Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Comcast Excited To Have Lost 4,000 TV Subscribers This Spring (consumerist.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the could-always-be-worse dept.

An anonymous reader writes from a report via The Consumerist: Comcast has released their second quarter results and they are happy to announce that they lost 4,000 TV subscribers in the last three months. Why are they so happy to announce such a loss? Because, compared to the same time last year where they lost 69,000 TV subscribers, the loss this year is much better for them. Comcast said in a statement to investors that "video customers net losses improved to 4,000, the best second quarter result in over 10 years." That Consumerist reports: "That means that for the most than a decade, the best Comcast can do in April to June of every year is to lose only 4,000 TV subscribers. At this time last year, Comcast reported 22.3 million TV subscribers, and at the same time this year, they report roughly 22.3 million TV subscribers. The major driver of increased subscriptions comes, as you'd guess, from broadband. Comcast reports an increase of 220,000 broadband customers in the second quarter which, in the overall growth of the company, entirely offsets a lost of 4,000 TV viewers."

68 comments

  1. I'd be excited too, if Comcast lost my address by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I mean, really, do they need to know where I live? Can't they forget about me entirely?

    1. Re:I'd be excited too, if Comcast lost my address by nitehawk214 · · Score: 2

      I haven't been a subscriber in 8 years and I get something in the mail from Comcast.... Every. Single. Day.

      I know sending junk mail costs next to nothing, but maybe if they step it down a notch they can save a few dollars.

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    2. Re:I'd be excited too, if Comcast lost my address by The-Ixian · · Score: 1

      CenturyLink does the same for me. I have said no to their face several times yet every week, there it is in my mailbox. I am sure they have wasted an entire tree and who knows how much ink on me...

      Oh... as long as we are talking about junk mail... what is with charities sending me huge packets of paper? I already gave you money! I sought you out! You don't need to market to me anymore!

      Won't someone think of the trees?!

      And... to stay on topic... How many subscribers did they take on during the same period and how does that compare to last year? That seems to be the more meaningful number... I would think anyway...

      --
      My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
    3. Re:I'd be excited too, if Comcast lost my address by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I haven't been a subscriber in 8 years and I get something in the mail from Comcast.... Every. Single. Day.

      Even better, I get a lot of email from them, and they don't offer service to my block here in Seattle.

    4. Re:I'd be excited too, if Comcast lost my address by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lol, Comcast and Centurylink to me and the company PLUS a couple in names of previous companies or employees.

      How many of what they 'kept' are basic TV at virtually no cost? TV would have been $2 more on last promo i saw :O

    5. Re:I'd be excited too, if Comcast lost my address by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I haven't been a subscriber in 8 years and I get something in the mail from Comcast.... Every. Single. Day.

      Even better, I get a lot of email from them, and they don't offer service to my block here in Seattle.

      Seattle is weird. There's Wave, but they only have about 7,000 subscribers when I worked there a couple of years ago. Our monopoly area is tiny compared to Comcast's, and we fought hard to provide service to every customer we could. Of course, we usually failed. Comcast is in the milk the profits mode, so they fight as hard as they can to not add any new customers. Also, it's hard to get permission to install cable or equipment and usually has to be piggy-backed on other work. That means you can have neighborhoods like the one where I grew-up that had cable in 1983 (IIRC), but my house two blocks away from where I grew-up didn't get it until 1997 when the city power company replaced their power poles in my backyard. My neighbor still doesn't have cable, but the guy on his other side has it after the city did sewer work in about 2005 that ended at his house before getting to my neighbor's. Cable coverage is spotty.

      The city should require the cable monopolies to provide service to everyone they can in their monopoly areas.

    6. Re:I'd be excited too, if Comcast lost my address by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or worse, they offer service to part of your building, but not all of it! In my building, they put amps in the equipment rooms in the first three floors, but not the fourth or fifth floors. The COA (condo owners association) hired a lawyer to get service for everyone, and Comcast said that was all they could support without upgrading their box outside the building, which the city of Seattle wouldn't allow them to do. So now, we have tacky TV cables run along the outside of the building in several places to pirate cable. Add-in the extension cords where people are stealing power from the laundry room in the basement so they can run an air conditioner since our tiny 30A electrical service per unit just isn't big enough, and it looks third-world.

    7. Re:I'd be excited too, if Comcast lost my address by Qzukk · · Score: 1

      The city should require the cable monopolies to provide service to everyone they can in their monopoly areas

      It's the city blocking it (or at least was, I see all sorts of articles about the mayor THINKING about changing Rule 2-2009, but I haven't seen a single one about it actually being changed).

      In order to install new telecom cabinets, 60% of the OWNERS (not the person renting the house, whatever guy in Florida or China or wherever who owns it) of the buildings within 100 feet of the cabinet has to approve the construction, and nonresponders are considered "No" votes.

      Seattle is weird.

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    8. Re:I'd be excited too, if Comcast lost my address by Bender+Unit+22 · · Score: 1

      I think the amount of money you give, puts you in a bracket where they assume that you would like to recieve that sort of thing or maybe give more.
      When I were looking through my budget to cut expenses( I dropped cable TV among other things), and halved what I gave to charity, the letters stopped.

    9. Re:I'd be excited too, if Comcast lost my address by flappinbooger · · Score: 1

      I haven't been a subscriber in 8 years and I get something in the mail from Comcast.... Every. Single. Day.

      I know sending junk mail costs next to nothing, but maybe if they step it down a notch they can save a few dollars.

      There is a local cable TV/Internet provider here called Mediacom. I had them once because it was the only real option. I once talked to a regional manager from Comcast and asked them why they don't buy Mediacom and put them out of their misery.

      The answer? Mediacom is too screwed up to buy and they tried. How screwed up do you have to be to not be buyable by Comcast??? Sheesh.

      Mediacom gave me an unsolicited call one day selling their business internet bundle service. They didn't realize that I at one time had their "residential" service.

      I informed the poor sap that

      1) I've HAD your service and it was slow and unreliable and WAY overpriced
      2) I've got fiber optic now, I will never change to anything else, and I tell everyone how awesome it is and
      3) I WOULD RATHER HAVE A TIN CAN AND A STRING THAN USE YOUR CRAPPY SERVICE (I literally said this to the poor guy)

      I still get the junk mail from them tho.

      --
      Flappinbooger isn't my real name
    10. Re:I'd be excited too, if Comcast lost my address by DuckDodgers · · Score: 1

      Cut the poor sap a break. I figure 99% of the evil at Comcast (or Mediacom, or AT&T, etc...) lives at upper management and above. The rank and file employees are just trying to pay the rent. I don't yell at anyone at Comcast on the phone, or even complain. Whatever problems I have come from someone who would never bother to speak with an actual customer.

    11. Re:I'd be excited too, if Comcast lost my address by flappinbooger · · Score: 1

      Cut the poor sap a break. I figure 99% of the evil at Comcast (or Mediacom, or AT&T, etc...) lives at upper management and above. The rank and file employees are just trying to pay the rent. I don't yell at anyone at Comcast on the phone, or even complain. Whatever problems I have come from someone who would never bother to speak with an actual customer.

      good point. I don't disagree with you.

      Perhaps I had a fit of PTSD from such horrible service and performance of Mediacom.

      At peak usefulness time, namely the 5pm to 11pm EST window, it was often sub 1.5 Mbps. This meant that, for example, youtube would not play. I know a guy who documented this and kept calling them and they kept comping him a months bill. He eventually went to DSL that was, on paper, slower, but in effect, much much faster.

      Comcast itself isn't THAT bad, it's much much better than Mediacom. It is, however, about 95% reliable. It goes down regularly, even their "business class" service. But when it is up, it is banging fast. They certainly do invest in their infrastructure. It is a good value in speed until it isn't (price creep).

      I think the only way to get a good deal with Comcast is to sign up, get the low rate for 1st year, then cancel and go to DSL for a year, then go back to Comcast and get the low rate. I know someone who does this, and it works.

      --
      Flappinbooger isn't my real name
    12. Re:I'd be excited too, if Comcast lost my address by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The city should require the cable monopolies to provide service to everyone they can in their monopoly areas

      It's the city blocking it...

      It is the city blocking it. I've been head of my HOA on an off for the past thirteen years, and we've been fighting that entire time to get cable to everyone in the neighborhood. During that time, the city hasn't allowed a single new connection. That is why it is important to make it illegal for Comcast to not offer service in their monopoly areas here in Seattle. If the fine costs them more than a lawyer would to fight the city, then we have a chance of one day getting cable. As it stands now, it's cheaper to lose money for customers you can't service than it is to fight the city. We need to back them into a corner where they have to fight back.

    13. Re:I'd be excited too, if Comcast lost my address by nitehawk214 · · Score: 1

      I also got on some list that thinks I am over 65. (Sad story, was because my mom's last address was my house right before she died. Even though she wasn't retirement age either. We have the same last name, so...) So, I get AARP cards, hearing aid advertisements, medical scams, and pretty much every form of insurance scam junk mail constantly.

      You would not believe the number of people trying to scam old people. Especially ones they think have just become a widow/widower.

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    14. Re:I'd be excited too, if Comcast lost my address by DuckDodgers · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry your Mediacom bandwidth and reliability has been horrendous. As I said, our experience with Comcast bandwidth and reliability has been uniformly excellent. It's just the billing and similar that has been awful - and of course their monopoly/cartel tactics.

      There is no DSL available at my house, so I can't use the swap tactics to get a better price.

  2. Annual Cycle by EndlessNameless · · Score: 1

    If there is an annual cycle where they tend to lose and gain subscribers at certain times of the year, then this makes sense.

    I would be happy too if my down season was less pronounced than normal.

    The article alone doesn't provide enough information to justify the snarky headline.

    Fortunately, Comcast is a shitty enough company that they earn the snark simply by continuing to exist.

    --

    ---
    According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
  3. And they're more than happy to charge more too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I pay as much now for my 100mbps cripplingly asymmetric broadband, owning my own cable modem, as I used to for cable TV alone.

  4. We call this Wall Street-ese... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    A high-flying stock missed the quarterly earnings by a penny per share and the share price plunged 50% in after market trading.

    Translation: Stock analysts are dicks.

    1. Re:We call this Wall Street-ese... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Translation: Stock analysts are dicks.

      Hysterical and irrational ones to boot.

    2. Re:We call this Wall Street-ese... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      But easy to replace with your average magic-8-ball.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  5. Numbers are easy to manipulate by Cristofori42 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They pretty much force the TV subscription on you these days. They pretty much forced a TV subscription on me even though I'm an Internet-only user since it's actually cheaper to have the cable package than the Internet package alone. I haven't even opened the cable box they sent me.

    --
    "Is that dad? Either that or Batman's really let himself go."
    1. Re:Numbers are easy to manipulate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Second this. Exact same thing happened to me - $79 internet only vs throw in cable for $89 or something. My set top boxes have'nt been switched on since last football season.

      Kinda explains why they lost lower number of clients.

    2. Re:Numbers are easy to manipulate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They just want the subscriber numbers even if you take the most basic package that nets them nothing and loses money in discount.

      Just like magazines use various tactics to up their circulation numbers just to be able to jackup advertising rates.

    3. Re:Numbers are easy to manipulate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mine's $74.99 for just internet or $64.99 for internet and TV. Which one do you think I chose?

    4. Re:Numbers are easy to manipulate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I guess I am missing something, but 79 certainly seems cheaper that 89. That's how they get you, you say hey the cost for two is 45 each, but the cost for one is 79, so two is a better deal. This is NOT CORRECT. That 10 dollar package is likely furthermore just to local over the air plus some shitty religious channels anyway. Maybe QVC so you can spend even more money on things you don't need.

      Do yourself a favor, and drop the TV, yeah paying $79 just for internet blows, however there are some fun things that go along with this, there is no TV 'fees' there is no tax on internet only accounts, and you are still saving $120 / year. All around wins.

      Fuck cable.

    5. Re:Numbers are easy to manipulate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's your bill after tax?

    6. Re:Numbers are easy to manipulate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just keep an eye on it in 12 months or whenever it is scheduled to shoot up to like $150 or something.

    7. Re:Numbers are easy to manipulate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In France basically every internet offer is called "a box" and comes with TV. You can't escape it, that's part of the deal.

    8. Re:Numbers are easy to manipulate by DuckDodgers · · Score: 1

      Agreed. With your Comcast internet bill, it has two parts: internet and modem rental fee (if any). With the television bill they will bury you in bullshit. "Your channel package changed." "The introductory rate expired." "We reduced your rate on the channel package $12 but our DVR service charge increased $14." "We added a special Fuck You, Customer Fee to your bill this month."

      Where I live, Comcast is the only high speed internet option. The next time I move, I think I'll ask the seller to purchased two different high speed internet connections for the home and demonstrate both for me. That way I can at least play two vendors off against each other for service and pricing. If the seller can't do that, I'm not interested.

      As an aside, I have a tip for anyone else stuck with Comcast: I can't speak for the rest of their coverage area, but near me the branch office staff are fast and competent.

    9. Re:Numbers are easy to manipulate by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      I asked some friends once why they had Comcast. They said its cable service sucked, they said its internet service sucked, they said its phone service sucked, but they used it because bundled together the price wasn't too bad. Ringing endorsement!

      Anyway, I don't have cable or cable internet. I went with AT&T. I think $50 for 12mbps, slower than Comcast for that price, but at least it's not Comcast.

    10. Re:Numbers are easy to manipulate by DuckDodgers · · Score: 1

      Comcast has a terrible reputation for reliability, but I've had three brief service outages in fifteen years and I live comfortably outside the closest city. So their service - internet, television, phone - has been rock solid when I used them.

      Their sales and billing department are pure evil. They have to know they're pure evil. Every piece of junk mail I get from them has both "Existing customers only" and "New customers only" in the same paragraph of fine print, and I have to believe it's an intentional weasel play so that they can argue that any particular deal they offered didn't apply to the person who just got an unexpectedly large bill.

  6. FORCED BUNDLES by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They raised prices across all subscribers on Internet. It is the worst rated company ever for a reason.

  7. Why VZ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1) my aunt is on Comcast and her bill is f#@%ed up 9 out of 12 months... And her experience appears to be the rule rather than the exception
    2) implies Comcast Internet is faster than anyone by comparing to *DSL*!!!!
    3) because we are not so stupid that we need to have a voice remote to do a stoopid search!
    4) do you really need more reasons?

  8. spring by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Trumpcast has released their second quarter results and they are happy to announce that they lost 4,000 TV subscribers in the last three months. Why are they so happy to announce such a loss? Because, compared to the same time last year where they lost 69,000 TV subscribers, the loss this year is much better for them. Trumpcast said in a statement to investors that "video customers net losses improved to 4,000, the best second quarter result in over 10 years." That Trumperist reports: "That means that for the most than a decade, the best Trumpcast can do in April to June of every year is to lose only 4,000 TV subscribers. At this time last year, Trumpcast reported 22.3 million TV subscribers, and at the same time this year, they report roughly 22.3 million TV subscribers. The major driver of increased subscriptions comes, as you'd guess, from broadband. Trumpcast reports an increase of 220,000 broadband customers in the second quarter which, in the overall growth of the company, entirely offsets a lost of 4,000 TV viewers."

  9. Remember when...? by camperdave · · Score: 2

    Remember when they where gaining subscribers because of Lost?

    --
    When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    1. Re:Remember when...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't, because like Lost, it was probably just a dream...

  10. FCC to save Cable TV by Dorianny · · Score: 2

    Even with its tricks of increasing the pricing of Internet only service so that the "Internet + TV package" looks like a great deal, they still can't keep people subscribed to Cable. A lot of people are simply fed up with the horrible Cable TV experience and simply don't want it at any price. The funny part is that the current proposal by the FCC to open up the CableBox to competition (something the Cable lobby has been fighting tooth-and-nail) would go a long way to improve the experience and possibly save the Cable TV Industry in the long run

    1. Re:FCC to save Cable TV by DuckDodgers · · Score: 2

      I don't want it to be saved. I hope Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon Prime bury the fuckers.

      I couldn't convince my wife to give up cable television, but two and a half years ago I finally convinced her to switch from Comcast to DirecTV. Our first two years at DirectTV were covered by a detailed contract, so I knew exactly what I was paying each month. Month 25 hits, and I get a bill for $107. Now, if anything I think the service cost of the first two years should be higher - they have to recoup the cost of equipment plus the travel time and installation labor costs. But no, the contracted price period is over so we're going to hope the customer is stupid and accepts prices higher than he paid Comcast.

      So now, thankfully, I have a Tivo and an HD antenna. I should have just built a MythTV box, but the Tivo is good enough and now some of their boxes (Roamio) don't carry a subscription fee. I'm never going back, I don't care how good the pricing is.

    2. Re:FCC to save Cable TV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who wants to deal with adding up a bill + box rental per box + dvr charge + local channel access fee + taxes + service reclamation fee + many more lines of taxes and surcharges..... Soon that 39.99 per month deal has become 70.00.... then the intro rate goes away and the raise it another $15.00 per month.

  11. Wonderful marketing strategy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    "We lost less than we did last year."

    That's like saying Clinton is not as bad as *That Other Guy*

    1. Re:Wonderful marketing strategy by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      It's more like "It doesn't look as good as it did yesterday, but it sure looks better than tomorrow!"

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  12. Really, not that interesting .... by brix · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Seriously, in other "news", Amazon sees a huge decline in revenue in Q1 every year ...

    Yes, Comcast, and just about every other related company (cable, IPTV, or satellite), loses subs every year in Q2, or at best sees fewer gains. People tend to move out of their houses in the spring, so that they can sell during the peak buying summer season, since families with children prefer not to move during the school year. And college students cancel their subscriptions when school ends in May or June (Q2) for the summer (even broadband, if they are living off campus). Typically, they gain the majority (or perhaps more, some years) of those subs back in Q3 or Q4; as evidenced by the "flat" year-over-year numbers.

    Yes, losing 4,000 subs in Q2 is something for Comcast to celebrate, because if history is any indication, that means that they are actually going to see positive growth for the year. But it's not all good news. It's entirely possible that history isn't an indication, and that the reason that fewer subs were lost in Q2 this year was because there are fewer students subscribing in the first place. And that means that these subs won't reappear in the fall, if that's the case. I can't tell for certain, but it's a possibility.

    1. Re:Really, not that interesting .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you're reading more sarcasm than is present in the article

      Yeah, celebrating over losing 4000 customers seems a bit silly, and it worth a laugh or two ... but cable TV is going the way of the dodo. I expect a permanent steady decline in subscribers until cables is completely gone, or relegated to a niche product.

      For a company the size of comcast, losing 4000 subs is basically a plateau. So they're celebrating the fact that the might be relevant for just a teeny bit longer. Yay them.

    2. Re:Really, not that interesting .... by DuckDodgers · · Score: 1

      As many other people have already said, Comcast is artificially boosting its cable subscriber numbers by bundling. It's currently cheaper for me to buy internet plus television from them than it is to just buy internet.

      Of course, it's partly a bait and switch scam. I can pay $80 for 75/5 internet or $65 for 75/5 internet plus television. But if I get the television, I'll probably want DVR service and that includes an equipment rental fee and a monthly service fee, and those push the price above $80. Still, I'm thinking of signing up for television for the price discount and then just leaving the TV equipment in a box.

    3. Re:Really, not that interesting .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, having your best Q2 sub result in 10 years *IS* worth celebrating.

      It's pretty easy to say "cable sux bro", but do you really have any concept of what Comcast is?

      Comcast is the largest cable company, second largest paytv company, largest home internet provider, 3rd largest telephone provider, own NBC, Universal, and most of the sources of local sports around the country.

      Yes, they are facing a challenge in terms of streaming tv, broadband providers, and internet telophy, but they are well equipped to meet those challenges, and if they were smart about it, well equipped to pivot to that challenge. Just one example - one of the major reasons many people don't "cut the cord" is because there is no truly good source of local sports available... except from comcast.

      They are gonna be relevant a lot longer than you will be.

    4. Re:Really, not that interesting .... by antifoidulus · · Score: 1

      Sigh, is it too much to ask that you fucking read the summary?

      Why are they so happy to announce such a loss? Because, compared to the same time last year where they lost 69,000 TV subscribers, the loss this year is much better for them. (emphasis mine)

      --
      Monstar L
  13. Internet + TV is cheaper from Comcast by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I just talked to Comcast yesterday. Internet + TV is cheaper than just Internet, especially with their "threaten to cancel every 12 months so you keep the low price" promotional deals. It doesn't make sense to drop the basic TV if you need Comcast Internet. The TV service you get is pretty much just the same as local OTA except with much lower quality SD channels (where the OTA is really nice HD).

  14. This is just the beginning, Comcast by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your very expensive cable offering, with all those commercials and all those channels that most people couldn't care less about, more and more people will cut the cable. Cut down on commercials, start offering a la carte subscriptions, and improve your customer service, and people will come back to you. Otherwise, contemplate the inexorable decline of your current business model.

  15. Second I get 100 Gbps service in Seattle by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    I'm out of there.

    Just saying. Already bought an HDTV antenna, so it's sayonara, Comcast.

    Knowing my high school classmates in BC get 200 Mbps for $20 a month makes me furious.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    1. Re:Second I get 100 Gbps service in Seattle by Strider- · · Score: 2

      Knowing my high school classmates in BC get 200 Mbps for $20 a month makes me furious.

      They're lying, or in one of a few very specific buildings... the rest of us suffer with plans as bad as what's south of the border, or worse.

      --
      ...si hoc legere nimium eruditionis habes...
    2. Re:Second I get 100 Gbps service in Seattle by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

      The ones I'm referring to just signed up for them in Burnaby and Vancouver. Still cheaper than $220 from Comcast for lower speeds.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    3. Re:Second I get 100 Gbps service in Seattle by jratcliffe · · Score: 1

      100Gbps service? Are you planning on running an ISP with a couple hundred thousand customers out of your house?

    4. Re:Second I get 100 Gbps service in Seattle by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

      100Gbps service? Are you planning on running an ISP with a couple hundred thousand customers out of your house?

      It's none of your business what I want to do.

      But Seattle is the home of tech startups, after all.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    5. Re:Second I get 100 Gbps service in Seattle by jratcliffe · · Score: 1

      If you happen to live in a major data center, 100Gbps service will cost you $20k/month at the very least. Are you sure you didn't mean 1Gbps service?

  16. Take it from someone who knows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    I worked at USPS and I can confirm that Comcast is on a whole different level than anyone else when it comes to sending junk mail, in measures of both frequency and address coverage.

    The best measure you had that a house was empty was when they would get no mail other than Comcast junk.

    I remember on one block on my very first route there was a tiny old empty house behind some trees back by an alley... if it weren't for Comcast junk making me go out of my way to look to see if such an address actually existed, I never would have noticed that hidden house. :P

    Trust me, your mailman gets no joy from having to shove all that junk in your box.

    1. Re:Take it from someone who knows by nitehawk214 · · Score: 1

      It must be somewhat demoralizing knowing just how much of a % junk mail makes up of your routes.

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
  17. So In Other Words... by Danilushka · · Score: 0

    with TV subscriptions in decline, customers who only use Comcast for internet broadband connectivity can expect to be milked all the more to keep Comcast executive's paychecks fat.

  18. Ban same company offering connectivity and content by iamacat · · Score: 2

    Even if Comcast remains a natural monopoly, it will not be able to push it's expensive TV packages riddles with ads and worthless filler channels. Speeds and rates can then be addressed with regulation and services like Sling will compete on price and quality.

  19. Comcast internet all I use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Comcast tried to sell me TV service several times. Offering teaser rates to get you signed up. I finally caved and tried TV but only because I got a bump to Blast internet speed. Well they sent me a pathetic tuner the size of an old VCR. I didn't even have a shelf big enough for it. The quality was far worse allowing only a RF output not even composite and certainly not HDTV. My small TV antenna in the garage gave digital HDTV for free! I sent the tuner back, and can understand better why people drop basic cable.

  20. If you can antenna... by speedlaw · · Score: 2

    do it. I have about $200 worth of antenna wire and splitters feeding four sets. All get networks and PBS. Cablevision jacked me $10 per month for no TV, but after raising the bill $6 per month for sports I don't watch, and $8 per month per box to decrypt a signal THEY decided to encrypt, I am still way ahead. My Tivos are well amortized, but for $40 you can get a Homeworx/Mediasonic box and add a $60 Hard Drive, and for one expense of $100 once you get basic VCR function. If you can't put up an antenna, or you are too far for what you can put up, I understand...but if you can, a bunch of wire in the air for a one time expense is the ultimate bargain.

    1. Re: If you can antenna... by Miamicanes · · Score: 2

      Better yet, buy a HDHomeRun (the HDHR3-US goes for about $50 on eBay) and pair it with an old laptop (dualcore, 4 gigs, preferably a ssd, win 7 pro or 8 pro) and external 2-8tb hard drive to use with Windows Media Center. Then, you'll have a DVR that's at least as good as any you could get from Comcast, and won't have to pay a thing for DVR guide service (if Microsoft discontinues the free guide data, there's a company that charges $25/year and integrated with WMC).

      Better yet, if you miss cable tv channels, you can buy a HDHR3-CC for about $65 on eBay and use the same gear as your Comcast DVR. You don't even have to give up the OTA, since the HDHR is networked... You can configure windows media center to show the OTA channels you prefer instead of Comcast's channels, as well as show ONLY the Comcast channels you actually get and/or like... 2 OTA channels at once from the hdhr3-us, and 3 cable channels at once from the hdhr3-cc. You can even map Comcast's ota channels to other numbers and record THEM if you want to record a third ota channel sometime.

      Best of all, Comcast will credit you around $8/month if you have ONLY a cablecard and no boxes from them, and regardless of how many tvs you network to it (the xbox 360 is dirt cheap at Gamestop, and makes the perfect media center extender, even if you don't actually care about gaming) since as far as Comcast's billing department is concerned, you have "a single outlet". Also, no monthly dvr rental or guide service fees.

      But wait! There's STILL MORE... If you cancel Comcast after the promo rates expire, you'll STILL have perpetual access to everything you recorded on the dvr. So you can cancel for a month or two, then re-subscribe once you're eligible again, and your DVR will barely even notice. This is a HUGE benefit, because it deprives Comcast of their ability to hold the threat of losing all your DVR'ed shows over your head.

      I just hope wish the fcc would hurry up and force DirecTV, Dish, and Uverse to implement a cablecard-like alternative too. It's not rocket science... If you already have the dish from past service or Uverse internet, it's basically just encrypted DVB-S or IP multicast. It won't work with current hardware, but making it work wouldn't be NEARLY as hard as DirecTV, Dish, and AT&T claim it would be, because they already have a working model for authorization and decryption using consumer-owned hardware.

  21. Sounds familiar? by eaglesrule · · Score: 1

    Make high-speed data plans slightly cheaper as long as basic cable is included. Claim subscribers as 'video customers'. "Success!"

    MS makes the latest Win10 upgrade nag full-screen, after a long campaign of dirty tricks forcing win7 users to upgrade. "Tens of millions of people switched to Windows 10! Success!"

  22. They'll soo lose a few more in my neighborhood... by warm_warmer · · Score: 1

    My condo association just signed papers to get Fiber access in each unit before the end of the year. While I can't speak for the rest of the community, Comcast will definitely lose me as a customer, and almost certainly a few others as well.

    Fiber would have to cost a LOT more than Comcast before I'd consider NOT switching.

  23. Cut my service by 2/3 yesterday by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

    From 197 (not even near a full package) to $70 with tax.

    That's $50 for 25mb plus 10 for basic cable & hbo plus 10 for taxes.

    It's a one year deal with a contract that runs 1 year (I was very specific- no 1 year deals with 2 year contracts).

    Can't tell the difference.

    That's about 1500 per year. That's a ski trip. maybe 2 with buds. Or it's a new car every decade.

    --
    She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
  24. Frontier's loss is Comcast's gain by obtuse · · Score: 1

    Frontier's takeover of FIOS has something to do with this too. Frontier is another traditional cable company (whose business model is to drive customers away as quickly as possible) and the churn is driving people to Comcast. I know several who made that choice quickly after Frontier took over.

    --
    Assembly is the reverse of disassembly.
  25. Cup Half Empty? by dcw3 · · Score: 1

    220,000 new customers - 4000 existing customers = 216,000 more clients. Where's the downside for them exactly?

    --
    Just another day in Paradise
  26. Re:Ban same company offering connectivity and cont by RatherBeAnonymous · · Score: 1

    It's a bit of a stretch to call Comcast a natural monopoly. Yes, it's true that the physical wiring installation is a barrier for entry for new competitors, but not an insurmountable one. Many areas of the US have multiple cable offerings. Not my area, but many. A natural monopoly occurs when a single company out-competes all competitors, or where profits are so slim that the remaining entities have to merge just to reduce overhead to survive. For most regions where a single cable company holds local monopoly status, the incumbent gained that status by making deals with the local governments to keep all competitors out.

    Now that every region with enough population to support a cable company has an incumbent, the existing cable companies seem to avoid competing with each other. Look at what happened when Comcast and Time Warner were looking to merge a couple years ago years ago. They argued that the merger would not reduce competition because the two barely compete for local markets. (http://money.cnn.com/2014/02/13/technology/comcast-time-warner-antitrust/) No, I would not call Comcast a "natural monopoly". It's better described as a cartel member. (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cartel)

  27. Re:Ban same company offering connectivity and cont by iamacat · · Score: 1

    I would argue that natural monopoly is when multiple competing companies would result in unacceptably higher cost of service. Like if there are 3 competing cable providers with equal market share, a customer of one of them ends up paying for cost of laying and maintaining cable to two other homes in case they switch. So regulated utility model is best to ensure good treatment of customers while controlling costs.