news-record.com

NEWS

Congressman vows to stop Time Warner's new pricing plan

Article
Comments (12)

Wednesday, April 8, 2009

(Updated 2:07 pm)

Staff Reports

A congressman from New York is vowing to stop Time Warner's plan to charge customers by their Internet usage.

In a statement released Tuesday, U.S. Rep. Eric Massa (D-N.Y.) said he will be "taking a leadership role in stopping this outrageous, job killing initiative."

Massa's district includes Rochester, N.Y. - one of four test markets for Time Warner’s metered pricing; the others are the Triad and the Texas cities of Austin and San Antonio.

"With limited choices in broadband providers, and virtual monopolies in many market areas, I view this as nothing more than a large corporation making a move to force customers into paying more money," Massa stated in a news release. "Just at a time when access to information is driving our economic recovery, Time Warner is moving to stagnate the 21st century technology needed to rebuild America."

Time Warner is expected to do away with flat-rate pricing in the fall in the Triad, capping customers’ Internet use at 10, 20, 30 or 40 gigabytes of uploads/downloads per month. Customers will pay an extra $1 per gigabyte when going over their cap.

All Triad Time Warner customers will be affected, including those getting service through providers such as EarthLink who use Time Warner’s cable. Existing customers will have to choose a capped plan at the end of current contracts.

more online

MediaPost: Congressman: Time's Up For Time Warner Metered Billing

Statement from Landel Hobbs, COO of Time Warner Cable

Comments

View Comments

This article has been closed to new comments. Comments are generally closed after 14 days. However, comments may be closed earlier at the discretion of the News & Record.

Inappropriate content? Please report abuse.

Illiterati

April 8, 2009 - 9:04 am EDT

That's great for Rochester, NY, but what are the Triad leaders doing about it?

Norm*

April 8, 2009 - 9:29 am EDT

Leaders?. . .that's one of those titles that has to be earned. What about the Chancellors at A&T and UNCG, as well as our local school board and superintendent? Online courses just became very expensive. How about the local chamber of commerce? This isn't just about downloading movies, this is our ability to access information, not just keep ourselves entertained. This is as important of a public "utility" as insurance, medical licensing, electricity, tattoo parlors (regulated, right?) any of them. They exist to provide a service, not just make a profit. A bit of regulation seems to be needed.

mthale

April 8, 2009 - 4:17 pm EDT

Thank you for your opinion norm & willhammer.
I agree with your points. Many areas do not have much choice but to use TWC. My last residence in Winston-Salem forced me into TWC. I had cable internet with no usage caps, paying a decent $35-$40 a month. I use the internet considerably & my past roomates enjoyed the many entities of the internet as well. So who was I to complain?? I was very pleased with their services. And I *was* considering signing back up with TWC when I move again to Greensboro. It is very unlikely now, unless they drop the new plan. I'll pass on being shackled within a free world.

Don't you think this is a little backwards?? TWC offered cable internet with no usage caps, then takes a step back and announces that they are now going to limit the amount of internet you can use based on how much money you have to spend. And at ridiculously low usage caps at that!! (and when you go over your usage, then you spend the big bucks $$$) This is wrong on so many levels. It's dirty & it's greedy. It's a devastating step backward in our technological and societal advances. Businesses ought to be better than this. I am truly disgusted & devastated.

I agree that everyone who feels outraged by this slap in the face should contact both legislators AND competition. TWC might as well have declared war. Bad business is bad for business.

weatherwithyou33

April 8, 2009 - 9:32 am EDT

While I think not having usage caps would be great, I don't think he'll get very far in stopping them. I think most people's complaint is the extremely low usage rates that TWC is looking to offer. It has been said that Comcast, who already has usage caps in place, caps customers at 250GB for about $55 a month. AT&T is looking to test usage caps and they are looking at 100GB for about $50 a month. These caps seem fairly reasonable and only punish very high bandwidth users. Then comes TWC who is offering 40GB at $55 a month. This is just a slap in the face to TWC customers. The internet is being geared as a one stop shop for all media, media that takes bandwidth, don't punish the end user for the future you helped to create. What we need is more competition. Is anyone from Verizon, Comcast or AT&T seeing the opportunity here yet? Caps or no caps we want to have choices and a fiber based network option.

JParker

April 8, 2009 - 9:34 am EDT

I have contacted Rep. Brad Miller in regards to this and recommend that everyone that is concerned about getting hosed by TWC do the same. It may also be a good idea to contact Kay Hagan in the Senate and Pricey Harrison in Raleigh as well.

weatherwithyou33

April 8, 2009 - 10:08 am EDT

This is certainly a good idea but I would also encourage people to contact other service providers about bringing fiber and cable services to our market. Even if you really like your TWC service you will benefit from lower pricing with added market competition.

histrion

April 8, 2009 - 10:14 am EDT

I think demanding legislative action is a bit over the top. If TW were the only broadband provider in the area, I could see it, but they aren't. If you don't like Time Warner's scheme, a.) write to Time Warner and tell them you're leaving their service within 6 months unless they reconsider the new pricing scheme and b.) if they don't back off before the fall, move to AT&T. I think the populists are getting a little too cocky.

jrp1

April 8, 2009 - 10:28 am EDT

Keep in mind that TWC and AT&T were the only providers in Beaumont, TX where TWC did their first test. AT&T began to also test tiered-pricing in that market. There are hints that they may also go to this in other markets. I think they are waiting to see how TWC makes out with their roll-out before they make any changes..

My point is that, without some action or competition, AT&T may cap their service in this area as well.

Wilhammer

April 8, 2009 - 10:47 am EDT

Wrong. Our Congress is suppose to protect us from Monopolies and Greedy Corporatism. Of course, the Cable Franchise system created this mess to start with - the Triad, especially the rural Areas, really don't have a choice.

This needs to be stopped and every effort must be made to accommodate competition. End the Cable Franchise System. Use imminent domain if needed to open up the Time Warner infrastructure to other ISPs, similar to what was rightfully done to demonopolize telephone service in the 80s. Why did we back down from that model? Greedy large media conglomerates funding political campaigns and providing Pork. This is just one example of the endless corporate abuse of the American Citizen.

Being a populist is not a bad thing - I am definitely disgusted with 'conservative Republican free trade tyranny'.

Our economy is a wreck because we let Capitalism reign Supreme to its always logical end - Greed and Monopoly.

JParker

April 8, 2009 - 6:22 pm EDT

Comparing DSL to cable is a little disingenuous. If you are someone whose business relies on true high speed, then yes, TWC DOES have a monopoly. DSL is a whole lot faster than dialup, sure, but it is only an adequate replacement for true broadband if you are a home user with modest needs. Once again, TWC is not rolling this program out in places where competition actually exists. The market cannot self-regulate in this instance, so legislative regulation is needed.

Katbyrd

April 9, 2009 - 6:40 am EDT

I have been with TWC for a very long time, but if this comes to pass, I will definitely assess other provider options. TWC is NOT the only provider around, and they need to realize this. In this economy, this is the worst possible timing they could have chosen. What are they thinking.

erichberger

April 11, 2009 - 10:04 am EDT

How ironic that TimeWarner and the rest of the cable industry has resisted so strongly to concept of "pay for what you use" in regard to their TELEVISION PROGRAMMING pricing structure - yet here embraces the concept for internet service. For years, millions of americans have been splitting the bill paying for the entire tab regardless of whether they have watched at "steak or salad" (as the COO of T-W so "folksily" puts it) levels.

I say LET THEM adopt the "pay for what you use" policy for internet pricing. But make it contingent on a similar pricing policy for their TELEVISION PROGRAMMING where consumers pay on the basis or HOURS WATCHED, and not a flat monthly fee.