HardOCP News
[H] News
- Joined
- Dec 31, 1969
- Messages
- 0
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Comcast Really, Really Doesn't Like Netflix
- Thread starter HardOCP News
- Start date
mullet
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2004
- Messages
- 2,017
Customers Really, Really Doesn't Like Comcast.
King Icewind
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2008
- Messages
- 5,442
I just moved into a new area with the "best" option being Comcast. It took about 3 weeks to get full Internet speed for whatever reason. It is double the speed where I was before. So that's nice at least. Otherwise I haven't had any issues..
Concast, the most hated company in America, has a reputation worse than Netflix's? Bring out the fainting couches and smelling salts, what a shock!
leeleatherwood
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2011
- Messages
- 1,582
Grahamkracka
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2008
- Messages
- 1,052
Wait till they start increasing your bill every 6 months without notifying you.
Heh.
AT&T did that to me...Now I'm with WOW (wide open west, relatively small provider), and it's great. The installers dropped a new line, and routed it very nicely. Clean, professional installation job. US based customer support, and the CSRs actually seem to care. Only know that much from when I called to activate my own cable modem, service has been rock solid.
sfsuphysics
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2007
- Messages
- 15,992
Comcast is the "best" option here, however I still stick with DSL if that tells you how much I feel about them. And no it's not AT&T DSL.
amddragonpc
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2012
- Messages
- 1,996
If worst comes to worst, I'll just dump Comcast and go to RCN. I really don't need cable TV. Those PPV events, I'll just go to the bar. I watch a handful of shows and I can get them on Amazon.
D
Deleted member 88227
Guest
Well damn man give them some time. Sheesh.
Once I heard about Comcast possibly/wanting/whatever TWC who was my previous provider I went looking for a replacement. Luckily for me I found a local TeleCo that offers Fiber to my home. Hello 80/30Mbps for $45 (out of pocket) a month. Although next month I am moving to a new location. I made damn certain that it's in the service area of the fiber I get. Now I'll be paying $70+ (taxes and fees) for Gigabit Fiber.
Screw the Cable Companies.
Another of my favorites:
"Even if larger MVPDs sometimes receive better pricing, there is no reason to think that the proposed transaction will incrementally increase Comcast’s buying power. Comcast is already the largest MVPD in the country, and its internal documents confirm that obtaining improvements in programming rates was not a driving factor of the deal, although other significant efficiencies it expected to achieve were important."
Translation: Comcast is already huge, is already doing this, and the deal won't make a difference.
"If the transaction did provide some marginal improvement in Comcast’s programming costs, that would benefit consumers. Programming is typically sold on a per-subscriber basis, making it a marginal cost. It is well-settled that reductions in marginal costs provide procompetitive benefits. Economic literature and simple logic confirm that if Comcast pays less for programming, its subscribers will benefit, especially given the highly competitive MVPD market."
Can someone explain to me how Comcast extorting money from Netflix benefited consumers? I didn't see any corresponding rate decreases. I know that wasn't a rate decrease for content per se, but the net effect to Comcast was the same. Seriously, this document is a gem. I could go on all day.
"Even if larger MVPDs sometimes receive better pricing, there is no reason to think that the proposed transaction will incrementally increase Comcast’s buying power. Comcast is already the largest MVPD in the country, and its internal documents confirm that obtaining improvements in programming rates was not a driving factor of the deal, although other significant efficiencies it expected to achieve were important."
Translation: Comcast is already huge, is already doing this, and the deal won't make a difference.
"If the transaction did provide some marginal improvement in Comcast’s programming costs, that would benefit consumers. Programming is typically sold on a per-subscriber basis, making it a marginal cost. It is well-settled that reductions in marginal costs provide procompetitive benefits. Economic literature and simple logic confirm that if Comcast pays less for programming, its subscribers will benefit, especially given the highly competitive MVPD market."
Can someone explain to me how Comcast extorting money from Netflix benefited consumers? I didn't see any corresponding rate decreases. I know that wasn't a rate decrease for content per se, but the net effect to Comcast was the same. Seriously, this document is a gem. I could go on all day.
And yet customers really really don't care and will still go to them and stay with them. Because the price is better, even if only for a year, they will jump around for the better price.
By AT&T DSL I assume you mean VDSL2+. Of course not knowing what type of speeds you have as options all I can say is that by self there is nothing wrong with DSL. I know many people can't get it out of their head that DSL doesn't equal slow 100% of the time just like fiber doesn't equal fast 100% of the time. They get stuck in the which weighs more a ton of feathers or a ton of bricks and keep arguing that the ton of bricks weigh more. I know of places that are 100% fiber to the home, and yet the max speed you can get is 3Mbps with standard speeds being 1.5Mbps. Makes no sense to me why one would do that, but that is what they offered years ago via the original ADSL standard. and never decided to change that when they made the jump to fiber. By the same accord, today we turned up a customer on DSL at 50Mbps down, 6 Mbps up. Sure that isn't a gig but it also isn't that horrible of speed either.
flashoverride
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2013
- Messages
- 496
Why all the hate for reflexive hate for Comcast?
Reading through the paper, seems pretty standard boilerplate stuff. Comcast makes more money on your broadband connection than they do on the cable package, so.... why would they intentionally degrade all your stuff?
As for that little tidbit about Netflix, Cogent and Level 3 all denying they were degrading service, I'd just ask this: who has more incentive to degrade service in this case - Comcast, who stands to potentially lose subscribers to their broadband services (which are more lucrative than their video programming), or Netflix - who can gain leverage in interconnection negotiations and possibly forgo paying at all? Cogent and Level 3 are both Tier 1 ISPs so their beef is that they shouldn't be forced to pay interconnects even though their traffic load was highly asymmetrical (because they decided to undercut CDNs by acting like CDNs). Only Netflix could control caching servers to the end customer, so to Cogent and Level 3 it may have just looked like another day at the office while Netflix was routing your requests to some amiga in an old server room in basement 2, sub-level 3. What's funny is the purported proof was that with VPNs people could get different results - well, duh! When you change the routing it can go around potential choke-points.
I get it: Netflix is cheap so we love them, and Comcast is expensive (and they do have really, really crappy customer service) so we hate them. But maybe don't let simple dislike for the messenger get in the way of understanding the message.
Reading through the paper, seems pretty standard boilerplate stuff. Comcast makes more money on your broadband connection than they do on the cable package, so.... why would they intentionally degrade all your stuff?
As for that little tidbit about Netflix, Cogent and Level 3 all denying they were degrading service, I'd just ask this: who has more incentive to degrade service in this case - Comcast, who stands to potentially lose subscribers to their broadband services (which are more lucrative than their video programming), or Netflix - who can gain leverage in interconnection negotiations and possibly forgo paying at all? Cogent and Level 3 are both Tier 1 ISPs so their beef is that they shouldn't be forced to pay interconnects even though their traffic load was highly asymmetrical (because they decided to undercut CDNs by acting like CDNs). Only Netflix could control caching servers to the end customer, so to Cogent and Level 3 it may have just looked like another day at the office while Netflix was routing your requests to some amiga in an old server room in basement 2, sub-level 3. What's funny is the purported proof was that with VPNs people could get different results - well, duh! When you change the routing it can go around potential choke-points.
I get it: Netflix is cheap so we love them, and Comcast is expensive (and they do have really, really crappy customer service) so we hate them. But maybe don't let simple dislike for the messenger get in the way of understanding the message.
It's an open secret in my area that Concast is paying my city's officials a lot of money to forget to discuss granting competing cable companies their cable TV franchises.
I got lucky. For a brief period of time, the competitor who already had the internet and phone franchise for this city decided "Screw it, we have the cable TV franchise for the county, we'll just start installing anyway." So my condo complex got the competitor's cable TV, and I jumped on it because they had a lot better channel lineup (all of the Showtime channels instead of just 2 of them, just for one example) and lower costs, and oh yeah, Concast had me using a huge crackerbox DVR box with a GUI straight out of the 1990s where you had to reboot the DVR into a secret menu if you wanted to turn closed captioning on or off. Apparently Concast got wind of what the competitor was doing and spread around some more money because the competitor had to stop. I still get to keep the competitor's cable TV, though.
So, nope, the hate is not reflexive on my part.
That is a great comedy, I hope it gets picked up for a movie deal.
You have the reversed some. If Netflix's service sucks they lose customers as they will go somewhere else to stream. So they need to keep their services working as best as possible. Comcast on the other end can claim to the customer that their tier is too slow and bump them up to higher speeds, while also strong arming Netflix into paying them money for them to allow their traffic through. Comcast is not going to lose customers because their Netflix streaming is slow. If you can show that everything other than Netflix is slow they will leave just that because after all the issue isn't with your service then it is with Netflix. They benefit as they can push their services more then to their customers if their stuff works faster and better. You do that all the time in this industry. "I am sorry that you are having trouble with that service / item from company X, did you know though that we also have a service / item to do that. I would be more than happy to set you up so that you can use our service / item." You try to convince your customers that going with your bundle will be better for them as they will have less issues. You try to convince them that getting your hardware instead of buying it on their own will be better for them. I had to laugh years ago when on of the sat tv companies (think it was dish) were claiming how their service was the better option because cable goes out during storms were at satellite tv always work no matter what the weather.
B00nie
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2012
- Messages
- 9,327
I recently dumped land line altogether and went full LTE. Same price than before per month but ping lowered from 40 to 20 and speed increased from 16/1 to 140/40. When LTE advanced gets to my area the theoretic max should bump to 300/50 (I already have a Cat6 modem). Can't wait.
What are you data caps?
flashoverride
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2013
- Messages
- 496
Where? Hulu? Amazon Prime? Man, it's $8 a month. For $8 you're willing to put up with a lot more than if it costs $120 a month. Knock it off. Hulu and Amazon Prime don't have anywhere near the brand strength or library as Netflix does and you know it.
Let me ask you: what's cheaper: building your own CDN, paying a real actual CDN to deliver your content with good QoS (Akamai), or funding an ad campaign against someone everyone already hates.
Did that ever happen? Because it doesn't matter what your line speed to your local node is when the congestion is at an interconnect upstream.
You mean paying interconnect fees to Comcast and cutting out the Cogent and Level 3 middlemen. That REMOVES a layer of routing, improving service to the end customer.
Comcast HAS lost subscribers to many different things, and in part due to the whole Netflix kerfuffle. Just read around in these comment boards - people have left Comcast specifically because of the Netflix thing. So you are simply wrong.
What are you trying to say here?
Except they don't make as much money. They make more money on broadband than they do on content.
So what? Do they put a gun to your head and make you buy it?
flashoverride
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2013
- Messages
- 496
So... what you are talking about is illegal. Are there minutes of the city meetings, records of votes?
Sounds like your problem isn't just Comcast, it's corrupt ass city officials. Maybe you should vote them out.
Records of what? The subject never comes up. They're too busy doing other stuff that's more important.
Guess who donates to the elections of the replacements. Go to the media! Oh wait, guess who owns one of the big three media channels? Hm, you know, fighting $68 billion of yearly revenue over your local choice in cable TV providers is a bit difficult. Might want to start fighting that merger with Time/Warner, which is strongly supported by certain political organizations which, curiously enough, are viewed quite favorably by many in this forum.
http://xfinitytv.comcast.net/ondemand/
As I said they want you to use THEIR service. Hulu and the rest are not Comcast. They would push their on demand.
You bring up interconnects but you miss one thing here. Netflix pays their ISPs for connections. Comcast's customers pay for theirs. Whatever happens between Comcast and the other ISPs at the top has zero to do with Netflix. Both ends have already paid for their services. That aside if the issue was a lack of bandwidth between Comcast and Level 3 or anyone else you would notice an issue with more than just Netflix. As you pointed out you are talking about top tier 1 ISPs. The fact that a single site is the only thing that has issues shows that a single site is being filtered out to be made to have issues.
To answer your question about if that happens, yes places do use issues to upsell customers on better plans even if it won't help. You can call to complain about the temp lose of stations to your plan due to rebroadcasting right fee arguments and the cable / sat company will try to use that to their advantage and offer to upgrade you to a higher package so that you can get more content since you now lost some.
What I was trying to say was that you can show blame on the other company. Somebody calls to complain about their speed because Netflix isn't working. You have them do a speed test and show them what type of speed they are getting, you question if everything else works fine. In the end you have them convinced that the issue isn't with your service but is with Netflix. Even if you have caused the issue. Same as anything else, you have an issue with somebody but you convince the customer that the issue is on the other end. As I was told in a class by people who deal with Verizon on a regular basis, "the problem left our end just fine".
When you push your broadband AND content you make more than only pushing one or the other.
And no, nobody puts a gun to your head. But it works as a way to get people to buy things. I work in this field, I work for a Telco / ISP. I know what others do. Places tell you that you have to use their cable modem, their router then they charge you rental fees. If you call into some places and are not using their equipment they refuse to give you any help and force you to instead buy their stuff if you want them to help you get your service working.
I'm sorry, are you apologizing for a company that is literally attempting to purchase the death of net neutrality? You must be kidding me.
FrozenSteel
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2011
- Messages
- 193
Yea, when I purchase my new house, the number 1 thing on my list is to make sure its not a Comcast service area... I mean when it comes down to people avoiding areas to live in with certain cable providers, it just tells you what a messed up system we really have. I hope one day we can skip all the duopoly shenanigans and have some real choices 
everything is in the quotes.
Stopped reading after this. Maybe 0.0002% of people actually canceled because of Netflix throttling and you know it. Dont waste our time with such disingenuous arguments.
Concast has a massive conflict of interest. It isn't just two businesses getting a better deal on each other. Comcast's hundred of channels of crap make them an incredible amount of money. So they have an ulterior motive to fuck with Netflix's business model even if it means failing to deliver to consumers the services they've paid for already.
MrCaffeineX
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2011
- Messages
- 1,604
This is part of the problem: if Comcast were screwing you by intentionally degrading some aspect of your service, for example, by limiting the allowable bandwidth for you to stream Netflix, where else are you going to go? Even with Comcast throttling your access to certain content, the fact would remain that your connection with Comcast would still likely be faster than any DSL/3G/4G/Satellite alternative(s) that may or may not be available to you. Fiber is great, but has a very small market penetration rate, unless things have drastically changed in recent months, leaving most people with no higher-quality alternatives.
People hate Comcast for varying reasons, citing terrible customer service most of the time, but there is also the aspect of Comcast being such a dominant power in the cable industry that they can, and sometimes do, start to behave like a monopoly. When a person or company gets that big and starts throwing their weight around, as is arguably being done in the case of ongoing "negotiations" between Netflix/Comcast, there will be a group of people that will automatically side with David because Goliath is a big meanie.
I remember a lot of hate toward Cablevision when they were my ISP. They would constantly have some station(s) blacked out because they were negotiating a different rate and their phone service was admittedly dodgy back in the day. Their customer service was hit or miss, but what do you expect when you're paying people $9/hour to be doused in other people's grief for 8 to 10 hours a day? The Internet service was exceptional for me the entire time that I had it and the price never went up during the 6+ years that I was with them. I dropped the TV and phone services as soon as the promotional rate was up, but the cable modem was always the same.
I have Time Warner now and there is no other alternative where I currently live. I've been on a promotional plan for 2.5 years, that will expire in May of next year. When it does, I'll probably drop the TV and phone services because I expect the rates to go up significantly based upon what my neighbors are paying for their service packages. I don't like the fact that their marketing strategy calls for long-term customers to get a shittier deal than new customers, but I can make do without everything except the Internet service. I get to vote with my wallet and drop what I do not see as a good value in terms of how much I will use the service versus its price.
I suspect that this is part of why we are seeing such backlash toward Comcast as well. They are obviously aware that many of the services that they offer are now being considered unnecessary because they can be replaced with some manner of online service. The kicking and screaming ensures that the regulators pay enough attention to them that all sides can come out claiming some small victory after some grand compromise is reached. This makes them look good in the eyes of the public while not dramatically altering their business structure or profitability and the world keeps spinning.
ZLoth
Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2010
- Messages
- 854
Lets see here....
Comcast owns a major broadcast network.
Comcast owns a major video provider which, in turn, provides high-speed Internet.
Comcast owns Universal Studios
Comcast owns or has a interest in TV stations in New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, Philadelphia, San Jose, Dallas/Fort Worth, Washington, Miami, and San Diego.
Comcast owns or has a interest in cable channels Bravo, Chiller, CNBC, MSNBC, SciFi, Sleuth, E!, Golf Channel, and USA Network.
Comcast has a 32 percent interest in Hulu.
Gee, why would Comcast tolerate any competition from alternative providers such as Netflix?
Comcast owns a major broadcast network.
Comcast owns a major video provider which, in turn, provides high-speed Internet.
Comcast owns Universal Studios
Comcast owns or has a interest in TV stations in New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, Philadelphia, San Jose, Dallas/Fort Worth, Washington, Miami, and San Diego.
Comcast owns or has a interest in cable channels Bravo, Chiller, CNBC, MSNBC, SciFi, Sleuth, E!, Golf Channel, and USA Network.
Comcast has a 32 percent interest in Hulu.
Gee, why would Comcast tolerate any competition from alternative providers such as Netflix?
Dr. Righteous
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2007
- Messages
- 3,163
YEP. Wait till they eliminate your cable plan and the only notification is most of your channels will just go away.
So you can call them and they will tell you "OH, that plan has been discontinued, the new plan is .........." (at double the cost).
I have internet only with Comcast. I refuse to pay $100 extra a month for TV when there are only 2 or 3 channels I would ever watch. The rest is GARBAGE; content suited for the welfare set.
flashoverride
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2013
- Messages
- 496
Please define Net Neutrality, and what you think it means.
+
Because comcrap knows that if it's an area they have subscribers, there is no competition. Like the people are going to leave and pay the same price for much slower DSL (if they even have that option). So your completely wrong, netflix is the only one with something to lose here. Especially considering netflix is a direct competitor with comcasts real business as content provider (HA!), not ISP.
Sp33dFr33k
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2002
- Messages
- 2,481
Outside of our Government I can't think of another entity that is so out of touch with reality.
It is most definitely corrupt officials that I would love to vote out. Too bad the combination of gerrymandering and stupid/uninformed public makes that pretty much impossible..... Yea that's not going to happen.
Competition is the only true solution to the problem though.
If it's anything like FiOS, they notify you. They send you some random email updating you on terms and agreements. Most all people overlook it and/or see the legalese in it and just close it. And that's it. No pop up on your TV that terms have changed. Nothing on your bill that they changed rates except one possibly noticing it's different now. I also like how they continue to rape people with these damned rental fee's on their piece of crap set to boxes/DVR's and then proceed to change rental fees in the middle of a contract, just because they can. Short of a cable card, there isn't a choice in most cases and cable cards are too technical for most average people to deal with. I've got no love for the ISP/TV providers at this point. Not that I have a ton for Netflix, which is just another large publicly traded company attempting to cater to it's share holders very likely.
sfsuphysics
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2007
- Messages
- 15,992
No I mean ADSL2+, I live in a major west coast city near Silicon Valley, and we don't have those boxes on the street for their Uverse package. I love my DSL provider, but the fact of the matter is my distance (or line quality?) I am maxed out at about 6Mbps down and about 768k up. The company is starting to switch over some customers to VDSL2+, however that is extremely distance limited, and unless AT&T puts up their boxes (so they can be leased out) I don't see my speed changing any on this front, they might soon offer pair bonding but it seems silly that I pay nearly twice as much (I think it'll be somewhere in the 70/month range) for 12Mbps
I'd be happy as snot for that speed, but I'm sure that customer was really close to a CO/access point.