[Editor’s Note: The fast-changing news on the Time Warner metered usage plan and its temporary demise did not allow sufficient time to present a full history of media coverage of this issue across all of the affected areas. For historical documentation, and in case of any potential resumption of this type of plan, I feel it is important to have this material archived here for future reference. Some of the information in this news report may no longer be applicable.]

“Sorry to burst people’s bubble.”

Five words I’ll bet Time Warner’s Regional Communications Vice President Jim Gordon wished he could take back.  Before the eventual “shelving” of the rationing plan (temporarily in our view), you could really begin to sense the growing frustration from the company about the fact they had created a public relations nightmare for themselves with a tiering system that no customer clamored for, and most adamantly opposed.  But those five words, which seemed to dismiss concerns of customers, was actually a major turning point in this battle.  That evening’s news report on Rochester’s most popular newscast caused a mad dash as constituents called and e-mailed the area’s congressional delegation, as well as state and local officials, complaining about the “dismissive attitude” many came away with from Time Warner.  It also brought an avalanche of e-mails here from customers claiming that was the last straw and they were switching providers.

The anchor found the use of the gas gauge concept interesting.  So do we.  It’s a great reminder of what people in this country went through last year when insufficient competition and the quest for extreme profits sent pricing into the stratosphere.  The OPEC of the Internet is an apt term to describe operators trying to meter their way to even fatter profits.

Rachel Barnhart did a fine job here, presenting very detailed information about the Time Warner proposal, especially about the speeds on lower tiers.  There wasn’t much from the other side in this report, but it didn’t stand alone.  The station also did a package on the response of the deaf community to the cap proposal.  WHAM also was the only station in town that put up an extended interview with Jim Gordon, with more Q&A.  Barnhart has a unique perspective on this issue, having dropped her own Road Runner service (for unrelated reasons) in favor of a local cellular carrier’s data service.  She wrote about her experience in her blog.

Not rated. This was not aired. It’s an extended interview for the web. It does offer some excellent insight into the talking points and philosophy the company was using locally to push this plan on consumers. “Why Rochester… the great news is” turned out not to be the sort of framing most people here were impressed with. The speed issue for lower usage customers is not that important. It is for the “power users” who are punitively capped at ludicrously low proposed tiers. The answers don’t get any better beyond that, especially the nonsense about companies “failing” when not preparing for the future.  This from a company with a broadband product that is highly profitable, added 11% more customers in 2008 and decreased investment in its network infrastructure by the same percentage to serve those customers.  You can rebut them yourself in the comments section. The plan that Rochester overwhelmingly thought was right for us is the one we have right now.

[Editor’s Note: The fast-changing news on the Time Warner metered usage plan and its temporary demise did not allow sufficient time to present a full history of media coverage of this issue across all of the affected areas. For historical documentation, and in case of any potential resumption of this type of plan, I feel it is important to have this material archived here for future reference. Some of the information in this news report may no longer be applicable.]

I remember hearing bits and pieces about the “loyalty program” or extra benefits for “loyal customers” here and there but never pinned down exactly what that represented.  WROC’s cameras panned across one of the publicity sheets Time Warner had created to help explain their plan, and I finally caught a glimpse of what that represented.

As you’ll see in the clip below, “loyal” customers of Road Runner’s standard service plan would be upgraded from 10Mbps to 15Mbps, and Turbo plan customers would be upgraded from 15Mbps to 20Mbps (nothing is shown about upload speed changes.)  As we’ve remarked previously, speed upgrades on a draconian usage capped broadband plan only let you hit the limits faster than ever, and additional speed is incidental under this kind of business model.  Since only low bandwidth applications are likely to be used by customers who don’t come anywhere close to their “allowance,” extra speed makes little difference to them.  Higher consumption or “power users” enticed by speed upgrades are discouraged from enjoying them because of the caps.

Incidentally, those “loyalty” speeds for Rochester are already commonplace in Time Warner markets where they face competition from Verizon FiOS.  No loyalty or cap required.  Time Warner’s “loyalty” program was just the frosting on this cake of inadequacy.  Consumers were not placated by Time Warner’s “new and improved” Cap ‘n Tier system of Internet rationing, and they remain dissatisfied and suspicious that the “shelved” cap proposal will be back by autumn like a bad penny.

Also not to miss is Frontier’s very clever injection into the story, expressing “surprise” Time Warner would stick it to their customers at a time when the economy is hurting.  Very nice touch.

[Editor’s Note: The fast-changing news on the Time Warner metered usage plan and its temporary demise did not allow sufficient time to present a full history of media coverage of this issue across all of the affected areas. For historical documentation, and in case of any potential resumption of this type of plan, I feel it is important to have this material archived here for future reference. Some of the information in this news report may no longer be applicable.]

Time Warner’s metered billing plan for broadband Internet was one of the hottest stories this year in Rochester, resulting in overwhelming numbers of comments and calls to station newsrooms and websites.  For this reason, it remained a hot topic day after day, and got expanded attention.

WROC had a quick report on Time Warner’s change of the original plan to increase usage allowances, but also allowed the company to state, unchallenged, the “exaflood theory,” that claims the Internet will somehow run out of bandwidth as early as 2012, a notion debunked several years ago when it turned out the study promulgating that theory was paid by an interested party (AT&T) in coming to that conclusion.

Beautiful Beaumont, part of the Golden Triangle with Port Arthur and Orange, Texas.  Home to Lamar Univerity, the Texas Wildcatters, and the South Texas State Fair, the city is also known to online enthusiasts as the unlucky epicenter of broadband usage capping.

Time Warner’s Golden Triangle Division rolled out the first broadband caps on Beaumont residents last summer, implementing service plans ranging from 4-50GB of usage for new customers, or those intending to change their Road Runner service plan.  Company officials rolled out the usual dog and pony show about how the change wouldn’t really affect most people at all.

1GB gets you about 70,000 e-mails, 34 hours of gaming or 1,344 hours of Web browsing; or, it’s the approximate equivalent of downloading 569 photos, 277 music files, 7 hours of low-resolution video (YouTube), 3 hours of standard definition streaming video or 45 minutes of high-definition streaming video.

As StoptheCap! reported last summer, the “experiment” was met with mixed reaction.  Many customers felt the tiers had paltry limits, many didn’t like the fact an unlimited tier was no longer available, and the whole thing was too expensive.  Notably, nobody asked for this kind of rationing, and nobody seemed to advocate for it outside of the company itself.

Alex Dudley, corporate spokesman for Time Warner, used most of the same rhetoric about the Beaumont “test” he used about those to be conducted in Rochester, the Triad of North Carolina, San Antonio, and Austin, Texas.

Dudley argues that the usage cap issue is not a foregone conclusion at Time Warner.   Dudley told GigaOm that TWC’s experiment in Texas was just that “a test.”

A test that has now become indefinite, and today Beaumont is the only city in Time Warner’s national service area still under the thumb of usage caps.  Dudley, bless his heart, added this familiar proviso:

“If consumers don’t want it, the company is going to back away from it.  I think this is a trial and we are going to learn from this trial,” he said.

Consumers in Beaumont don’t want the cap.  Consumers in Rochester don’t want the cap.  Consumers in the Triad don’t want the cap.  Consumers in San Antonio don’t want the cap.  Consumers in Austin don’t want the cap.

Executives at Time Warner want the cap.

Beaumont is stuck with the cap.

It took thousands of protesters from all of these cities, a United States congressman, a United States senator, and pressure from investors, the media, and who knows who else to get them to “temporarily suspend” the cap nightmare, but with the allusion it will be back later.

The only thing they have learned from the trial is customers don’t like it.  But they’re going to get it anyway.  Just like in Beaumont.

WHEC-TV tried to explain what a gigabyte is to the average consumer, using small squares that remind me of those AT&T “milky minutes.”  Only Time Warner gigabyte allowances never roll over.  In fact, the only thing Time Warner wants to roll over is YOU.

Reporter Ray Levato gives it his best shot, and does generally well with his analogies (although everyone has different numbers about what equals a gigabyte), but things rapidly derail when he tries to explain Time Warner isn’t a monopoly in Rochester.

People in our area can get their Internet service from companies like Frontier, Comcast and Clearwire.

Comcast?  Don’t think so.  Not in metropolitan Rochester.  There might be a scattering of Comcast systems in some of the rural communities far away from the city, but you can be assured Time Warner doesn’t compete in those areas.  Frontier and Clearwire are options, but not for everyone.  Frontier DSL has limited availability in many rural communities outside of the city and adjacent suburbs, and Clearwire service is extremely limited outside of the city itself and a few nearby towns.  There are numerous Time Warner customers who have just three other options: outrageously priced satellite Internet, dial-up, or go without.

The report seems to suggest that consumers’ hatred of this plan is somehow now alleviated by Time Warner’s second plan, which I’ve yet to hear anyone suggest is an improvement worth discussing. The train comes completely off the tracks by the time Time Warner’s guy shows up.  I am certain he has heard from customers.  But I am also certain the overwhelming majority of them want to leave things just the way they are, profitable for Time Warner, rationally priced and worry-free for customers.  Then, short shrift is given to Rochester’s deaf community: “not a problem,” according to this report anyway.  That’s not what my e-mail inbox says.

By the way, since I couldn’t find their promised list of alternative providers on their website, here’s ours.

This was a tougher call, because some facts were wrong, and nobody seemed willing to challenge anyone else’s assertions, but it gave equal time to ordinary consumers who hate caps, a reporter willing to try and explain what the heck a ‘gigabyte’ is to the average person who has no idea, and Time Warner’s position on the matter.  A good newscast report will let the viewer decide.  I suspect most already have, but you still have to give them the chance.