Subscribe
Time Warner Cable CEO Glenn Britt told Wall Street the company is backing AT&T’s decision to cease unlimited access to its wireless data services.
“In most businesses when usage goes up, that’s a good thing because people pay more,” Glenn Britt, Time Warner Cable’s chief executive officer, said at a Sanford C. Bernstein Wall Street investor conference Friday in New York. “It’s going to get the industry better aligned with consumer behavior.”
But Britt also said AT&T’s decision was “more sensible than when we did it,” referring to the company’s April 2009 aborted experiment to charge customers up to three times as much for broadband service with a consumption billing scheme that got a hostile response from consumers.
Britt was speaking about the network capacity constraints that wireless data networks have that do not compare with the much wider pipeline available to wired provides like Time Warner Cable. Britt cited AT&T’s still-exclusive iPhone as being the single most significant factor in AT&T’s decision.
Britt told Business Week that “at the time” consumption “pricing was needed to maintain the expense and expansion of the network.”
But consumer advocates suggested the company targeted its overcharging experiment in cities where customers didn’t have strong competitive alternatives. That was particularly the case in Rochester, N.Y. and Greensboro, N.C., where alternative broadband meant significantly slower telephone company DSL service. In the case of Rochester, that service included a monthly 5GB usage allowance in Frontier Communications’ Acceptable Use Policy.
Without equivalent competing alternatives, broadband consumers would be trapped in a broadband backwater with significantly worse service than neighboring cities.
Despite Britt’s acknowledgment that his company backed off because of strong consumer opposition, he’s still willing to talk about bringing the overcharging scheme back, telling Business Week, “Exactly how it works and what the PR around it will be is something we can talk about.”
[Note: We will have some audio up soon. -- Editor]
Other stories of interest:
- Time Warner Cable CEO Reports Basic Cable Suffers While Broadband Gains, Still Thinks ‘Usage Based Pricing’ is the Future
- Pondering Glenn Britt, CEO of Time Warner Cable
- Time Warner Cable CEO Still Loves Cap ‘n Tier Approach to Internet Billing
- 1st Anniversary of Time Warner Cable Internet Overcharging Experiment for Texas, North Carolina, New York
- [Updated] Time Warner Cable Offers Their Broadband Network to Cell Phone Companies; ‘Exaflood’ Apparently Doesn’t Apply
I can guarantee Mr. Britt and his TWC cronies that the outcry will be twice as loud here in Austin if he tries to bring another overcharging scheme back to this city.
It seems Mr. Britt thinks others are going to go to sleep and rollover on this issue. Nothing could be further than the truth.
TWC is very much still on my radar screen.
Sort of begs the question, how exactly can it be argued that “consumption billing” (euphemistic phrase for “capped Internet”) is good for consumers if TWC seems to be chomping at the bit to implement it?
So consumer bandwidth use grew at a faster pace than the ISP used profits to build adequate infrastructure. Obviously this is the consumer’s fault and they should face the consequences.
So consumer bandwidth use grew at a faster pace than the ISP used profits to build adequate infrastructure. Obviously this is the consumer’s fault and they should face the consequences.
EXCUSE ME??
I think it SHOULD be the COMPANY’S RESPONSIBILITY to KEEP UPGRADING THE NETWORK TO MEET CONSUMER DEMAND!!
If these Cable & Phone Internet providers are making AS HIGH A PROFIT as they SEEM TO BE, then I think it is THEIR CIVIC DUTY as providers to PROVIDE THE BEST SERVICE POSSIBLE TO THESE CUSTOMERS!! THAT MEANS KEEPING THE NETWORK UPGRADED to MEET THE CUSTOMERS’ DEMANDS!!!
I think that the FACT that MANY of these INCUMBENT ISP’s are ATTEMPTING to impose this MOST-UNFAIR TYPE OF BILLING on customers, while costs for bandwidth are DECREASING, and capacity is STILL INCREASING, is NOTHING LESS THAN A CRIMINAL ACT by these INCUMBENT ISP’s!!!
They’re trying to HAVE THEIR CAKE AND EAT IT TOO!!! DECREASE INVESTMENT in the network while INCREASING THEIR PROFITS…THAT IS CRIMINAL IN MY NOT-SO-HUMBLE OPINION!!!
THAT is why, in communities where there are ONLY 2 providers…one Cable and one Phone, and if that phone provider’s service isn’t as “fast” or “robust” as its Cable competitor, then some SENSIBLE GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS of said providers ARE IN ORDER!!!
I AGREE TOTALLY that the FOLLOWING NEEDS to be IMPOSED on INCUMBENT ISP’s in the ABSENCE of EQUIVALENT COMPETING SERVICES by other providers…
1) The practices of “Forced Bundling” and “data-transfer limits” MUST BE BANNED OUTRIGHT!!
2) The practices of “speed throttling” or “performance-reducing” of certain websites or applications ALSO MUST BE BANNED!!
3) ANY AND ALL SO-CALLED “Sweetheart deals” or “Exclusivity deals” between said Incumbent providers and certain websites, which FAVOR THEIR SITES & APPLICATIONS WHILE THROTTLING, BLOCKING, OR DEGRADING THE PERFORMANCE OF COMPETING WEBSITES & APPLICATIONS, MUST ALSO BE BANNED OUTRIGHT!!!
It is HIGH DAMNED TIME that INCUMBENT CABLE & PHONE INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDERS MUST BE MADE TO PLAY FAIR with ANY AND ALL RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL CUSTOMERS!!!
Incumbent ISP’s, LISTEN UP!!
THE CUSTOMER IS KING!! That’s the BEGINNING OF THE STORY, and that’s the END OF THE STORY!!!
Dean
Dean,
I was being sarcastic… But I’m glad that you brought up all the points you did. I am sick of being abused by the wireless phone, cable, and broadband providers.
Thank you for saying that.
I am LUCKY that, in Storm Lake, Iowa, there is a DSL Internet Service Provider (Qwest), and there are TWO (2) Cable high-speed ISP’s…Knology and Mediacom!!
I can tell you that, in a community where there are 2 Cable ISP’s that BOTH offer SIMILAR services and speeds on their Internet services, and also “go out of their way” to offer the BEST Cable TV / High-Speed Internet / Phone services, that the CUSTOMER IS INDEED KING!!
Sadly, that ISN’T the case in MOST communities here in Iowa, or ANYWHERE ELSE for that matter. In MOST communities, there’s only the Cable high-speed ISP, and the Phone DSL provider (who oftentimes offers less speed & performance compared with the Cable provider).
I advocate those regulations in the communities where there is ONLY ONE Cable and One DSL provider offering services. In the ABSENCE of a COMPETING high-speed ISP that would offer COMPARABLE services to the Cable provider (the high speeds and such).
Of course, having talked about THIS stuff tonight on here has kinda “inspired” me to talk about other ways that our American country SHOULD be, INSTEAD of the way things NOW ARE.
But, I’ll leave the REST of that for ANOTHER day, and ANOTHER website.
Dean
Britt’s yahct burned fuel faster than the TWC profits increased. We must pay more so his bonus can be larger. I feel so bad for his family. I quit them when they started that in Beaumont. Now what is our alternative if they all start doing it?
in the wirless service front i can understand consumption based billing to a great degree radio spectrum is more expensive then spectrum on cable wires
of course i hope that they use the new money to expand wireless services to new areas (sadly i doubt that will happen)
wired services will always pawn wirless due to spectrum youve got spectrum used for everything from ota tv to sattlite to radio to police and emergency communcations
Glenn’s greed is endless