BroadbandCapping

Latest

  • Julius Genachowski voices support for capped, tiered broadband

    by 
    Daniel Cooper
    Daniel Cooper
    05.24.2012

    FCC honcho Julius Genachowski has come out in favor of usage-based pricing for your broadband. At this year's Cable Show, he said that he supported the sort of usage caps that Comcast adopted last week and hoped that such plans would reduce costs for those who use less internet. Comcast's new pricing structure offers a 300GB monthly cap, after which point it'll charge users $10 for every extra 50GB used. We're not sure how this'll play out, but we suspect anyone with a Netflix or Hulu addiction might feel less than pleased this morning.

  • Surprise! The American Cable Association favors tiered broadband pricing

    by 
    Joshua Topolsky
    Joshua Topolsky
    04.28.2009

    Guess what everybody? Time Warner Cable isn't the only one who thinks tiered broadband is the future -- so does the American Cable Association (ACA). The group claims that a stepped set of packages is the only way in which the high-speed industry can survive the coming hellstorm of your online TV viewing and rampant MP3 downloads. According to ACA president Matt Polka, "the outcome is certain," that metered pricing is on the way -- even if there aren't standardized plans in place yet. The ACA's ex officio chair Patrick Knorr adds that current billing models are "not a sustainable business model," and that "a la carte for the net is consumption-based billing." Though some of the arguments are compelling, the ACA also dramatically suggest that grandmothers shouldn't subsidize those with HD downloading habits, and can't seem to get a fix on just how they want to meter users or what kind of overages should be charged -- both of which seem to be common points of debate. While we're not sold that there's only this single option for pricing broadband (one which heavily favors the provider's bottom lines), the group does bring a tiny bit of thoughtfulness to the discussion, with a member noting that Time Warner Cable's approach hadn't made a very good case for the practice. We suggest a page from Cablevision's playbook, guys.

  • Time Warner Cable scraps broadband capping plan in Rochester, NY

    by 
    Donald Melanson
    Donald Melanson
    04.16.2009

    It's already delayed its controversial broadband capping plan in a number of markets, and it looks like Time Warner Cable has now gone one big step further in Rochester, New York (one of the initial test markets), where it has reportedly scrapped the new tiered pricing plan altogether. As you no doubt recall, the plan was more or less modeled on cellphone pricing plans, and had intended to cap customers' data usage at a certain level and charge upwards of $1 per GB for any overages (eventually maxing out at $150 per month). That, naturally, didn't go over so well with folks, and even New York Senator Charles Schumer eventually got in on the act and complained directly to Time Warner Cable. Of course, this still doesn't officially mark the end of the pricing plan in other markets, but it certainly seems to be getting increasingly difficult for Time Warner Cable to move ahead with it.[Thanks, Phil]Update: As a few of you have helpfully pointed out in comments, Time Warner Cable has now put out a statement of its own that confirms in not-at-all Orwellian terms that it is shelving all of its consumption-based billing trials "while the customer education process continues." The company also says that it'll soon be making bandwidth measurement tools available to customers, which it hopes will "aid in the dialog going forward."

  • Public rage stalls Time Warner trials of consumption-based internet

    by 
    Laura June Dziuban
    Laura June Dziuban
    04.16.2009

    Time Warner's new data capping broadband scheme was never expected to win any popularity contests, and the details of its plans are so frustrating, that this probably should not come as a surprise. Regardless, it looks like the company's plan to further roll out testing of the consumption-based billing method has been foiled, or at least stalled, because it couldn't find enough customers to participate in the testing. TWC had planned to test in several locations, including San Antonio and Austin, Texas, but the response has apparently been so negative, and there were so many complaints, that the company has "delayed" the trials until October. So... maybe if we keep moaning about it the plan will be abandoned altogether? Here's to hoping, anyway. [Via The Register]

  • Time Warner Cable lays out broadband capping plans, says $150 for "unlimited" use

    by 
    Joshua Topolsky
    Joshua Topolsky
    04.10.2009

    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 / monthly, 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. We only have two questions, guys. First, how will you let end users know they're hitting caps? Right now there's no centralized solution for monitoring bandwidth. Even cell phones show minutes used, so will you give us the infrastructure for broadband monitoring? Secondly -- instead of giving users a "virtually" unlimited package, why not just sell an unlimited package at $150 a month? The impression we get is that you want to leave the door open for aggressive users, and that your capping of capping charges might be a moving target in the right situation. [Via eWeek]