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.
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.
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.
when 640k got you a lot!
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.
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.
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
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.