Kyle McSlarrow, president of the National Cable & Telecommunications Association (NCTA), a cable industry trade group, wants cable companies to be able to continue experimenting with metered broadband service.

McSlarrow

In an interview with Ars Technica, McSlarrow claims broadband pricing experiments aren’t about “gouging” customers or creating even fatter profit margins.  Instead, he claims the cable industry just wants to provide Internet access in a way “that’s best for the consumer.”

According to McSlarrow, there’s no particular rush to pick one business model, and the industry has no “grand plan” hashed out by cigar-smoking executives in clubby back rooms. In his view, though, cable needs to do the experiments to make sure that the Internet survives the coming bandwidth apocalypse.

“As demand goes in a certain direction,” he says, “someone’s going to have to build a network” to deal with “not just instantaneous peak but, more importantly, average peak usage. The whole point is to do it in a way, and to serve your customers in a way, that they have a great experience. If you fail on the network side to do that, particularly with our shared network, that’s a real problem.”

McSlarrow himself enjoys flat rate pricing from his Internet service provider, so he’s not a part of any experiment, nor is he willing to defend Time Warner Cable’s recent attempt to launch metered billing in several cities around the country.  But, he feels that broadband service doesn’t have to come with a single monthly price for everyone, claiming that the “majority” of broadband customers consume so little, they are basically overpaying to support heavier consumers of bandwidth.

McSlarrow, who has ties to the Republican party, having been the national chairman for Dan Quayle’s failed 2000 presidential bid, and has worked for two Senate Majority Leaders — Sens. Bob Dole and Trent Lott, is a firm believer in free markets, with no government regulation.  He also claims the broadband industry is highly competitive, which means market forces will protect consumers from gouging providers.

McSlarrow must have spoken to Ars Technica on Fantasy Island, because that must be where he is living these days.  He certainly doesn’t live in Reno, Beaumont, San Antonio, Rochester, Greensboro, or Austin, where AT&T and Time Warner Cable decided to test their paltry Cap ‘n Tier schemes.  It’s no surprise he wasn’t willing to defend Time Warner Cable, which tried to launch a Money Party at consumers’ expense.  McSlarrow should also know that free market competition without regulation only works when there are competitors — lots of them, offering similar levels of service.  That’s not the broadband industry the majority of America lives with today.

Nate Anderson, who penned the piece for Ars, took a skeptical aim at many of McSlarrow’s claims.  We’re willing to go further and say they don’t represent reality, period.

… Continue Reading

I had no idea.  Why was I not informed?  Did I miss the campaign?  Did I miss the protests?

Time Warner Cable has announced it is dropping HDNet and HDNet Movies from its HD lineups nationwide on May 31st.  Was there a clamor for these channels to be tossed off Time Warner Cable lineups?  Multichannel News printed the excuse:

Asked why the company was dropping HDNet’s services, Time Warner Cable director of corporate public relations Robyn Watson said, “There’s a limited appeal for the programming. In a world with more than 100 HD channels, being in HD is not enough. We are adding other channels in HD to give our customers more choice.”

Folks offended by Dan Rather in HD will be pleased, but those who watch HDNet for their mixed martial arts programming won’t.

Of course, customers really don’t have much choice either way.  The real reason TWC is dropping these networks is that there is a price dispute over what TWC is willing to pay for them.  Mark Cuban, who owns the two networks, apparently wants more than what the bean counters at the cable company are willing to pay, so the channels are gone whether you wanted them or not.

The delightful replacements, which you also didn’t clamor for (and probably never heard of) vary by system.  In Rochester, the Smithsonian Channel and RFD-HD will replace the two channels.  In some other areas, Mav TV will be forthcoming.  How many of you knew any of these channels even existed, much less in HD?

It’s ironic that two networks that were among the first to highlight and showcase high definition programming, and are routinely used in showrooms to show off HD picture quality, are now being banished for the likes of RFD-HD, which shows Hee Haw reruns and the chased-into-obscurity Don Imus.  My only question: who is more frightening to see in crystal clear high definition, Dan Rather or Don Imus?  If Hee Haw circa 1974 didn’t sell you, here are some of the other shows on RFD to consider:

• Machinery of the Past
• Fiesta of the Spanish Horse
• Classic Tractor Hour
• Big Joe Polka Show
• Brazil Ag Report
• Superior Livestock Auction
  
• Training Mules and Donkeys
• Tractor Supply Company Live

Get the popcorn ready.  Get more if you are going to sit through the Livestock Auction.  That runs from 9am-5pm on Friday with no breaks.  That’s a whole lot of bull.

As far as Mav TV goes, it’s billed as “TV created by men for men” and seems to have a core programming requirement that bikini clad models parade across the screen every 15 minutes, and things need to get “blowed up real good.”  I suppose that might look better in HD, but it only reinforces the broader argument that at the same time a cable company wants to convince you to pay for only what you consume online, on the video side where the channels you didn’t care for and didn’t want come and go with little notice, you’re still forced to pay for all of it.

The Austin Community Technology & Telecommunications Commission convened this past Wednesday for their monthly meeting to discuss, among other items, possible actions on Time Warner Cable consumption billing for broadband Internet.  According to chairman Chip Rosenthal, it was the longest agenda in the many years he’s been there, and the TWC discussion didn’t come up until after 9 p.m.

As a concerned Austinite and former TWC customer (thanks to AT&T U-verse!), I attended this meeting to make sure all the important information on the subject was made available to the commissioners.  I only had three minutes to speak, as per meeting rules, which wasn’t near enough time for me to get through my three pages of material.  Luckily though, since the topic was an agenda item, the commission was allowed to ask questions and they were gracious enough to ask me open-ended questions and allow me to continue my points.  I stressed to the Commission that the most effective actions they and the City Council could do is file comments to the FCC and the FTC, and to put pressure on state and federal legislators to remove impediments to municipal broadband.  I emphasized that even if the City has no intention of creating a municipal broadband service, it is to Austin’s benefit to have the option on the table.  I told the commission that I believe a major reason TWC initially chose Austin as one of its metered billing test markets is that TWC knew the city’s hands were tied and that it had no real recourse.  During the discussion after my presentation, the commission agreed to work on a resolution recommending to the City Council that, through the City Attorney, submissions be filed to the FCC, Federal Trade Commission, and the Texas State Attorney General, and they agreed that the city should begin working with state and federal legislators to stop abusive practices.  The commission also agreed they should focus their efforts on  the state and federal level because little could be done at the municipal level, and that they should seek out other municipalities in a similar situation to present a coordinated effort.

There were two interesting facts that I learned at this meeting.  One, the municipal franchise that TWC has with the city of Austin will expire in 2011, but at that point it will transition to a state franchise agreement.  I had never heard of a state franchise before.  I know that the negotiating power the city has at franchise renewal will be diluted considerably on the state level. Second, the current franchise only applies to TWC cable TV service, not its broadband products.  It was brought up in the meeting that Grande Communications, another regional cable provider, has full authority to compete in TWC’s market for broadband service.  This raised a serious flag to me.  If both cable TV and broadband products are carried on the same infrastructure, but the franchise agreement only applies to the cable TV service, then they are in effect creating and illegal de facto franchise out of the broadband market.  Grande cannot compete with TWC’s broadband product, because they’re not allowed to bring their cable TV infrastructure into TWC’s market.

Since TWC has decided to shelve it’s metered broadband trials in Ausin for the time being, there is not much the Telecom Commission can do against current TWC actions other than possibly investigate instances of service being shut off based on a soft 40 GB cap in their excessive use clause.  But the commission has resolved to begin the groundwork necessary to fight this issue in the future by codifying its own policies and rules for fair market practices and pressing the city of Austin to lobby state and federal lawmakers.

Road Runner Service Post-Cap 'n Tier in the Golden Triangle, Texas

Time Warner Cable has quietly ended its “experiment” of their “consumption based billing” scheme in the first city to test it, and the last to be rid of it — Beaumont, Texas.

Time Warner Cable’s website for the Golden Triangle division, serving Beaumont, dispensed with the tier selection menu which limited customers to 40GB of usage per month, and has returned to an unlimited service plan offering 5Mbps/384Kbps service for $44.99 per month.

Customers calling Time Warner’s office in Beaumont were told the consumption based billing experiment had ended.  However, as with other Time Warner Cable divisions, the “FAQ” on the topic has now also appeared on the help pages for this division as well.  It explains Time Warner Cable still believes their Cap ‘n Tier formula is the “fairest” and will reimpose limits “once customers gauge how much bandwidth they actually consume.”  Time Warner Cable has gotten bolder in sending the message the very unpopular billing system they attempted to test in several cities around the country will be back, whether customers like it or not.

But for now, the grand experiment has finally ended nationwide.

Time Warner Cable has appointed Andrew Heller, a 25-year veteran of the cable industry to oversee the cable-owned video project dubbed TV Everywhere.

TV Everywhere is the brainchild of Time Warner Cable, which wants to create a new central video distribution platform leveraging broadband to deliver streamed, on demand TV shows and movies, but only to verified customers of cable companies that already take a video channel package.

Andrew Heller, TWC's Head of 'TV Everywhere'

The cable industry is afraid that broadband customers might decide to watch all of their television online, and simply drop or bypass traditional cable television packages.  TV Everywhere is designed to stop that, by prohibiting non cable-video subscribers from accessing cable network programming online.

The first test of the new service is due during the second quarter of this year.  Meanwhile, the cable operator is engaged in intense discussions with programmers to state their case that it is unfair for them to pay monthly subscription fees for programming, when those same programmers are giving away clips and shows on the web for free.

Assuming the company is successful in its negotiations, programming websites would discontinue much of their traditional online video and get customers to “authenticate” they are verified cable TV subscribers before being permitted to access on demand video.

In a new wrinkle, Heller told Advertising Age that TV Everywhere is not going to be free, even to existing cable subscribers.  In fact, he’s concerned that consumers may stage protests similar to what Time Warner Cable received after testing metered pricing for Internet service.

The price of TV Everywhere has also been a subject of recent debate after Time Warner Cable canceled plans, after a huge outcry by customers, to test metered consumption of broadband video in certain markets.

“The consumer’s going to speak with their pocketbook,” Mr. Heller said. “We do know they want a new model, we do know they want more choice and they use their computer as an additional outlet. We will do what we can to listen to them.”

The question is, do consumers “want a new model” for online video, or are they satisfied accessing content the way they do now — through video programmer websites, or purchasing viewing rights for series from iTunes, Netflix, or Amazon?  Are consumers clamoring for a cable-controlled video platform that only provides access, for a price, to customers who already pay for a cable subscription including video channels?  Will this “listening tour” be like the last one the company attempted during the metered billing fiasco?