Time Warner Cable lays out broadband capping plans, says $150 for "unlimited" use
By Joshua Topolsky 
posted Apr 10th 2009 10:27AM
posted Apr 10th 2009 10:27AM
In a move seemingly designed to further our frustrations with broadband providers, Time Warner Cable has soft-announced an "unlimited" package once its new data caps go into place... for an affordable $150 monthly charge. Responding to criticism over the company's plans to start capping usage and charging for overages, Landel Hobbs clarified the provider's stance, letting users know that the capping would be limited to a $75 ceiling, thus (when paired with its top tier plan) would provide "virtually unlimited" usage. Virtually unlimited. Here's a rundown of what the COO proposes:- A limited package for "light users" at 1GB/month, 768KB down / 128KB up, with overage charges of $2/GB/month.
- Road Runner Lite, Basic, Standard, and Turbo packages at 10GB / 20GB / 40GB / and 60GB caps, respectively, and overage charges at $1/GB/month.
- A big daddy, 100GB Turbo package at $75/month with overage fees of $1/GB, which, when coupled with that magic threshold of $75 in charges, becomes the "unlimited" plan.
[Via eWeek]
Glad I have FiOS, the 20Mb/20Mb static IP business service @ $139.99/mo suits me nicely.
Sorry to top-post but I use DD-WRT router firmware that tracks my internet usage. I basically use 200gb / month with spikes of 270gb when I get crazy. (download and upload combined)
What do I do? well, netflix basically. but I also download games and basically live off my computer. So virtually unlimited at 100gb is a woefully inadequate statement even at today's standards let alone by this time next year when everyone starts streaming HD content... or when my daughter grows up and wants a computer of her own.
Thank goodness comcast hasn't said anything about my downloading, they're all bark and no bite so far with their 250gb cap.
Shit I use 2GB a month on 3G on my friggin phone. I don't even want to think what I use broadband.
Apologies for slightly off-topic response to top post, but this needs to be seen. The trouble is, quite simply, that as we find new ways to use more and more bandwidth, yesterday's "outlier power-user torrent freak" turns into today's Joe Sixpack. HD video streams, OnLive's entire business model, hell the next patch for World of Warcraft alone is probably going to use a month's worth of their new "baseline" policy. Oh, you want to download the new Ubuntu 9.04 install DVD? Well, that just cost you about $10. Fully using that baseline 768 kb/s policy would let you do this practically overnight with absolutely no warning on how high overcharges have gotten, until the shock at the end of the month. Oh, and I hope you have a TiVo because Hulu and other such services are no longer going to be feasible with these connections.
Also, anybody checked their bandwidth usage for just normal surfing these days? Flash video ads everywhere, just look at this site for example! I bet that an avid Engadget user - without ad blocking software or using a RSS aggregator, refreshing the site itself - would blow over 1 GB per month. This crap will drive more people to block more ads, as they are PAYING TO VIEW THEM, and may consequently kill a lot of the ad-driven free service models.
These caps are disgusting and a mess. Like most cell phone companies, they're trying to get into the business model of "sell something hard to measure (bandwidth instead of minutes) and charge through the nose once they go over the cap." I bet there will be NO easy online monitoring tool to tell how much you've used of your month's bandwidth. If you're currently using Time Warner, please inundate their call centers saying in no uncertain terms that unless they rescind this ASAP, you will terminate service. If you don't have another broadband provider, band together with your similarly broadband-starved neighbors and create your own small ISP; it's not all that difficult and will end up far cheaper (and more importantly, actually usable in today's online environment) than how this will end up.
I'm kinda like Ken. I avg 3-5 GB per month on my mobile phone. Man this is stupid. However, it's just a round-a-bout way to push net neutrality.
I use DD-WRT as well. I have Netflix, a 360, PS3, Wii, and an HD-Tivo. We also have two desktops, a laptop, and an iPod touch in use as well. All of these are regularly used over the net. I stream from Netflix a few times a month. I download game demos on my consoles. I even buy games over Steam (Dawn of War 2 was my latest purchase.) and music from iTunes. I do not torrent anything.
What is my average usage?
Around 28GB a month.
There have been spikes of upwards of 40GB, but that is rare, and usually when I am reinstalling an OS, and all the patches need to be pulled down again, and when Steam needs to be reinstalled and all the games pulled down again. But it is rare. There are two of us living here and we are constantly on the net doing everything. I would consider myself a heavy user.
Amen to 20/20! I wonder how long before cable companies realize that broadcast television is rapidly being deprecated for streaming and VOD services. Verizon is on the right track; first big name to offer FTTP and they aren't capping it at all. It baffles me as to why cable companies continue to cling to their decedent services and shaft their customers rather than trying to meet consumer needs.
The people who 'abuse' cable connections and use upwards of 250GB in a month might be the minority now, but they won't be forever. More and more users will become savvy and realize that unlimited bandwidth is a necessity, it's inevitable. And when those users aren't willing to pay gouged prices, Big Red will be waiting around the corner to soak them up.
At the bottom of the article it has an email where you can send them feedback. ;-)
http://www.woai.com/content/news/newslinks/story/Time-Warner-moving-forward-on-usage-based-fees/8SdwGZ0T1U6l-rTKHPn5Mg.cspx
Same here. What a lot of people don't think about is that, with modern ads, you often get audio and video. Yes, you can often block them (unless you're trying to watch a video and the ad precedes it)--but that's a constant arms race.
Why are they doing this? I think it's because they can see the writing on the wall for traditional cable TV. Hulu, Netflix, YouTube, etc. You want a show or movie? It's a click away. In five years, everyone will be doing it--so they've elected to get their money by bleeding the customer rather than adapting.
I don't have any other options where I live. I'm going to have to go DSL--but I'd rather do that than be capped. I also canceled my cable TV with Time Warner and have switched to satellite. When I explained why, the rep said, "Well, if you don't mind my asking, where are you going to go?" I said, "I'd rather use AOL dialup than be manipulated. As soon as you guys put the caps in place, I'll figure something else out."
They're going to get some calls. The people who stay on who "don't know any better" are the same people who don't know how to secure their Wi-Fi connections. I hope TWC plans to expand the number of people working support.
I don't have TWC and now I never will. This is dumbest move I have ever heard of.
Note to all. Look into a local provider and/or someone else. They may not be able to provide as fast as Verizon's fastest, but they sure can give you what you need for a fraction of the price and probably without the caps.
STUPID STUPID TWC.... isn't Engadget owned by them?
Time Warner and Time Warner Cable are not related (anymore). TWC (Time Warner Cable) is not a TWC (Time Warner Company). Tricky, eh
Agreed. I thought for sure I would be no where near 100GB, so I looked at my usage. I thought a"ll I do is check email, surf, nothing major right." I forgot about my xbox, netflix, wii, VPN into work.
Time Warner, this model blows. Luckily I no longer live in a Time Warner market. What are telecommuters supposed to do? Dumb idea.
Because if you consistently go to $150 and higher, they will probably cut you off saying that you are reducing network performance for others.
If you have a good router, the tomato firmware can show bandwidth usage.
I have a problem with the terminology used. "Bandwidth" implies a rate, not an amount. In fact, I would probably prefer an arrangement where they have tiers for rates, and leave the amounts unlimited. Instead, they want to advertise the maximum rate, then charge for the amounts used. If they didn't have monopolies in lots of markets, this wouldn't fly.
Of course, what really matters to them is congestion, which is a product of rate * amount * number of simultaneous users. And why do they worry about congestion? Because it lets them avoid upgrading the infrastructure. Rather than build bigger pipes, they'd just like to say "look, the pipes are getting crowded; let's keep the supply constant and let the increase in demand drive up prices." This makes more sense to them than increasing the supply (building bigger pipes).
In the end, the only solution may be to increase competition.
Hell, CableOne here has a per frickin day limit ... it's just sad. I think it's just a little over 1300mb per day and then they cut your available bandwidth in half or more. I'm provisioned for just a little over 8mb/s down and 512kb/s up and when I cross that cap they automatically put me on the 3mb/s tier. You know, I hate Verizon's wireless business model but their landline infrastructure cannot be beat. Rot in Hades you greedy cable bastards!!
that's outrageous. you hit a college nerd house that has 4 computers playing wow, and a couple of xbox 360's playing online multiplayer and you'll shatter that in about 2 weeks.
Poor nerds... Don't we all feel sorry for them. Perhaps they will join the real world.
Hell, my non-nerd parents go through that in a week on occasion... they filled up 750gb of space in a month with downloads.
Pretty soon time warner is going to realize that they are loosing more customers than the cost of extra bandwidth costs, especially in areas where netflix online, itunes, or youtube addicts are found in large numbers. 100gb/month is two dozen full dvd streams or maybe twice that in netflix quality.
@basroil
But bandwidth costs for them is decreasing. At least that's what they claim in their SEC filing:
http://stopthecap.com/2009/04/10/why-is-time-warner-saying-costs-increasing-to-consumers-but-decreasing-to-stockholders/
FOREX, you obviously don't realize you're posting on Engadget.
Oh FOREX realizes where he is posting, just a troll. Vote down and move on
They are implementing this in upstate, NY at RIT where you find a lot of nerds doing what you said.
"Hell, my non-nerd parents go through that in a week on occasion... they filled up 750gb of space in a month with downloads."
WTF!? r u cereal?
what on earth did they download? i download 20gb a month so am i like a complete pimp if they are non nerds then?
just a question whats the most engadget readers have downloaded in a month?
ME.
Month: 20gb (plan gets shaped for me)
Day: 3.4gb
@Dave:
Month: 400GB
Day: 5GB
That's between 2 desktops that are powered on 24*7 and another laptop that's used for surfing the web.
Why doesnt time warner just hand over their sunscriber base to verizon. Heck verizon doesnt even have to lower prices or anything. Just let time warner and comcast self destruct.
Agreed. The cable industries are so paranoid about turning from a content distributor into a pure ISP, that pretty soon they're going to be neither.
I'll tell you, I am moving and I canceled a move to a complex where the only broadband available was TWC. I explained to the complex that TWC was the AOL of broadband, and I will not be locked into them. The agent had the owner call AT&T and got confirmation that DSL service from them would be available as well as UVerse.
I think it is time we start berating TWC users like we did AOL back in the 90s. Hopefully we will get to the point that no self-respecting internet user will allow themselves the stigma of subscribing to TWC. Soon they will be sending out CDs with "20 Gig Free" advertised
I just did the same thing while house shopping. If FIOS wasn't available, it wasn't on the list.
@gnaget - all fine unless, like me, you live in a Time Warner monopoly. They are my only choice for broadband. My alternative is dial up.
Agreed, if they are going to be so strict about this, is it going to go both ways? Will you get the advertised bandwidth? I have been in tree different neighborhoods with TWC and I always got half of the advertised bandwidth. Ummm... Cable companies confuse me. First they cripple everyone on the same node if one person triggers the throttle. Now they somehow have a way to monitor and control each subscriber's connection? The only reason I'm didn't get U-verse or FIOS was the price. But I guess now it makes sense to switch.
America Broadband initiative hopefully will KILL all monopolies. Australia is doing it right - put in the infrastructure for everyone, then, the government OWNS it. And keeps it. Then it leases it to ISPs. Monopolies gone forever.
The problem comes when the infrastructure is owned by a private company - then it's very expensive for other private companies to move in, and the monopoly-owning company has every motivation to gauge their customers for all they are worth. Witness America today.
@nikster: did you just say that once the government owns all of it, the monopolies are gone forever?
would you like a moment to rethink that idea?
Just called and dumped Time Warner for Internet and Cable, petitioning the owners assosication to see if we can get rid of TW and get a different provider in here.
And here Japan is getting 160Mbps for $60/month with no usage cap...
lol know anyone hiring computer animators over there?
Uhh, ever heard of Anime?
Damn, time to move to Japan!
Damn, and I thought UK was quite okay compared to the US. 10Mbit down/512k up on cable with Virgin Media, unlimited usage (almost, you get throttled for downloading over a gig in the evening), £20/mo which is less than $30/month.
These local cable monopolies have to go! They pretty much have free reign over anything they do.. there is not enough competition in areas and people usually have to suck up their greedy companies pricing because there is no alternative :(
I'm really not happy about this. I'm stuck using TWC, and would blow through most of those tiers in a week with all the Hulu/Netflix streaming, downloading games and patches on Steam and on other games, and all the software programs I like to try out. I'm already paying $60 something.
If there is any good news about this, there will be such an uproar over this that hopefully gov. will step in and make it so there are more options than just the local monopoly cable company on your pipe. I would say I'm looking forward to Wi-Max, but it will be a very long time before I could get that in this area.
Who do you think started the monopoly in the first place by assigning each cable/phone company a region.
Answer: The gov.
What oversteer said. All the gov. needs to do is end their regional monopolies.
The allocated area agreements actually made sense at the time they were constructed. No one knew if cable TV was going to be a success, but everyone wanted access to it. The only way to guarantee said access was to provide the cable company the incentive to spend the capital to lay the lines was to promise them exclusive rights to a given area. Largely the terms of those agreements are expiring (hitting the 50 year or 25 year exclusivity agreement) allowing other players in to the market. Concurrently new technology is being developed that allows one to enter that market without violating the exclusivity agreements i.e. FIOS.
It was a very good system at the time, and a brilliant way to get private industry to foot the bill for wiring a large portion of the country. However, the time for it to die has come, and the exclusivity agreements will continue to do so over the next few years.
You couldn't make cable cheap enough for me to get it ever again (over FIOS) but i still give credit to a business model that was very positive for a long period of time.
In the state of WI we recently passed a bill that sets up a group of people who "Okay" a cable provider to sell in the state. Once they are okayed, they are allowed to set up shop and sell their services ANYWHERE IN THE STATE. It was hailed as a great way to open up for competition and lower prices. I live in Madison and we've always had a single cable provider that was contracted to the city up until this was passed.
It's been a year. NOTHING HAS CHANGED.
Charter is still the only cable provider in Madison. We were expecting by this time we would be able to choose from Time Warner, Charter, Cox, etc. They all sell in the state, but only in specific cities. It's almost as if they have a pact to not go into each others markets.
I have a feeling if this was done on a national scale, the same thing would happen. Those stuck with a single cable company will still be stuck with them.
Let the exodus begin. AT&T, I'll be knocking...
I was just about to switch from AT&T to TW, but it looks like the lesser of two evils just swapped.
time warner makes me sick.
time warner can take those obscene prices and shove it
Of course you all know this is just to try and squash competing VOD streaming services and the future of IPTV. It's only in their best interests.
That is exactly it. TWC charges about $4 for a movie-on-demand assuming their crappy STB wants to actually work, Netflix gives me one dvd at a time and as many streaming online movies as I want for $9/month. If I watch three movies a month, Netflix is clearly a much better deal. However, if TWC puts bandwidth caps in place, they can at least make streaming Netflix more expensive vs TWC's VOD "service".
To me, it's clearly anti-competitive behavior from TWC.
Maybe we should get Netflix to get into the isp business...
Every company that has an Internet based model needs to be paying conveyance charges to the companies who laid out the backbone. It makes no sense at all for TWC to carry the cost burden for running an internet service, but companies like Netflix or Hulu walk in and use loads of the bandwidth for free. These companies are making money so they need to pay a stiff fee to the ISP's so they are properly compensated.
Imagine Netflix got to send the DVD's for free but you had to pay $2 for each first class mailing. Absurd, right?
I want to blame TWC for the cap, but I need to blame companies like Netflix who are being irresponsible and taking advantage of the companies providing the connection and hardware to carry the data..
@ Kwikit: How is Netflix being irresponsible? Everybody pays (NF, TWC, You, Me) for their access to the network. Now. Who buys more capacity TWC or Netflix? Who can get a better price per GB? The one who buys less, or the one who buys more?
I am so glad Cincinnati Bell rolled out Fiber to my apartment.
What part of Cincy do you live in?
Clifton. Cincinnati Bell and my apartment agency partnered up to bring their new FiOptics fiber TV and internet service to my (and 1600 other) apartments.
THIS SUCKS!
Oh yeah, and I came up with a new heavy data usage scenario that is 100% legal and could happen very easily:
You reformat your computer, make a little 2MB download that is a gateway for tons and tons of more data: Steam. Empire: Total War is a 16GB download alone- get a gamer looking to fill a 1TB HDD with all of their games, and you're looking at some serious data usage.
FUCKING BULLSHIT!
I have the RR standard, 40GB cap a month sure as hell is not enough, and I'm not planning on paying more.
Greedy bastards, time to switch ISP.
You'd think with all the crap that Comcast got for capping that others would stay away. But I guess money is more important to them than satisfied customers. RoadRunner is the only reason I haven't dropped Time Warner, their compressed-as-all-hell cable sucks.
FIOS FTW
I agree with the sentiment. But how does one be greedy and make tons of money without satisfying customers when you're in a service industry? This could only work for TWC because of the monopoly cable companies hold over their region. The solution to the problem is to petition for the end of regional monopolies for cable companies.
This is bull*poop*, TWC is the only effective high speed internet option available in the Milwaukee area with their established monopoly.
Agreed. I live in Greenfield, WI and while there's Uverse, I don't think I can go back to anything under 10/1 internet. i would die at 6/.77, but i just might have to if this ever moves here.
one of the apartments I used to live in had free provided internet. They capped us at 250megs per day. It kept track of every hour. So if you downloaded 200 megs at 3pm. And then downloaded 51 megs at 8pm. You would be shut down, until 3pm came around the next day and reset it to 0.
So your limited was based on the previous 24 hours. But their was an internal website that let you see what you've used. This was like 6 years ago. So 250 megs was still painful, but not as much as it would be today. PLaying Battlefield 1942 online usually used all 250 megs in an hour.
And if you had a large file to download, you could technically cheat the system by starting it slightly before the hour. Because it only updated your downloads on the hour. So I was able to download a 2 gig file (Matrix Online Beta Test) in an hours time. When the next hour hit, then I was shut down for 24 hours.
That system really sucked. And there was nothing we could do about it. The complex had an exclusive contract, so we couldn't get any other service out there.
WTF?!?!
They offer faster bandwith to ALLOW gaming, movie streaming, etc, then turn around and cap it? What the hell did they think was going to happen?
Fucking horseshit. Time to take a look at DSL or Uverse. TWC's story is getting old quick.
And I just haggled with comcast to get 6mb for $19.99/mo
I don't think i'll be able to do that again in 6mo with headlines like this. Seriously, those caps are ridiculous, and probably determined by the marketing department.
When Time Warner is really the only option outside of going back to dial-up, what is a customer supposed to do? I don't have the slightest clue how much bandwidth I use.
http://www.wispcheck.com/
Are you kidding me? Those bandwidth numbers are pretty low if you ask me. Ugh, I just hope that Cox doesn't follow suit. It seems like a very unsmooth and counter-productive move to take away/charge more for services that customers have already had. They should at least let current customers grandfather themselves in a their current plans/rates/etc, but then again they wouldn't get much out of this if they did.
If Cox does this, I will go ninja on every person that works there. In the meantime, I'm getting 26/3 with the 8/1.5 package, so I'm not complaining.
how would the data caps effect online console gaming?
downloading games and demos off the network. (some demos can be 1GB)
let alone playing them online for many many hours a day.
I'd say have one dsl line and one cable line.
DSL for lengthy and large downloads (torrent?) (you can get a 1MB dsl line which is ok )
Cable for quick and impulse downloads.
I pay $50/month for my Optimum Online. I just recently dumped their cable service for DirecTv. If they follow this type of capped plan that Time Warner is going to offer I'll simply save myself the $50/month it costs for the Internet. while I love having the internet, I have access to it all day and I "could" live without it or deal with the Satellite offering. It's not worth $150/month to me, at least not currently.
I am a cablevision subscriber too. Dont worry they actually bashed time warner for the metered billing and stated tha tthey will not be implementing this.
Heck us lucky cablevision subscribers will be getting a speed upgrade. They are testing a 100/15 ultra plan right now.
i agree with both of you. compared to TW and RR, optimum online clearly is the best cable service. prices asides, they don't cap, like he said im pretty sure they stated they never will, and its handily the fastest cable provider.
I am also Cablevision. LOVE their internet, HATE their cable offering. I will be dropping cable soon and just getting internet TV as I have a HTPC setup. I'll probably spring for the upgraded 30Mb/s internet because without cable, it'll still be cheaper than purchasing both.
Speed and reliability wise, it's tough to beat Cablevision.
stop the cap!
http://www.stopthecap.com/
Get involved.
If the information in that blog is correct then I am going to puke a little.
....Makes me almost happy to be using Comcast.
Almost.
I have had time warner for over two years. I am switching to DSL within the next two weeks. You can't cap bandwith and expect to have customers stay with you. I am pissed.
This is bad.
HAHA I pay $75/month for Unlimited through Rogers but it's a loop hole that I am using to get that. You see ROGERS charges $50/month for 60gig cap then $2 for each gig after that up to $25 and then they can't charge for anymore. Unlimited Bandwidth for $75/month legally.
First I beat the power company and now the net provider, Who's Next?
Check Norris
Chuck*
This is bullcrap. The amount of users who 'go over' any proposed caps is far less than the number of users who do not go anywhere close to the proposed caps. The overall, or average, bandwidth of the cable company is hardly affected by the power users. And, who are they to cap the amount or quality of movies I can watch via the Internet? I believe they should only be permitted by the FCC to hike prices if, and only if, there are other cable companies in the area for competition. Where I live, TWC is the only choice. This makes it additionally irritating to me.
Call to arms brothers and sisters! This is BS! Everyone needs to write every congressional member at the local, state, and national levels---and don't forget to include the FCC. This is purely a move to stifle the competition from Netflix, etc.
People absolutely need to start complaining and writing TWC to complain about these decisions. I've gotten a response from almost everyone I've contacted there. Here is a great starting point: TWC Executive Customer Care- twc.cotp@twcable.com
What these cretins want is to establish limits that people will routinely - and unknowingly - exceed, so they can tap into the overages. Hmmm, sound familiar ??? Kinda like the ol' late charges at Blockbuster.
I use Carbonite for backup. It's $50 per year and I have about 200 GB backed up. Now if I should happen to have a hard drive failure and need to restore my files I'll get hit with a huge charge in the month I need to restore.
I'll be looking to drop my Time warner ASAP....
This is just plain stupid. When it isn't metered and at a reasonable cost, people will pay. By metering they are going to encourage people to try to steal bandwidth. I pity the folks that have unlocked WAPs and use Time Warner.
I had only considered getting off Time Warner before. Now I will for sure. Bye-Bye TW. It was nice knowing you.
You are going backwards... In Portugal it started like that and then little by little we got the unlimited data plans and the low prices... Those guys are really getting greedy and want you to pay for poor management decisions and extra bonuses. Extra bandwidth costs very little for them, they just don't want to get an extra cow until this one is dry.
Actually it started out like that here, back in the days when AOL finally got connected to the internet (AOL was huge at that time) they limited you by so many minutes of dial up access per month. Once cable and DSL became a reality that's when the mainstream services became unlimited. However, now things are regressing. Hopefully people in Portugal won't stand for that, sadly though, I'd say you're just behind the curve and you'll soon be seeing these same sorts of BS tactics.
There is no regulator entity there? This smells so much like price fixing...
It is somewhat regulated, if by regulated you mean they (broadband providers) pass the costs of a "Universal Service Fund" on to the customer. This "Universal Service Fund" is supposed to have the following goals:
1. to promote the availability of quality services at just, reasonable, and affordable rates
2. to increase access to advanced telecommunications services throughout the Nation
3. to advance the availability of such services to all consumers, including those in low income, rural, insular, and high cost areas at rates that are reasonably comparable to those charged in urban areas.
I'm not sure if that legislation has any hard numbers relating to point 1 above, or even if it has any teeth to penalize the providers.
Honestly this all smells like price gouging in rural areas and price fixing in markets that have "competing" products.
I believe the US government is trying to hash out some kind of national broadband policy, however, with the last few turds the senate gave birth to I hope they leave it alone entirely. There are current laws that enable companies to be penalized for price fixing and gouging, I'd rather see these laws enforced or at least an honest non-biased investigation into some of the policies of these providers, and how they conform to current law.
This is bad news, Time Warner is my only choice for high speed internet. I wish Verizon would roll out FIOS more quickly.
Arrg..I'm stuck with TW. There is FIOS one town over from where I live...Damn it verizon hurry up...I'll give you my business in a split sec.
Their prices is not the worse part of it. The worst is that no matter what plan you pay for, you never get anything near the speed you're supposed to. Why? Because they're always stalling you.
I am sure the theoretical speeds will magically be real once there is cap, that way you can get there ASAP.
How long before they ask for bailout money? It's the trend right?
yeah saying that their custumer base has decreased and need the bail out in order to be competive,