Comcast: You owe us $640 (Original image: Sentinel & Enterprise)

Comcast billed a Leominster woman $640 for cable television equipment destroyed in a major apartment fire, despite promises from the company she would not be charged.

Lakisha Nunez spent months fighting with Comcast over the equipment lost when a fire broke out at the Columbia Hotel building on Nov. 24.

Two days later, Nunez contacted Comcast to inform them of the fire and to temporarily suspend service. A representative promised she would not be held accountable for the unreturned equipment because the fire was not her fault.

One month later, the company changed its mind and refused to discuss the matter further. When the $640 bill arrived, she complained.

“I called and was told that is what (renter) insurance is for,” Nunez told the Sentinel & Enterprise.

Another representative told her the fees would be waived if she filed a “fire report” with the local Comcast office. She complied, but Comcast still refused to remove the charges.

The bill was finally waived after Leominster Mayor Dean Mazzarella’s office intervened on her behalf and reporters from the Sentinel & Enterprise also began making inquiries.

Comcast spokesman Marc Goodman quickly apologized and promised to refund $233 in fees she already paid, believing it covered her monthly service.

Stop the Cap! reminds renters that buying renter’s insurance is essential to protect your personal property (and that belonging to others) in the event of a catastrophic loss. It is inexpensive and easy to buy from any large insurance company.

Data caps protect incumbent big studio and network content creators at the expense of independent producers and others challenging conventional entertainment business models.

That was the conclusion of several writers and producers at a communications policy forum hosted by Public Knowledge, a consumer group fighting for an open Internet.

A representative from the Writers Guild of America West noted that cord-cutting paid cable TV service has become real and measurable because consumers have a robust online viewing alternative for the first time. John Vezina, the Guild’s political director, noted how Americans watch television is transitioning towards on-demand viewing.

New types of short-form programming and commissioned series for online content providers like Netflix are also changing the video entertainment model.

Welch: It is about the money.

But a digital roadblock erected by some of the nation’s largest broadband providers is interfering with that viewing shift: the data cap.

Data caps place artificial limits on how much a customer can use their Internet connection without either being shut off or finding overlimit fees attached to their monthly bill. Critics contend usage caps and consumption billing discourage online viewing — one of the most bandwidth intensive applications on the Internet. With broadband providers like Time Warner Cable, AT&T, Verizon, and Comcast also in the business of selling television packages, cord-cutting can directly impact providers’ bottom lines.

Providers have traditionally claimed that usage limits are about preserving network resources and fairness to other customers. But Time Warner Cable admits they exist as a money-making scheme.

Rachel Welch, vice president of federal legislative affairs at Time Warner Cable, says the cable company is not worried about limiting data consumption. It considers monetizing that consumption more important.

“We want our customers to buy as much of the product as possible,” Welch told PC World. “The goal of companies is to make money.”

Time Warner now offers customers a choice of unlimited service or a $5 discount if customers keep their monthly usage under 5GB, but some worry that is only a prelude to introducing expanded usage limits on a larger number of customers in the future.

For many consumers already hard-pressed by high broadband bills, worrying about exceeding a data allowance and paying even more may keep viewers from watching too much content online.

For that reason, Vezina called data caps “anti-innovation.”

“It hurts consumers [and] it hurts creators who want to get as much out to the public in as many ways” as possible, he said.

Public Knowledge has become increasingly critical of data caps in the last two years. The organization has questioned how ISP’s decide what constitutes a ‘fair’ usage limit and criticized inaccurate usage meters that could potentially trigger penalties and overlimit fees.

Windstream has announced the increased broadband investments that expanded DSL service to about 75,000 more homes and businesses and brought fiber connections to cell towers are nearly complete and the company intends to dramatically cut spending on further enhancements by the end of 2013.

Jeff Gardner, Windstream’s CEO, told investors on a conference call last week the company’s highest priority in 2013 is preserving its current dividend to create value for shareholders. Not on the priority list: improving broadband infrastructure to support video streaming services, further expanding broadband in areas it now bypasses, and boosting the quality of service it delivers to current customers.

Gardner called the company’s increased investment in 2011 and 2012 a result of “finite opportunities that provide[d] attractive investment returns.”

But most of that spending will come to an end next year.

“We expect to substantially complete our capital investments related to fiber to the tower projects, reaching 4,500 towers by the end of 2013,” said Gardner. “In addition, we will finish most of our broadband stimulus initiatives […] to roughly 75,000 new households. As we exit 2013, we will see capital spending related to these projects decrease substantially.”

That could be bad news for communities in places like Wayne County, Mo., which suffers with inadequate broadband from the company. In some areas when local broadband traffic reduces DSL speeds to a crawl, area businesses are occasionally forced to shut down for the day.

Broadband and business services now account for 70% of Windstream’s revenue, but it has come with a price: increased investment, that Wall Street considers negative to the company’s value. To satisfy analysts and shareholders, Gardner made it clear improving the balance sheet is a major priority. He said he will continue to direct excess free cash flow first to preserve the company’s shareholder dividend, and then direct much of the rest to debt repayment.

That does not mean Windstream will end all investments in its business. The company now spends 12.4% on ongoing capital investments and will continue to do so, but much of the spending will cover network upkeep and supporting more profitable business services.

“Over the last four years, our acquisitions have been very targeted on businesses that are growing in the strategic growth areas that we’re focused on, and we’ve really changed the mix very significantly here, away from the consumer business toward the enterprise space, and I think that puts us in a very different position with respect to the stability of our revenue and OIBDA over time,” Gardner added.

Windstream plans to bring back its “price for life” promotion this year.

Gardner noted Windstream is well-positioned to take advantage of the fact it has few competitors, which reduces pressure to invest and improve its networks to stay competitive.

“Our residential customers remain concentrated in very rural areas where there is less competition, which has contributed to a more stable consumer business,” Gardner admitted.

He added that those rural customers will have to rely on the company’s satellite partner Dish Networks for video services. Windstream will not build a “capital-intensive facilities based technology” to support online video. In contrast, CenturyLink has invested in Prism, a fiber-to-the-neighborhood service in several of its larger markets, to offer triple play packages of broadband, phone, and cable TV. Windstream has no plans to follow.

Despite investments in 2011 and 2012 to improve broadband service and speeds, Windstream’s DSL services have not kept up with its cable competitors.

During the last quarter, Windstream lost 2,000 broadband customers and 23,000 consumer voice lines (a 4.5% decline year over year).

To stem the tide of customers moving away from the phone company, Windstream is trying to sell value-added Internet support services, online backup, and faster speeds to maximize profitability. It will also add new customers made possible from federally funded broadband stimulus projects.

Windstream customers can expect to see increased promotional activity this year to win or keep their business:

• Covering the costs of switching from another provider to Windstream;
• A return to the “price for life” promotion, which promises stable rates as long as a customer stays with the company;
• A substantial introductory discount on satellite TV when bundled with Windstream’s own services.

Time Warner Cable subscribers in Wisconsin are facing the third rate increase since October 2012.

The cable operator has announced a $3/month rate hike for most television packages — a four percent increase for those with the popular digital variety package.

Time Warner blamed increasing programming costs in a notice attached to this month’s cable bills. The company defended the increase, stating the rate rise was half of what it could have been if the cable company tried to recoup all the programming costs incurred over the last year.

Customers facing higher cable bills and still paying regular prices should consider our advice on winning a lower rate from the company. With just 10 minutes, our readers are saving $20-50 a month on Time Warner Cable services with attractive customer retention deals.

In October, Time Warner announced it was introducing a cable modem rental fee of $3.95 a month. In November, the company raised rates on its converter boxes by $1.05 a month. The latest rate increase for cable television takes effect next month.

 Thanks to Stop the Cap! reader Nkundinshuti in Milwaukee for sending word.

Do you ever wonder why your local cable system suddenly decided to begin carrying barely known networks like Centric, Logo, Palladia, and a dozen other channels you can’t recall ever watching even as providers perennially complain about “increased programming costs?”

The cable dial has gotten increasingly crowded with secondary cable networks that usually occupy three digit channel numbers somewhere in cable dial Siberia, unlikely to be encountered by anyone other than the most hearty channel surfer.

Welcome to the cable network racket, run by the corporate owners of popular cable networks that allegedly force cable operators to also carry (and pay for) lesser-watched networks as part of a broader carriage deal.

Today, Cablevision filed an antitrust lawsuit against Viacom in Manhattan federal court for illegally forcing the cable company to carry and pay for more than a dozen ancillary cable networks it claims customers don’t want, just so Viacom will sell access to popular cable networks including Comedy Central, MTV and Nickelodeon.

“The manner in which Viacom sells its programming is illegal, anti-consumer, and wrong,” Cablevision indicated in a prepared statement. “Viacom’s abuse of its market power is not only illegal, but also prevents Cablevision from delivering the programming that its customers want and that competes with Viacom’s less popular channels.”

Cablevision argues Viacom is hostile with cable operators who don’t want these add-on channels, coercing carriage agreements by threatening “massive financial penalties” or exclusion of popular channels altogether until operators sign up for the majority of Viacom networks.

Cablevision’s complaint asserts that Viacom is engaged in a “per se” illegal tying arrangement in violation of federal antitrust laws. Cablevision also claims Viacom has engaged in unlawful “block booking,” a form of tying  conditions on the sale of a package of rights to the purchaser’s taking of other rights.

Cablevision is seeking a number of remedies including voiding the carriage agreement Cablevision signed with Viacom just last December, a permanent injunction banning Viacom from making carriage agreements conditional on adding other networks, and financial relief in the form of damages and legal costs related to bringing the suit.

Yes

Viacom-owned networks customers actually want:

• MTV
• MTV2
• Nickelodeon
• VH1
• Spike
• TV Land
• Comedy Central
• BET

What?

Viacom’s 14 extra networks you may have never heard of and may not want to pay for:

• Centric
• CMT
• MTV Hits
• MTV Tr3s
• Nick Jr.
• Nicktoons
• Palladia
• Teen Nick
• VH1 Classic
• VH1 Soul
• Logo
• CMT Pure Country
• Nick 2
• MTV Jams

Viacom issued a statement minutes ago claiming it would “vigorously defend this transparent attempt by Cablevision to use the courts to renegotiate our existing two-month-old agreement.”

Viacom argues it does not force operators to carry any of its networks, but admitted it does offer financial incentives in the form of lower prices when operators agree to also carry its lesser-known networks. Viacom said that it had “long offered discounts to those who agree to provide additional network distribution.”