Comcast Is Raising Its Data Caps From 300GB To 1TB (arstechnica.com)

An anonymous reader writes: Comcast has announced today it will be raising its monthly data cap of 300GB to 1TB beginning June 1st. They will however charge more to customers who want unlimited data. After June 1st, less people will need to buy unlimited data from the company. Previously, users were charged an extra $30 to $35 a month for unlimited data but now they will have to pay an additional $50 for unlimited data. "All of the data plans in our trial markets will move from a 300 gigabyte data plan to a terabyte by June 1st, regardless of the speed," Comcast's announcement today said. The reason for the change? Customers are exceeding the 300GB cap. In late 2013, Comcast said only 2 percent of its customers used more than 300GB of data a month. That number was up to 8 percent in late 2015.

Comments

"Unlimited nights and weekends"

[jxander]

If broadband ISPs insist on having data caps (which they really shouldn't), they need to adopt a schedule like the old cell plans. Not necessarily the same "night and weekends" model ... but that old jingle was stuck in my head

People who shape their traffic and plan large downloads at overnight aren't clogging up the lines. Why punish customers who are making their best efforts to not impact other people? We should be rewarding that behavior.

Re:"Unlimited nights and weekends"

[Lumpy]

Comcast hates giving you what you paid for.... Comcast rewarding customers? HA!

Re:"Unlimited nights and weekends"

[fustakrakich]

People who shape their traffic and plan large downloads at overnight aren't clogging up the lines. Why punish customers who are making their best efforts to not impact other people? We should be rewarding that behavior.

Because they'll clog the lines during the overnight. Comcast has a ton of money. They can afford to install fatter pipes. If people only made a stronger demand for municipal service, the threat of actual competition would make pricing and service much more reasonable.

Re:"Unlimited nights and weekends"

[unrtst]

For the extreme users, you both may be right, but that's still just the 1% - 2% of top users.

300gb/month is approximately 5.5 hr of HD streaming from netflix per day (http://www.apartmenttherapy.com/how-much-monthly-bandwidth-doe-136401)

That may seem like a lot for one person, but it wouldn't be very difficult for one person to use that and hold down a normal job.
If you consider a household, which both the comcast and netflix subscriptions allow, then you could easily burn through that much, as at least 8% of their customers are doing now (according to TFS).

That's just legit streaming, with no torrents or other large downloads, nor any intensive work stuff, and completely ignoring all other internet usage. I doubt those users are going to schedule their streaming TV/movie watching for off peak hours. There's a reason the peaks are where they are now, and it's damn near all streaming video.

IMNSHO, I think:
* they shouldn't be allowed to charge per GB without offering better tools for their users
* once they do though, they should offer a base package (300-1000gb seems fine for that), and then a flat per-GB fee above that.
* get rid of speed restrictions if they use caps or charge per-GB (if everyone is paying same price per-gb, everyone should get the same bps)

Re:"Unlimited nights and weekends"

[The Raven]

They can't. Even if they thought it was a good idea systemically.

• What's sucking most people's bandwidth? Streaming.
• What can't you timeshift? Streaming.
• What can you timeshift? Torrenting.

So if they implemented time based data surcharges, they would drive users to piracy. Since Comcast and Time Warner both have significant media holdings, any policy that incentivized piracy (would be a non-starter.

Re:"Unlimited nights and weekends"

[Shadow99_1]

Looking at my usage in the TWC control panel, I regularly use 300 GB+ almost every month. All of which is streaming from Twitch or Youtube, web surfing, and gaming. Most of my entertainment is from those sources.

Re:"Unlimited nights and weekends"

[Wycliffe]

Comcast hates giving you what you paid for.... Comcast rewarding customers? HA!

They aren't rewarding customers. Having a nights and weekends policy would only benefit them. The extra capacity is free and being wasted at night. Yes, they might lose a small amount of money from overage fees or people that don't pay to upgrade to unlimited but this should be more than compensated for if even a small percentage of their customers scheduled their large downloads for after hours. This would increase their capacity and improve their performance instantly without them spending a dime. I'm very surprised that noone who is considering caps in the first place hasn't already done this.

Re:"Unlimited nights and weekends"

[fustakrakich]

You take your chances on the first attempt. But why in the world would you reelect him or the party when he screws up? And then you got these kind of guys in there for five or six terms, what is up with that? The problem is now self inflicted. It's not even politics anymore, it's a pathology.

Re:Which they really SHOULD

[geek]

Why should Comcast give everyone unlimited access to a self imposed limited resource?

Fixed that for you

Re: Can we just have municiple broadband?

[johnsmithperson123]

Y'know, I'm a small government fan but also an aggressive anti-truster. Seems to me that we should just start threatening to smash the ISPs into tiny little pieces if they don't improve.

Re: Which they really SHOULD

[jxander]

Because the limits are false.

Comcast, Cox, Time Warner, etc. have made their own little monopolized diamond business, creating artificial scarcity.

The problem is that they've done this to a basic utility service, instead of an exorbitant luxury item like diamonds.

Re:Which they really SHOULD

[AK Marc]

It's not "self imposed" but cost imposed. Data caps are a proxy for bandwidth use. If everyone used too much bandwidth, they'd have to buy more. So caps impose usage penalties designed to reduce overall bandwidth usage, to decrease cost.

Re:Which they really SHOULD

[FrankHaynes]

What a pity that Comcast's enforced monopoly results in usage of their network. Boo-fucking-hoo for them.

If they operated their retail network like real carriers do on a wholesale level by setting a 90th percentile rate based on actual usage, charge for THAT and make reasonable allowances for overages that would be closer to fair. As it is now, it's a shell game since their metering favors the house and not you, the customer.

I'd prefer HONEST metering, but Comcast aint interested in that.