Comcast To Regulators: Data Caps? These? Nooo! These Are Just... Fuzzy Friendly Flexible Consumption Plans For Friends
from the friends-who-pay-more dept
A few weeks ago, Verizon Wireless introduced a new bandwidth throttling plan and tried to claim it wasn't throttling at all, but rather "network optimization," and now Ars Technica has the story of how Comcast is trying to spin its data caps as not being data caps at all. Instead, they're "flexible data consumption plans." Because flexible is fun. Of course, their definition of flexible may be different from yours and mine, because they're only "flexible" on Comcast's side in determining just what the caps are. Once you go over those "flexible" plans, you'll certainly be paying more. Just like a data cap. But, Comcast insists, it's no data cap.Comcast has been trying to make this argument for a while, even demanding a correction from GigaOm when it referred to these plans as data caps. However, now it's made this argument in a regulatory filing with the New York Public Service Commission in support of its merger with Time Warner Cable. In a section responding to the concerns that some have raised about the merger, Comcast attacks the worries about data caps head on:
First, Comcast does not have “data caps” today. Comcast announced almost two years ago that it was suspending enforcement of its prior 250 GB excessive usage cap and that it would instead be trialing different pricing and packaging options to evaluate options for subscribers – options that reflect evolving Internet usage and that are based on the desire to provide flexible consumption plans, including a plan that enables customers who want to use more data the option to pay more to do so as well as a plan for those who use less data the option to save some money. As has been well publicized for some time now – including through Comcast’s own website – these trials are ongoing and currently cover a small minority of customers. Some of these trials include a data usage plan that allows customers who use very little Internet each month to receive a discount on their service fee, and variations on a plan that provide customers with the ability to buy additional increments of usage if they exceed a base amount (starting at 300 GB) that is included with their service. As it turns out, only a very small percentage of Comcast customers in the trials go over 300 GB in any given month, so few customers see increased costs because of the data plans and Comcast has seen no evidence that the data plans discourage usage, which has generally continued to increase in and outside of the trial markets.In other words... Comcast is, in fact, testing a data cap. They just don't want you to call it that. Because it's flexible.
Jon Brodkin, over at Ars Technica, notes that the FCC's own working group on data caps -- which included a Comcast VP -- defines data caps in a way that makes it clear that Comcast's plans are, in fact, data caps.
A cap is rarely, if ever, a hard and fast ceiling on a customer's ability to access the network. A cap is usually better understood as a threshold after which the user is subject to a different set of conditions for access, such as movement to a higher priced tier, different product or different speeds. As discussed below, another way of thinking of this is as the boundary between different ‘tiers' of service.Though, there is a footnote (perhaps added at the behest of the Comcast VP) that Comcast "does not have any caps in place but is trialing two UBP [usage-based pricing] plans."
Either way, the point is pretty clear. To basically everyone who doesn't work for a giant broadband provider, Comcast is testing data caps. Time Warner Cable has tested them in the past. And, furthermore, as we wrote about back in May, in candid moments Comcast will admit that it wants to roll those data caps out to everyone within a few years. Having Time Warner Cable under its belt would certainly help on that front...
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, data caps
Companies: comcast, time warner cable
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
I am so glad...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I am so glad...
To be honest, most people that I know seldom have anything nice to say about TWC's customer service. I might be the exception, but they have never failed to impress me with good, quick, helpful responses. If just half of what I read about Comcast is true, I imagine my choices will be AT&T versus TWC/Comcast. :((
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The only caps that make any sense is caps on the size of the pipe itself (the speed). If they have issues at peak times they can make tiers that give discounts for limited speeds at those times (ie: you get 100mbit but during peak times this is reduced to 50 to accommodate everybody equally). Sure the best solution would be to expand the network but this would be a much more reasonable way to distribute the load without shafting your customers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I'm on Time Warner so I don't worry about caps from them. But, if Comcast gets approval for the merger, it is rumored that my area (Columbus, OH) will either end up in the spin off company or under Charter. Charter has caps and isn't afraid to use them. I don't know what will happen with the spin off company. I'm not excited about either prospect honestly.
If Comcast wins approval for the merger, I will seriously consider switching to WOW as I believe it is available in my area. Verizon FIOS isn't available in my area and I'm not interested in AT&T U-Verse which is available and isn't as fast as what I have with Time Warner.
I'm not excited at all about this merger talk.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Fortunately, I live in the UK and our ISPs have finally started to learn that ripping us off loses them customers. Most unlimited plans are now actually unlimited. In the past unlimited meant a hidden cap (under the guise of a fair use policy) which could result in suspension of your account. I was suspended by two separate ISPs under their FUPs in the past - after getting warned to reduce my usage they still refused to tell me what the upper limit was!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Indeed, the U.S. offers incumbent business more protection from competition than most other countries and so the U.S. is falling behind in ... everything (like broadband speeds, manufacturing, etc...)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Not being a Comcast user, I still have a reason to bitch because other ISPs would like to follow Comcast's example.
How I use my bandwidth is none of your, or Comcast's business.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Glad to know the only people actually using the internet are criminals. Glad to know that in the future I'll never need more. But really glad to know the my Google Fiber imposes no limits on my data usage.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
This is just more BS on why Comcast should never be allowed to merge with Time Warner. Comcast has been very active in the news while the merger consideration is going on. I've heard more BS being attempted to be spun into what's good for the customer while not actually being so than I've heard from ISPs in a long time. It tells me Comcast wants this really bad.
What's good for Comcast is good for none of it's customers. For an internet company that has terrible customer service combining with another internet company not known for it's customer service, this is a terrible idea. Comcast is out for one thing, how much it can be allowed to get away with in gouging the customer. Making them a bigger bully isn't going to help.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: kenichi tanaka
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Why? Comcast is one of, if not the, worst ISPs around. They deserve every bit of the bitching.
"Most customers don't even use a fraction of that data unless you're doing something illegal"
First, so what? That doesn't make this data cap business in any way reasonable. And it doesn't make Comcast's lying about data caps any better.
Second, lots and lots of people use large amounts of data without breaking the law. Bringing up illegal acitvities as some kind of justification for data caps is just plain stupid.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Comcast is a fucking joke of an ISP. If they were actually forced to compete they would go under, which is why they fight so hard to not to have to compete.
If someone drinks and drives it's the person's fault not the vehicle manufacturer, much like if someone abuses their internet for illegal means there's reprocussions for them. That however does not speak to the fact that Comcast plays bullshit games like "UP TO" 50mbps in their marketing materials while never actually providing that service. Or bullshit like "oh these, these aren't data caps....they're....data.....caps...."
But hey, keep on keepin' on with that whole comcast shill thing you have going on.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
ENGAGING REPORT BUTTON NOW.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I swear
Quite a clever way to get around restrictions, claim it isn't what it is and give it a fun new name.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I swear
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Between the lines...
What they don't mention is that they're eliminating the plans for those who want to continue to use the data they've always used and want to pay the same or less to do it
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
On the other hand, if a municipality tried this, that's obviously a data cap.
- FCC
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
In The Amount Of __ONE-HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS AND NO/100
$100,000
For __NOT A DUCK__
__COMCAST__
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
No no you misunderstand. It's flexable as in: "last month you used 30gb and the cap wa 4000; this month you used 130 and the cap was 10 you owe $100 in overages" ...
See flexible,
Your friends at ComCast (Castrating your communication since ???)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Old Bull Vs. Young Bull
What they meant to say....
– these trials are ongoing and currently cover screwing over a small minority of customers, before we roll the plan out and fuck'em all.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Flexible
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why?
Then why bother with the cap?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Flexible
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Flexible
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
They also give you a grace period of 3 months over and they supposedly tell you that they are doing so. But they do so over your comcast.net email account(that you don't check). Then when you try to go check the fact that they told you by logging and checking your comcast.net email account.... you find out that by default they delete all unread email after 45 days so they can't prove or disprove the fact that they actually notified you 3 times. And now since I average 600GiB a month they want me to pay $120 in overage fees.
I tried to call and have the fee removed because I claimed they never actually notified me that anything was happening and they hung up on me.
Horray for Comcast!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If after reacing the 200 GB or so the company would provide a slower connection (say 1 Mbit/s), that would be a flexible data service. But cutting access to 0 Mbit/s is a data service cap.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]