Home » Comcast/Xfinity »Competition »Public Policy & Gov't »USI Wireless »Video » Currently Reading:

Comcast Bans Twin Cities Wi-Fi Upstart’s Ads After Pointing Out Comcast CEO’s Salary on Billboards

Phillip Dampier December 2, 2010 Comcast/Xfinity, Competition, Public Policy & Gov't, USI Wireless, Video 5 Comments

USI Wireless' TV Ad was rejected by Comcast

“Our competitor’s CEO made $27 million last year. Ever wonder why you pay so much for Internet?”

That question is posed on an enormous billboard over downtown Minneapolis.  It comes courtesy of US Internet of Minnetonka, a tiny wireless provider competing against Comcast in Minneapolis.  The Wi-Fi upstart has taken center stage in another dispute with Comcast that threatens to have national implications.

For US Internet, the cable giant is already big enough to throw its weight around, because the Wi-Fi competitor has been notified it is not going to get its television ads seen by Comcast subscribers.

That struck Joe Caldwell, CEO of USI Wireless, as anti-competitive.

“I spent thousands of dollars to get this ad produced, and now Comcast won’t run it,” Caldwell told the Minneapolis Star-Tribune. “I think maybe they’re mad at me because I said the CEO of Comcast made too much money.”

Although Caldwell’s billboard only names Comcast in fine print, barely visible from Minneapolis streets, his company’s door-hangers are more direct:

“We at USI Wireless would like to congratulate Qwest & Comcast for both having sports arenas named after them. Ever wonder why you pay so much for Internet?”

Comcast told Caldwell it could not run his ads because they are a competitor.

USI Wireless charges $14.95 a month for wireless access across the city.  Comcast charges between $40-115 for its standalone broadband service.

It’s not the first ad controversy for USI, which irritated some residents back in May with some edgy billboards featuring a woman some described as a prostitute next to big, bold print: “Fast, Cheap, and Satisfaction Guaranteed.”

USI got into some controversy with its earlier billboards, which raised more than a few eyebrows.

Caldwell’s television ad features Fancy Ray McCloney, head of Minneapolis-based ad agency Chocolate Orchid Productions, as its pitchman, loudly asking, “Why pay $30 to $60 a month when you can get the same quality service for as low as $14.95?”

McCloney adds salt to USI’s wounded bank account because, as he tells it, it was Comcast that invited him to produce the ad and get it running on the system.  McCloney claims a Comcast advertising representative contacted him after seeing the billboard and invited USI to buy TV advertising.

“They saw the billboards, and they asked if they could get some of that advertising business on Comcast cable,” McCloney told the Star-Tribune.

After Caldwell spent $7,500 producing the TV ad, Comcast now says it cannot run on their system.

A local Comcast spokesperson told the newspaper he didn’t know if McCloney’s story was true or not.  A national spokesperson for the cable company said Comcast decides on a case-by-case basis whether to take advertising for services that compete with Comcast.

The dispute threatens to have national implications as Comcast pushes to have its merger with NBC-Universal approved.

With ownership of additional broadcast outlets, would-be competitors to Comcast could find themselves banned from advertising on broadcast stations with ties to the cable operator.

[flv width=”640″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/USI Wireless Ad.flv[/flv]

USI Wireless’ “banned” TV ad, which makes no mention of Comcast by name, or the current controversy.  (1 minute)

Currently there are 5 comments on this Article:

  1. Lexster says:

    Oh, right…because I don’t see ads for satellite TV services on my cable. They’re totally not competition. Comcast is just sore because they were called out for their CEO getting paid a ridiculous amount of money.

    And I would like to add that I would totally get USI from that commercial alone were I in Minneapolis.

    • In a competitive market, I don’t think the government should get involved in these ad decisions. But when a company amasses the market power of Comcast, there is little alternative.

      And I would not take service on USIW. They are much cheaper for a reason, their services are slow at best. And never reliable.

      • Scott says:

        I would agree as well if we actually had a competitive market. As long as the government continues to rubber stamp massive corporate mergers allowing these companies to dominate the markets in virtual monopolies, we’re going to end up relying on the same government to eventually regulate and police those very same companies.

  2. Paul says:

    Comcast uses its dominance in one arena (cable TV) to prevent competition in another (home internet). That is the very definition of anti-competitive behavior.

Search This Site:

Contributions:

Recent Comments:

  • Lee: Seems I need to amend my post about the closed fiber optic loop system. Frontier Communications is not installing it. It is an expansion of the Elkhar...
  • James: In the beginning I was hopeful of Frontier a good review but I just zcan't do it.. we switched from comcrooks recently oct. '17, the phone reps screwe...
  • Lee: Change the name from Spectrum to Speculum....
  • Lee: I am in Indiana. I used my Street Atlas program to figure they are installing 6.5 miles of underground fiber optic along the roads between the two sch...
  • Bob: I have Mohu Leaf antennas on both TV's and I get the locals that way also. All I know is that as a former regular DirecTV customer, they are trying v...
  • Phillip Dampier: Institutional broadband. Frontier owns the network that taxpayers subsidize and Frontier gets to charge whatever it wants for service on that network....
  • Lee: This company is a steaming pile of dung. I noticed the work along the road by a local restaurant. Today I stopped and talked to the crew working by th...
  • Andrew: Bob is right.. but directvnow has HBO and youtube doesn't... I use OTA antenna for locals so it works out....
  • Bob: All well and good, but DirecTV Now still lacks the local Rochester channels that are included in the YouTube TV lineup....
  • FredH: Spectrum should have just paid the $1M fine.....it's chump change since they make about $300M in profit from operations every QUARTER!...
  • L. Nova: This is why we need municipal networks Since ejecting these greedy executives into the vacuum of space is not an option YET....
  • Linda amoroso: This happened to me. I cancelled and they told me I had to pay until the 22nd of the month and the reason why I cancelled this because they didn't ha...

Your Account: