Let the gouging begin. Here was the price being charged by an eBay vendor this past Tuesday for the SB6141 cable modem.

A few days ago, Stop the Cap! notified readers Time Warner Cable was planning to charge a $3.95/mo modem rental fee for current High Speed Internet customers planning to keep using company-supplied equipment.

With over $300 million in potential new revenue, this new surcharge from the folks living high on 1% Mountain is guaranteed to make the cable company a tidy sum for doing… absolutely nothing. Time Warner is not improving your broadband service — they are just charging you separately for a piece of equipment needed to use the service you already paid for. It would be like selling you a lamp and then start charging an extra monthly fee to keep the power cord.

We’ve had our own illuminating experience here at Stop the Cap! headquarters finding our way around this newest surcharge — by purchasing our own DOCSIS 3 cable modem and sending the soon-to-be $47.40 a year (until the end of time) Ubee modem packing back to Time Warner. Only we can’t.

I am unsure what bothers me more: Time Warner’s scanty “approved modems for purchase list” — mostly Cadillac-priced models that would fit in at Barney’s New York or Nordstrom, the bottom feeder eBay and Amazon Marketplace sellers who are capitalizing on the modem fee by increasing their prices for customer-owned equipment to gouging levels, or Time Warner’s failure to activate customer-purchased modems because it “changed its billing system this week” in preparation for the new modem fees “and can’t activate customer owned modems at the moment.”

As Time Warner Cable customers began ordering the SB6141 online, the price doubled. This is the same vendor that charged $99.95 two days earlier.

Out of the five “approved” models, the obvious best choice for those who do not require a modem-router combination is the Motorola SurfBoard SB6141 DOCSIS 3.0 Cable Modem. It features support for 8×4 DOCSIS 3 channels, which in non-technical terms means it will handle the best speeds Time Warner is likely to offer in the foreseeable future. We do not recommend customers invest in DOCSIS 2 modems, because that technology is closer to the end of its useful life and simply will not support broadband speeds customers will crave in the next few years.

Once Time Warner Cable made the announcement, the race was on… for the handful of online retailers carrying the SB6141 to jack up the price as quickly as possible. I predicted this was likely in the comment section of our earlier piece. When the nation’s second largest cable operator plans to subject millions of broadband customers to unnecessary modem rental fees and smart customers are clever enough to avoid them, demand is going to rise. Prices would rise much faster.

In the last 48 hours, the cost of the SB6141 has literally doubled from $99 to $200 thanks to some eBay sellers looking for quick profits. This unit is now barely available from Amazon.com Marketplace vendors, typically with a waiting list, for around $130. It was selling for as little as $89 just a few weeks earlier. We even found some refurbished units on eBay that formerly sold for less than $100 now selling for $199, just after Time Warner’s new fee hit the media.

Buying a refurbished unit won’t save you much. Two days ago, this eBay vendor was charging $100 for the same used cable modem.

Finding retailers for this particular model has proven difficult and because of the relentless price gouging, we are now recommending customers hold off on buying their cable modems, at least until Time Warner expands their list of approved models or a broader number of retailers start selling the model to help force prices back down to earth. Don’t pay an eBay gouger twice the usual price!

For customers who mistakenly ended up buying our earlier recommended model we quickly crossed off the list (the SB6121), we’ve found Amazon.com especially accommodating, even supplying a prepaid return shipping label, after explaining the modem model mess to Amazon’s customer service and requesting a free return. So yes, we got stuck with the wrong model too. Sending the 6121 back is our best recommendation as Time Warner Cable customer service explained as late as this evening they cannot activate customer-owned equipment not on their approved-for-purchase list (or anything else at the moment).

Our second order, for the SB6141 at the pre-gouge price of $99 arrived this afternoon, and that led to more frustration with Time Warner Cable, who ultimately failed to activate the modem.

After a very lengthy hold time, a Time Warner representative took my modem’s MAC address to activate the device, and it failed to register. A supervisor eventually explained Time Warner Cable updated their billing system to accommodate the forthcoming modem rental charge and in the process brought down the customer-owned equipment activation system (the one that will let Time Warner know who will not have to pay the fee) earlier this week. In other words, while adjusting their billing system to charge you more, a “glitch” made it impossible for customers across the eastern United States to prevent that from happening.

The problem, it was explained, was temporary and they expected to fix it by the end of the week. After explaining today is Thursday (the end of the week is already near), I was told to “call back this weekend or Monday” and “hopefully” the problem would be fixed. Hopefully before October 15th, when the fee kicks in for the Big Apple anyway. That was 40 minutes of my life I will never get back.

One would think if Time Warner was planning to throw a Money Party for themselves, they would at least take some of the forthcoming $300 million to invest in a better way to keep customers from long hold times and inconvenience to avoid the latest unnecessary fee, only to be told everything was broken and to call back some other time. This is why cable companies regularly earn the disdain of their customers.

Even as DOCSIS 3 cable technology continues to roll-out across cable systems now offering faster Internet speeds, the next generation of cable broadband is on the way, reportedly capable of delivering up to 10/2Gbps service.

CableLabs’ DOCSIS 3.1 project will be the subject of a special panel at an upcoming cable engineer conference later this month.

“DOCSIS 3.1 specification development is a significant milestone on the industry’s road map to next-generation services,” said CableLabs chief technology officer Ralph Brown. “Our SCTE Cable-Tec Expo panel will identify the motivations, requirements and key technology building blocks under development with the collaboration of the vendor community.  DOCSIS 3.1 solutions will provide both residential and commercial cable customers with faster data rates — both upstream and downstream — that support increasingly compelling broadband services.”

The DOCSIS 3 standard allows cable operators to bond multiple channels to support faster speeds.

The new standard will incorporate changes in how cable spectrum is utilized for broadband, vastly expanding potential bandwidth. Although the standard can support gigabit broadband speeds, nobody expects cable companies to offer those speeds in the near term.

Instead, providers are more interested in addressing their upstream speed limitations. From the earliest days of cable broadband, the assumption was that customers would care far more about downstream speeds and consider uploading an afterthought. The result was a network that prioritized download speed. But as users continue to upload more multimedia content and embrace cloud storage, slow upload speeds are starting to aggravate customers.

DOCSIS 3.1 is rumored to de-emphasize the current QAM modulation cable operators use for broadband in favor of more robust technologies such as orthogonal frequency-division multiplexing (OFDM), already used by the wireless industry. Unlike interference/noise-prone QAM, OFDM uses much smaller subcarriers that work better in noisy signal conditions. Although coaxial cable is capable of delivering a large amount of spectrum to cable operators, all of it cannot be practically used because of external interference from electrical equipment, broadcast radio and television signals, and other sources. Error-correcting technologies can let operators use more of their available spectrum without reducing the quality of service to customers.

The study group working on DOCSIS 3.1 is also reviewing the incorporation of “low density parity-check” (LDPC) error correction that would efficiently improve noise rejection over today’s Reed-Solomon approach. Combining OFDM and LDPC could improve spectral efficiency up to 25 percent.

The cable industry is pressuring the study group to preserve backwards compatibility with the older DOCSIS 3.0 standard just now coming into widespread use. Some industry insiders predict cable operators will keep today’s QAM modulation for downstream speeds while boosting upstream speeds using OFDM.

Cable operators across the country are gradually moving away from analog service in favor of digital with the ultimate goal of an entirely IP-based network for television, phone, and broadband. The pressure is on for DOCSIS 3.1 to help accelerate that transformation, but most industry experts don’t believe the new standard will be finalized until at least the middle of 2013, with at least 6-12 months before equipment shows up supporting the finalized standard.

Most Time Warner Cable broadband customers across the country will soon pay a $3.95 a month cable-modem lease fee in an effort by the cable operator to boost revenue by as much as $300 million annually.

New York City-area customers will be the first to see the modem rental charge, and customers began receiving postcards this week informing them of the new fee, which begins Oct. 15.

“It’s an outrage considering how much Time Warner Cable is already charging for broadband service,” says Stop the Cap! reader B.J., who received notification in yesterday’s mail. “My Ubee cable modem is four years old and they want to charge almost $50 a year for something that costs $40 retail brand new? Not a chance. I am calling Verizon. Goodbye Time Warner.”

A Time Warner Cable spokesperson said the company is busily printing notification cards that will arrive in customer mailboxes across the country in the next two months.

“Customers have the choice to purchase a modem from a third-party retailer to avoid paying the $3.95 per month,” according to the cable company.

Last year, Time Warner began gradually rolling out a $2.50 modem rental fee for new customers, but exempted current ones. Now the cable operator has increased the rental fee and intends to impose it on everyone except Starter Internet, Connected Learning, SignatureHome and certain IntelligentHome customers.

The cable operator may get resistance from customers, but Wall Street analysts state other cable operators, including Comcast, already charge up to $7 a month for modem leases.

Many customers will elect to buy their own cable modem, but the cable company has severely limited its approved device list in many areas to just a single manufacturer: Motorola Mobility, despite still leasing out often less-costly models from seven other manufacturers.

“It’s convenient how they will lease out inexpensive Ubee cable modems made in China but they won’t let you buy one,” says B.J. “There is nothing wrong with Motorola modems, but it reduces customer choice.”

Time Warner Cable (and Stop the Cap!) recommends all customers who plan to buy modems choose a DOCSIS 3 model for future compatibility. The company has switched out cable modems for customers at least twice over the decade plus history of cable broadband service. If history holds, the estimated useful life for a DOCSIS 2 cable modem will probably be five years or less before future standards make them obsolete. DOCSIS 2 modems are not capable of supporting the fastest broadband speeds, while DOCSIS 3 modems often cost just a little more.

Time Warner Cable’s Approved Modem List in the Northeastern U.S. And Our Reviews (all prices approximate, from Amazon.com — consult Time Warner Cable’s website for specific modems approved in your area):

DOCSIS 3

Recommended Motorola SurfBoard SB6141 DOCSIS 3.0 Cable Modem ($100): The SB6141 is now on the approved list for most TWC service areas and has gotten excellent reviews. It is an upgrade from the 6121, now off the list of approved devices. The 6121 could only support four-channel bonding for upstream and downstream, while the 6141 supports up to eight downstream channels and four upstream channels increasing data rates to over 300Mbps for received data and over 100Mbps when sending data. The only downside is that it is harder to find in stock for purchase.

Motorola SURFboard Gateway SBG6580 DOCSIS 3.0 Wireless Cable Modem ($117): The 6580 includes built-in gigabit Ethernet and a Wireless-N router, so it theoretically could replace your home router. My personal experience with cable modem-router combinations has been less than glowing, however. Consider this only if you do not already have a Wireless-N router. This model gets overall good, but not excellent reviews.

DOCSIS 2 – Consider a DOCSIS 3 modem to guarantee future compatibility.

Motorola Surfboard SB5101 Cable Modem ($50): This workhorse DOCSIS 2 cable modem has been around since 2003 and is popular with cable companies and customers, with a proven track record of performance. But it is not DOCSIS 3-capable, which means its useful life may be shortened as cable broadband standards continue to evolve.

Motorola Surfboard SB5101U Cable Modem ($53): Functionally equivalent to the 5101, the 5101U was introduced in tandem with Motorola’s cheaper 5101N model that omitted the USB port and driver CD. Choose the 5101 or 5101U based on which model is currently selling at the lowest price.

Not recommended Motorola SURFboard Gateway SBG901 DOCSIS 2.0 Wireless Cable Modem ($84): Overpriced and mixed reviews plague this aging Motorola DOCSIS 2 modem with built-in wireless G support. You would do better buying a Wireless N router yourself, or consider the SBG6580 if you absolutely need built-in Wi-Fi.

Updated 4:54pm ET: Readers report the SB6141 now has the best chance of being on TWC’s list of approved equipment, so we’re deleting the 6121 and replacing it with the 6141. If you happened to place an order for the 6121, make sure you verify whether it is on your area’s approved list. If not, cancel the order.

Update #2 10:00am ET 10/17/12: After publishing, Time Warner Cable overhauled their entire website. We have updated the link for the current approved list. None of the models have changed as far as I can see. I have also deleted the model 6121 entirely from the story — it is not on any approved list I’ve seen. As of today, the gouging continues on eBay with the 6141, still selling for up to $200. Amazon.com sellers have also jacked up the price to take advantage of current demand, though not as much.

Do NOT pay eBay sellers $200 for the 6141, which normally sells for $99. It only encourages the bottom-feeding speculators. If you want the 6141, I recommend you wait until prices drop to between $99-125. Do not pay more.

Some readers are finding used/refurbished cable modems that work perfectly fine on Craigslist and eBay. There is generally nothing wrong with these, unless they happen to be stolen or unreturned modems that really belong to Time Warner Cable, which will in turn not activate them. Be careful.

PC Magazine has declared fiber to the home service America’s fastest broadband technology, and among larger providers, Verizon’s FiOS once again took top honors for delivering the fastest and most consistent broadband speeds.

Over the past nine months, the magazine’s readers have been conducting regular speed tests using their personal broadband connections. The magazine found fiber optics remains the best current technology for delivering cutting-edge broadband service, with an average speed rating for FiOS reaching 29.4/16.7Mbps. Since PC Magazine readers were subscribed to various speed tiers while conducting the tests, the magazine’s ratings do not measure the fastest possible speeds on offer from different providers. Verizon’s most-popular service bundle includes 15/5Mbps service, heavily weighting Verizon’s speed rating which is capable of even faster speeds with their 50-300Mbps premium service tiers. But on average, consistently fast speeds kept them in the top spot.

Cable broadband technology was the second-best choice, depending on how cable operators implement it. Cable companies depend on a singl, shared broadband pipeline in each neighborhood. DOCSIS 3 upgrades allow a cable operator to vastly expand that pipeline by “bonding” several channels together to increase the maximum bandwidth. Cable operators that combine the latest technology with the smallest number of customers sharing a connection do the best.

Midcontinent Communications (better known by customers as Midco), achieved first place nationwide. The company, which serves customers in Minnesota, the Dakotas, and Wisconsin, took top honors with an average speed of 24.7/4.4Mbps — the best of any cable operator.

Ratings sometimes show the level of investment made by cable operators in their network. A sudden boost in average speeds is a sure sign a cable operator is rolling out network upgrades. A speed decline can expose a cable company trying to oversell an already constrained network. Charter Cable, which has routinely gotten poor ratings in Consumer Reports’ rankings, showed dramatic improvement in PC Magazine’s ratings, achieving third place with an average speed increase from 15Mbps to 18.5Mbps. But while the added speed is nice, the company’s usage caps are not. Conversely, WOW!, which achieved top scores in Consumer Reports’ ratings, scored towards the bottom of PC Magazine’s tests.

Comcast, which last year trumpeted its high rankings in controversial ads claiming to deliver the fastest broadband in the nation has now been overrun by both Midco and Charter. Comcast Xfinity is now in sixth place, hardly the fodder for any future ad campaign.

Cox Cable actually lost ground since last year, with average speed now down to 14.8Mbps. The bottom four: Time Warner Cable, Mediacom, WOW!, and Suddenlink — are all hampered by slow upload speeds and more anemic “take-rates” on higher speed broadband plans with the speeds on offer. With fewer premium speed customers, average speed ratings take a hit from the larger proportion of customers sticking with standard service.

Phone companies barely appeared in the magazine’s top ratings. AT&T’s U-verse could not even make the top-15. While 25Mbps was adequate when U-verse was first deployed, the broadband speed race has quickly overshadowed the company’s fiber to the neighborhood service, which still relies on home phone lines and antiquated copper infrastructure in the immediate neighborhood.

Phone companies still offering traditional ADSL on almost all-copper networks turned in even more dismal results — most too low to rate. Only Frontier’s adopted FiOS network kept them in the rankings in the overall broadband “slow zone” in the Pacific Northwest, along with CenturyLink’s acquired ADSL2+ and bonded DSL networks built by Qwest.

ISPs that perform poorly typically criticize the methodology of voluntary speed tests as the basis for speed and performance ranking. Most criticize the apparent lack of consistency, random sampling, the possibility rankings may be weighted in certain geographic areas, and may mix a disproportionate number of customers with standard or premium level speeds to unfairly boost or diminish average speed rankings. But overall, PC Magazine’s rankings show some technologies superior to others. If a customer has a choice, finding a fiber to the home provider is likely to provide an improvement over what the cable company offers, but the differences between phone company DSL and cable broadband are even starker.

The FCC speed test program, conducted by SamKnows, takes more regular snapshots of broadband quality from volunteer panelists. Your editor’s home broadband connection from Time Warner Cable is profiled above, showing results from January-September 2012

Phillip “Tollbooths are not innovation” Dampier

Federal Communications Commission chairman Julius Genachowski last week wrote a guest editorial on TechCrunch espousing the benefits of faster broadband networks, but the advances he celebrates often come with innovation-killing usage caps and overlimit fees he continues to ignore.

We feel the need – the need for speed. As Tom Friedman and others have written, in this flat global economy a strategic bandwidth advantage will help keep the U.S. as the home and most desired destination for the world’s greatest innovators and entrepreneurs.

[…] But progress isn’t victory, particularly in this fast-moving sector. Challenges to U.S. leadership are real. This is a time to press harder on the gas pedal, not let up. The first challenge is the need for faster and more accessible broadband networks. We need to keep pushing because our global competitors aren’t slowing down. I’ve met with senior government officials and business leaders from every continent, and every one of them is focused on the broadband opportunity. If we in the U.S. don’t foster major investments to extend and expand our broadband infrastructure, somebody else will take the lead.

We need to keep pushing because innovators need next-generation bandwidth for next-generation innovations – genetic sequencing for cancer patients, immersive and creative software to help children learn, ways for small businesses to take advantage of Big Data, and speed- and capacity-heavy innovations we can’t yet imagine.

We need to remove bandwidth as a constraint on our innovators and entrepreneurs. In addition to steadily increasing broadband speed and capacity for consumers and businesses throughout the country, we need – as we said in our National Broadband Plan – “innovation hubs” with super-fast broadband, with speed measured in gigabits, not megabits.

[…]Some argue the private sector will solve these challenges itself, and that all government has to do is get out of the way. I disagree. The private sector must take the lead, but the public sector has a vital though limited role to play.

Among the policy levers government needs to use is the removal of barriers to broadband buildout, lowering the costs of infrastructure deployment with new policies like “Dig Once” that says you should lay fiber when you dig up roads. The President recently issued an Executive Order implementing this idea, suggested in our Broadband Plan. Government must promote competition, which drives innovation and network upgrades.

We must ensure the Internet remains an open platform that continues to enable innovation without permission.

Genachowski

Genachowski’s vision for faster broadband has the noble goal of maintaining competitiveness with the rest of the world and putting the United States back on top in broadband rankings and innovation. But while hobnobbing with his industry friends at recent industry conventions, he may have gotten too close to one of the biggest impediments holding us back — big cable and phone companies merrily working their magic to create a comfortable duopoly with pricing and service plans to match.

Back in the late 1990s, most cable operators thought of broadband as an ancillary service easy enough to operate, but probably hard to monetize. Just like digital cable radio services like Music Choice and DMX, “broadband” would likely appeal only to a tiny subset of customers.

“Back in the 1990s, Time Warner was primarily a TV company in a TV industry.  Broadband then was an innovating and radical thing, and a lot of people thought it was stupid and wouldn’t work,” Time Warner Cable CEO Glenn Britt said in April, 2009.

The launch of “Road Runner” was not the most auspicious marketing effort undertaken by the cable operator. In fact, the service was rarely targeted for price adjustments, hovering at around $40 a month for a decade.

When the Great Recession hit the United States, something unexpected happened. Cable operators discovered people were willing to cancel their cable and phone services, but not their broadband. In fact, as high bandwidth online video became an increasing part of our lives, the cable industry realized they were in the catbird seat to deliver the best broadband experience, and be well-paid for it. With little competition, increasing prices brought little risk and, thanks to the insatiable drive to boost revenue and reduce costs, implementing usage caps to control “excess” usage and costs were within their grasp.

In 2008, when Stop the Cap! launched, only a handful of ISPs had usage caps. Now most providers, with the exception of Time Warner Cable, Verizon, Cablevision, and a handful of others, all have usage allowances and overlimit fee Internet Overcharging schemes to further pad their bottom lines.

Innovation: Rationing Your Internet Experience — Stick to e-mail and web pages.

Genachowski has completely ignored the growing pervasiveness of usage caps, and even excused them as an experiment in marketplace innovation. But limits on broadband usage will also limit the broadband innovation revolution he wants, especially when most Americans have just one or two realistic choices for broadband service:

1. Usage caps are the product of artificial scarcity. Rationing Internet usage, even with now-pervasive cost-effective upgrades like DOCSIS 3, simply does not make sense (but it will make dollars). Cable operators are switching off analog television service to free up bandwidth to provider faster Internet speed and fatten the pipeline that delivers it. They have plenty of capacity, but continue to proclaim they must limit usage for “fairness” reasons, without providing a single shred of evidence to prove the need for usage caps. Consumers will self-ration just to avoid the prospect of being cut off or handed a bill with overlimit fees.
2. Usage caps make faster speeds irrelevant. Selling customers premium-priced, super fast broadband speed is hardly compelling when accompanied by usage caps that constrain the benefits of buying. Why pay $20-50 more for faster speeds when customers cannot take practical advantage of them. Customers using their Internet service to browse web pages and read e-mail have no interest in upgrading to 30+Mbps. Customers streaming video or moving large files do.
3. Usage caps retard innovation. Google’s new 1Gbps fiber optic network was built on the premise that usage caps were unnecessary on a fiber-based network and would retard innovation. Developing the next generation of innovative apps that Genachowski celebrates will never happen if developers are discouraged by Internet usage toll booths and stop signs. The cost to provide the service is not largely dependent on customer usage. It is the initial price of last mile infrastructure that really matters. Both cable and phone companies have reduced their investments to upgrade their networks, and AT&T and Verizon both contemplate getting rid of their rural landlines. Most cable operators paid off their networks years ago.
4. Usage caps create a whole new digital divide.  Time Warner Cable’s discounted Internet Essentials program delivers only a $5 discount with a harsh 5GB usage cap. For an income-challenged home compelled to switch to a provider’s budget plan, the result is a different Internet experience than the rest of us enjoy. Imagine if your home broadband account was limited to 5GB a month. What online services would you have to avoid to stay under the provider’s limit? Traditionally, operators sell the lowest speed tiers with the lowest usage allowances. Slower speeds already offer a disincentive to use high bandwidth services, but many providers typically drive that disincentive home even harder with a paltry allowance that will cost plenty to exceed.
5. Usage caps harm our broadband standing. While Genachowski celebrates increasing broadband speeds, he ignores the fact the rest of the world is moving away from usage caps even as the United States moves towards them. Both Australia and New Zealand elected to construct their own national fiber networks in large part because the heavily usage-capped experience was holding both countries back. Usage caps are a product of a barely competitive market.

[flv width=”640″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Bandwidth Caps 7-2011.flv[/flv]

Tech News Today debunks providers’ claims that usage caps are fair and control those who “overuse” their networks, noting the same phone companies (AT&T) pushing for usage caps are also moving voice calling to unlimited service plans. (August, 2011) (4 minutes)