[smith555]

this company cooks the books repeatedly and they also dont honor arranged deals.i dont know how good or bad it will be with at&t but i have no choice as these guys are fked in their head

[detwahDJ]

Originally Posted by smith555

this company cooks the books repeatedly and they also dont honor arranged deals.i dont know how good or bad it will be with at&t but i have no choice as these guys are fked in their head

Are you talking about TV, internet, phone, wireless, or what? I just switched from Comcast to ATT, not by choice, but by what is available in my area.

[313Weather]

Originally Posted by detwahDJ

Are you talking about TV, internet, phone, wireless, or what?

All of the above. Find me one happy/satisfied Comcast customer.

EDIT: AT&T sucks too (good luck if you have to call their Customer Service line) and in comparison, is only marginally better than Comcast. But of course they don't care. In most parts of the country, Comcast and AT&T have a monopoly over the Cable/Phone/Internet.

[detwahDJ]

Originally Posted by 313Weather

All of the above. Find me one happy/satisfied Comcast customer.

EDIT: AT&T sucks too (good luck if you have to call their Customer Service line) and in comparison, is only marginally better than Comcast. But of course they don't care. In most parts of the country, Comcast and AT&T have a monopoly over the Cable/Phone/Internet.

Correct, they each have their "territories" which they rule over with little or no competition. Judging from my experience, ATT has almost totally automated services with robocalls, voicemail, and has outsourced its customer service to India, and technical services to Mexico. Good luck if you can get through, understand them, or get timely service without snafus. The ATT store personnel seem to be trainee order takers only, although they have some access phone numbers not available to you the customer.

[animatedmartian]

No disagreement here. I have WOW but really the only problems I get are when heavy storms pass by. It really kills the internet speed but it's exceptionally better and more cost effective than AT&T or Comcast.

[Arthur Digby Sellers]

They all stink and can only survive as the oligopoly they currently exist as. I can't wait until the internet's disruption of entertainment delivery puts all of these bozos out of business.

[MSwartz]

Originally Posted by Arthur Digby Sellers

They all stink and can only survive as the oligopoly they currently exist as. I can't wait until the internet's disruption of entertainment delivery puts all of these bozos out of business.

You'll still be paying them for your Internet bill which is the new connection in their content delivery. I think that the cheapest Internet deal Charter Communications, my provider, offers right now is $50/ 30 Mbps. I never use anywhere near that much bandwidth though. IMO it isn't really that different from how they force consumers into buying channel packages. Old plans are grandfathered in of course but I don't even remember the last time I saw a plan available for less than $40 anyway, then what happens is that you one day find yourself on an old plan with low bandwidth and you upgrade for $5 or whatever because it would be senseless not to. I recall paying something like $45 for 5 Mbps some years back.

It is unfortunate. I don't foresee the option of lower tiered packaged coming anytime soon and I have no interest in going with a pay per use plan because I am sure I'd run that bill up over the course of a month because I do use my bandwidth, I just don't need the huge high-bandwidth connection that I've been sold.

Then again, maybe they need my $50 for maintenance and maybe it would be just as expensive regardless of expanding network bandwidth.

[detwahDJ]

Originally Posted by Arthur Digby Sellers

They all stink and can only survive as the oligopoly they currently exist as. I can't wait until the internet's disruption of entertainment delivery puts all of these bozos out of business.

We have to keep an eye on them because they have been lobbying Congress for content control and manipulation of bandwidth to their customers. If they have their way, this will all be done under the radar.
Do we want the provider to filter what we see?

[Arthur Digby Sellers]

Originally Posted by MSwartz

You'll still be paying them for your Internet bill which is the new connection in their content delivery. I think that the cheapest Internet deal Charter Communications, my provider, offers right now is $50/ 30 Mbps. I never use anywhere near that much bandwidth though. IMO it isn't really that different from how they force consumers into buying channel packages. Old plans are grandfathered in of course but I don't even remember the last time I saw a plan available for less than $40 anyway, then what happens is that you one day find yourself on an old plan with low bandwidth and you upgrade for $5 or whatever because it would be senseless not to. I recall paying something like $45 for 5 Mbps some years back.

It is unfortunate. I don't foresee the option of lower tiered packaged coming anytime soon and I have no interest in going with a pay per use plan because I am sure I'd run that bill up over the course of a month because I do use my bandwidth, I just don't need the huge high-bandwidth connection that I've been sold.

Then again, maybe they need my $50 for maintenance and maybe it would be just as expensive regardless of expanding network bandwidth.

While that's true, the vast majority of their revenue comes from cable television. As entertainment becomes more fractured, and less people watch their shows in real time, more disruptors will come along that will slowly take their share away. Think House of Cards on Netflix. They're already panicking by making huge deals with the major sports leagues as that's the only TV anyone watches live anymore.

Did anyone in the late 90s think that the record companies would be as decimated as they are today?

[smith555]

there def needs to be more competition