Comcast: Allowing Us To Get Immensely, Inconceivably, Ridiculously Massive Is 'Pro Consumer'
from the now-witness-the-fire-power-of-this-fully-armed-and-operational-battle-station dept
Comcast has confirmed reports that the company will be acquiring Time Warner Cable in a deal estimated to be worth around $45 billion. With the ink on their NBC acquisition only just dry to the touch, the deal will tack 8 million broadband subscribers onto the company's existing 22 million broadband customers. Comcast is already the nation's largest fixed-line broadband company, largest cable TV provider, and third largest fixed-line phone company -- and that's before you include the company's NBC or other assets. From a geographical perspective the deal makes sense; Time Warner Cable filling in Comcast's coverage gaps and in particular giving Comcast the prized markets of Los Angeles and New York City, where Time Warner Cable has traditionally under-performed.The problem is less of market share (the two companies didn't compete directly) but one of consolidated power; allowing one, massive company to control both the content and the conduit to your home across the vast majority of the country -- then just hoping they'll play nice with smaller competitors, startups and consumers. Never worry, insists Comcast, who states that they'll divest a few of these markets (most likely to failed Time Warner Cable suitor Charter Communications) so that they won't be quite as absurdly massive as they might have been.
In a memo (pdf) paving the way for what's sure to be a tough attempt at regulatory approval, Comcast's David Cohen trots out Google Fiber as an ambiguous example of why vertical integration and market dominance concerns no longer apply:
"In today’s market, with national telephone and satellite competitors growing substantially, with Google having launched its 1 GB Google Fiber offering in a number of markets across the country, and consumers having more choice of pay TV providers than ever before, Comcast believes that there can be no justification for denying the company the additional scale that will help it compete more effectively."Except, well, not. Google Fiber is only available in two actually-deployed markets currently, and despite being a great price-disruptive product in those locations, likely won't be expanding beyond more than a handful of cities. As for "growing" national telephone competitors, both AT&T and Verizon are in the process of gutting regulations across dozens of states so they can begin hanging up on unwanted DSL and phone customers they don't want to upgrade. They're effectively ceding all competition on the fixed-line front in half of their markets so they can focus on wireless, signing co-marketing deals with cable directing those users to what will be their last fixed-line choice for broadband.
That choice is going to be Comcast, and with less competition than ever across huge swaths of the United States, you can be certain the company will be bringing their planned usage caps to your neck of the woods before long -- impacting consumers, startups and small businesses across the country. Again, no sweat argues Comcast. In a "public interest benefit summary," (pdf) Comcast again states you don't have to worry about any of this, because, well, Google Fiber and Netflix. Or something like that:
"A number of online businesses like Apple, Google, Amazon, Hulu, Netflix, and a host of smaller companies are entering the online video space and trying to position themselves as competitors. While we view online businesses as complementary to our business, previous antitrust concerns about further cable consolidation are truly antiquated in light of today’s marketplace realities."Right, because there's no way that a massive company like Comcast with that kind of lobbying power and market leverage could find it easier than ever to squeeze these companies through restrictive content licensing deals, regulatory capture, or usage caps, right? And oh, just a reminder Comcast, you own Hulu, and alongside other broadcast owners have worked hard to ensure it never disrupts the legacy TV apple cart. All in all, Comcast would prefer you not worry your pretty little head about any of this stuff as we wait to see whether new FCC boss Tom Wheeler (formerly a lobbyist for the cable industry) approves Comcast's latest adorable growth spurt.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: broadband, cable, television
Companies: comcast, time warner cable
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Petition to resurrect Teddy Roosevelt
If anyone was good at keeping the bloated corporations in line, T.R. was the guy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Petition to resurrect Teddy Roosevelt
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Maybe this isn't such a bad thing?
Of course, that would involve leadership in this country who actually gives a crap about the people and what we want.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Maybe this isn't such a bad thing?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Maybe this isn't such a bad thing?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Maybe this isn't such a bad thing?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deregulation_of_the_Texas_electricity_market
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Maybe this isn't such a bad thing?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Maybe this isn't such a bad thing?
This is 2014. They are too big to fail.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Whitehouse.gov Petition
For what it's worth ... a Whitehouse.gov petition to Stop the Comcast/TimeWarner Cable merger and require more competition in the cable industry
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/stop-comcasttimewarner-cable-merger-and-require-mo re-competition-cable-industry/ym52vbd4
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[/half-expecting a certain anti-Google troll to pop up, hoping he doesn't though]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Uh... about that NUMBER... that number is one. Sure they will be launching two others but as of now those are still under construction so you can't really say they have launched them yet, not honestly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
We should take a poll: Who will be the next government official -supposedly regulating Comcast- to accept a job offer from Comcast?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: revolving door should be harnessed as renewable energy
FCC's Meredith Baker hopped beds so fast that it was pretty obvious she must have been negotiating for her new job (at the mega-corporation she was helping create) at the same time as they were negotiating for her approval of the merger. A "package-deal" in which all sides benefited -- except the public, of course.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I think I had better start saving so I can afford the move to Kansas City.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The telcos can then compete against one another for providing individuals with hardware hookups to the network. Although at that point honestly I might just be OK with having the telcos replaced with a state level agency
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: local governments buy out the infrastructure from the telcos
Internet service could be handled similarly: one company to provide local service and infrastructure, another company to tie-into that local network and work outward.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: local governments buy out the infrastructure from the telcos
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why eat up bandwidth streaming Netflix, and pay for higher tier "data cap limits", when streaming Comcast On Demand content doesn't count against your "data cap limit".
Sound familiar Verizon? You wankers!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Its Official
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Its Official
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Disturbing on multiple levels..
The weakness to ComCast will be a 2 meter wide exhaust port...which happens to be no larger than a wamp rat...
The merger with TimeWarner was a matter of time when TimeWarner decided to buy out most of Northern Ohio's ComCast contracts..what was left over was given to Cox...What this means is that it's certified proof of an illegal form of an Ologopoly between the two companies....I'll be willing to bet that the 2 meter exhaust port we are looking for is in the e-mails between the two companies during that time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Come in Susan Crawford
* Net Neutrality both in the network and to its edges
* investment in increasing speeds of the core infrastructure
* Separating out the current vertical integration between content & wires
* putting catastrophic penalties in place for violations of the above, or in support of legislation to undermine competitors and municipal alternatives
Somehow, I don't think the FCC or DOJ are smart enough to go close. About the best result is to decline to merger, or put a precondition to spin out the infrastructure and content sides to separate trading entities...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
*quickly and quietly cancels Hulu subscription* Cunts don't deserve my money.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
crap
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I've been thinking that law is obsolete for some time, but perhaps it really just needs to be expanded to include ISPs. Perhaps it should be illegal to be a content provider and an internet service provider, as companies cannot be trusted to treat other content providers fairly.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Paramount_Pictures,_Inc.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Who are we kidding?
If the ATT/T-Mobile merger didn't go through, how the f**k could this possibly get approved? It's 2x the ATT/TMO deal ($45B vs. I think $23B).
Maybe Com-ass-t gets better hookers for their FCC flunkies than ATT did. God forbid this actually gets approved.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Getting SCR_WED NO MATTER WHAT
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Here's a deal for Comcast...
Let me buy access to Netflix from "Bob's Hometown Cable Internet" company, and Comcast can suck up all the old TV companies it wants.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]