Comcast: Without Time Warner Cable, we can’t compete against Google, Netflix

Comcast says it has "one arm tied behind our back" on eve of Senate hearing.

Read the whole story

 

[Netguru]

This can only be bad for consumers no matter what Comcast says!

On another note, comcast says that 98.4% of households have access to "other broadband" providers. I don't have this so called access to any other broadband providers. I have a very slow dsl (centurylink) capped at 100 G/ mth or comcast. That's it.

I am pretty sure that the fact that these two companies don't compete, will be the reason that the merger unfortunately will go through.

Edit: another thought.

 

[Alyeska]

Its hard to believe Comcast when their pants are on fire. And that nose just keeps getting longer and longer.

 

[Morder Von Allem]

The fact that they don't compete against each other is part of the problem. Now a single company going to own the *major* markets.

 

[cmannes]

The "we don't compete" thing is funny. When I moved into the western burbs in the twin cities back in 2001, my provider was TWC.

A few years in, TWC & Comcast did a swap. So suddenly my provider became Comcast, and TWC wasn't available anymore.

Sure, they don't compete, because they're already working together to screw everyone.

 

[Deadlius]

How hard is it for them to compete when they're legally allowed to essentially block Netflix traffic by not upgrading their peering connections? They've already forced Netflix to pay them additional money for a more direct path to their customers... and now they want to claim that they "can't compete?" What a load of crap.

 

[carbonsx]

Good. In my mind, the ISPs should not be competing with the content providers...

 

[Facekhan]

They keep using that word, "compete". I don't think it means what Comcast thinks it means.

 

[guifa]

"Without Time Warner Cable, we can’t compete against Google, Netflix"

This is a problem because... ?

Nothing in the merger actually guarantees better service or prices, and nothing in the merger enables them to do something they can't already do above and beyond what Google, Netflix, et alia, offer. Let them compete and die off.

 

[Deleted member 14629]

You know, I would permit this merger if as part of it they were required to adhere to common carrier rules, and were never, ever allowed to lobby any level of government against other providers like Google or municipal internet coming into a market.

 

[fgoodwin]

I wonder if the FCC Merger Conditions will include anything related to peering and interconnection? If so, this could be a prelude to separate rules for peering and interconnection that could apply to all ISPs.

 

[Quisquis]

Their point about how they compete in different markets and as such their merger wouldn't reduce customer choice is a red herring. Their merger will allow them to use their market position as BY FAR the largest provider of internet services to end users to basically say to any website or web services provider "pay us to reach the last mile, or you're effectively not on the internet".

The fact that they can say that as opposed to "pay us to reach the last mile, or you're effectively not on the internet for ~half the population" like they can now, is a big part of what makes this unacceptable.

 

[sapphir8]

Ummm...Netflix doesn't compete with comcast overall. You don't see netflix triple play bundles. Google is highly limited and not even allowed in some municipalities by law.

I am a happy comcast subscriber (a rarity I'm sure), but I don't agree with the merger.

 

[DragonTHC]

arguing they need to acquire because if they don't, they'll no longer be a monopoly is just ludicrous.

It's offensive to consumers. It's blatant. When our lawmakers are terrified of angering the captains of industry, who is really in charge?

 

[axia777]

To bad Comcast, change with the times. Adapt or die. That is how a FREE MARKET WORKS. If Google Fiber kicks you asses that means that YOU SUCK.

carbonsx[/url]":26q8s5fs]Good. In my mind, the ISPs should not be competing with the content providers...

This too!!

 

[CTMike]

They have resisted being a "dumb pipe" as long as possible. Now, they want to monopolize the pipe and use content as leverage to turn the screws. What a sorry state of Internet access we have.

 

[Black Frost]

I think my brain melted trying to process that ridiculous claim. "We need to merge because Google is maybe but not really coming to places where one of the top two (but never both) ISP providers have a foothold. Also we need it to fight the guys who are literally paying us to let their streaming work right."

What is this.

 

[Terabitman]

Does no one at these hearing think that the current lack of competition between these two companies is a problem in itself? This will only make the current problems worse, not better. It's not enough for Comcast to turn a profit, they want to pound everyone else into the ground, and everyone knows Comcast doesn't give a crap about it's customers.
The reason Google Fiber is such a threat is because they actually offer good service at a reasonable price. Comcast has the money to compete on a technological/service level, they just don't want to. It's easier to just buy more market share.

 

[Facekhan]

The next step for Comcast is to just get their lobbyists to get a public right-of-way that just goes in front of every pair of eyeballs in "their" territory. If we want to see anything, we will pay them and all content creators will pay on the other end too.

 

[steelhand]

carbonsx[/url]":84dcnjlb]Good. In my mind, the ISPs should not be competing with the content providers...

Exactly! They're having their cake and eating it too.

"Give us money so your content can pass through our network"
"Wahhhh! We can't compete with their content."

You're either a content provider or a consumer of content, you should never be allowed to be both. It's a conflict of interest. I'm amazed that they're actually using this as an argument for the merger.

 

[grizzlyaddams]

Yes, if this merger went through I wouldn't even be able to get away from the terrible service and high prices of my cable provider by moving out of state.

 

[hubick]

Maybe Big Cable needs to trim some fat and scale their operations *down* to compete with Netflix and co, not up?

 

[snowman<ca>]

... and by compete I mean have unfair position of leverage

 

[Some Idiot]

Comcast and TWC should honor their subsidy commitments first. You know, the ones that were set out to improve the infrastructure to the home that haven't actually been attempted at all?

I mean, come on, Comcast! When you honor your commitments tot he public, then you can get what you want.

 

[CoolHwip92]

we can’t compete against Google, Netflix

Good. Comcast shouldn't be competing with either of those companies, which is part of the problem with ISP's. Netflix is purely content delivery, and Comcast should be providing bandwidth so customers can access Netflix, not competing and charging them money on top of what Comcast customers are paying. That's like UPS charging the sender and recipient of a package for shipping, sounds ridiculous, doesn't it? As far as Google, besides Google Fiber in a couple cities Comcast shouldn't be competing with them either.

 

[xme]

Comcast: Without Time Warner Cable, we can’t compete against Google, Netflix

And you can't compete with them with TWC either.... but that's the point isn't it? Remove consumer choice to force customers into your service and you don't *have* to compete.

Frankly the only thing I can see having television for any more is sports - everything else seems to be available al la carte elsewhere, for a competitive price.

 

[Gawain Lavers]

While that obviously doesn't make any sense, I'm surprised the document isn't just "ipsum lorem" after the headline. Everyone knows the contents are going to be nonsense, the only question is how many FCC commissioners they own.

 

[Danrarbc]

Netguru[/url]":egql67b1]This can only be bad for consumers no matter what Comcast says!

On another note, comcast says that 98.4% of households have access to "other broadband" providers. I don't have this so called access to any other broadband providers. I have a very slow dsl (centurylink) capped at 100 G/ mth or comcast. That's it.

I am pretty sure that the fact that these two companies don't compete, will be the reason that the merger unfortunately will go through.

Edit: another thought.

According to Comcast LTE counts as a broadband provider. Therefore 98.4% of households have a choice...

Absolutely laughable.

 

[carbonsx]

Graypanther[/url]":3om7dtaa]

carbonsx[/url]":3om7dtaa]Good. In my mind, the ISPs should not be competing with the content providers...

But.... They.... Are.... A.... content provider.. OOPS did I just point that out?

But.... They.... Should.... Not.... Be.... A.... content provider. That's my point.

 

[saru-kun]

Oh man. That's funny. I needed a good laugh this morning.

 

[Rommel102]

Fine, you can merge your content network with Time Warner to compete.

But...you must carve out your data network and make it a dump pipe network.

 

[moridinga]

Every time they say "Look, we don't currently compete in any local markets, so competition won't be reduced. Am I right?", I just want to scream out loud that "This is exactly the problem with you Comcast!". The map shows that they have elected (apparently in collusion with Time Warner and other cable companies) to NOT compete. The map shows that their behavior is anti-competeitive. The have chosen to maintain local monopolies in order to maximize profit and minimize the required investment. And now they want to just do that on a larger scale. Do their team of lawyers not see the giant hypocritical hole in this argument that they keep touting? Hey Comcast, if you want the customers in the areas currently served by Time Warner, go ahead and enter those markets and compete to get them!

Idiots.

 

[SFC]

By "compete" does he mean "force them to pay us for access to consumers"? Because outside of that, I'm not sure what the TWC acquisition is going to do. I hope Netflix, Amazon, and Google all get together and form a coalition to roll-out gigabit to the entire nation instead of the current pockets of access. It appears to be the only way we'll ever move forward as a country.

 

[brainchasm]

Jesus. I'm never leaving Las Vegas!

We have Cox, and...I'm...glad...?

(did I just say that?)

 

[ken27238]

Without Time Warner Cable, we can’t compete against Google, Netflix

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

You funny, Comcast.

 

[illuminar]

Netguru[/url]":20cqzyew]This can only be bad for consumers no matter what Comcast says!

On another note, comcast says that 98.4% of households have access to "other broadband" providers. I don't have this so called access to any other broadband providers. I have a very slow dsl (centurylink) capped at 100 G/ mth or comcast. That's it.

I am pretty sure that the fact that these two companies don't compete, will be the reason that the merger unfortunately will go through.

Edit: another thought.

They compete for content. And that should be the key point here. The fact that end customers don't overlap is moot. It's the fact that the merger will give them greater control over the content that's a critical issue here. Most in terms of programming buying power and in terms of content access to their internet infrastruture.

 

[SunnyD]

Verizon, AT&T, Sprint and T-Mo as a fixed home ISP...

Oh please oh please! I can haz 10GB caps for $75/month and $10 per 5GB overage rates plz?!

Here Comcast, why don't I just hand you my routing and ABA numbers. Would that make you happy?

 

[GhostRed]

Comcast: Without Time Warner Cable, we can’t compete against Google, Netflix

100%, irrefutable evidence that they simply don't get it: Comcast, you ignorant schmuck, you're NOT in competition with Google *or* Netflix.

You are a dumb pipe. Be a dump pipe.

Sit down, shut up and listen for a minute: All your customers want is a dumb pipe. Those who don't are the ones who don't already subscribe to your broadband internet because THEY DON'T USE THE INTERNET, or get it from another provider (if there's an option) but the other 80% of your client base want one thing and one thing only: a dumb pipe to serve them the content they want, the way they want it, on demand.

You aren't in competition with Google or Netflix. You are the means by which those services are accessed. Try to do a really good job at being *just* that, and you'll be very successful. Try to compete and you will fail.

*Edit* Comcast, I just want to remind you of the origin of the name "Google", which is googol, a 1 followed by 100 zeros. In the grand scheme of content and competition you are but a zero on the end of a very, very long trail of zeros.

Good companies usually started out doing something very different than what they ultimately became successful doing; this is known as diversifying and adapting. Bad companies stick with a failing business model and stubbornly bury themselves in their pride, and predictably collapse under its weight.

Learn to adapt or die.

 

[TechStyle1982]

I have 2 landline choices for internet currently- Comcast and CenturyLink. Both completely suck, but CenturyLink at 7Mbps for $30 or Comcast at 25Mbps for $35 left me with no actual choice. Portland is just up the road from me, and if Google Fiber moves in I'm there in a heartbeat. Comcast is full of it when they say they can't compete without TWC. It is a grab for more ability to screw over the consumer.