 

dkreichen1968

Moderator
Staff member
#8
When Comcast pushes this through the FCC by making short-term promises and giving cushy jobs to FCC commissioners, the only real "choice" for most people in 19 out of the top 20 markets in the USA for cable or internet will be Comcast.
You're about 10 years behind the times. That would have been true in 2004, but now that Verizon FiOS and AT&T U-verse are available in many of those markets (with more than 10 million customers and counting), that's just not the case. And, now with CenturyLink launching Prism... The idea that combining two companies that don't have overlapping service areas is anticompetitive is just illogical.
 
#9
No, they don't compete with each other. But it is anti-competitive because the cable business is not competitive to begin with! Your choice of pay TV and internet providers is limited by those that serve your geographical location, and the only real choice in many places is the local cable monopoly - ie, no choice.

When Comcast pushes this through the FCC by making short-term promises and giving cushy jobs to FCC commissioners, the only real "choice" for most people in 19 out of the top 20 markets in the USA for cable or internet will be Comcast.
Just because Comcast is seeking a higher stake in the TV business and more hands-on approach with the FCC they are not even close to a monopoly or any threat to the casual TV viewer. Sure their usage has grown over the years but a few years ago the sdame could be said about ATT. Just because one service provider seekws a higher stake in the market is no reason to fret, it has been happening asince TV first started broadcasting, and still no one group has claimed full control....
 
Top