Slashdot Mirror
Comcast Expanding Data Cap Locations, Training Reps To Avoid Subject (arstechnica.com)
An anonymous reader sends news that Comcast is about to expand its 300GB data cap to more cities in the Southeastern U.S. "Newly capped areas include Little Rock, Arkansas; Houma, LaPlace, and Shreveport, Louisiana; Chattanooga, Greeneville, Johnson City, and Gray, Tennessee; and Galax, Virginia." This happened at the same time organizations are calling on the FCC to investigate Comcast for this practice. A helpful Comcast employee decided to leak the internal training on how Comcast plans to message these data caps to consumers. For example, they direct their representatives to tell customers that areas without a data cap actually have a 250GB cap, but it just isn't being enforced. They even suggest avoiding the term "cap," instead preferring "usage plan." There's also this: "If a customer calls in with any questions associated with the usage policy and how it relates to Net Neutrality, Netflix or observations about how XFINITY services are or are not counted relative to third party services, do not address these items with the customer."
Soon as this hit my area, I signed up for the $30 extortion fee, bc 300 gigs is a joke and my household crosses that in a week easy. Now, I make it a point to use as much bandwidth as I can, downloading every goddamn cat video on the internet, twice, daily, while playing games online and streaming netflix on multiple devices most of the day, just because.
I'm getting every damn pennies worth out of it.
I'd be okay with "usage plans" if I got credited back for the data I didn't use. If I use 200 of my 250 plan this month, then use 300 next month, I shouldn't be charged an overage. I'm paying to use X amount of data. Where the hell is my change back for the stuff I didn't use?
Comcast support is so horrible it's the go-to for making memes. Anecdotally, the people I know with Comcast have no other viable solution. If that's a more general case, it's monopolistic lock-in based on area. If it's not, why do people still use them?
LITTLE GIRL: But which cookie will you eat FIRST? C. MONSTER: Me think you have misconception of cookie-eating process.
So basically they have a formal policy to mislead, misdirect, or lie to their clients in order to implement a policy and pretend it's always been there?
Isn't shit like this illegal?
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
.
There's a good discussion here.
That's what Comcast has done. Their network capacity has been so overbooked that if everyone actually tried to use what they think they're paying to get, the whole thing would grind to a halt. It makes me wonder how many network engineers tried to tell management that what they were doing was a really bad idea, and how many of them got fired for daring to explain it to them. Now they're painted into a corner, and rather than invest in expanding their network to meet demand, they'll just tell everyone who is paying them 'tough shit, deal with it, it is what it is' and hang up the phone in your face -- then badger you to death when you try to cancel their 'service'. They've painted themselves into a corner, and are denying it furiously. Meanwhile they're allowed to buy up more and more other companies so they can corner the market.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
Pretty sure that any Chattanoogan in their right mind doesn't even have Comcast to begin with.
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
Chattanooga is one of the cities mentioned and if I recall offers municipal fiber. If Comcast isn't completely shut out by consumers in that city by now, they will be very soon.
after common carrier reforms were passed this year its really shocking to see internet providers still pulling crap like this. Comcast considers this a trial because its hoping if it rolls the whole thing out slowly enough then maybe, just maybe, it wont face scrutiny by the FCC and a class-action lawsuit.
caps, wireless hotspot whoring, advertisement injection and yes, even SRVFAIL hijacking should have come to an abrupt halt under the FCC reform. Turning your callcenters into crisis hotlines that grill you in ESL about what you use the internet for are also a pain in the ass. stop advertising internet service i can buy over the internet if it just means i have to spend 2 hours on the phone to seal the deal 3 days later when a truck drives by to hook my internet up.
Good people go to bed earlier.
Comcast was saying at one point that caps/overage fees were needed to reign in bandwidth hogs who were clogging the network. Since then, they've admitted what we all knew from the beginning: This isn't about network management/congestion.
The reason reason for caps and overage fees is simple: Cable TV. Cable TV revenues are declining as people move from watching Cable TV to getting video entertainment from Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, and other online sources. The cable companies don't like this because it means money flows to other companies instead of to them.
Now, cable companies tend to have a monopoly for wired, high-speed Internet access in their areas. (If not a monopoly, then likely a duopoly with the phone company.) They are using their monopoly control over Internet access to prop up their Cable TV business. By establishing caps and overages, they can ensure that people: a) Are limited in what they can stream and b) wind up paying the cable company if they stream too much. The overages raise the price of streaming videos. Instead of paying under $20 for Netflix and Hulu, you might wind up paying $40 or more. Suddenly, streaming "costs more" than cable TV would and (Comcast hopes) people will abandon streaming and come back to the cable company.
The big problem (for Comcast) in all of this is that it's illegal for a company to use their monopoly position in one market to squash competition in another market. That's exactly what Comcast is doing here and the FTC/DOJ needs to investigate and stop them.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
They even suggest avoiding the term "cap,"
The "C word" used to refer to something different.
"We're not going to cap your data, we're just going to ummm, 'rate limit' it according to your 'usage plan'...and the rate limit will be zero bytes per day. Thank you for being a Comcast customer!"
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
System sucks!
Great!
So how are filling your broadband requirements now?
Isn't funny how in so many areas, the only viable solution for anything other than dialup is comcast?
Conal O'Rourke was right Comcast needs to be investigated for breaking the law.
comcast needs to use there power to make ESPN and Disney channel premium channels that alone can drop the cost of a cable plan by at least $10-$15 /mo.
when 640k got you a lot!
We don't even need Net Neutrality to fix this. All we have to do is require that any service with bandwidth caps not exclude any of their own services from those caps.
.
Just as Microsoft did with their online storage, Comcast will eventually say that the extra $35 for unlimited is no longer valid. Now $35 gets you only an extra 200GB. If you want more, well there's $50 for 500GB, or $75 for 700GB, etc.
I'm probably in the .01% in usage. I remember one month I did 1TB. I'm curious about their congestion issues, and their actual costs.
I think they should just raise it to something ridiculous like 1TB, and be done with it. Most people don't use that much anyway, and people that do, like me, will.
But of course we don't want to pay anymore, and rightly so (if it's not about congestion).
We live in the day and age of unlimited talk and text. Why not data? Especially when I've heard employees from ATT spouting that they have the entire country laid with fiber, and that all "costs" are all "profit."
IDK if his bragging was personally beneficial to him, but I suspect it was.
What, of course, would always solve these issues is more competition. And we all know (well I do) what stands in the way of that: local, state, and federal regulations. http://www.wired.com/2013/07/w...
Then there is their broadband service (my area does not have DSL) but I don't want to pay those crooks more money. OK so I man up and cut the cord. crap someone sent me a 80MB file. I will be dead of old age by the time I download using dialup.
mfwright@batnet.com
"If a customer calls in with any questions associated with the usage policy and how it relates to Net Neutrality, Netflix or observations about how XFINITY services are or are not counted relative to third party services, do not address these items with the customer."
This sorta reminds me of an experience I had with AT&T. I have one of the grandfathered unlimited plans. In 2011 AT&T started throttling unlimited users indiscriminately, some only using a gig in a month and then *BAM* modem speeds. I was never affected mainly because I never really used that much data (I do now... somewhat vengefully...) but I did want to know exactly what their minimum spec for throttled transfers was. That seems like a reasonable question, right? If they're offering an unlimited plan but throttling the speed, they should tell me what the minimum speed is otherwise zero kb/s is an option, meaning that's unlimited.
I had several phone calls and emails with them about that, 3/4ths of the conversation was them trying to convince me that it'll never affect me. "You can always use wifi!", "You don't actually use that much data", "a little data goes a long way!", and so on. I actually had to tell one rep that I had already heard all that and it didn't apply (I made up a story about going on a long business trip to a place with no wifi...) and she was nice enough to get her supervisor involved, and SHE had to listen to the bit about how we always have wifi and all that stuff. If the call didn't' take so long I would have considered that funny.
Their final answer was to tell me that their network throttling speed was proprietary information about their network performance and that I had no business knowing anything about it. Nice chaps, I hope they enjoy their 100 million dollar fine over it. Too bad Comcast isn't paying attention.
"I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
They probably don't currently have the technology in place to meter during the day, and be unlimited at night.
If unmetered early mornings is easy for satellite ISPs to deploy, why can't a much bigger company such as Comcast put it in place quickly?
Heavy Internet users should consider getting a business account.
Provided your representative is willing to offer a business account to an individual without a business license and a commercially zoned service address.
You play by their rules, or you go play somewhere else.
I recommend everyone do precisely that.
"Go play somewhere else"? Not everybody has the financial resources to just pack up and move out of a Comcast-serviced area. Other Slashdot users have pointed out that finding a new job and a new place to live for your family aren't exactly trivial,[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7], especially if the ISP in your new area will likely just get bought.
How do you burn through 300 GB in a week?
By having more than one person in the household, for one. If one copy of Netflix downloads 1 GB/hr, three will download 3 GB/hr.
Capacity to carry data at peak time is a finite resource. In addition, subscribers to services other than satellite have historically voted with their wallet against "complicated" plans that distinguish peak time from non-peak time because subscribers' attention is another finite resource. This is why satellite ISPs are more likely to offer unmetered early mornings than ISPs using any other last mile.
So how are filling your broadband requirements now?
Isn't funny how in so many areas, the only viable solution for anything other than dialup is comcast?
By choosing employers outside such "so many areas" whenever it comes time to relocate, I'm guessing.
Do you live in an area whose ILEC is Frontier Communications? Frontier licenses the FiOS brand from Verizon, from which Frontier acquired operations in several markets in June 2010. Frontier might be allowed to extend FiOS-branded fiber to the premises into areas not covered by the agreement between Verizon and Comcast.
Yeah you will need a good download manager for that assuming you dialup isp kicks you after 3 hours like the ones here do.
Set aside about 5 hours for the transfer.
I used to average about 100MB usage per day on dialup. 53.2kbps connection I had a really good quality line. left it connected 24/7. had to redial every 3 hours or so.
Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
I wonder if Comcast has internal projections that show the cable TV business -- ie, delivering real-time TV broadcasts -- basically dying over time.
That would depend on NHL, NFL, MLB, and NBA dying. These sport promotions have sold long-term exclusive live video rights to national and regional networks commonly included in multichannel pay TV packages.
If Comcast actually had the power you think it has, its NBCSN would be able to outbid ESPN for Monday Night Football effective 2021 when the rights come up for sale again.
"You can always use wifi!" doesn't help if the Wi-Fi router is connected to a satellite modem on a plan with a 10 GB/mo cap because satellite is the only broadband offered in your area that isn't Comcast.
I love to hate on Comcast as much as anyone, but the quote in the summary really was taken out of context.
The full quote from the document is:
Leaving off the last sentence escalating the call to someone who is more thoroughly trained in how to bullshit the customer changes the narrative. Without it, it sounds like the policy is to just ignore the customer.
If you can get television and internet for the same price as you can just get internet and netflix then why wouldnt you just pay one bill for more?
Because someone wants the shows exclusive to Netflix more than the shows exclusive to Streampix.
For example, they direct their representatives to tell customers that areas without a data cap actually have a 250GB cap, but it just isn't being enforced.
Well of course. It's called getting your foot in the door. They roll out a "cap" that isn't enforced, and simply start enforcing it little by little in different locations. Why are you complaining when it was there all along? /s
comcast needs to use there power to make ESPN and Disney channel premium channels that alone can drop the cost of a cable plan by at least $10-$15 /mo.
Unfortunately Comcast is in the weaker negotiation position relative to Disney and ESPN so threatening to drop them i they don't go premium is not a viable course of action.
I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
On the other hand, we have noticed an increase in sightings of Halley's Comet by Comcast customer service personnel.
Have gnu, will travel.
At work I have a 12/1 att uverse dsl line. Download is fast enough for what we do with it. However a faster uplink would be really nice even just half a meg faster would make a lot of things work.
Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
It's hard to take a stand when Comcast is the sole broadband provider. Or when an alternate provider actually costs MORE than the uncapped, business class service Comcast offers.
I had a local co-op approach me about putting in a line as they expanded into our area. I told them I though ti sounded great. Except they were only offering T1 service at $150/mo. Now, I'm all for the reliability of a T1 line, but getting 1/30 the download speed and 1/10 the upload speed for twice the cost makes it very hard to "send a message" to Comcast.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
Competition is the ideal solution, but it's unlikely to happen anytime soon. Failing competition, this would be my solution:
1) Separate the business lines: ISPs should be dumb pipes and not offer services (TV, Phone, etc) across the lines. They definitely shouldn't own content that goes across said lines. Separate companies like Comcast into Internet, TV/Phone, and Content companies. Let these companies survive or fail on their own.
2a) Require access to lines: Now that "Comcast Internet" only manages the Network, require them to open up to allow other companies fairly priced access to their networks. Those companies can then sell services to the users.
---- or ----
2b) Regulate ISPs as utilities. The government can set fair rates the ISPs can charge (the same way that your water company can't charge $50 per gallon because they're the only game in town) and ensure that any caps/overage fees come with fair metering.
Is this as good as having 10 other wired, high-speed ISPs in the area? Of course not. Perhaps you could also implement measures to encourage other ISPs to come into the areas, but the steps above would be a good short-term solution.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
As a forced Comcast user, out of curiosity, I checked my usage. It's day 5 of the month and I've used 70GB so far...previous months I've downloaded anywhere between 260 - 290 GB of data.
I work from home and access all my work data over my internet connection (I move very few files around - it's mostly rdp/ssh sessions, git interactions), use voip phones (both work and home), my kids almost exclusively watch "tv" via Netflix and YouTube and I would say my wife and I maybe watch 4-5 hours of streaming tv a week. Apart from that our internet usage isn't anything out of the ordinary and we're still exceeding the cap.
Comcast is insane if they think classifying anyone over 250GB of consumption a bandwidth hog especially as streaming services continue to grow in popularity - and eat into cable revenues.
If I had any real choice of provider, I'd be switching away from Comcast in a heartbeat.
I was in Utah about a decade ago when UTOPIA was rolling out; 15x15 (super-fast 10-12 years ago, looks like $5 less for 100x100 now) for $40/mo ... couldn't drop Comcast fast enough, though they did send a retention guy to my house to try to get me to stay. Offered me an 8x3 (fastest they could do in my area) like for $30-something. Pretty sure I laughed.
"If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear." - Every fascist, ever
There is actually one really good reason for the salespeople not to discuss this, at least not unless they're specifically vetted and approved to: the salespeople *Don't understand the numbers*. I've had times on the phone with ISP sales reps when I have to make them check whether the "b" is lowercase or uppercase when they're marketing speeds. This is their job and they don't know whether they're advertising megabits or megabytes. If they start trying to explain to customers how many movies they can watch without following a very good script, most of them are going to be *wrong*.
Comcast is a monopoly in most of their regions. They're frightened to death about the problem of cable cutters getting their programming online instead of from their cable service. Limiting their subscribers ability to watch online solves this problem.
Signed,
Municipal Fiber.
But if they don't offer what I want to watch on TV this ain't really going to promote not cutting the cable either.
By not letting people eat bread, they ain't going to turn to the shit sandwiches you offer.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Allow me an educated guess?
There is more than one provider of TV, internet, phone and whatnot where you are?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Revoke their charter.
Problem solved.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Speak to them and calmly re-iterate the concerns, pointing out Comcast/XFINITY's training when necessary.
It sounds like that Comcast doesn't want to fall foul of NN and have someone admit it.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
I think the confusion comes from the use of the term "waifu", which can mean a body pillow printed with a drawing of a Japanese cartoon character that a lonely man wishes he could marry.
The city I live in (Brunswick, MD) has Verizon for land line phone service, and they sell you up to 6mbit DSL as the fastest Internet service they offer. Comcast is also available here for TV, phone and broadband -- and with them, you can purchase up to 200mbits down / 10 up. (For some weird reason, they won't give you more than 10mbits up no matter what package you buy here. They tried to tell me it had to do with a limit because their central office is too far from here, but it sure looks artificially capped to me. When you run speed tests, you see it immediately bang up against the 10mbit upload speed limit and get throttled right back down again as soon as it hits 11-12.)
The interesting thing is, FiOS very quietly crept into a neighborhood in town where new construction is taking place (Brunswick Crossing). Initially though, I was told almost nobody purchased it or kept it for any length of time because they could only offer broadband Internet, not television. Comcast supposedly had exclusive rights for the TV in our area. I believe as of just a month ago or so though, that has been lifted and the full FiOS bundle is available for them.
It's not possible to get FiOS anyplace besides in the Crossing housing development out here though. The rumor is, Verizon claims it's "not feasible to run fiber through the hilly terrain the rest of the city consists of" -- but they found a relatively low-cost/easy way to extend service to the one development that sits on flat land, outside the main part of the city.
Caps are when bandwidth is cut off or throttled when you hit a threshold. Metering is when you're not capped, but instead price-gouged for any bandwidth over that threshold. The latter is obviously much more lucrative when there's no actual congestion.