Stop the Cap! » Charter

Former Cablevision COO Hits Pay Powerball as New CEO of Charter: $90+ Million Salary

Phillip Dampier — Thu, 05 Jan 2012 16:16:58 +0000

Payday for Rutledge

Cablevision’s former chief operating officer Tom Rutledge has hit executive pay Powerball, scoring a compensation package worth more than $90 million dollars as the incoming CEO of formerly-bankrupt Charter Communications.

Documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission reveal why Rutledge abruptly resigned from his position at Cablevision on Dec. 15. Just four days later, Charter announced Rutledge would become its new CEO this February, replacing Mike Lovett who earlier announced his departure plans.

Rutledge will be extremely well compensated in his new position, scoring $8,000 a week in walk-around money until February when the executive suite opens up. After that, his base salary will amount to $2 million annually, with yearly increases possible. But the real money will come from Rutledge’s bonus and incentives package. In addition to an annual bonus worth up to $3.5 million annually, Rutledge will also get more than one million shares of Charter stock, worth more than $70 million at present. If Rutledge focuses on boosting that stock price, he could earn considerably more.

That’s a remarkable pay package for a cable company that declared bankruptcy just two years ago. It’s also a lot more money for Rutledge, who collected just over $28 million at his old job at Cablevision.

In 2010, soon-to-be-former Charter CEO Mike Lovett earned just under $11 million in total compensation.

No related stories.

Time Running Out on New England Cable/Phone Customers Seeking Storm-Related Credits

Phillip Dampier — Tue, 29 Nov 2011 22:37:42 +0000

Storm damage in eastern Massachusetts. (Courtesy: WGBH Boston)

The northeastern United States got more than its fair share of severe storms these past few months. Remnants of Hurricane Irene caused severe flooding, heavy rainstorms that followed didn’t help. But one of the worst of all was the Halloween Nor’easter that left serious wind damage in some areas, heavy snowfall in others, leaving customers without power, phone, cable, and broadband service for days, if not weeks.

Telecommunications companies including Cablevision, Charter Communications, Comcast, Cox Communications, Dish Network, Time Warner Cable, and Metrocast Communications of Connecticut are under fire across the region for not providing automatic service credits for impacted customers. Charter and Comcast are both facing a class action lawsuit filed last week by a Massachusetts law firm that accuses the cable operators of “gouging” their customers by not automatically crediting affected subscribers for lost service.

Jeffrey Morneau of Springfield, Mass. law firm Connor, Morneau & Olin says up to 1.2 million Charter and Comcast customers were without service, but the companies will only provide credits on a case-by-case basis, and only if customers request them within a short time after the outage occurred.

“If you pay for a service and you don’t get it, the company can’t keep your money,” Morneau said.

Stop the Cap! readers in Massachusetts and New Hampshire report Comcast will grant reasonable service credit requests, assuming you get through to ask for them.

“Hold times are epic,” reports Tom Turlin, a Comcast customer in Massachusetts. “I managed to get my credit by using their web contact form instead.”

Most providers require consumers to request credits for outages within 30-60 days of the service interruption, and time is running out for Nor’easter credits.

“Most people think they will only get 50 cents back so why bother, but actually with today’s huge cable bills, credits can be substantial,” Turlin says. “I received almost $15 back on my bill.”

Only AT&T, Connecticut’s largest phone company, agreed to automatically credit customers the company determined were without service for at least 24 hours. Customers who don’t receive credit automatically can appeal to the company for credit they believe they are entitled to receive.

Here’s how different companies are responding:

AT&T: “We will give U-verse TV customers in Connecticut who experience a service outage for longer than 24 hours a pro-rated credit,” AT&T said. “In addition, we will voluntarily give similar credits for U-verse Voice and U-verse High Speed Internet service customers who experienced a service outage for longer than 24 hours. Customers are not required to take any action: the credits will be applied automatically on the customer bill for impacted customers within the next several billing cycles.”

Cablevision: “While state law provides for consumer credits for qualifying outages for cable service only, Cablevision has been providing a credit to customers on an individualized basis for all their services,” Cablevision said. “Customers will be credited when they notify us that they had a service outage. We are extending our normal period to request refunds to 45 days from the date of the storm.”

Charter: Customers must call or visit the cable company offices in person to request service credit. “We are providing credit to customers for the entire time they were without service, from the time they lost power to the time their Charter services were fully restored, and we are providing credit for all services,” Charter said.

Comcast: “In order to receive a credit, a customer must contact Comcast and identify the time period during which they did not have access to Comcast services,” Comcast said.

Cox: “We need our customers to call us after their service is restored to report that they were without Cox services, and for how long,” Cox said. “We then credit their accounts from the time of the service outage until service was actually restored.”

DISH Network: The satellite provider is waiving service and equipment fees for consumers who need their equipment realigned, reinstalled or repaired due to the storm. “DISH subscribers who indicated that they were without service due to the storm were provided a credit for their time without service,” DISH said. “In addition, DISH subscribers who needed to suspend their service due to storm damage were allowed to do so at no charge.”

MetroCast Communications of Connecticut: It will provide customers with a refund on their next invoice after contacting the company. “The credit equals a prorated amount of the affected customer’s monthly charges for all MetroCast services, calculated based on the number of days during which such services were interrupted, and are included in the customer’s next invoice,” MetroCast said.

Time Warner Cable: Customers must contact the cable company online, by e-mail or phone and request credit for the number of days they were without service. Most service credit requests that can be verified are granted within hours, and will appear on the next billing statement.

Click here to view the embedded video.

WSHM in Springfield covers the ongoing dispute city officials have with Comcast, who is refusing to automatically provide storm credits to customers impacted by the October Nor’easter. (2 minutes)

Other coverage you may enjoy:

Charter Cable Increasing Broadband Speeds, But You’ll Hit Their Caps Faster

Phillip Dampier — Mon, 21 Nov 2011 19:19:36 +0000

Charter Cable is upgrading its broadband service to deliver free speed upgrades, but with the company’s Internet Overcharging-usage cap scheme in place, some customers are not impressed.

“We plan to streamline Charter Internet options to: Lite, Express, Plus, and Ultra,” Charter social media rep “Eric” wrote on the Broadband Reports‘ Charter customer forum. “Current Max customers will be able to move to a different level of Internet Service.”

The company’s boosted speeds (prices vary in different markets):

Charter Lite: 1Mbps/128kbps → Unknown ($19.99) 100GB limit
Charter Express: 12/1Mbps → 15/3Mbps ($44.99) 100GB limit
Charter Plus: 18/2Mbps → 30/4Mbps ($54.99) 250GB limit
Charter Max: 25/3Mbps → Discontinued ($69.99) 250GB limit
Charter Ultra: 60/5Mbps → 100/5Mbps ($99.99-109.99) 500GB limit

Charter has usage caps on all of its residential broadband service plans, but Stop the Cap! readers tell us they are not always enforced. No overlimit fees are charged. No announcements have been made about any changes to the existing usage limits. Some Charter Max customers tell us they are using the speed upgrades an an excuse to downgrade to the cheaper Plus plan, which is faster and $15 less a month, with the same 250GB usage cap. Customers who absolutely won’t tolerate a usage limit have to upgrade to commercial-grade service, which is considerably more expensive. Lower speed plans run about $80 a month in many areas, but are unlimited.

“I’m glad to discover faster upload speeds, which I’ve waited for a long time, but I’d rather have no usage limits to worry about instead of faster speeds,” shares Stop the Cap! reader and Charter customer Paul McNeil. “My problem with these faster speeds is that you can’t use them for too long. Why buy a luxury race car you can only drive down the street?”

Light users who use the Internet primarily for e-mail or web page browsing rarely require more than the most budget-priced broadband package because high speeds do not deliver a significantly improved user experience. But those who use the Internet for higher-bandwidth applications including video, downloading, certain online games, and file backup do benefit the most from high speed packages. But when providers slap usage limits on them, the value erodes away.

“Why spend more for less?” asks McNeil. “Two years ago there were no limits and I honestly received more value from my Charter Internet service then over what I have to deal with now.”

Other coverage you may enjoy:

Low Income $9.95 Internet Coming to Time Warner, Cox, and Charter… If You Qualify

Phillip Dampier — Wed, 09 Nov 2011 18:24:25 +0000

Genachowski

The cable industry is expanding so-called “lifeline Internet service” to more households in an effort to combat what a government agency calls “a persistent digital divide.”

Next spring, Time Warner Cable, Cox, and Charter Communications will launch low-speed Internet service for $9.95 a month for two years. The offers will echo Comcast’s Internet Essentials, which launched earlier this year as part of a deal with the government to win approval of the cable company’s merger with NBC-Universal.

The Federal Communications Commission calls the effort “Connect to Compete,” and suggests the public-private initiative will help rural Americans and low-income minorities get affordable Internet access. A study by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration found just 55% of black households and 57% of Hispanics currently subscribe to broadband. More than 72% of Caucasian households and more than 81% of Asian homes use broadband by comparison. The rural southern states of Mississippi (52%), Arkansas (52%) and Alabama (56%) have the lowest broadband penetration rates in the country. In contrast, more than 80% of Utah residents have broadband in their homes.

“In this difficult economy, we need everyone to be working together on solutions,” FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski said. “Broadband is a key to economic and educational opportunity and these kinds of commitments to close the digital divide are powerful.”

But not every poverty-stricken American will qualify for the discount programs.

Cable operators are following Comcast’s lead, restricting access to families with at least one school age child enrolled in the free school lunch program. Customers must not have existing broadband service during the last 90 days and customers with past due balances cannot sign up. Don’t have children or fell behind on your cable bill? No discount Internet for you.

Pilot programs will be launched by each operator in around a dozen cities total starting next spring, with plans to roll programs out nationally by the start of the 2012 school year. Broadband speeds, usage limits, and other fees were not disclosed. Comcast’s Internet Essentials operates at 1.5Mbps with upload speeds up to 384kbps.

Comcast’s program sells a netbook computer loaded with Windows 7 Starter Edition for around $150. The $250 computers expected to be provided by Microsoft will include Windows 7 Home Premium operating system and Microsoft Office. An additional vendor will sell refurbished computers to interested program participants for around $150.

The program will primarily reach urban residents who cannot afford current Internet service plans that are sold for $40-45 a month. Rural residents are unlikely to benefit much because most cable operators do not deliver service in rural areas.

CenturyLink announced its own version of discounted DSL Internet in October to sell for $9.95 a month, but with numerous “gotcha” fees and surcharges.

One group unlikely to take advantage of the program: older householders, particularly those ages 65 and older, where just 45% have broadband at home. The biggest reason the rest don’t? They don’t believe they need the Internet at any cost.

Other coverage you may enjoy:

Frontier’s Everyday High Prices for Slow DSL Just Don’t Make Any Sense

Phillip Dampier — Tue, 20 Sep 2011 20:59:39 +0000

Phillip "Frontier DSL is Too Slow and Expensive" Dampier

Frontier Communications occasionally sends me mailers promoting their latest offer for DSL and/or satellite service. The price on the front of the letter looks good — usually around $20 a month — despite the fact the best Frontier can deliver my area less than one mile from the Rochester, N.Y. city line is 3.1Mbps. But Frontier’s fine print is infamous for bill padding extra fees, charges, and service commitments that makes the out-the-door price literally higher than Time Warner Cable’s Road Runner service, which actually delivers substantially faster speed at a lower price.

I’m not alone.

Customers in several Frontier service areas are openly wondering why they should do business with the phone company when they are charging more for less service.

In Ohio, Frontier Communications competes in some areas with Buckeye Cablevision. Frontier sells DSL Internet in northwest Ohio for $29.99 a month. For that, customers like Inquiry receive 6.2Mbps even though they bought 7.1Mbps service.

“Their [Internet prices] are significantly higher when comparing the other providers in northwest Ohio,” Inquiry writes. “Buckeye Cablevison has 10Mbps service for $24.95/month. And they actually give the customer 10.8Mbps.”

In areas where Frontier often finds itself the only game in town, that price is downright cheap.

Frontier's "High Speed" Fantasies

Nialis in Aliso Viejo, Calif. doesn’t know what Inquiry is complaining about. He pays $30 a month for 1.5Mbps DSL service from Frontier.

Eric McDaniel from McDavid, Fla. found small relief when he complained about the 2.2Mbps DSL service he was paying $39.99 a month to receive.

“I now pay $29.99, and that is only because I threatened to cancel my service,” McDaniel says. “Now they give me a $10 recurring credit.”

“What are you going to do when they’re the only show in town?”

Even Charter Communications, one of America’s lowest rated cable companies, has prices and service that beats Frontier hands-down.

In some Charter areas like Wausau, Wisc., Frontier DSL comes with a two year service commitment, a $14.99 monthly Wireless Router Fee, and comparatively slow service:

Frontier Communications Pricing - Wisconsin

Customers can pay $29.99 a month (before fees) for “up to 3Mbps” DSL service from Frontier or spend $29.99 and get 12Mbps from Charter:

Charter Communications Pricing - Wisconsin

So how does Frontier Communications keep offering service at uncompetitive prices? They have much greater success in the rural markets they favor, where cable competition rarely exists. Plus, many consumers may not understand the impact of the speed differences they receive from different providers, tending to blame “the Internet” for slowdowns more than the provider delivering the service. Some customers may also be attracted to valuable customer promotions that include free netbooks or television sets, and forget about the fine print service commitments that come with the deal.

As dwink9909 from Clintonville, Wisc. shared on the Frontier Broadband Reports forum: “Frontier Communications Inc. is free to charge the maximum the market will bear primarily because they are the only provider in most of the areas they serve. That’s certainly true here in Wisconsin. Six miles south of me you can get dial-up service from two dozen ISPs and broadband via wireless, cable or DSL, but here there is only a single provider for telephone and broadband. We are among the “under-served” millions who are just glad to have high speed Internet at any cost.”

Frontier is only too happy to oblige.

Other coverage you may enjoy:

Charter Cable Tells Family Tough Luck: Pay Us $1,600 for Cable Equipment, Batteries Lost in Fire

Phillip Dampier — Thu, 01 Sep 2011 21:14:27 +0000

Charter Cable told a Howell, Mich. family that lost everything in a major house fire they owed the cable company $1,600 for cable equipment, remote controls — even the batteries — that were consumed in the blaze.

Kerry Cacchione, her three children and her husband Jeff lost every single possession they owned in the fire seven weeks ago. The Cacchione family, like many home renters, neglected to purchase all-important renter’s insurance, and without it, all of their furniture, clothing, and other valuables were gone for good.

When the family returned home to see the property, undergoing repairs paid for by their landlord, they were confronted with an enormous bill from Charter Communications, their cable company.

“$1,600, and they [charged us] for every remote, every battery, every modem, every cable box, and every DVR box,” said Cacchione.

The Cacchione family took the bill to Charter Cable and begged for forgiveness, telling employees there was no way they could afford to pay that cable bill.

Kerry reports Charter was unsympathetic and refused to waive the charges, leading her to ask WXYZ’s “Call for Action” to intervene.

With the threat of more bad publicity on the 6 o’clock news, Charter Communications decided to wipe out their bill.

Charter is among the most intransigent cable companies when it comes to demanding compensation for cable equipment destroyed or damaged in fires. The company always relents when confronted with the prospect of bad publicity, such as when a customer service representative told one tornado victim in Alabama she would wait on the phone while she searched through debris in the neighborhood for lost cable equipment.

Every renter should always have renter’s insurance, which typically will cover damaged cable equipment. It’s very affordable and protects renters from losses. Many consumers believe landlords carry insurance which will protect them in the event of a natural disaster or fire, but those insurance policies protect the landlord’s property, not renters’ possessions. The peace of mind afforded by renter’s insurance can make all the difference in a major loss like the one experienced by the Cacchione family.

Click here to view the embedded video.

WXYZ in Detroit comes to the rescue of yet another family falling victim to an enormous cable bill from equipment lost or damaged in a house fire. (3 minutes)

Other coverage you may enjoy:

Charter’s Excuse-o-Matic: Reporter Ambush Finally Effective At Getting Service Fixed in Texas

Phillip Dampier — Wed, 31 Aug 2011 15:56:27 +0000

Click here to view the embedded video.

Charter Cable left one North Texas family with lousy cable and poor Internet service for months, even scattering a new drop line across their backyard and leaving their cable connection exposed to the elements. Despite repeated calls for assistance, all this family got were excuses, even going as far as telling them the local town wouldn’t allow Charter to bury their new cable line. When a reporter from KDFW-TV ambushed a Charter Cable repairmen sent to assist with the family’s Internet service, all that changed. In hours, the cable the company claimed couldn’t be buried was, and Charter even offered service credits. (2 minutes)

Other coverage you may enjoy:

‘Measuring Broadband America’ Report Released Today: How Your Provider Measured Up

Phillip Dampier — Tue, 02 Aug 2011 17:04:24 +0000

The Federal Communications Commission today released MEASURING BROADBAND AMERICA, the first nationwide performance study of residential wireline broadband service in the United States. The study examined service offerings from 13 of the largest wireline broadband providers using automated, direct measurements of broadband performance delivered to the homes of thousands of volunteers during March 2011.

Among the key findings:

Providers are being more honest about their advertised speeds: Actual speeds are moving closer to the speeds promised by those providers. Back in 2009, the FCC found a greater disparity between advertised and delivered speeds. But the Commission also found that certain providers are more likely to deliver than others, and certain broadband technologies are simply more reliable and consistent.

Fiber-to-the-Home service was the runaway winner, consistently delivering even better speeds than advertised (114%). Cable broadband delivered 93% of advertised speeds, while DSL only managed to deliver 82 percent of what providers promise. Fiber broadband speeds are consistent, with just a 0.4 percent decline in speeds during peak usage periods.

Cable companies are still overselling their networks. The FCC found during peak usage periods (7-11pm), 7.3 percent of cable-based services suffered from speed decreases — generally a sign a provider has piled too many customers onto an overburdened network. One clear clue of overselling: the FCC found upload speeds largely unaffected.

DSL has capacity and speed issues. DSL also experienced speed drops, with 5.5 percent of customers witnessing significant speed deterioration, which could come from an overshared D-SLAM, where multiple DSL customers connect with equipment that relays their traffic back to the central office, or from insufficient connectivity to the Internet backbone.

Some providers are much better than others. The FCC found some remarkable variability in the performance of different ISPs. Let’s break several down:

Verizon’s FiOS was the clear winner among the major providers tested, winning top performance marks across the board. Few providers came close;
Comcast had the most consistently reliable speeds among cable broadband providers. Cox beat them at times, but only during hours when few customers were using their network;
AT&T U-verse was competitive with most cable broadband packages, but is already being outclassed by cable companies offering DOCSIS 3-based premium speed tiers;
Cablevision has a seriously oversold broadband network. Their results were disastrous, scoring the worst of all providers for consistent service during peak usage periods. Their performance was simply unacceptable, incapable of delivering barely more than half of promised speeds during the 10pm-12am window.
It was strictly middle-of-the-road performance for Time Warner Cable, Insight, and CenturyLink. They aren’t bad, but they could be better.
Mediacom continued its tradition of being a mediocre cable provider, delivering consistently below-average results for their customers during peak usage periods. They are not performing necessary upgrades to keep up with user demand.
Most major DSL providers — AT&T, Frontier, and Qwest — promise little and deliver as much. Their ho-hum advertised speeds combined with unimpressive scores for time of day performance variability should make all of these the consumers’ last choice for broadband service if other options are available.

Some conclusions the FCC wants consumers to ponder:

For basic web-browsing and Voice-Over-IP, any provider should be adequate. Shop on price. Consumers should not overspend for faster tiers of service they will simply not benefit from all that much. Web pages loaded at similar speeds regardless of the speed tier chosen.
Video streaming benefits from consistent speeds and network reliability. Fiber and cable broadband usually deliver faster speeds that can ensure reliable high quality video streaming. DSL may or may not be able to keep up with our HD video future.
Temporary speed-boost technology provided by some cable operators is a useful gimmick. It can help render web pages and complete small file downloads faster. It can’t beat fiber’s consistently faster speeds, but can deliver a noticeable improvement over DSL.

More than 78,000 consumers volunteered to participate in the study and a total of approximately 9,000 consumers were selected as potential participants and were supplied with specially configured routers. The data in the report is based on a statistically selected subset of those consumers—approximately 6,800 individuals—and the measurements taken in their homes during March 2011. The participants in the volunteer consumer panel were recruited with the goal of covering ISPs within the U.S. across all broadband technologies, although only results from three major technologies—DSL, cable, and fiber-to-the-home—are reflected in the report.

Other coverage you may enjoy:

The ’19 Most Hated Companies in America’ Includes Big Telecom Abusers; TWC Is #3, Comcast #4

Phillip Dampier — Wed, 13 Jul 2011 18:05:55 +0000

Cox alienates their customers.

Six of the 19 ‘Most Hated Companies in America’ are big cable, satellite and phone companies. The list, published this month by The Atlantic magazine, call out the perpetrators of bad customer service, high prices, and in the case of Time Warner Cable (#3) — Internet Overcharging.

The American Customer Satisfaction Index rates companies based on thousands of surveys. In the latest index, the most-hated companies include large banks, airlines, power and telecom companies. Especially called out this year was Time Warner Cable, celebrating a decade of public relations blunders ranging from gouging experiments on Internet service pricing, showing pornography on children’s channels, high rates, and downright lousy service in some areas. And with CEO Glenn Britt entertaining a return to Internet rate gouging, the company’s 59/100 score still has plenty of room to fall.

#3 — Time Warner Cable (59/100) — All of the above, plus sexually harassing a North Carolina customer.

#4 — Comcast (59/100) –Dreadful customer service and poor communications left consumers with dozens of channels gone missing, outrageous rate hikes, their phone service implicated in a Florida woman’s death, and who could forget the technician that set a customer’s house on fire. This one actually lost two score points since last year.

#5 — Charter Communications (59/100) — The usual rate increases were bad enough, but Charter also told their customers they were on the hook for cable boxes lost in fires that were not their fault, was held accountable for faulty billing practices, went bankrupt, introduced its own Internet Overcharging scheme, and worst of all — their infamous PR disaster telling tornado victims in Alabama to go and find their lost cable boxes scattered somewhere in the neighborhood. The representative on the line will wait.

#14 — AT&T (66/100) — Limited coverage and the introduction of usage pricing for data pl … oh sorry, AT&T dropped the call. All reasons why AT&T wins the ‘you suck’ award among mobile providers this year.

#17 — Cox Cable (67/100) — The home of the $480 early termination fee, Cox alienates customers like few others. They even use spacemen to harass their customers. Bemusingly, Cox is considered a customer service success compared with our other bad boys.

#18 — Dish Network (67/100) — Trending downwards, Dish is still giving their customers a bath in bad billing and worse customer service. They are lovers of big ad splashes with a terrifying excess of fine print which ruins the deal, if you read it.

Other coverage you may enjoy:

Frontier: America’s Worst Wired ISP for Netflix Viewing (Second Time Winner!)

Phillip Dampier — Fri, 24 Jun 2011 00:13:09 +0000

Click to Enlarge

Frontier Communications’ DSL service delivers abysmal results for customers looking for quality time with Netflix. For the second quarter running, the independent phone company’s ability to keep up with Netflix’s high quality video is about on par with a garden slug in a triathlon — yes, it may eventually reach the finish line, but you’ll be dead before it happens. Even more embarrassing for Frontier, their service is occasionally beaten by Clearwire, a wireless ISP with a bandwidth throttler that can reduce your online experience to the painful days of dial-up if deemed to be using “too much.”

“Frontier sucks,” writes Stop the Cap! reader Doug in Charleston, W.V. “After they took over where Verizon fled, my ability to watch Netflix online became a source of endless frustration, so now I limit myself to mailing DVD’s back and forth.”

Remarkably, Charter Cable, which does poorly in customer satisfaction surveys, is again the runaway winner, followed by Comcast, the heavily usage-capped Cable One, Time Warner Cable, and Cox. Verizon and AT&T only deliver middling performance.

Other coverage you may enjoy: