Slashdot Mirror


FCC Set To Approve Charter, Time Warner Cable Merger (dslreports.com)

insitus writes: The FCC is getting close to approving Charter's $79 billion acquisition of Time Warner Cable and Bright House Networks. According to a (paywalled) report in the Wall Street Journal, FCC boss Tom Wheeler is expected to circulate an order among fellow commissioners as early as this week that would approve the deal with some conditions. Those conditions would include provisions requiring Charter deliver low-income broadband to select communities. That paywalled WSJ report is here. The story's also at Ars Technica, among others. From Ars' report: If Charter's acquisitions of TWC and Bright House are approved, Charter would become the nation's second largest Internet service provider after Comcast, with the two companies controlling the majority of high-speed Internet subscriptions. Comcast struck a deal to buy Time Warner Cable in February 2014, but it failed to convince the FCC and Department of Justice to approve that merger. Among other things, the agencies were concerned that a bigger Comcast would try to harm online video providers that need access to Comcast's broadband network.

44 comments

  1. STOP! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In the name of love!

    It's a TRAP!

  2. Merging telecos by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

    We're just merging telecos, limiting total competition. <sarcasm> And nothing of value was lost </sarcasm>

    --
    Your ad here. Ask me how!
  3. maybe not so bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I realize a lot of people dont like the idea of ISP's merging, because it stifles competition and lets them run wild.
    But if it had to happen, I'm glad charter is involved.
    Out of all the regular ISP's out there (im excluding google fiber here) Charter is probably one of the better ones, if not the best one when it comes to not pulling any BS or trying to screw the internet in general over. They removed their data caps, and stuck with it. I always get way more bandwidth then what I pay for, and in general, everyone I have ever known who has moved out of the neighborhood and been forced to use time warner instead of charter has begged for their charter connection back.

    I realize its still kind of fishy, and would be better if there was no merger. But if this means Charter will get Time Warner in gear, then I think im ok with this.

    1. Re:maybe not so bad by king+neckbeard · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's precisely why I'm so concerned. They are about the only major ISP that doesn't complete suck, and TWC might end up making Charter service worse.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    2. Re:maybe not so bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which one? Charter does suck.

      My office has them, and there's at least an outage a day. My last company had a guy who could have worked from home, except for the constant Charter outages.

    3. Re:maybe not so bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My office has them, and there's at least an outage a day.

      That doesn't mean the company sucks. Every ISP has some areas where local issues happen frequently. Call your sales rep and complain about it, so that the local plant gets fixed.
      I worked for a NOC for a cable company a few years back, they had a great network but one local (and prominent) business kept making noise about how horrible they were due to all the outages. I spoke with the lead field tech, turns out the primary trunk line which fed that location ran through a heavily wooded area, which was infested with squirrels. They were out in the field at least once a week repairing lines that the rodents had chewed up, which is what caused the outages.
      They eventually got approval to run buried conduit instead of hanging the trunk on the poles, which took care of the issue. But the permits to run the conduit took three years to obtain from the local government and required an EPA impact study, and was heavily opposed by the local Telco (AT&T) who owned the poles and didn't want to lose rental fees and see their competition able to provide a stable service.

      Moral of the story is that there are many situations where it's not your ISP causing the issues or dropping the ball.

    4. Re:maybe not so bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll see your anecdote and raise you another.

      I've had ZERO outages since I switched to Charter two years ago.

      Even when there was supposedly a "nationwide" outage, I still had service. I have no idea why, but I do know there are some substantial differences between Charter service in the St. Louis area (where I live) and in other Charter-served areas. For example, they gave everybody in the St. Louis area a bump from 30/5 Mbps to 60/5 Mbps, no questions asked, no changes to the bill. That was around June 2014. Three or four months later, in September/October 2014, they bumped everyone from 60/5 Mbps to 100/7 Mbps. Again, no questions, no billing changes. Just "we only have one tier of residential internet service and it's 100/7 Mbps, and we're rebranding it as Spectrum."

      Granted, the router I have on that connection can't keep up anymore, so I'm still capped at 60 Mbps down, but that's my equipment, not theirs.

      Also, it doesn't hurt to have friends that work at Charter HQ in non-CSR capacities. Which I do.

    5. Re:maybe not so bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seconded. I'm very happy with my Charter pipe. I wish I had fiber, but there are a lot of things I'd wish for before using up a wish on that. They don't have native IPv6, but the 6RD tunnel works just fine. I happily torrent probably hundreds of GB per month.

      I've heard the horror stories about TWC. Fwiw, I don't play the "cancellation game" where one calls up and tries to cancel service just to get on the introductory pricing again for a few months. I'm not a sociopath (which is probably why I'm not a good Randian bootstrapper either), and I think the price I'm paying is fair enough. Really, the only thing they've done that's made me moderately irritated is intercepting NXDOMAIN responses and sending whatever domain name I was trying to resolve to some crap search engine, but that was easy enough to deal with. No service is perfect.

      If data caps and throttling get put in place and if they fuck with my 6RD, I could see myself easily playing the "cancellation game."

  4. provisions requiring ... low-income broadband by spacepimp · · Score: 3, Informative

    When there is no consequence to failing to meet the low income broadband and other conditions, then there really are no conditions whatsoever on the merger. So this is a win for industry consolidation and competition shakedown.

  5. No competition by Virtucon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    No competition means no choice and higher prices. If you have two or three possible broadband providers that can service your business or home, consolidating 3 or 2 into 1 doesn't improve competitiveness or deliver better service; it just drives up your costs for crappy service. TWC isn't starving, neither is Charter so why do this other than to grease pockets of merger and acquisition lawyers and gouge consumers?

    --
    Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
    1. Re:No competition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      charter went bankrupt a few years ago due to the crushing costs of upgrading their systems. If you think you are entitled to free or low cost broadband move to northern Europe or southeast Asia. It costs money, and lots of it, to move those bits to your house and Charter or anyone else has a right to recoup the money it invested and a reasonable return as well ... nerd entitlement issues aside. I don't think you have a very solid understanding of the way the world actually works.

    2. Re:No competition by king+neckbeard · · Score: 1

      If they are in dire straights financially, perhaps they shouldn't be going through a merger. We are getting our ass kicked in regards to broadband, and we seem to be seeing a ton of mergers.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    3. Re:No competition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure it costs money, which is why we gave the telecoms Billions over the past 3 decades to upgrade their networks. The problem is is they took the money and failed to expand the services as required.

    4. Re:No competition by wasexton · · Score: 1

      Even if you disagree with the debates about internet access being a "human right" (http://www.wired.com/2011/06/internet-a-human-right/), it is hard to feel guilty over companies who have exploited their near monopoly conditions by gouging consumers with their "right to recoup investment and make a reasonable return" when that return tends to be at 97% profit margin (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bruce-kushnick/time-warner-cables-high-s_b_6642210.html).

    5. Re:No competition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they are in dire straights financially

      They're not. Go to Google, and do a little bit of searching regarding who owns Interests in Charter. Follow the chain of companies, and you'll see they have investors with some VERY deep pockets. Which is why they're able to purchase a cable company which is over twice their size.

    6. Re:No competition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      due to the crushing costs of upgrading their systems

      Is that the actual reason for their financial problems? Not the executive compensation?

      CEO Tom Rutledge saw his compensation nearly quadruple to $16.1 million in 2014, up from $4.5 million the year before, according to Securities Exchange Commission filings .... a number of other Charter executives also received big pay increases in 2014: CFO Christopher Winfrey made $36 million, up from $848,122 in 2013; COO John Bickham banked $8.6 million, up from $2.8 million; and executive VP and president of commercial services Dom Detampel took home $3.6 million, up from $913,707.

      .

    7. Re:No competition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While this is all valid, Charter and TWC already are not competing with each other. They don't service the same areas. Charter is the only broadband ISP in my area as well as most of the areas it serves, just as TWC is in most of its service areas too. If we're going to fix the competition problem, we need to fix the government-sponsored-monopolies problem, this merger has little, if anything, to do with it.

    8. Re:No competition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So a multi billion dollar company was in dire straits financially because of millions in compensation?

    9. Re:No competition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, but when you're giving your executives major pay increases when your company isn't doing so hot its probably a pretty clear indicator that you're making poor decisions elsewhere as well. It's a little like a coworker who you know buys a few too may lotto tickets but what you don't know is they also blow thousands of dollars a year at casinos.

    10. Re:No competition by GrumpySteen · · Score: 1

      charter went bankrupt a few years ago due to the crushing costs of upgrading their systems

      Oh, in that case we should definitely approve a deal that will cost them $79 billion dollars. Nothing could possibly go wrong!

  6. This will save money for customers! by Lew+Perin · · Score: 2

    After all, the newly merged company will be able to cut down on duplicative lobbyist staffing. Is this a win-win or what?!

    --
    Sorry, I forgot there are ads on the Web; I use Lynx.
    1. Re:This will save money for customers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you mean duplicitous.

    2. Re:This will save money for customers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indupitably.

  7. Time to start looking... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I currently have TWC but I used to be a Charter customer when I lived in Texas. Charter was complete shit. I thought I had escaped that nightmare but like a supernatural serial killer in a teen camp it found me again. Time to start looking for another ISP... Done, I don't have any other options. I just have to take it up the ass and hope that they have the decency to use a little bit of lube.

    1. Re: Time to start looking... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why is this marked troll?

    2. Re: Time to start looking... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Slashdot comment system is shit.

  8. There is a bright side by robot256 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    On the bright side, once we are left with only one commercial broadband provider in the entire country, there will be absolutely NO illusion of competition anywhere in the country. Maybe then someone will fight for more options. Or just take their big fat lobbyist paycheck and go home.

    1. Re: There is a bright side by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is there any single locality that does have competition in the cable TV-based broadband?

  9. From a current Time Warner subscriber... by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

    ... it can't possibly get worse. Honestly, all it would take to make me a happy customer is if Charter comes in and fires anyone responsible for CCI flagging every channel they legally can as CopyOnce and then stops flagging them so. Time Warner is the only cable service that does this, and the only effect it has is reducing customer choice to either renting their absolutely fucking garbage set top boxes, buying a TiVo, buying a HDHomeRun product, or using Windows Media Center.

    I'd really like to give the multitude of DVR software that can talk to a CableCARD a try, but I'm saddled with Windows Media Center unless I shitcan my perfectly working tuner. And the best version of WMC shipped with Windows 7 - the Windows 8 version is less featured, and the Windows 10 version doesn't exist because Microsoft killed it.

    Please, Charter - let me use an operating system and DVR software that I don't hate, as a choice above the absolutely terrible set top boxes that Time Warner provides at a ridiculous monthly charge.

    --
    Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    1. Re:From a current Time Warner subscriber... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jesus fucking Christ. Watch less teevee ffs.

  10. Good... by frank_adrian314159 · · Score: 1

    The fewer of them there are, the easier they will be to nationalize.

    --
    That is all.
  11. I'm waiting for the inevitable terrorism by Khyber · · Score: 1

    Once all these companies 'merge' and follow the same shitty security practices, our country is going to be one ripe target for every hacker on this planet.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  12. Whipslash, can we work on... by EzInKy · · Score: 2

    ...forbidding any "paywalled" links in summaries? They are very irritating to those of us who truly wish to research an article. Seriously, what is the point of providing citations that everyone can't verify freely?

    --
    Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
    1. Re:Whipslash, can we work on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Paywalled Internet, it's the Internet those self-entitled adblocking freeloaders asked for.

    2. Re:Whipslash, can we work on... by EzInKy · · Score: 1

      An article that can not be freely viewed can not be freely discussed.

      --
      Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
    3. Re:Whipslash, can we work on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's already said elsewhere that paywalled links are ONLY for when they have info that can't be found at non-paywalled links.

      You don't want to do the needful? Then don't. I'm glad the story is here.

  13. FCC needs to regulate Internet connections by DogDude · · Score: 1

    The only thing that's going to bring the US out of it's 3rd world status is for the FCC to regulate Internet connections like they do POTS now. Otherwise, forget trying to do any business that requires a reliable Internet connection.

    --
    I don't respond to AC's.
  14. Mergers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, I would not be concerned if it was a luxury company.
    I am concerned when it is a utility. Which the internet should be classified as.
    If it is being supplied ( by my tax dollars ) to the low-income people so they can get jobs, take online classes,
    communicate with the bureaucracy.... then it is in the same category as subsidized housing and power/water bills... a utility.

    Monopoly is a game, not one to be played by government or corporations...

  15. nipple windows ahoy by Pseudonymous+Powers · · Score: 1

    The FCC is getting close to approving Charter's $79 billion acquisition of Time Warner Cable and Bright House Networks.

    If Charter's acquisitions of TWC and Bright House are approved, Charter would become the nation's second largest Internet service provider after Comcast, with the two companies controlling the majority of high-speed Internet subscriptions.

    The government sure seems to have a hard time recognizing when a massive corporate merger seriously endangers competition, so I've compiled this handy form for the auditors:

    Line 1. Does the word "billion" appear anywhere in the proposal? [ ]

    Line 2. Does the phrase "two companies controlling the majority" appear anywhere in the proposal? [ ]

    If you wrote down "yes" on line 1 or 2, STOP. You cannot use this form, or any other, to approve the merger, as it poses a clear existential threat to competition in this market segment. You need to instead use form 8686, entitled "Kicking Uncle Richie-Rich in the Pennybags: Monopoly Busting and You"

  16. Just a larger dumpster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Both crappy companies; now, we will have one big dumpster company. Higher prices, same crap.

  17. Fuck me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Guess I have to learn to live without

  18. Jacking up rates! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So that's why my Time Warner rates got jacked up a few months ago!

    Over 20%, what a scam.

  19. And the day after by p51d007 · · Score: 0

    Look for a huge price jump UP! Less competition means they can charge more.