Home » Competition » Recent Articles:

A Note to Readers About Charter, Time Warner Cable, and Bright House Networks

With the transition from Time Warner Cable and Bright House Networks to Charter Communications now complete, starting today all stories referring to Charter/Spectrum, Time Warner Cable or Bright House Networks will be found under “Charter Spectrum” in our provider list.

Regardless of the name change, media reports from around the country have little positive to say about customers’ experiences with “New Charter.”

Industry consolidation from mergers and acquisitions does nothing to improve competition, something essential to fix the broken broadband market in the United States, as this PSA illustrates:

 

FCC Reverses Merger Condition Requiring Charter to Overbuild to Compete

Reuters is reporting the Republican-dominated Federal Communications Commission has reversed a pro-consumer mandate requiring Charter to overbuild at least one million homes to offer competitive internet service. The requirement was imposed on Charter Communications as part of the FCC’s approval of its merger deal with Time Warner Cable and Bright House Networks in 2016.

The overbuild requirement would have forced Charter to directly compete with incumbent phone and/or cable operators in areas where only one provider now offers service.

Pai

The petition to repeal the condition was personally circulated by FCC chairman Ajit Pai who didn’t feel the FCC should mandate cable companies to compete as part of a merger approval.

Former FCC chairman Thomas Wheeler pushed for the requirement, noting that Charter’s merger offered an opportunity to incorporate pro-consumer deal conditions like increased competition. The overbuild requirement would have required Charter to expand its cable service in areas where only telephone company DSL was available or give an opportunity for consumers to have a choice of cable operators. Pai’s effort gives Charter a big break, now only requiring the company to offer high-speed internet as a de facto monopoly to two million new customers where no internet service currently exists.

It also represents a gift to small independent cable operators and their lobbying arm, the American Cable Association, who feared the overbuild requirement would bring Charter into their service areas as an unwelcome competitor that would have “devastating effects on the smaller broadband providers Charter will overbuild” and could put them out of business.

The Competitive Enterprise Institute has its own pending filing asking the FCC to eliminate other deal conditions, including a prohibition on data caps Charter must adhere to for up to seven years.

Comcast Takes ‘XFINITY Instant TV’ Online Video Package Across National Footprint

Phillip Dampier March 29, 2017 Comcast/Xfinity, Competition, Consumer News, Online Video, Reuters Comments Off on Comcast Takes ‘XFINITY Instant TV’ Online Video Package Across National Footprint

The NBC and Comcast logo are displayed on top of 30 Rockefeller Plaza, formerly known as the GE building, in midtown Manhattan in New York July 1, 2015. REUTERS/Brendan McDermid/File Photo

NEW YORK (Reuters) – Comcast Corp is planning to rebrand and expand a streaming video option for broadband subscribers who do not want to pay for a traditional cable package, sources told Reuters on Monday.

The service, dubbed Xfinity Instant TV, will be priced as low as $15 a month to roughly $40 a month, sources said. It will include major broadcast networks as well as sports channels like ESPN and Spanish language channels such as Telemundo and Univision.

Xfinity Instant TV is expected to be available in the third quarter to more than 50 million homes within Comcast’s footprint, which includes cities such as Philadelphia, Washington, D.C., and Chicago.

The company is changing its video offerings to be more targeted as viewer habits evolve. Xfinity Instant TV will be aimed at high-speed Internet subscribers who cannot afford or do not want to pay for bigger cable bundles, sources said. The hope is that subscribers will eventually upgrade to Comcast’s X1 platform.

Comcast has already given a $15-a-month streaming video service known as Stream a trial run in Boston and Chicago, sources said. Xfinity Instant TV is a revamped version of that offering and will be rolled out nationwide in Comcast’s territories.

Other pay-TV providers including Dish Network Corp and AT&T Inc have started online streaming services for “cord cutting” consumers, or those who are dropping their cable packages for other options.

Comcast’s service is different in that it is limited to its territories and to its own broadband subscribers. It has yet to offer an over-the-top streaming service more broadly nationwide.

(Reporting by Anjali Athavaley; Editing by Bill Trott)

America’s Best Three Internet Providers: EPB, Sonic, and Google Fiber

Phillip Dampier March 27, 2017 Broadband Speed, Competition, Consumer News Comments Off on America’s Best Three Internet Providers: EPB, Sonic, and Google Fiber

Consumer Reports is having a hard time handing out high scores to America’s cable and phone companies after its recent editorial overhaul that replaces simple numeric-only scores with a simpler color code that ranks good companies in green, fair companies in yellow, and downright lousy ones in red.

In its most recent rankings (subscription required), only three internet providers managed to win green ratings: a publicly owned municipal utility in Chattanooga, Tenn., a private ISP serving northern California communities in and around San Francisco, and Google Fiber, which shows every sign of stopping further expansion of its fiber to the home network.

EPB Fiber is the runaway winner of Consumer Reports’ ongoing ratings of America’s top telecom providers, scoring 92 and getting excellent ratings for value, reliability and speed. Sonic, which still primarily offers DSL service, achieved second place despite being limited in selling higher speeds available over AT&T’s wireline telephone network. Google Fiber made third place and is a regular favorite for offering affordable gigabit speeds for around $70 a month, not much more expensive than what some ISPs charge for 60Mbps for less.

The fact a public utility like EPB offers America’s best broadband service must give fits to the telecom giants like Comcast, Charter, and AT&T that only dream of achieving similar scores and have a history of opposing public broadband and in some cases have financed lobbying efforts seeking to ban it.

Providers achieving “yellow” ratings were almost exclusively small, regional independent cable operators and overbuilders like WOW and RCN. Verizon and Frontier’s versions of FiOS also made the cut, although it seems both suffered ratings drops attributable to decreased scores for value and customer service. Both companies have eliminated some of their most aggressive promotions that used to lure customers with a very low price for service.

The list of lousy-scoring companies is larger than ever, and encompass all the familiar large operators most Americans have to do business with. Since Stop the Cap! started in 2008, Mediacom is still rated the lousiest of the lousy cable companies, achieving a score of just 51. Only HughesNet, a satellite internet provider, scored worse, and not by much — achieving a 47 score.

DSL providers other than Sonic performed dismally as well: FairPoint (52), Windstream (53), Frontier (53), Verizon DSL (54), TDS (55), AT&T DSL (55), CenturyLink (57), and Cincinnati Bell DSL (57).

Cable companies also live in the ratings basement – Comcast/XFINITY (54), Charter/Time Warner Cable (55), GCI (60), Comporium (60), and Atlantic Broadband (60). Charter Communications just barely made it out of the red section with a score of (61), also shared by Cox and Cable ONE. Altice’s Cablevision, AT&T U-verse, Blue Ridge Communications, and Consolidated Cable managed scores of just 63. Charter/Bright House and Service Electric got a 64, and Altice’s Suddenlink managed a surprising 66.

The consumer magazine’s conclusion – most Americans still loathe their cable and phone companies, their prices, their bundles, and are greatly dissatisfied with the state of competition. That is unlikely to change considering the industry’s current trend of consolidation, which further reduces customer choice.

Wide Open West Will Be Wide Open to Merger/Takeover After Launching IPO

Phillip Dampier March 27, 2017 Competition, Consumer News, Editorial & Site News, WOW! 3 Comments

One of America’s handful of cable overbuilders that provide competing cable television service will be ripe for an acquisition or merger after launching an initial public offering that could raise as much as $750 million and make them a juicy target for a takeover.

WideOpenWest, which customers know better as WOW!, provides almost a half-million customers in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, Ohio, South Carolina and Tennessee with a choice of a second cable company. It has consistently won reasonably high scores in ratings issued by Consumer Reports and often offers better speed and service than incumbent providers. WOW has been quietly and slowly expanding service, but in the last two years has attracted the interest of private equity firms and Wall Street banks. One of those equity firms — Crestview Partners, invested $125 million in WOW 18 months ago. UBS Investment Bank and Credit Suisse have teamed up to manage the IPO.

Jeff Marcus, who also happens to be a partner in Crestview, has been named chairman of WOW. Avista Capital Partners still owns almost 60% of the company.

By entering the public market, WOW could quickly come under pressure from Wall Street analysts to get out of the cable business by selling the company and profiting investors. The drumbeat for mergers and acquisitions has only intensified with a corporate-friendly Trump Administration that has sought to appoint “hands-off” regulators at the FCC and Justice Department. There are several likely buyers — the various cable companies that face direct competition from WOW and would like shut the company down and upstarts like Altice, which has targeted smaller cable operators like Cablevision and Suddenlink.

Marcus has telegraphed he is isn’t in a hurry to spend investors’ money, which could leave WOW flush with cash, something else attractive in a takeover. Multichannel News reports that one of WOW’s “main directives” would be to offer “video, voice, and data services in packages that consumers want,” — hardly a revolutionary concept. In a July interview, Marcus made it clear there was ‘no burning need to increase scale.’ That tells would-be buyers the company hasn’t any immediate plans to spend a lot of money or expand service, things that could drive away some buyers.

“It’s all opportunistic,” Marcus said. “When I started Marcus Cable with 18,000 subscribers, I had no idea that it would get to 1.3 million. One thing led to another and we took advantage of opportunities as they presented themselves. I think that’s what is going to happen here.“

A wealth opportunity for Marcus would be collecting significant proceeds selling the operation. There is a good chance WOW will either buy other companies or be bought itself as the cable industry consolidation wave continues. Other operators about its size — Cable ONE and until recently NewWave Communications, have been considered takeover targets for years. NewWave was acquired by CableONE in January for $735 million in cash, coincidentally slightly less than the potential upper limit of WOW’s proceeds from an IPO.

Search This Site:

Contributions:

Recent Comments:

Your Account:

Stop the Cap!