CUT-THE-CABLE.COM

March 3, 2011

Comcast Contractor Accused of Raping a Child

The following was found at  Click2Houston.com Click here to see the video   Feb 14, 2011 – HOUSTON — A Comcast worker has been accused of raping a 14-year-old girl.  Jose Torres was charged with aggravated assault of a child.  Investigators said Torres visited the family’s home last summer to try to sell them cable [...]

The following was found at  Click2Houston.com

Click here to see the video

 

Feb 14, 2011 – HOUSTON — A Comcast worker has been accused of raping a 14-year-old girl.  Jose Torres was charged with aggravated assault of a child.  Investigators said Torres visited the family’s home last summer to try to sell them cable service. The victim told police that two nights later, Torres came back, broke into her family’s trailer and put a knife to her throat while she was sleeping.  The girl’s mother asked her ‘Why didn’t you call out?’”   She said her daughter replied, “because he said he would kill everyone and me.”

Jose Torres -Accused Comcast Rapist

Torres left a business card with the family last summer.  The girl later identified Torres from a photo spread.  A KPRC reporter called the number on the card Monday afternoon and was able to speak to Torres.  He told the reporter that he has been cooperating with police and suggested the charge is a case of mistaken identity.

A spokesman for Comcast said Torres worked for one of the company’s contractors.  They said he passed a criminal background check before he was hired. He was fired shortly after police opened an investigation.

Comcast issued the following statement: “We are horrified by these very serious allegations and have been cooperating with the authorities since their investigation began. Upon hearing of this incident, we immediately removed Mr. Torres from working on our behalf.”

OK folks, so here’s the deal.  We’ve seen a number of other Comcast manufactured criminal that have been well documented on this site.  If we use the same set of standards that Comcast uses to hire employees and/or contractors, then we would have to say “Sorry Comcast, but you do not pass MY background check”  YOU ARE FIRED!  Where there is smoke there is fire as they say.

I firmly believe that everyone is innocent until proven guilty and this is not an indictment of Mr. Torres.  This is purely an indictment of Comcast via clear evidence that they have no regard for their customers or the community at large. If Comcast is using contractors to send individuals to your home, then do they really know who these people are?  DO THEY EVEN CARE?  Obviously NOT.

October 11, 2010

Inherent Flaws in Cable TV Business Model

If you have been watching any television at all for the last few weeks, you have most likely been inundated by the media blitz spawned by the FOX NETWORKS GROUP.  They are raising awareness within the viewing public that DISH NETWORK has discontinued carrying some of their stations as of Oct 1, 2010 and will [...]

If you have been watching any television at all for the last few weeks, you have most likely been inundated by the media blitz spawned by the FOX NETWORKS GROUP.  They are raising awareness within the viewing public that DISH NETWORK has discontinued carrying some of their stations as of Oct 1, 2010 and will most likely drop the balance of the stations on Nov 1, 2010.  FOX has created a web site called GETWHATIPAIDFOR.COM in order to provide the public with details from their perspective regarding what the problems are and how the public can get involved.

This is not the first time this type of thing has happened nor will it be the last.  It is not a problem with FOX or DISH.  It is a problem with the Cable Television Business Model and it affects all of the cable services providers, the stations that are carried by those providers, but ultimately it is the consumer that pays the price in higher fees and programming disruptions.

It happened back in March ’09 when Comcast held Portland Basketball Fans hostage by raising the rates of games being broadcast to all carriers, and just days later when Comcast pulled MSNBC from the Portland lineup.  These are just a few examples, but as you can see it is nothing new and the occurrences are getting more frequent and having a larger impact on the general public.

The Federal Communications Commission is the regulating body for the television, telephone, radio, and other related industries.  They make and enforce the rules and are supposed to look after the public’s best interests.  If you have any problems with your cable or satellite company and can’t get any satisfaction, then these are the guys you need to go to.

Just a little over a year ago, we proposed our vision of how the cable TV industry SHOULD operate if the best interest of the public were of primary concern.  Let me reiterate the key points so that everyone {including our friends at the FCC} can comment:

  1. Cable/Satellite TV companies SHOULD NOT be providing content, or getting into the telephone business, or Internet business, or any other business.  If they do they are creating a conflict of interest and detracting resources from their primary product.  If they want to get into other things, than spin off a new company rather than have CATV subscribers finance your ventures and receive sub-standard services while doing so.
  2. If their mission can be narrowed down to nothing more than transporting 3rd party stations to households, then they can be treated the same as a public utility companies and regulated by those governing bodies.  Put metered usage in place and mandate an ‘a la carte’ option for customers.  This will stop the speculation regarding what a channels worth is in terms of viewership.
  3. Most importantly, CHANGE THE REVENUE STREAM.  The current business model has the consumer paying the cable company and the cable company paying the content providers and the advertisers paying the content providers.  This is insanity!  It is the reason for cable companies dropping channels that demand price increases, and the reason that there are so many GARBAGE CHANNELS in a typical lineup that never get watched.  Here are some simple changes that are in the best interest of the public:
  • Content providers should be paying the cable companies to carry them based upon bandwidth consumption…not the other way around.  Bandwidth is a commodity and rates should be on a flat schedule based on usage regardless of the perceived value of the content;
  • Commercial channels (ones that have revenue generating advertisements) should be provided free of charge to cable customer;
  • Premium channels (no advertisements) should be made available to cable customers on an ‘a la carte’ basis so that the market can determine what the true value is of any channel.

I can go on & on (and I will, I promise), but I think you get my drift.  In the mean time, let’s get back to the matter at hand.  I have extracted the Q&A section from the GETWHATIPAIDFOR.COM site so I can give you my standard ‘smart-ass’ diatribe.

[Supposed] FACTS ABOUT FOX’S NEGOTIATIONS WITH DISH

Myth: Fox is seeking a 50 percent increase in programming fees for FX, National Geographic Channel, and our 19 regional sports networks. [Keep in mind as you read on that these are all CABLE STATIONS mentioned here, not their broadcast channels that are available over the air.  FOX will be arguing the point for BROADCAST STATIONS later in an attempt to confuse the issues]

Fact: We are not seeking a 50 percent increase [great, so why not tell us what the actual increase is that you are seeking?  49.99% ???] for FX, National Geographic Channel, and our 19 regional sports networks. And we are not asking you for any more money. [Of course you're not...BECAUSE YOU HAVE NO BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP WITH THE PUBLIC!!!  You must think we are all stupid if you are going to put a statement like that in there and think you wont get called out on it] We are simply asking DISH to compensate us fairly out of their massive profits for Fox’s entertainment and sports programming services they sell to their subscribers. [...and FOX will define what is 'fair', right?] We have made what we believe are fair and reasonable proposals to DISH – ones that are consistent with our agreements with the hundreds of other cable and satellite companies with whom DISH competes for your business. To date, DISH has not responded with a proposal that is reasonable by comparison to the hundreds of other deals we have in place for these same channels.  [And the bottom line is that the public ends up suffering]

Myth: If programmers did not ask for fair compensation for their television networks, consumers’ rates for cable and satellite services would be lower.

Fact: TV Providers have been raising rates on consumers for years and consumers have been paying for broadcast programming that is available free over the air. [That was when everything was analog and cable/satellite reception was better than over-the-air, but now that everything is DIGITAL more and more people have discovered that they get BETTER quality from FREE OVER-THE-AIR TV and have CUT-THE-CABLE] In good economic times, rates have gone up. In the recent recession, rates have still gone up. Even if Fox does not receive fair compensation for its content, it is entirely likely that your bill will still go up.  [But basically what you call a Myth is really TRUE because if cable companies didn't have to pay for programming, then there's no way that they could justify charging more than 20% of their current rates]

Myth: If TV Providers like DISH Network pay fair value for the programming provided by broadcasters and other content providers, it will “force” them to raise fees for consumers.

Fact: DISH Network is a successful, profitable business (thanks in part to the money they already charge subscribers for free, over-the-air broadcast programming). It can surely afford to fairly compensate broadcasters for that content without raising rates. Just how profitable is DISH Network?  [Once again the so-called Myth is a FACT because if ANY cost increases are not passed on to the consumers, then it necessarily has to come out of their profit margin.  The corporate executives responsible for that decision would have to answer to angry stockholders.  The only way around this BUSINESS FACT is Regulation]

DISH Network may advertise itself as a low price provider, but that still hasn’t stopped them from posting exceedingly high profits. As of August 2010, DISH Network is on pace to profit nearly $2 billion for the year or more than 40 percent more than they did in 2009. From January-June 2010, DISH Network generated more than $6 billion in revenue from subscribers and is on track to significantly improve on the $11.5 billion it earned from subscribers in 2009. In the second quarter of 2010, DISH Network received nearly 50 percent more in revenue from each subscriber than each such subscriber actually costs the operator. Overall in the most recent quarter, DISH Network posted a very healthy 25 percent profit margin.  [Unfortunately, FOX does not publish these same numbers for themselves to show us what 'reasonable' numbers look like in comparison.  If you think these DISH number look high, then have a look at these COMCAST Revenue and Profit figures!!!]

Myth: The compensation programmers like FOX are seeking is “exorbitant” and “unreasonable.” [ABSOLUTELY!  Why is FOX any different than ABC, NBC, and CBS who can transmit their programming to the public over the air.  You get advertising dollars too, don't you?]

Fact: The compensation FOX is seeking for the FOX stations is entirely reasonable. Based on the comparable cost of programming, the Fox stations could charge $4-5 per subscriber per month [Hold the phone!  Did I just read that correctly?  FOX thinks that the average household is willing to pay $4 to $5 per month for their programming?  Once again, what makes them think they are so much better than ABC, CBS, and NBC that I would be willing to pay $50 to $60 per year for their programs?  YOU GUYS ARE SMOKING CRACK!], but we are asking for just a fraction of that. ESPN receives $4-5 per subscriber [that's to F$%^&ing HIGH!] and TNT gets $1 per subscriber [and if you don't have a DVR to filter through all of their advertising then you are missing 1/2 of your life], but spends about 80% less on programming than FOX [Whos fault is it that you are spending that much on programming?]. And if one looks at the ratings [otherwise known as BOGUS JACKED UP NUMBERS] FOX and its stations get relative to cable networks, the value would actually be closer to $10 per subscriber. [Dude!  You have to back off of the CRACK...PRONTO!] Moreover, FOX attracts more viewers than the five most expensive cable networks combined (ESPN, TNT, USA, ESPN2 and NFL Net). The bottom line is that the Fox stations feature some of the nation’s most-watched programming with shows such as American Idol, House, Glee, and The Simpsons, as well as the most compelling sports on television with the National Football League, Major League Baseball, and NASCAR. The price FOX is asking for as compensation for all this value is extremely reasonable.[...NOT, and BTW neither are the others you are using for comparison.  Wait, just one question...if you get the increases you are asking for does that mean that you can afford to pay PAULA ABDUL to come back on American Idol?]

Myth: Broadcasters like FOX are already receiving fair compensation for their programming. [Wrong again CRACK-HEAD.  And if you think it is a myth then charge more for advertising instead of trying to charge cable/satellite companies (which you know full well will be passed on to the consumer if it happens).  You and all of the other stations that get money from the carriers have done nothing more than INFLATE THE MARKETPLACE]

Fact: The broadcast television business is suffering because broadcast networks are competing on an uneven playing field with cable networks. Cable networks have two streams of revenue: advertising and fees paid by distributors. Broadcasters like FOX have the single stream of advertising, and TV providers have been charging subscribers for free, over-the-air broadcast programming. [and only regulation will put an end to that, or customers getting wise to the fact that DIGITAL Over-The-Air TV is better than cable or satellite] This has allowed cable networks like ESPN to get a leg up to purchase the rights to content like Monday Night Football and The BCS Championship Series – which means that tens of millions of Americans who can’t afford or choose not to subscribe to cable or satellite miss this event programming. [But if regulations were put in place to prevent premium channels from taking advertising revenue, then the playing field would be even again] The future of free, over-the-air broadcast programming requires broadcasters to compete on a level playing field – which means getting fair compensation from companies like DISH Network. [If customers want your broadcast channels they will hook up an antenna to their TV.  Now LAY OFF THE CRACK, and get on board with our proposed changes that would level the playing field for all networks (broadcast & cable) AND substantially reduce prices for the consumers at the same time]

September 17, 2010

What Comcast is Telling their Investors

Check out the entire report at Wiki Invest where they take stockholder reports and create a very effective execute summary.  I’ve included a few key statements from the report here since the link supplied above will most likely update the content with new information as it comes out. < Business Overview > NBC Universal Deal [...]

Check out the entire report at Wiki Invest where they take stockholder reports and create a very effective execute summary.  I’ve included a few key statements from the report here since the link supplied above will most likely update the content with new information as it comes out.

< Business Overview >

NBC Universal Deal

“…Comcast will benefit from the deal by further vertically integrating backward into the production side of media as well as adding large and profitable cable franchises to its national cable business.  However, the deal has raised some questions about net neutrality and antitrust issues, requiring the deal to undergo lengthy regulation reviews before it is passed, to ensure that Comcast does not obtain too much power in the media world.”  [...not to mention that it will drastically increase Comcast's lobbying expenses to buy off all of the politicians and regulators.]

BreakDown of 2009 Revenues ($35.8 BILLION)

  • Video (54.2%): “…This revenue increase was due mostly to rate adjustments [otherwise known as PRICE INCREASES] as well as customers upgrading to Comcast’s more expensive digital video services. This increase in revenue is significant because Comcast lost approximately 623,000 customers between 2008 and 2009 due to increased competition.“  [This statement comes directly from their 2009 10-K report.  You and I know exactly why Comcast lost all of those customers and you might say that this is a gross MISREPRESENTATION to their stockholders, but I'm sure that a good lawyer could argue in court that "competition" could be construed as  FREE OVER-THE-AIR TV or even competition with the consumer himself for the few dollars left in his pocket.]
  • Internet (21.7%)
  • Phone (9.1%) Comcast earned $3.3 billion in revenue from its phone services, a substantial increase from its 2008 revenues of $2.6 billion”
  • Advertising (4%) “Comcast’s advertising segment earns revenue through programming license agreements with programming networks.” [OK, so check this out...Comcast has to throw price increases at consumers because of rising programming costs, yet they freely admit that they DRIVE UP THE COST THEMSELVES with "you scratch may back and I'll scratch yours" advertising deals with the programmers.  Comcast uses the higher programming costs to justify higher rates, AND they get $1.4 Billion in advertising revenue as PURE GRAVY...WHAT A SCAM!!!]
  • Other (3%) “Comcast earns revenue through its regional sports networks, digital media center, on-screen guide advertising, and fees from various other services. In 2009, Comcast earned $1.1 billion in revenue in its other segment.[This one cracks me up!  If they can be so blatant about their EXTORTION in the defined segments, can you imagine what they might be hiding in the "OTHER" category?  I see more advertising here too.  Why isn't that in the 'advertising' category?]
  • Franchise Fees (2.7%)
  • Programming (4.2%) “…mainly through advertising sales and from subscriber license fees for its networks, which include E!, Golf Channel, VERSUS, G4, and Style.”  [Looky here, more advertising.  If you add up all of the real advertising revenue we're talking about 11.2% which would probably raise the eyebrows of regulators and auditors...or at least line their pockets a little moreThe real issue is how do we get Comcast OUT OF THE PROGRAMMING BUSINESS?  Forget that.  They are getting deeper into it.]

< Trends and Forces >

NBC Deal Subject to Regulatory Approval [Yeah, we know all about this but the deal will go through and the politicians will get their COMCAST BONUS BUCKS for making it happen]

The Cable TV market is shifting to a new digital system, which is upsetting some customers

“In areas all over the United States, cable providers are requiring their subscribers to shift to a new digital system… The benefits for Comcast are obvious: they can offer a lot more channels compared to analog offerings. However, many customers are upset that there is no option to maintain the old analog option for a lower price, which is driving down the collective satisfaction of Comcast’s consumers.”  [Here's another case of 'smoke & mirrors'.  Comcast could easily provide a digital package to their customers that is priced the same or lower than the 'old analog option', but they simply refuse to do so.]

Net Neutrality

“Congress is considering legislation that would allow broadband Internet providers–like Comcast–to charge for preferred delivery of digital content. “Net neutrality” advocates are lobbying Congress to treat all web content the same, as is the current standard. Comcast and other Internet providers claim they should be able to sell premium service to larger users of their networks, since they are investing heavily to build and maintain such networks. If legislation is passed to prevent Comcast from charging premium prices for differentiated delivery, it would limit Comcast’s future revenue growth.”  [This is the scariest thing going on.  As stated here, Comcast's business plan moving forward relies upon the demise of Net Neutrality.  This means that we may have to pay for things on the Internet that we take for granted as Free to the Public today.]

August 30, 2010

Comcast/NBCU Merger Under DOJ Microscope

The Department of Justice is examining how the proposed $13.75 BILLION deal of Comcast acquiring NBC Universal from General Electric might adversely affect the blossoming Internet video market.  There are fears that the new Comcast could potentially stunt the Internet video industry’s growth.  The agency’s antitrust division is looking into whether or not Comcast could [...]

The Department of Justice is examining how the proposed $13.75 BILLION deal of Comcast acquiring NBC Universal from General Electric might adversely affect the blossoming Internet video market.  There are fears that the new Comcast could potentially stunt the Internet video industry’s growth.  The agency’s antitrust division is looking into whether or not Comcast could potentially control distribution rights to significant amounts of television programming on the Internet, which would effectively block potential competition.

Companies like Netflix and others are providing access to television programming and movies over the Internet which is encroaching on the traditional market of cable and satellite companies, which in turn are trying to fend off the competition by creating Internet-based distribution methods of their own.  Current regulations require cable companies that own content (like Comcast) to make that programming available on reasonable terms to rivals.

DISH and DirecTV have added their 2-cents into the discussion by requesting that those regulations be extended to any Comcast/NBCU content that’s delivered over the Net.  [Hmmm, do you think they fear that Comcast will be looking to make some content EXCLUSIVE to Internet distribution to bypass existing regulations?]

They are also looking closely at Comcast’s efforts to give its cable customers online access to some TV content that isn’t widely available online now, and how that might affect access to those programs by other Internet providers. That might result in fewer competitors over time so that consumers would end up paying more for video in general.  [LOL,,,if WALMART can do it and get away with it, why not COMCAST?]

“The success of the online-video-business model depends critically on access to online content, and strict conditions on the transaction would be necessary to thwart” any attempts by Comcast-NBCU to block access, Dish wrote in a complaint to the FCC detailing its support for broadening the existing regulations.

Comcast’s response to the complaint: “Online video is not a substitute” for multichannel video programming.  “In addition, several impediments – technological, pricing related, and rights related – make it highly unlikely that online video will become a substitute” for such service “in the foreseeable future.” [...so let us just SQUASH it before it does and we'll be doing you a favor too]

Although the transaction is expected to be approved late this year or early in 2011, the government does have some leverage and it could impose conditions particularly because of the FCCs involvement which has broader authority to act to stop anything that it deems to be against the public interest.Regardless of the outcome of this deal, the DOJ & FCC will most likely continue to investigate whether cable operators are acting to thwart emerging competition from the Web. If so, they could file a suit under the Sherman Antitrust Act for anti-competitive behavior.  [...in which case they will pay what seem to be a hefty fine but will only amount to a drop in the bucket compared to the stolen revenues and lost opportunity cost for Internet Video companies that could have been great if only they had a fighting chance]

August 11, 2010

Comcast + Blockbuster = ???

Blockbuster has jumped in bed with Comcast and should they produce any offspring you can be sure that the combined DNA of these two companies will spell nothing but trouble with a capital “T” for consumers. A talking head for Comcast describes the deal as a marketing agreement where Comcast will be able to offer [...]

Blockbuster Logo

Blockbuster has jumped in bed with Comcast and should they produce any offspring you can be sure that the combined DNA of these two companies will spell nothing but trouble with a capital “T” for consumers.

A talking head for Comcast describes the deal as a marketing agreement where Comcast will be able to offer discounts on Blockbuster’s DVD-By-Mail service to certain Comcast customers. As part of the agreement, Comcast will not take a cut of any related revenue, but will provide deeper discounting for customers who decide to take advantage of the Blockbuster DVD-By-Mail service. It wasn’t immediately clear how much the deal might be worth to Blockbuster.

“It’s not about a financial benefit, but about targeting (our) the products to Blockbuster customers,” the Comcast talking head said.

As part of the model, Blockbuster stores have been promoting Comcast’s triple-play (otherwise known as the “3-Card Monte”) services.

Here’s the real scoop folks…Blockbuster is in big financial trouble and is grasping at straws.  Comcast sees an opportunity to get some cheap advertising through Blockbuster, but mostly they want their customer list.   When Blockbuster goes bankrupt about 18-months from now, Comcast will swoop down on all of the former Blockbuster customers with a “teaser” deal that they can’t refuse.

It is no different than a street corner crack dealer handing out free samples to the neighborhood kids to get them hooked so they can score the BIG BUCKS on the back end.

COMCAST…DEALING YOUR FAVORITE DRUG SINCE 1963

July 3, 2010

Al Franken Weighs in on Comcast/NBCU Merger

Reprinted from The Hill: Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) blasted the prospective Comcast-NBC Universal merger and pressed Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan for her views on net neutrality during her confirmation hearing this week. Kagan declined to weigh in on the pending merger, but said that First Amendment rights should not be used as a kind [...]

Reprinted from The Hill:

Senator Al Franken

Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) blasted the prospective Comcast-NBC Universal merger and pressed Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan for her views on net neutrality during her confirmation hearing this week.

Kagan declined to weigh in on the pending merger, but said that First Amendment rights should not be used as a kind of free pass when companies are charged with anti-competitive conduct.

“The First Amendment does not provide a general defense to the anti-trust laws,” she told the Senate Judiciary Committee. “In general, the anti-trust laws are the anti-trust laws and they apply to all companies.”

When Franken asked more explicitly about how net neutrality might be legally defended, Kagan declined to take a stance on what she characterized as a policy issue. But she generally supported Franken’s description that free-speech rights promote media diversity.

“One of the purposes of the First Amendment is to ensure a public sphere in which all kinds of thoughts and views can be expressed and we can learn from all of them,” she said.

Franken reinforced the strong stance he took earlier this year in opposition to the merger.

“Comcast is already extremely powerful,” he said. “It’s the nation’s largest cable operator and also the largest home Internet service provider. If it owned both the pipes and the programming it would have the ultimate ability to keep others from publishing.”

He warned that other major Internet service providers may decide to follow the Comcast into the content arena.

“I worry that if Comcast and NBC merge, AT&T and Verizon are going to decide that they have to buy ABC or CBS and that will mean there will be less independent programming, fewer voices, and a smaller marketplace of ideas,” he said.

Franken broached net neutrality during Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s confirmation hearings last year as well.

A Saturday Night Live Comedian gets it.  What can be so hard? Speaking of SNL, can you imagine what it would end up being if Comcast gets their hands on it?

June 30, 2010

Comcast Increasing Rate 50%

That’s right folks, you heard it here first.  This is a Cut-The-Cable (CTC) EXCLUSIVE! On July 1, 2010 Comcast will be raising the rate that it costs you to pay them through Western Union Convenience Pay at your local supermarkets in cash from $1.00 to $1.50.  See it for yourself. Here’s the story that goes [...]

That’s right folks, you heard it here first.  This is a Cut-The-Cable (CTC) EXCLUSIVE!

On July 1, 2010 Comcast will be raising the rate that it costs you to pay them through Western Union Convenience Pay at your local supermarkets in cash from $1.00 to $1.50.  See it for yourself.

Comcast SUX Again!

Comcast 7/1/10 Rate Increase

Here’s the story that goes along with this gem.  On Sunday 6/27/10 my wife and I are out grocery shopping.  The grocery store was completely out of one of the sale items that we were looking to pick up, so after checking out we headed over to the courtesy booth to get a ‘rain check’ for the sale item.  That’s when I spied this little item that was prominently laminated and taped to the from of the counter.  It reads “ATTENTION (grocery store name obfuscated so that the store manager doesn’t get fired) CUSTOMERS.  EFFECTIVE July 1, 2010.  The Service Fee for Comcast wil increase from $1.00 to $1.50.  This is a Western Union Convenience Pay ® service fee payable in cash only.  THANK YOU for your business!”

Well, of course I had to get all of the details on this from the grocery store manager (GSM) so here is what he told me.

CTC: Hi, I’m doing an article for the Internet regarding Comcast and I was wondering if I could take a few pictures of your Courtesy Booth area.

GSM: I’m sorry but picture taking within the store is not allowed unless your get permission from our corporate headquarters.

CTC: Ok, then would it be possible to get a copy of the rate increase notice that is posted?

GSM: Sure, I can help you with that.  [GSM struggles to remove tape from the front of the posted notice.]  I’ll tell you what, you just need a picture of this notice right?  I’ll let you take that if you PROMISE to cross out the store name at the top.

CTC: I promise. [*CLICK*]  Do you mind if I ask you a few questions regarding Comcast?

GSM: I’ll try to answer what I can.

CTC: Do you know if this rate increase is being driven by Comcast or Western Union?  Who receives the fee?

GSM:  We receive a very small portion for doing our part.  Western Union Convenience Pay is the service used by most of the companies that we collect for and the rates are not going up for those other companies, so I am 99% sure that the rate increase is all going to Comcast.

CTC: Why would someone pay you a service fee to take their money?  Wouldn’t it be cheaper to pay their bill using a 1st class stamp?

GSM: …or even the Internet.  I wold say that most of the people that pay their bills in cash at our service booth are the ones that do not have a checking account and either do not have Internet service or are not very computer savvy.  They are probably from a different socio-economic situation than you and I.

CTC: One last question, About how many Comcast transactions do you handle n a month, and what is the average amount of each transaction?

GSM: Oh, it’s very small, maybe 1% of our business and the size of the bill is for whatever is typical for just basic cable TV, what is that, about $50 a month, and then you tack on all of those taxes and other charges.

CTC:  Thank you very much for your time

GSM: No problem.  Just remember to take the store name off of that picture or I’m hunting you down!

Now I look over to my wife and I’m all proud that I was able to nail this story, and she’s looking down at the frozen items that are beginning to melt and giving me the STINK EYE!  I wonder if Matt Drudge has those issues?

I contacted Western Union and they assured me that the rate increase was not coming from their end, so at this point it is all being chalked up to more Comcast greed.  It is obvious to me that the people that are paying their Comcast bills at the grocery store are the ones that can least afford it, and by increasing the fee that they charge for processing a cash payment Comcast is rubbing salt into the wound.

My opinion is that by allowing alternate means of paying for their services by cash though local grocery stores and other outlets, Comcast has grouped itself with the likes of electric companies, telephone companies, and other services that are all regulated in some form or another by Public Utility CommissionsIf Comcast wants to act like a utility, I say that they should be treated like one too and have the local and state regulatory bodies enact some PRICE CONTROL on them.

June 22, 2010

Comcast Lies Again About HDTV Channels

This commentary is from TV Predictions and is re-printed here for your reading pleasure. Washington, D.C. (June 17, 2010) by Phillip Swann Comcast has informed the Federal Communications Commission that it plans to deploy a new technology that will enable it to offer more than 150 HD channels later this year, Multichannel News writes. Oh, [...]

This commentary is from TV Predictions and is re-printed here for your reading pleasure.

Washington, D.C. (June 17, 2010) by Phillip Swann

Comcast has informed the Federal Communications Commission that it plans to deploy a new technology that will enable it to offer more than 150 HD channels later this year, Multichannel News writes.

Oh, really? Where have we heard this before? Oh, I remember.

In March 2008, Comcast CFO Michael Angelakis told a financial conference in Florida that his company had the capacity to offer more than 150 High-Definition channels. In March 2008!

What happens when a Comcast Executive goes on the record?

That was more than two years ago and Comcast has yet to offer 150 HD channels in any market. In fact, the cable operator now offers less than 50 high-def channels in many markets, including ones as large as South Florida.

When asked in 2008 why Comcast was not offering more HD channels, Angelakis said that “not every HD channel deserves to be in HD, and there are lots of HD channels that aren’t watched very much.”

Folks, don’t be fooled by Comcast’s latest effort to pull the wool over your HD-hungry eyes. The company said the new technology, which is actually an old technology called Switched Digital Video, will be deployed in several markets this year and it will expand to more markets in 2011 and 2012. But, trust me, Comcast has no plans to offer 150 real HD channels. Just as it didn’t in 2008.

The cable operator is just trying to bamboozle subscribers into thinking that waves of additional channels are coming their way. But they are not. Comcast may add some HD channels, but it won’t offer as many as DIRECTV, Dish Network, Verizon, AT&T, Cablevision or a few other providers because it doesn’t want to pay programmers to carry their channels.

It’s that simple. The company wants to reduce programming costs because it’s losing video subscribers hand over fist. (Nearly one million customers have dropped their Comcast TV service in the past year.)  [ You see, IT'S WORKING!  KEEP IT UP! ]

According to Multichannel News, Comcast says SDV will “result in the launch of at least 50 additional channels, bringing the total number of HD channels in these systems to over 150.”

Again, you might see more HD channels in some large markets — the ones the media watches closely — but don’t expect Comcast to significantly expand its HD lineups, particularly in small and mid-sized markets.

And if it tries to claim 150 HD channels in any given market, it will likely be the result of expanding its Video on Demand lineup and calling that “channels.”

When it comes to HD, Comcast lies.

Phillip Swann is president and publisher of TVPredictions.com. He has been quoted in dozens of publications and broadcast outlets, including CNN, Fox News, Inside Edition, The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Chicago Tribune, The Financial Times, The Associated Press and The Hollywood Reporter. He can be reached at swann@tvpredictions.com or at 703-505-3064.

And when is comes to Customer Service, Comcast lies, and when it comes to Pricing, Comcast lies, and when it comes to Delivering their Product, Comcast lies, and the list goes on and on.

How to get TV through the Internet

Here’s a nice little article forwarded by Joann…Thanks Joann!  This is a re-print from of all places The Cable News Network. Jonathan Strickland cut ties with his cable company a year ago, yet he continues to watch all his favorite TV shows. He has saved nearly $700 over the last year and, most importantly, he [...]

Here’s a nice little article forwarded by Joann…Thanks Joann!  This is a re-print from of all places The Cable News Network.

Jonathan Strickland cut ties with his cable company a year ago, yet he continues to watch all his favorite TV shows. He has saved nearly $700 over the last year and, most importantly, he tasted the thrill of telling his cable provider to shove it.

“We were having poor service, channels were getting cut back and the prices were going up,” said Strickland, a senior writer for HowStuffWorks. Although cable companies often lure new customers with special rates, he said it seemed “the longer you were staying with them, the more you were getting punished.”

How has Strickland pulled this off? Mostly through a combination of Netflix and Hulu, the Internet TV service he views on his laptop.

And he’s had no regrets.

Hulu.com

An onslaught of new technology is freeing people from cable or satellite TV companies like never before by allowing customers to get shows via broadband and other means.

Some people use sites like Hulu, and don’t mind with waiting a couple days after the show airs on television to watch. Others figure out elaborate set ups to run their HD televisions through their PCs using applications like Windows Media Center.

It’s not mainstream yet and far from a perfect alternative, but little by little a younger generation is starting to take notice and make the switch, technology experts say.

“It’s a niche audience now, but it’s a concern for cable companies because this is the way things are going,” said Lance Ulanoff, editor-in-chief of PCMag.com. “They’re going to have to figure out the revenue model.

“Right now, there’s tension between what people want and what content providers are willing to deliver.”

At a recent visit to Google’s Silicon Valley headquarters, comedian Conan O’Brien told the tech-savvy crowd what it already knew: The landscape is changing fast.

“I don’t know what television is going to be five years from now. There’s a lot of people that think you’re just going to experience it through your server,” said O’Brien, between taking digs at Jay Leno and Google execs.

“People don’t even know how the business is going to change. There might not be network television as we know it.”

The former NBC talk-show host, who is moving to cable channel TBS this fall, then added, “Wouldn’t that be sweeeeet!”

Joking aside, it’s something everyone, from consumers to industry executives, is keeping a close eye on.

The cable and satellite-dish giants already have their share of critics. Facebook pages “I Hate Time Warner Cable,” “I Hate Comcast” and “I Hate DirecTV” [and CUT-THE-CABLE] have sprung up, allowing fans to vent their frustrations.

“I wonder how many more channels on my little line-up they are going to continue removing and want me to keep paying their rising rates,” one person wrote.

Another said, “All the providers for TV services suck ’cause they are all trying to suck you in and then up your rates.”

Yet before consumers pull the plug on cable or satellite TV, people like Strickland say they should be prepared for the change. Internet TV takes getting used to, and there is a loss of picture quality, he said. And if you want a complete home theater set-up, it’s extremely hard to accomplish unless you’re an electronics whiz and know how to make end-arounds.

Web TV also may not be ideal if you’re a major sports fan, experts say. Most pro leagues, most notably the NFL, have exclusive contracts with networks or cable companies.

“This is the hard part about switching to an online-only consumption model,” said Ulanoff of PCMag.com. “There are no guarantees [about what content is available].”

Sites like Major League Baseball and ESPN3 have helped fill some of the void with live streams of games, but their offerings pale in comparison to the many choices on cable. Many World Cup soccer games are available on ESPN3, although some, such as the much-anticipated United States vs. England match, were not.

Blogger Sam Grobart tried going cable-less, but he found himself longing for cable TV for a completely different reason. Quite simply, he missed channel surfing.

“This isn’t a post about technology,” he wrote on the New York Times blog Gadgetwise. “This is a post about behavior.”

Strickland, an admitted “all-around geek,” understands that sentiment. Yet he says the DVR has already helped with that mentality, freeing people of the belief that they need to tune in at a specific time on a specific day of the week.

Besides the thrill of ditching his cable bill, convenience has been the other biggest benefit, he says. “I’m going to watch a show when I want to watch it.”

Strickland uses Hulu and Netflix’s streaming capabilities for most of his shows and movies. He watches about half of the material on his television and the other half on his laptop.

He has used a Roku box for his TV, a cost of about $100, to help stream movies. But since he bought the device, gaming consoles such as Nintendo’s Wii and Microsoft’s Xbox have begun offering Netflix’s streaming service, making his Roku less necessary.

In the end, Strickland says he’s saved at least $55 a month. Perhaps more importantly, he says he has a new level of freedom.

“I realized how much time I was spending watching television, and now I’m doing other things,” he said.

“He will deliver his soul from going into the pit, and his life shall see the light.” -Job 33:28

June 15, 2010

Comcast Accused of Attempted Bribe

Read this story re-printed from BLODIC.US Congresswoman Suggests That Comcast Tried To Bribe Her To Support Merger 6/9/10 – With plenty of scrutiny still facing the proposed merger between NBC and Comcast.  Representative Maxine Waters strongly suggested that someone from the company tried to bribe her to get her to support the merger: During a House [...]

Read this story re-printed from BLODIC.US

Maxine Waters

Congresswoman Suggests That Comcast Tried To Bribe Her To Support Merger
6/9/10 – With plenty of scrutiny still facing the proposed merger between NBC and ComcastRepresentative Maxine Waters strongly suggested that someone from the company tried to bribe her to get her to support the merger:

During a House Judiciary Committee that took place in L.A. on Monday, Representative Maxine Waters stated that she had received a call from “somebody at Comcast” asking, ‘What do you want?’”

Waters, who has been grilling the cable giant on issues of ethnic diversity, claims she replied by explaining the need for greater diversity in media. However, Waters says the Comcast caller responded by saying, “I’m talking about what do you want?”

Comcast, not surprisingly, denies any suggested wrongdoing:


Any implication that anyone ever inquired about what Congresswoman Waters would want personally is completely untrue. We meet and discuss the proposed joint venture with many members of Congress and other leaders. We have repeatedly tried to understand Congresswoman Waters’ concerns so that we can address them.

[It sounds to me like her concern is that you INSULTED HER INTEGRITY.  Maybe a few more ZEROS will help fix the situation]

Older Posts »

Powered by WordPress