Zombie bill.

Time Warner Cable has pulled back on their winter promotions for new customers, bundling slower broadband and significant equipment fees into the bottom line price that may cost as much as $20 or more than the cable operator’s advertising suggests.

Several readers contacted Stop the Cap! over the last few weeks about the disparity between Time Warner’s advertised new customer pricing and the out the door price that arrives on the first month’s bill.

Diane, a Stop the Cap! reader in Brockport, N.Y., was attracted to an $89.99 triple play promotion for TV, Internet, and phone service until she learned what did not come with the deal.

“By the time I got off the phone, that $89.99 offer turned into more than $130 a month once adding a DVR, faster broadband service, and a second cable box,” Diane complains. “You really have to read the fine print. They only give you 3Mbps broadband speed on most of their offers now and DVR service is rarely included. In fact, all the equipment turned out to cost extra.”

Stop the Cap! checked out the offer Diane was interested in, and it turns out the $89.99 advertised price only tells half the story.

The wall of text. Time Warner’s rebate offer has hoops customers will consider an Olympic event.

First, Time Warner requires customers on this promotion to pay for at least one cable box, at $8.99 a month. A CableCARD is also available for $2.50 a month for televisions equipped to support that. Most consumers stick with traditional boxes. Diane wanted one DVR box and a second box for a bedroom. DVR Service from Time Warner, which does not include the box itself, has dramatically increased in price over the years. In 2013, the combined rate for the “box” and the “service” is $21.94 a month in western New York. A second cable box for Diane’s bedroom ran another $8.49 a month. The new Internet modem rental fee is also not included, so that adds an additional $3.95 a month.

Diane is also correct about broadband speeds. Time Warner bundles only 3Mbps service in most of its promotional packages. Increasing to Standard speed (15/1Mbps) generally costs an additional $10 per month. Now Diane’s monthly bill is well over $130 a month.

In fact, Diane should have selected a more deluxe package from Time Warner at the outset. Their $104.99 promotion bundles Turbo (20/2Mbps) Internet, free Showtime, and at least covers DVR service (although Diane still has to pay $9 a month for the DVR box). Her out the door price for that package is less than $127 a month.

Customers served by AT&T U-verse or Verizon FiOS stand to come out better if they plan to dump the phone company in favor of Time Warner. The cable operator is throwing in a debit card worth up to a $200, but only for customers switching away from a competitor. Diane just had Frontier phone service, so no $200 reward card for her. Time Warner requires customers to switch from services comparable to those selected from Time Warner to qualify for the maximum rebate.

For those that do quality, the rebate hoop-jumping begins:

• Customers qualifying for the reward card have to write down a promotion code and register their rebate request online within 30 days of starting service.
• Customers must remain active, in good standing and must maintain all services for a minimum of 90 days after installation.
• Customers are required to upload a scanned copy of their last provider’s bill, showing active service within the last 90 days. Card should arrive 4-6 weeks after a 90 day waiting period.
• Comparable services do not include wireless telephone service or online-only video subscriptions.
• Offer is not available to customers with past due balances with Time Warner Cable during the program period or customers who have been disconnected for non-payment during the twelve months preceding this offer.
• The customer’s name and address on file with Time Warner must exactly match the name and address on your former provider’s bill.
• Customers better spend the money quickly. After six months, the issuing bank deducts a $2.50 monthly “service fee” from the debit card until empty, except where prohibited by law.
• If the card is lost or stolen, there is a $5.95 Re-Issuance Fee. If you need to dispute a charge on the card, you are out of luck. The issuing bank will not intervene on your behalf.
• Customers cannot apply the rebate to their Time Warner Cable bill.

Time Warner Cable customers in southern California are bracing themselves for a rate increase that will raise prices by 8.2 percent — almost four times the rate of inflation.

The price for digital basic cable, the most popular cable television package, will rise from $67 to $72.50 per month. The price charged to record shows from that package is also going up. “DVR service,” which does not include the DVR equipment itself, is rising 18.6% — from $10.95 to $12.99 a month.

Stop the Cap! reader Steve in Carlsbad adds his rate increase notification also mentions price increases for bundled packages:

All Standard and Basic packages and bundles will increase by $5.00 and all digital video packages and bundles will increase by $3.00.

The rate increases are by no means over. As Time Warner mails its price change notifications for 2013 to customers, it also signed a 25-year deal with the Los Angeles Dodgers for yet another regional sports channel showcasing the baseball team. Industry insiders estimate the deal is worth between $7-8 billion and could eventually cost cable subscribers an additional $5 a month, whether they watch the channel or not.

It is likely the latest rate increase does include the cost of the 2012 launch of Time Warner Cable SportsNet, which features the Los Angeles Lakers. Time Warner asks competing satellite and telephone company video services to pay between $4-5 a month to provide SportsNet to their customers.

The rate increases will not affect customers on retention or promotional packages until they expire. As usual, Time Warner blamed the rate hike on increasing programming costs, notably for sports and broadcast television stations.

Although many Californians have alternatives, ranging from AT&T U-verse to two satellite television providers, those companies are raising prices as well:

• Comcast (San Francisco Bay area) rates went up 4.3% last year and will increase again this summer;
• DirecTV rates will increase Feb. 7 by about 4.5 percent;
• Dish Networks’ most popular packages rose $5 a month on Jan. 17;
• AT&T U-verse will boost prices on components of its service by around $2 a month each on Jan. 27.

Customers facing price increases can use the rate increase notification as the trigger to threaten to cancel service to win a lower price with a customer retention offer. Stop the Cap! published a comprehensive guide on how to win a lower rate from Time Warner in 2012 and those tips are still working for our readers today.

If Time Warner seems unwilling to bargain, customers can also consider taking their business elsewhere by signing up for a promotional introductory offer with a competitor. When that offer expires, Time Warner will take you back with a new customer promotion as well.

In general, bundling all of your services with one provider will save the most money. Triple play packages consisting of television, broadband, and phone service are the most economical when considering the cost of each service. But it is also a good idea to consider whether you need all three services.

The weakest link of the triple play package is the landline. If you subscribe to broadband and cable service, consider switching to a broadband-based phone company like Ooma, which received a high rating from Consumer Reports. After an initial investment of around $150 for the equipment, the price of the phone service itself is next to nothing and includes nationwide unlimited calling. Ooma basic customers only pay for FCC-mandated fees and local taxes and surcharges. Combined these are usually well under $7 a month. Ooma Premier customers pay $119.99 a year and get a free number transfer, free calling to Canada, the choice of a Bluetooth Adapter, Wireless Adapter or Extended Warranty, a large list of calling features, a second line, voicemail, and free mobile calling minutes.

This digital adapter cable box is free through 2015. A traditional set top box from Time Warner costs $8.49/mo.

Next consider your current cable television package. Scrutinize your bill for add-on fees, especially for digital/HD add-on packages for channels you may never watch. Do you still need to pay for HBO, Cinemax, Showtime, and Starz? Consider Netflix, Redbox, and Amazon video — among others — to satisfy your movie needs without paying more than $15 a month for HBO alone.

Equipment fees may also make up a substantial portion of your bill. If you pay separately for DVR equipment and service, you are probably paying Time Warner’s regular customer rates. Seize the opportunity to demand a better deal. Customers with multiple set top boxes may want to consider ditching them on secondary sets, especially if they don’t need an on-screen program guide or access to on-demand programming.

Time Warner is offering customers “digital transport adapters” (DTAs) at no cost through 2015. These boxes, a fraction of the size of a traditional set top box, will allow older sets to access most digital channels that are included in your cable television package. But a DTA won’t work with on-demand programming or premium channels, at least for now. The devices also do not support a handful of digital channels that Time Warner provides under a bandwidth-saving scheme that only delivers a network if a customer with a traditional set top box actually starts to watch. In western New York, we found about 10 unavailable channels, virtually all very minor networks that won’t prove much of an inconvenience. Using a DTA instead of a set top box can save up to $8.50 a month for each cable box it replaces.

If you subscribe to Time Warner Cable broadband and are paying the company’s $3.95 a month modem rental fee, you are throwing your money away. Invest in purchasing your own cable modem. They are simple to install and are reliable. You’ll earn back the purchase price in as little as a year. Now may also be a good time to review your speed needs. Time Warner recently boosted its standard broadband speed to 15/1Mbps. If you pay extra for Turbo, this might be a good time to consider dropping it if you don’t need the incrementally faster 20Mbps download speed Turbo offers.

Phillip “Oh look, more industry-backed research in denial regarding unpopular usage caps and consumption billing” Dampier

It seems America’s biggest industry-funded broadband astroturf group, Broadband for America, thinks the New America Foundation completely misses the point of “new pricing strategies” like restrictive usage caps, costly consumption-based billing, and fiendishly high overlimit fees. In a hurry, they released this particularly weak argument favoring usage pricing:

A new report by the New America Foundation suggests that “dwindling competition is fueling the rise of increasingly costly and restrictive Internet usage caps” in the broadband sector. But as we’ve explained before, these experimental new pricing strategies are actually signs of competition in the market and ultimately benefit consumers.

In terms of competition between broadband service providers, a study by Boston College Law School Professor Daniel Lyons concluded “data caps and other pricing strategies are ways that broadband companies can distinguish themselves from one another to achieve a competitive advantage in the marketplace.” He also concluded these practices were not anti-consumer: “When firms experiment with different business models, they can tailor services to niche audiences whose interests are inadequately satisfied by a one-size-fits-all flat-rate plan.” Indeed, many consumers are no longer satisfied with one-size-fits-all rate plans. Since data usage by individual users can vary dramatically, imposing a one-size-fits-all approach to pricing would result in light data users subsidizing the use of heavier ones. As Michigan State University Professor of Information Studies Steven Wildman explains, not having usage-based pricing models “means that light users pay a higher effective rate for broadband service, cross-subsidizing the activities of those who spend more time online. With usage-based pricing, those who use more bandwidth contribute more toward the cost of building and maintaining broadband networks.”

Broadband providers should be free to experiment with usage-based pricing and other pricing strategies as tools in their arsenal to meet rising broadband demand on their networks. Moving forward, Lyons recommends instituting public policies that allow providers the freedom to experiment, in order to best preserve the spirit of innovation that has characterized the Internet since its inception.

Broadband for America thinks they are clever when they introduce “academic papers” that extend credibility to their arguments. No, Broadband for America, we get the point. Your benefactors want to charge customers more  money for less service and call that a fair deal.

The wheels driving their talking points start to fall off the moment one peaks under their covers:

1. Broadband for America (BfA) is America’s largest telecom industry front group, backed almost entirely by cable and phone companies and dozens of supporting groups that are typically funded by those companies, have telecom industry board members, or whose lifeblood depends on doing business with Big Telecom companies.

2. Experimental pricing plans that largely leave existing pricing in place –and– impose new service limitations is not a sign of competition that benefits consumers, it is proof of its absence. With today’s broadband duopoly, there is little risk imposing new fees or service restrictions when the only competition you have typically follows suit. There is no evidence that usage-based pricing is saving consumers money, particularly when broadband providers are using their marketplace power to further increase prices.

3. There is no evidence “many consumers are no longer satisfied with one-size-fits-all rate plans” for home broadband. In fact, the reverse has been proved conclusively, sometimes by industry-funded researchers.

4. With a 90-95% gross margin on broadband, there is plenty of room for price cuts –and– unlimited broadband, but why give those profits away when lack of competition doesn’t provide the necessary push. Instead, providers’ ideas of “innovative pricing” are always upwards and include usage limits, modem rental fees, and other restrictions.

5. The railroad industry argued much the same case in the early 20th century when communities complained about wide pricing disparity, depending on local competition. We all know what eventually happened there.

6. Full disclosure, as is too often the case, is completely lacking at BfA. So we’ve offered to help:

The “study by Boston College Law School Professor Daniel Lyons” is accurate. He is now a faculty member there. But BfA fails to disclose the study was actually produced on behalf of the Koch Brother-funded Mercatus Center, which specializes in industry-friendly position papers on deregulation. Lyons is also on the Board of Academic Advisers at the Free State Foundation, itself an industry-backed astroturf group that advocates on behalf of large telecom companies, among others.

His colleague Michigan State University Professor of Information Studies Steven Wildman is also an adviser at the Free State Foundation. He is also a bit more transparent about where the money comes from for his studies advocating usage-based pricing – the National Cable and Telecommunications Association (NCTA), the largest cable industry lobbying and trade group in the United States.

The only surprise Lyons and Wildman could have delivered is if they advocated against these Internet Overcharging schemes. But then they probably would not have been invited to present their findings at an NCTA Connects briefing last week entitled, “Connecting the Dots on Usage-Based Pricing.”

We at Stop the Cap! can connect the dots as well.

A new report critical of broadband providers’ implementation of usage-based billing and data caps finds providers are not using them to handle traffic congestion, instead implementing them to monetize broadband usage and protect pay television from online video competition.

The New America Foundation and the Open Technology Institute today released its report, “Capping the Nation’s Broadband Future?,” which takes a hard look at the increasingly common practice of limiting subscribers’ broadband usage.

The paper finds that provider arguments for limiting broadband traffic don’t make sense, but do earn more dollars from customers forced to upgrade their service to win a larger monthly usage allowance.

“Although traffic on U.S. broadband networks is increasing at a steady rate, the costs to provide broadband service are also declining, including the cost of Internet connectivity or IP transit as well as equipment and other operational costs,” the reports argues. “The result is that broadband is an incredibly profitable business, particularly for cable ISPs. Tiered pricing and data caps have also become a cash cow for the two largest mobile providers, Verizon and AT&T, who already were making impressive margins on their mobile data service before abandoning unlimited plans.”

The study finds providers are attempting to invent a climate of broadband scarcity, particularly on the nation’s wired networks, to defend the introduction of various forms of Internet Overcharging, including data caps, usage-based billing, and overlimit fees.

The New America Foundation is calling on policymakers to take a more active role in defending online innovation and controlling provider zeal to cap the nation’s broadband future.

The False Argument of Network Congestion

Providers’ tall tales.

The most common defense for usage caps providers put forward is that they curb “excessive use” and impact almost none of their customers. The report points out many of the providers implementing usage caps have left them largely unchanged, despite ongoing usage growth patterns. In 2008, the report notes Comcast measured the average monthly usage of each broadband customer at around 2.5GB. Just four years later that number has quadrupled to 8-10GB. While many customers rely on Comcast’s broadband service for basic e-mail and web browsing, the cable operator has begun to entice customers into utilizing its online video platform, which in certain cases can dramatically eat into a customer’s monthly usage allowance, which remained unchanged until earlier this year.

Many broadband providers are less generous than Comcast, some imposing caps as low as 5GB of usage per month.

“Data caps encourage a climate of scarcity in an increasingly data-driven world,” the report concludes. “Broadband appears to be one of few industries that seek to discourage their customers from consuming more of their product. Thus, even as the economic and engineering rationale for data caps on wireline broadband does not hold up given the declining costs of providing service and rapid technological advancement, the proliferation of data caps is increasing. The trend is driven in large part by a woefully uncompetitive market that allows the nation’s largest providers to generate enormous profits as well as protect legacy business models from new services and innovators.”

The argument that increased usage puts an undeniable burden on providers is untenable when one examines the financial reports of providers.

The study found, for example, Time Warner Cable’s latest 10-K report shows that connectivity costs as a percentage of revenue have decreased by half, from an already modest 1.20% in 2008 to a little over 0.60% in 2011.

In 2012, the company is again exploring ways to introduce usage caps on at least some of its customers, in return for a modest discount.

Upgrade? Spend Less and Charge Customers More Instead!

The report notes cable companies like Time Warner Cable and Comcast, whose networks were originally built for television services and have now been repurposed for broadband as well, are enjoying lucrative profits on
networks that have long been paid off. In fact, Time Warner Cable recently disclosed it earns more than 95 percent in gross margins on its broadband service, with additional rate increases for consumers likely in the near future. The company recently began charging its customers a modem rental fee as well.

Shammo

At these margins, the report concludes selling broadband service to “data hogs” who consume hundreds of gigabytes of traffic per month are still profitable for providers.

As financial reports disclose capital spending on network upgrades continue to fall, operators are instead content imposing usage limits on customers to control traffic growth and further monetize an already enormously-profitable business.

The nation’s largest phone companies also come in for criticism. The report quotes from Stop the Cap!’s coverage of Verizon’s chief financial officer openly admitting it is investing most of its available capital in the highly profitable wireless sector.

“It is clear that in shifting a greater percent of their overall capital expenditures to their wireless segments, Verizon and AT&T are more interested in expanding their dominance in the wireless industry than they are in upgrading DSL or expanding fiber connectivity to provide aggressive competition for residential broadband service,” the report found.

Verizon’s chief financial officer recently made the following statement at an investor relations event:

“The fact of the matter is wireline capital — and I won’t give the number but it’s pretty substantial — is being spent on the wireline side of the house to support wireless growth,” [Verizon CFO Fran Shammo] said. “So the IP backbone, the data transmission, fiber to the cell, that is all on the wireline books but it‖s all being built for the wireless company.”

Wall Street Educates Providers on How to Lead the Way With Data Caps

Although the majority of subscribers loathe usage restrictions on their already-expensive broadband accounts, a vocal group on Wall Street strongly favors them, and routinely browbeats providers on the issue.

Helping educate cable companies how usage caps can protect against cord cutting and further monetize broadband.

The report’s authors discovered some Wall Street banks even invest time and money developing presentations advocating usage caps and consumption billing to protect video revenue. A 2011 Credit Suisse presentation outlined ways usage-based billing can protect cable operators’ video revenues:

“…over the longer term, consumption based billing could reduce the attractiveness of over the top video options (e.g., Netflix and Hulu), as the economic attractiveness of such over the top options could be partially offset by a [broadband] bill that is higher, due to [broadband] overage charges that would be driven by large amounts of data being streamed via a customer’s [broadband] connection.”

Yet most cable operators vehemently deny usage caps and consumption billing are designed to decrease usage or protect video revenue. Credit Suisse and other Wall Street banks and analysts say otherwise, and express little concern over network congestion.

The report finds compelling evidence that data caps have effectively stopped new competitors and online innovation already, noting a Sony executive stated that the company was putting the development of its own online video service on hold, citing Comcast’s monthly usage cap.

The Wireless Cap Shell Game: Caps Protect Scarce Airwaves While Companies Promote More Usage, For a Price

The report also found suggestions of a forthcoming wireless traffic tsunami are greatly exaggerated. AT&T and Verizon Wireless have issued repeated alarmist rhetoric claiming that wireless data’s exponential growth is threatening to overwhelm available network capacity.

But both carriers recently changed pricing models to encourage consumers to bring more devices to their networks, along with suggestions customers upgrade to higher allowance plans to handle the additional traffic generated by those devices. In fact, both AT&T and Verizon Wireless see profitable futures in forthcoming “machine to machine” wireless traffic that will allow cars, appliances and medical devices to communicate over their respective mobile networks. AT&T’s security and home automation system also relies on its own wireless network, offering customers remote access to their homes, chewing up wireless bandwidth as they go.

Despite suggestions from both providers their new wireless data plans would save customers money, it has brought overall increases in the average revenue earned from each subscriber instead.

Top-rated WOW! only delivers service in a handful of cities in the midwest, but is getting larger after acquiring Knology.

Lawrence, Kansas can’t catch a break. While their neighbors in Kansas City are preparing for Google’s unlimited-use gigabit broadband, the three different owners of the area’s cable operation in the last three years have stuck local residents with usage caps as low as 5GB per month.

What began as Sunflower Broadband, formerly owned by the The World Company, which publishes the daily Lawrence Journal-World, has now been sold to a new owner that plans to leave the current caps in place.

Knology of Kansas Inc., a division of West Point, Ga.-based Knology acquired the Sunflower operation for $165 million in 2010. This week, WideOpenWest (WOW) announced it had completed a system-wide acquisition of Knology, including the former Sunflower system for $1.5 billion.

Consumers in Lawrence hoping for something better from one the nation’s top-consumer-rated cable operators will apparently have to wait. The company announced it was planning no immediate changes to its services or rates, said Rod Kutemeier, who currently remains general manager of the operation.

“Which means while Kansas City becomes a gigabit broadband city with unlimited-use broadband ranging in price from free to $70 a month, we’re stuck with this lousy cable operation that wants $53 a month for 18/2Mbps service with a nasty 50GB data cap and up to $1/GB overlimit fee,” says former Knology customer Sam. “I switched to U-verse, which is only mildly less criminal with their 250GB cap.”

Sam’s price represents standalone broadband service and includes Knology’s $5 monthly modem rental fee. If he purchased video service from the company, his broadband rate would be $10 lower.

Sunflower Broadband introduced one of the country’s first broadband Internet Overcharging schemes, limiting customers on the company’s lowest speed tier to 5GB of usage per month. The company later introduced devotees of unlimited, flat rate access to a reduced priority unlimited option for just shy of $60 a month, with no quoted speed or promise of performance.

Lawrence cable subscribers were hopeful the new owners would adopt pricing and service similar to what WOW offers elsewhere. WOW tells its other customers it does not impose usage limits or consumption-based billing of any kind. But that doesn’t hold true in Lawrence.

“They need to get rid of the current management which continues this ripoff scheme and bring in the same WOW mindset that gave them top ratings in magazines like Consumer Reports,” shares Stop the Cap! reader Sam.

WOW currently offers most customers broadband speeds of 2/1, 15/1, 30/3, and 50/5Mbps. Knology of Kansas offers service at speeds of 5/1, 18/2, and 50/5Mbps — all usage capped.

Pricing and packages for Lawrence, Kansas’ local cable company will remain the same… for now.