Yes, You Will Probably Get Screwed If The Comcast-Time Warner Deal Goes Through

[KamaAina]

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/yes-probably-screwed-comcast-time-152932397.html

If you’re a Comcast or Time Warner Cable customer, you’re probably thinking, how will this affect me?...

There wil be less choice, prices will go up, data caps will get worse, and the cable industry's top lobbyist is the former chairman of the FCC, according to people who follow the TV business closely. So don't get your hopes up as a consumer, in other words....

First, it will reduce competition. There will be a fewer cable companies for consumers to choose from, and more areas where Comcast/TWC is the only practical choice for many subscribers. Here’s a chart showing which cities would come under the new Comcast/TWC umbrella, from analyst Rich Greenfield of BTIG....

"This transaction is dangerous for broadband competition and would likely inflate consumer prices. Antitrust officials and regulators need to scrutinize this deal carefully and prevent harm to consumers and the competitive process," said Gene Kimmelman, a former Justice Department antitrust official and chief executive of the open media advocacy group Public Knowledge.

[vi5]

1. "if" it goes through.....HA!!!

Who would stop it? This administration or any of it's agents/agencies? Not fucking likely.

It's not a question of if this FCC/SEC/whoever else has a say lets it go through. It's only a question of how the usual suspects and sycophants excuse it, dismiss it, or insult those who actually dare to expect more out of a Democratic administration.

[progressoid]

8. No, kidding. It's laughable (but not funny).

Good for Franken for fighting the good fight.

But I expect the usual "harumphs" and then it goes through.

[Armstead]

11. Don't be a purist. Monopolies are good.

Didn't you get the memo?

Actual competition and true free enterprise are so....leftist.

We're Democrats. We loves our Big Corporations.

[frazzled]

2. I'm not a Comcast or Time-Warner customer, but

my choices are still few. (In most markets, they have been few to none anyway.)

For some reason, our building was not wired for cable, and had a satellite system installed instead (DirecTV); we pay a bulk rate for service to the building, which is apportioned to each owner's monthly assessment (we pay $27 I believe). When the contract was up a few years ago, the condo association decided to investigate switching to cable, and Comcast, of course was the only provider. (ATT Uverse does not yet have fiber optic to this area.) I argued against it, for two reasons: (a) switching to Comcast would be like going from the frying pan to the fire; (b) cable will be dead within the next decade, and we'd be better off waiting until the new technologies take hold. A building survey was held and Comcast was nixed.

This means we have to get our Internet service via AT&T DSL. Well, we don't have to, but that's what we've had. I'd love to get rid of them, but am not sure what other options are out there for us, if any.

Aren't we always screwed with these "utilities"?

[Armstead]

12. We don't have to be screwed by them. But we choose to be.

We let them go as far and grow s biog as they choose. And we do nothing.

That's f'd up.

[Incitatus]

3. Time Warner was my only choice anyway

So for now Comcast will be my only choice. AT&T is expanding in the area and their service should be available sometime in the future. I'm paying enough as it is. If Comcast raises rates I'll probably cancel my premium channels and stick with Netflix and other Internet options for movies.

[subterranean]

6. Most people only have one choice for cable.

Comcast and Time Warner don't compete head-to-head in most markets, with only a few exceptions. My choice is either Comcast or DSL.

Where competition can come into play is when cities or regions renew their cable contracts. If Comcast is the only provider bidding for the contract, it will have no incentive to offer better prices or service.

I've already canceled my cable TV service, and just use an antenna and a streaming device. But I worry that Comcast will reinstate data caps to discourage people from doing that.

[Armstead]

13. They're going to do a lot of shit if we let them get away with this

[seaglass]

14. Yes my choice is between Verizon and Comcast. I switch back and forth between them, depending on

who gives me the best deal for the options I want.

I worked for Comcast about 8 years ago for a very short period of time (maybe 3 months) and at that time they were the biggest cable company but they did not want that fact emphasized at all.

[get the red out]

4. This is terrible

I hope this deal doesn't go through.

[KamaAina]

5. So does Sen. Al Franken

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024494938

[Triana]

7. Please sign petition urging FCC/DoJ to stop the merger:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024494019

[onenote]

9. Is there anywhere TWC and Comcast compete head to head?

The article claims that there will be fewer cable companies for consumers to choose from. But that statement assumes that there are areas where consumers have a choice between TWC and Comcast. I don't think there are any such areas.

There are reasons to be concerned about this combination. For example, here is a list of the top ten television markets in the US:

New York
Los Angeles
Chicago
Philadelphia
San Francisco - San Jose
Boston
Dallas - Fort Worth
Washington, D.C.
Atlanta
Detroit

Comcast currently is the dominant cable provider in 6 of them. After acquiring TWC (and assuming it doesn't divest any of those markets), it will control 9 of the ten. It also will directly own one of the top 4 broadcast stations in 7 of them (up from 4).

But reducing direct head to head competition? Don't think so.

[KamaAina]

10. Looking at the graphic in the OP, the NYC market

where Time Warner has Manhattan and Comcast has the Jersey Shore.

But it's not all about head-to-head competition. It's about the undue influence this behemoth will have on content providers -- much the same way Walmart does on manufacturers.

[onenote]

16. As I said, there are reasons to oppose the merger

But arguing that it will result in a significant reduction in head to head competition is a stone cold loser. Even the fact that Comcast serves part of the Jersey shore while TWC is in Manhattan only proves the point -- that's not head to head competition. And its unlikely to say the least that Comcast would ever seek a franchise to serve Manhattan or TWC would seek a franchise to serve the Jersey shore.

[Armstead]

15. You're missing -- or deflecting -- from the point

In the region where I live there were three different cable companies that served different parts of the region.

Then they all go swallowed into Time Warner. Now Time Warner is going to get sucked into Comcast.

Do you really think it is not dangerous for one company to grow to the point where they will have such power over a basic service?

This whole deal is scary and will affect everybody.

[onenote]

17. Since you missed it: I said there are reasons to oppose this merger

But the claim that it will reduce existing head-to-head competition --- the claim made in the article in the OP -- is a stone cold loser. Making easily shot down arguments is not the way to go about successfully defeating this merger and anyone making such arguments either is uninformed or is actually trying to help it get approved.

[Armstead]

18. The other resons are so huge the point you raised is not worth mentioning

And ys it does matter. I live in a region where there were three different companies covering different sections. Then they got swallowed up by Time Warner. Now Time Warner is about to get swallowed up by Comast.

And Time Warner ws already bullying local communities and refusing to negotiate new licensing contracts.

Not to mention that together they own a whole shitload of cable networks.

The potential for conflicts of interest and abuse are enormous.

Existing geographic exclusivity is just a distraction from the much bigger picture. Not even worth mentioning.