Home » Competition »Consumer News » Currently Reading:

Cable Listens to Wall Street: Standalone Broadband Pricing Heading for $80/Month

Phillip Dampier October 18, 2017 Competition, Consumer News 10 Comments

Cable operators that have watched their stocks get pounded after warning their third quarter earnings would reflect an undeniable trend towards cord-cutting are considering dramatically raising broadband-only pricing to $80 or more to protect profits.

Comcast is among the largest cable companies responding to repeated calls from Wall Street analysts to boost broadband pricing, hiking broadband-only rates to around $65 a month after a customer’s $40 promotional pricing offer expires. Charter Communications also hiked prices earlier this year to $65 a month for its entry-level 60 or 100Mbps package, with further rate increases expected in early 2018. But those incremental rate hikes are not enough to satisfy analysts who fear cable’s video earnings losses are already higher than the revenue gained from charging more for broadband service.

In a note to investors, Morgan Stanley said the cable industry’s efforts to jack up prices for those dropping video service have made some progress, noting most companies raised prices by 12% in 2017, establishing a new beachhead rate of $65 a month — the rate broadband-only customers should now expect to pay.

“As video revenue growth is increasingly pressured, leaning on data pricing is tempting to sustain earnings,” said Benjamin Swinburne, a Morgan Stanley analyst in a report.

But recent rate hikes don’t go far enough for some. Prices must rise at least another $15 a month to satisfy Jeffries analyst Mike McCormack and restore industry profits lost from cord-cutting. McCormack notes customers who have not canceled cable television are being insulated from the most dramatic rate hikes impacting cord-cutters, pointing out the average customer with a bundle of services now pays around $49 a month for broadband service — $16 less.

“Cable companies are likely to raise stand-alone broadband pricing in order to combat the EBITDA declines from downsizing,” said McCormack in a report. “This practice is already evident and justified given the lack of a bundling discount. Based on our analysis, we estimate Comcast would need to raise stand-alone pricing to roughly $80 in order to break even from a profitability perspective.”

Swinburne

Jonathan Chaplin, an analyst for New Street Research who has called on the cable industry to double broadband pricing for more than a year, thinks the marketplace is ripe for sweeping rate increases.

“We have argued that broadband is underpriced, given that pricing has barely increased over the past decade while broadband utility has exploded,” New Street said. “Our analysis suggested a ‘utility-adjusted’ ARPU target of ~$90. Comcast recently increased standalone broadband to $90 (including modem), paving the way for faster ARPU growth as the mix shifts in favor of broadband-only households. Charter will likely follow, once they are through the integration of Time Warner Cable.”

Wall Street analysts typically use code language that avoids portraying the marketplace as a monopoly or barely-competitive duopoly, instead preferring to note there is little risk or headwind to prevent operators from boosting prices or using their large market share to their advantage. Chaplin argues that cable television is no longer to profit center it used to be — broadband is.

“In fact, the [free cash flow] lost from subs dropping pay-TV is generally recovered through higher [broadband] pricing,” said Chaplin.

Many analysts also argue that most of the proceeds collected from charging higher broadband prices should be used to buy back shares of stock or returned to shareholders, not used to upgrade or expand service. In fact, Wall Street is currently punishing Altice USA, sending its initial stock price from $30 a share to just $24.49 this week. One of the reasons for the fall is the money its Cablevision unit is spending to replace its coaxial cable network with fiber optics. AT&T’s stock has also suffered as the company continues to spend money on expanding its AT&T Fiber service while combating cord cutting with its U-verse and DirecTV services.

Currently there are 10 comments on this Article:

  1. FredH says:

    If no one saw this coming – they were idiots. Next come the data caps for everyone.

  2. EJ says:

    They better do it while the getting is good. Raise your price and be put on the radar for unfair rate increases. Attempt to sell that you NEED to increase rates to a Bernie type president that fires that douche canoe of a FCC chairman to hire someone more inline with his/her beliefs. So you have three years to milk your $90 internet price. Mind you I was paying that for a long time to a COOP for 10 meg, but that is neither here nor there.

    As of right now internet providers can guarantee that they can raise prices to just about any level with this administration, but they better look at it as a potential short term gain. If they think the political climate can’t easily change from light touch Trump to a consumer sided Sanders they don’t know anything. The FCC has the power and ability to push an consumer protections without congress. All it takes is someone that will turn a blind eye to the lobbyist and say it like it is. Internet is a utility and should be regulated as a utility. Due the current low competition landscape everything should be regulated where monopolies and duopolies exists. That means data caps should be regulated, up time should be regulated, Data percentages should be regulated (paying for 25 meg you get 25 meg 24/7) and of course price should be regulated, We have given these companies tax breaks and cold hard cash for years. They have no excuses left if they raise prices while a CEO makes 5 to 30 million a year. So go for it cable companies. Listen to the “street” and see how long you can milk your short term gain. See if your math works out in the end and good luck to you.

  3. Matt says:

    Until an operator has the guts to give true à la carte options to the customer the trend is just going to continue. Everyone I know who has cut the cord has said the same thing. People are willing to pay for what they watch but not all the “hanger-on” channels so to speak.

    And there were plenty of mergers and consolidation under Obama as well. I don’t think it’s going to matter unless there is an administration willing to break up the big boys again or make sweeping legislation in regard to municipal broadband that’s currently being strangled out by the industry pouring money into the law makers pockets. Only then will real competition return to the market.

  4. Larry Gall says:

    This has become far, far too important a resource for the likes of these jerks to control (in it’s entirety). The jerks I’m referring to are the Hollywood movie houses that started us down this path. Here’s a brief recap..

    Whether it’s the cable companies buying into movie studios, or vice versa, the end result is a merge of the two. Now, what was the motivation? Hollywood, tired of years of falling ticket sales at theaters, while people preferred to stay home and watch instead, wanted to go where the eyeballs were. They didn’t just want to regain former movie patrons as new customers, they also sought to regain over a decade of “lost” ticket revenue.

    Between escalating monthly bills, junk infomercial channels, and now selling every scrap of our personal information they can get their hands on, they’ve put a decade long squeeze on us. Casing every potential nickel and dollar on made up fees and charges, now caps ..remember the “technology fee”, or the people in the midwest who were getting native Indian reservation related bills in which they didn’t even live near. Always chalking it up to a ‘mistake’. A significant “mistake” campaign of these so-called “billing errors” in the hope that at least some won’t be noticed.

    So, on to the third and final stop.. ISPs. After chasing customers from the movie theaters with $20 tickets and $12 popcorn, the next price gouging trip led to our living rooms. But that’s not good enough for them. People got tired of wading through the infomercial channels, religion channels, foreign language channels and a myriad of others, so they started moving to Netflix, Hulu and other internet based subscription services.

    So now we get to the worst part. After seeing this new internet based trend and the cord cutting that comes with it (not to mention the old thorn in Hollywood’s side called Pirate Bay), the next logical step was for these movie houses / cable tv companies was to buy up every ISP they could get their hands on.

    So what did they do first? Did they start investing in infrastructure? Did they start adding value to the channel lineup? Lower prices lol.. NO. They started throttling bandwidth. Not caps, not at that time, this was specific throttling of Netflix and others on these Hollywood owned ISP networks (MAJOR conflict of interest here). After net neutrality, it stopped for a while, and they started to cap home internet services since they didn’t have the resources to fight back, and since their collusion with other ISPs meant there were no other choices. It became a “our way or the highway” mentality that was significantly worsened with the recent misfortune called Ajit Pai.

    With Pai, everything is going to get much worse. This talk of yet more price increases is because the climate of Trumps White House and Pai’s ..well, I cant use those words here.

    God help us.

    • EJ says:

      Trump and Pia are a blessing in disguise you will see. As long as someone somewhere can muster a decent Bernie type person we only have three more years of this. The power will shift to far away from consumers creating a a door the size of a semi to regulate broadband as a utility. Then the game will change. You will either see more competition or utility based regulation. Either way the consumer will benefit. It is unfortunate this is the culture of America, in that things have to be pretty bad before we act. Still this is going to get bad and there are few to no clear heads within these organizations and regulatory bodies that are going to see that they might have gone a little to far in screwing the people that just want some internet. We will see, but if my logical hypothesis is correct this will be the path. This is the trend of modern America so pending anything drastic happening I am pretty confident in my hypothesis.

  5. George says:

    It’s a good thing Charter was allowed to buy up Time Warner, or else we’d still have $15/mo cable internet service packages available…

    If you’re not a heavy user, there are options. Unlimited cellular on a Mobly from ATT was only $20 for quite a while. Sprint has some similar options. I’ve helped a few retired folks boost their neighbor’s WiFi signal so they can at least share the costs. And with any luck the telco in your area will have much lower pricing.

  6. JayS says:

    Will these price hikes attract over-builders, like Google, to fire-up the trenching machine again? Insight the likes of AT&T, Verizon, T-mobile, Sprint and US Cellular to accelerate the deployment of 5g-fixed internet? Speed the launch of, soon to be deployed, LEO Satellite constellations? If it does not do any of these, the price of Cable/Internet is priced correctly. Sure, I want lower prices, but it initially takes higher prices to attract competitive innovators into the market.

  7. Dave says:

    How long before democrats force households to buy cable so they can get “real news”?
    If they could force us to buy health insurance, then why would this be hard to imagine?.
    The left wing are scum and the reason our founders wanted us armed.

    • Roger says:

      Better get your tin foil hat tuned up, Dave.

      The idea behind the ACA was a noble one. The idea of mandatory health insurance was to build the pool of clients so that the risk of taking on people with pre-existing conditions and to remove yearly and lifetime maximum was spread over a much larger base of clients. This, in turn, SHOULD have stopped the price from escalating quickly while covering a lot more people. This is the system that works so well in Switzerland.

      Unfortunately, too many lobbyist got their scummy little hands into things and made the bill onerous and, to a great extent, unworkable.

  8. Limboaz says:

    What!? No mention of anti-trust hawk Paul Weiss being nominated to head the FTC? He needs to break up the tech behemoths, like Comcrap, Slime Warner, Google, Amazon, etc. That would be a good start. Of course, bringing competition into the Internet marketplace is pretty hard when the cost of competitors digging up entire cities to lay fiber and cables is prohibitive. This is a problem that will bedevil us for some time to come. I do think ISPs will have to be regulated like power and water utilities eventually, as much as it pains me to say that as a capitalist pig.







Search This Site:

Contributions:

Recent Comments:

  • PMN: I got the same answer from the AT&T "Call Center" agent, and I hung up and didn't escalate. Did you happen escalate to the "Retention" dept? I w...
  • Larry Fostano: BBB and or your Attorney General. I say , lest get a petition going to submit also....
  • Ryan: Just tried this, worked like a charm. Said I was switching to streaming because of the price. Right away they offered $40 for choice for 12 months....
  • EDWIN Dennis: I ordered a liveware antenna and amplifier: they tried to charge me for 3 antennas.. I got that straight at the bank. Now, no response from liveware; ...
  • j lundberg: after forcing the purchase of their phone- i paid taxes and 1st months service in January ,then find out the phone will not be here before Dec. 29 as ...
  • John Michel: How can one stop SPECTRUM from sending filthy, immoral emails to my email address. I went to settings to set up a block on these filthy emails. Does...
  • Catherine Harris: Where can I find COUT TV on Frontier?...
  • Roger: I read about this once. I think it was in the book 1984....
  • Roger: On top of that, you know the cable companies are going to price the individual stations in such a way that ten or fifteen of them will be the same pri...
  • Oddest Artist: Agreed. Nearly all deals from programmers (and broadcasters) require equal distribution and/or carriage of their services. Providers are bound contrac...
  • Doug: Good luck with that. Forcing a cable company to sell channels a-la-carte will need the consent of the content owner (i.e. - Big Media). And the cont...
  • L. Nova: Blame Wall Street and their relentless greed led by people such as Craig Moffett who have hissy fits when companies such as Verizon want to spend the ...

Your Account: