Author
|
Topic: Time Warner - Comcast merger
|
AcousticGod Knowflake Posts: 8530 From: Dublin, CA Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted February 18, 2014 01:53 PM
Alarm over monopoly isn't anything new, or "Left", or anti-Capitalistic. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_antitrust_law IP: Logged |
Randall Webmaster Posts: 37977 From: Saturn next to Charmainec Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted February 18, 2014 04:34 PM
Anti-trust laws are not what we are talking about here. If said laws apply, the merger won't happen, will it? And if it's allowed, then the free market dictates, as it should.Read why the anti-trust laws don't apply in my next post. IP: Logged |
Randall Webmaster Posts: 37977 From: Saturn next to Charmainec Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted February 18, 2014 04:45 PM
Comcast-Time Warner Merger Is Good for Competition—and ConsumersBy Larry Popelka February 18, 2014 Members of Congress are lining up to criticize the proposed Comcast (CMCSA)-Time Warner (TWC) merger announced last week, threatening a careful antitrust review. This is a great example of how U.S. antitrust policy has turned into a political game instead of a serious attempt to encourage competition and consumer choice. With all their flaws, cable companies present an easy target for politicians, and the pending antitrust review provides a forum to score points with constituents. None of this chest-pounding will lower cable bills or improve service. It may actually hurt honest competition in the long run. The Sherman Antitrust Act was created to prevent monopolistic activities that diminish consumer choice or competition; the Comcast-Time Warner deal will do neither. The two companies’ footprints are in completely separate geographies. They don’t compete over a single customer, so the merger isn’t going to eliminate choice for anyone. More important, both companies are limping along, victims of big changes in the television industry that may make them irrelevant within a decade. Only about 40 percent of homes in the combined Comcast-Time Warner geography still subscribe to cable TV service, according to investment research firm Morningstar, due to inroads from satellite TV, IPTV (Internet offerings such as those of AT&T (T) U-verse, and Verizon (VZ) FiOS) and subscription video-on-demand services like those of Netflix (NFLX), Hulu Plus, and Amazon (AMZN) Prime. Morningstar also reports that total cable TV subscribers across all cable operators declined 10 percent in past four years; Time Warner was down 6 percent last year alone. Many analysts expect cloud-based on-demand services to take over a large portion of the industry in the next several years, enabling virtually unlimited content to be viewed anytime, anywhere. Many younger households known as “cord cutters” are walking away from cable and satellite TV for these online services, which offer more content, fewer ads, and lower prices. The cable TV industry has no answer for this, although Comcast is the one company making an effort. It is investing in technology to provide its own cloud-based, on-demand service to subscribers. This helped Comcast perform better than rest of the cable industry last year, though it still lost 1 per cent of its TV subscribers. Merging with Time Warner Cable will increase Comcast’s subscriber base by 50 percent, from 22 million to 33 million homes, giving it access to about 70 percent of U.S. households and a bigger base over which to spread its on-demand investment. For perspective, Netflix has 29 million subscribers in the U.S. and 44 million worldwide. Unlike Comcast, Netflix doesn’t have the burden of owning and maintaining a clunky cable wiring system to deliver its product, so its capital requirements are low and it can invest more in proprietary content such as the popular show, House of Cards. While some have theorized that Comcast’s control of the physical cables that deliver Internet service to millions of homes might give the company an unfair advantage, AT&T, Verizon Communications, and Dish Network (DISH) all offer high-speed broadband and are poised to capture dissatisfied Comcast users. Meanwhile, Google (GOOG) is testing an option —Google Fiber—that could provide speeds up to 100 times faster than Comcast. If Comcast and Time Warner are guilty of anything, it is poor public relations. Most cable consumers hate their operators because of years of price increases, and many members of Congress are playing to this. But these pricing actions were generally driven by content providers. Six months ago, CBS (CBS) demanded that Time Warner pay more for CBS content, from 50˘ to $2 per subscriber. Time Warner chose to go without CBS for a month but lost 300,000 subscribers in the debacle. CBS came out of it with nary a blemish. A stronger Comcast with greater bargaining power would make it more difficult for content providers to extract additional payments, which might keep cable TV prices in check. Expect content providers to be vocal opponents of this merger. Further opposition will come from bureaucrats who still use the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) to evaluate monopoly status. The HHI is a dated metric that looks solely at market share and fails to take into account any other competitive factors. For this reason, Comcast is offering to divest 3 million Time Warner subscribers, a silly move designed solely to keep Comcast below a mythical 30 percent HHI market share threshold. If government regulators are serious about increasing competition in the TV business, they need to look beyond old metrics and political motivations. If they did, they might actually encourage Comcast to buy up all of the remaining cable operators to give the cable business a fighting chance at competing over the next decade. http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-02-18/comcast-time-warner-merger-good-for-competition-and-consumers IP: Logged |
AcousticGod Knowflake Posts: 8530 From: Dublin, CA Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted February 19, 2014 12:41 PM
It reads, especially at the end, like a piece designed to assuage fears of anti-trust, which makes me question it's viewpoint.Yes, I agree that the trend is away from cable. However, cable does still have some benefits not easily found elsewhere. quote: Merging with Time Warner Cable will increase Comcast’s subscriber base by 50 percent, from 22 million to 33 million homes, giving it access to about 70 percent of U.S. households and a bigger base over which to spread its on-demand investment. For perspective, Netflix has 29 million subscribers in the U.S. and 44 million worldwide.
You add up the subscribers that Comcast and Time Warner have, and you get 55 million, which is in excess of Netflix's subscribership. Perspective indeed (What are we, simpletons? We can't do the math to figure out the correct perspective?). quote: Unlike Comcast, Netflix doesn't have the burden of owning and maintaining a clunky cable wiring system to deliver its product, so its capital requirements are low and it can invest more in proprietary content such as the popular show, House of Cards.
Nice try here. Comcast isn't poorer for owning or maintaining the cable wiring system. In fact, it seems to have so much capital it bought NBC, and is now attempting to buy Time Warner. That makes it a little difficult to make Comcast out as the struggling upstart against Netflix, which has only just begun to provide independent content. quote: Six months ago, CBS (CBS) demanded that Time Warner pay more for CBS content, from 50˘ to $2 per subscriber. Time Warner chose to go without CBS for a month but lost 300,000 subscribers in the debacle. CBS came out of it with nary a blemish. A stronger Comcast with greater bargaining power would make it more difficult for content providers to extract additional payments, which might keep cable TV prices in check. Expect content providers to be vocal opponents of this merger.
Maybe. I mean it sounds reasonable, but is it? If CBS, for example, were to walk...could they find a home elsewhere? Yes. A bigger Comcast isn't likely to do anything to reign in costs from these players. Also, I personally don't want Comcast to be stronger. They're already being greedy with their contracts preventing member channels from other avenues of distribution. I can't watch Face/Off because of tv providers like Comcast. Nor can I watch HBO or Showtime. The demise of Comcast would be much faster without these contracts in place. quote: If Comcast and Time Warner are guilty of anything, it is poor public relations. Most cable consumers hate their operators because of years of price increases, and many members of Congress are playing to this. But these pricing actions were generally driven by content providers.
Yes, Comcast does have a PR problem, and more importantly they have a service problem. If they actually had stellar service, if they had a coherent system that created less of a need for service, they wouldn't be so far out of people's good graces. No customer gets to decide on their username. No customer determines their own password. No customer even gets to name their network or set the network's password anymore. Getting a bill detail online is virtually impossible (in my experience). When you call in, they try to direct you back to the internet, but their internet site doesn't usually have the info you need. While in Visalia, we got the latest beta cable box. We couldn't even get NBC's (Comcast's own) Saturday Night Live on demand. We had to switch back to the old box anyway, because the new box wasn't working properly, in order to get SNL on demand. It's stupid stuff like this that draws ire. Investments in service would do way more for the company than acquisitions will. The belief that it's just the cost of the service misses the mark by far.IP: Logged |
Catalina Knowflake Posts: 1408 From: shamballa Registered: Aug 2013
|
posted February 19, 2014 01:16 PM
When i call Geico i get royal service. When i call Comcast they act like they are doing me a favor. The fact that they have agreed to carve up the market and not compete with each other is not reassuring, lol!The fact that there are a million channels doesn'r mean they are any more watchable. The fact that they were caught outright lying during negotiations is worse than not reassuring. IP: Logged |
Randall Webmaster Posts: 37977 From: Saturn next to Charmainec Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted February 19, 2014 04:18 PM
One person's experience means nothing. That's called a man-who statistic. If this merger is allowed, then quit your belly aching. It clearly isn't a violation of any anti-trust laws, or else it won't be allowed to happen. None of us here are anti-trust lawyers. Our opinions don't amount to a hill of beans. To me, it's just another day in a captalist society. Deal with it. IP: Logged |
AcousticGod Knowflake Posts: 8530 From: Dublin, CA Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted February 19, 2014 05:21 PM
I'm certain my experience isn't unique. That would be remarkable.Either way, in the end, Comcast will be supplanted by the internet (unless it figures out how to adapt better). Hopefully, Google does continue with its Google Fiber project. IP: Logged |
Randall Webmaster Posts: 37977 From: Saturn next to Charmainec Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted February 19, 2014 08:13 PM
I'm sure there are bad customer service experiences with any and every business. But it's generally the exception and not the rule. But transferring one own's experience to the majority is a fallacy of thinking.IP: Logged |
Randall Webmaster Posts: 37977 From: Saturn next to Charmainec Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted February 19, 2014 08:23 PM
I know a man who smoked for 50 years and never got cancer. Does that make smoking a healthy practice?I will give you a more personal reference. Over several years, I have ordered a medium rare steak at Applebees, and each time, I have to send it back...usually two or three times. Different locations in my city and different cities. If you can't cook a steak medium rare, you shouldn't be cooking steaks at all. Why do I persist in ordering steaks at Applebees? Because I know it is just chance. Like flipping a coin and getting heads 20 times in a row. But still, each outcome has a 50/50 chance of occurring with each event. Just because I have had these experiences with Applebees does not validate a thing. Obviously, they cook a great steak most of the time, or else they would not be thriving as a business. They are swamped with business. I've been coincidentally unlucky, but I know better than to think that translates into any statistical significance. IP: Logged |
Catalina Knowflake Posts: 1408 From: shamballa Registered: Aug 2013
|
posted February 19, 2014 10:34 PM
Lol well I can't agree with you that Applebees are successful because of their great fare...MacD's are successful too and you won't catch me there either. Assembly line food is not my idea of a good night out.Nor is my interest in this merger personal...I don't have a tv these days. But I can't believe that the ability to sew up the market strikes any lover of capitalism as a good thing. It kills competition, period. Flown anywhere since the anti-merger rules were thrown out? The big guys get together and fix prices and policies and the consumer and small fry are the losers. IP: Logged |
AcousticGod Knowflake Posts: 8530 From: Dublin, CA Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted February 21, 2014 02:10 PM
I have to say, "Nice try," here, Randall. There's nothing wrong with my thinking. There is no rule that Comcast offers great customer service, nor is there any dearth of stories of poor customer service from this company. I don't need to transfer my own experience to anyone else to know the truth of this. I can verify such a thing really easily. You can, too. Just go to Yelp, and type in "Cable tv" alongside any location you like. I just did Atlanta, GA. One and a half stars average. Of course, you have to find an area that's not dominated by Time Warner, but I have no doubt that ANY place you can find info on Comcast, you'll find dissatisfaction. You shouldn't assume that you're right just because you think you are.IP: Logged |
Randall Webmaster Posts: 37977 From: Saturn next to Charmainec Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted February 21, 2014 02:18 PM
You are so unscientific, to proclaim science so much. Such is the Liberal mind. A small sampling is worthless. People are way more inclined to report what they think is a bad experience in their own mind (customers are often wrong and demand something they are not entitled to and get angry when they don't receive what they demand), while satisfied customers generally do not take the time to do so. Large companies will have these issues occur. Just like PowerSellers on eBay may have several negative feedbacks, but by sheer volume still have a 99% positive rating, and one can expect nothing but stellar performance by ordering from them. IP: Logged |
AcousticGod Knowflake Posts: 8530 From: Dublin, CA Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted February 21, 2014 02:23 PM
The food is just one aspect of any successful or supposedly successful restaurant. If a restaurant can get by on just its food, then you might be able to extrapolate that they regularly get the food right. Applebee's has a bar, and heavily advertises, right? Both are helpful in securing the success of the franchise despite its food. When success is dependent upon multiple things, you can't conclude that just one thing keeps it in good stead.IP: Logged |
AcousticGod Knowflake Posts: 8530 From: Dublin, CA Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted February 21, 2014 02:35 PM
quote: You are so unscientific, to proclaim science so much. Such is the Liberal mind.
quote: A small sampling is worthless.
Says the guy that just assumes something is so simply because he alone dreampt it up. quote: (customers are often wrong and demand something they are not entitled to and get angry when they don't receive what they demand) while satisfied customers generally do not take the time to do so.
I'll grant you these points. quote: Just like PowerSellers on eBay may have several negative feedbacks, but by sheer volume still have a 99% positive rating, and one can expect nothing but stellar performance by ordering from them.
Yes, in the case that the power seller learns from mistakes and corrects the mishap. If not, they wouldn't have kept their rating up. They had to adapt in order to keep their reputation. I'm saying that no such reputation exists with Comcast. If you were to poll Comcast customers I'm sure you'd be astounded by the amount of people that have something negative to say about the company. It wouldn't constitute "a small sample". I'm sure that if you even have Comcast in just your immediate area, and poll your friends you'll find out I'm not wrong about this. I didn't write this article: And yet somehow, that author asserts the very same thing. Maybe because he did his research: Last year, the American Customer Satisfaction Index ranked Comcast last and TWC second to last among Internet service providers. Among pay-TV providers, Comcast ranked third from the bottom and TWC second. Just because you want me to be wrong, doesn't make me wrong. IP: Logged |
Randall Webmaster Posts: 37977 From: Saturn next to Charmainec Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted February 21, 2014 03:03 PM
No, it has nothing to do with learning from mistakes. It has to do with unreasonable demands by customers. You can do everything right and still get negatives. I personally don't care how Comcast treats its customers, but why would they intentionally treat them all bad? That just makes no sense. I sometimes get bad service at Walmart, but does that mean Walmart condones bad customer service? Nope. They pride themselves on providing the best training to ensure great service. Granted, it may not always translate into the field. But ultimately, I support a free market system and the economy that results thereof. If companies want to merge, so be it. IP: Logged |
AcousticGod Knowflake Posts: 8530 From: Dublin, CA Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted February 21, 2014 04:03 PM
quote: No, it has nothing to do with learning from mistakes. It has to do with unreasonable demands by customers.
I'm certain that every bad review isn't solely the fault of bad expectations on the consumer's part. Sure, it's possible to do everything right and by the book, and some people might still have an issue. That's not going to be every single case, though. In instances where the customer was right in some way, the sellers do learn and move on. Why would Comcast intentionally treat them bad? I don't think it comes down to desire. I think it comes down to what they deem acceptable. If a certain percentage of your customer base is unhappy with you, but you're meeting your revenue goals, then who cares? Why establish a precedent of good service if it's only going to possibly lead to more hassle or expense? It's the classic, "If it works, don't change it," mentality. The article I posted in my last post makes a good point about the possibility of a new low in customer service. IP: Logged |
Randall Webmaster Posts: 37977 From: Saturn next to Charmainec Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted February 21, 2014 04:53 PM
If you read the feedbacks, it's a rarity indeed that it's the seller's fault. Sometimes the seller may be on vacation and a response was delayed. But by and large the negative feedbacks to PowerSellers (eBay's best) are outside of their control and undeserved. IP: Logged |
AcousticGod Knowflake Posts: 8530 From: Dublin, CA Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted February 24, 2014 12:35 PM
And now Netflix has made a deal with Comcast to ensure better streaming. I wonder why Netflix thinks Comcast will be able to deliver. They must know something that I don't.IP: Logged |
Randall Webmaster Posts: 37977 From: Saturn next to Charmainec Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted February 24, 2014 05:16 PM
Of course, they know something you don't. You are one individual. They are a huge company. They know many things that you don't.IP: Logged |
teasel Knowflake Posts: 5987 From: Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted February 28, 2014 05:05 PM
quote: Originally posted by AcousticGod: And now Netflix has made a deal with Comcast to ensure better streaming. I wonder why Netflix thinks Comcast will be able to deliver. They must know something that I don't.
I read about this on another board, and there were only complaints about Comcast. I've only had Netflix for two months, and can't really afford it as it is; I hope they don't run the price up. IP: Logged |
Randall Webmaster Posts: 37977 From: Saturn next to Charmainec Registered: Apr 2009
|
posted February 28, 2014 07:18 PM
Any large company will have complaints. Paypal has a whole site devoted to its haters. But by far people are extremely pleased with them. I know I am. The complaints I've seen are when the complainers have broken the rules. PayPal continues to thrive, though. So, does Comcast. IP: Logged | |