4 ms·

Can someone help explain how this isn't anti-competitive? I want to use and enjoy Sling.com and Netflix, yet doing so might cause me to go over my monthly data

Can someone help explain how this isn't anti-competitive? I want to use and enjoy Sling.com and Netflix, yet doing so might cause me to go over my monthly data cap and in turn be costly. Yet, my Internet provider who controls the pipes and the arbitrary cap it has placed on me is offering a OTT type service that doesn't count against my cap; won't be costly to me. How is that not anti-competitive? It's a bit amazing that they are trying to pull this when no one likes them and this makes them look even worse!

privacy101 11y ago
Couldn't Netflix setup IPTV as an option to the user to take advantage of the same loophole? or maybe the FCC could classify all streamed videos as IPTV...
- izacus 11y ago
  That's just kicking the same can down the road and letting Comcast think of some other expensive obstacle for Netflix to favor their own services.
  - anon4 11y ago
    They'll run out of loopholes eventually...
  - privacy101 11y ago
    Not sure if the FCC has a set definition for IPTV that would make Netflix not IPTV ... if they don't, it would just require Netflix to say "we are IPTV too".
us0r 11y ago
Their former chief lobbyist is now their chief regulator.
- tzs 11y ago
  If you are talking about Wheeler and the FCC, that is wrong. Wheeler has never been employed by Comcast. He was once the head of the main cable trade association--over 30 years, when (1) Comcast was insignificant, (2) there were no cable ISPs as there was no public internet yet, and (3) being a cable lobbyist meant being on the pro-consumer side since cable was the small underdog going against the big broadcasters.
themartorana 11y ago
It's not like anti-competitive, monopolistic situations are new for cable companies. When that behavior is already your business model, and not only legal but in some cases protected by local governments... Well, if it ain't broke...
skylan_q 11y ago
Over-deliver, you're anti-competitive. Over-charge, you're being a monopolist. Provide what everyone else provides at the price they provide it, you're colluding. Businesses are trying to make a buck. The people coming up with and enforcing regulations are also just trying to make a buck.
- fweespeech 11y ago
  But I wouldn't want to watch Comcast's service because its crap. So how are they "over delivering" as you put it?
  - skylan_q 11y ago
    I'm not following. People are getting their bandwidth allotment AND additional services. Your contempt for them doesn't mean that they're anti-competitive.
    - fweespeech 11y ago
      I am not getting the service I care about. I am getting crapware.
- anon4 11y ago
  If Comcast ever over-deliver, I'll eat my hat.
  - oldmanjay 11y ago
    I get more download and upload speed than my package includes, and I am a Comcast customer. use salt, hats are gross.
- Dylan16807 11y ago
  It's anti-competitive to use one business to over-subsidize another to get market share. Bundling IE, anti-competitive. Dropping the price below cost in a town that's getting fiber from someone else, anti-competitive. Comcast improving price or speed or caps over their entire network is what everyone wants. And if the caps had anything to do with infrastructure costs, they should be doubling every year or two. Instead we're up from 250GB in 2008 to 300GB in 2015.
schnable 11y ago
The thing is, it's _not_ an OTT service and that is why it isn't considered Internet traffic. It is offering a slimmed down cable tv package for a low price, and you use your own devices instead of a cable box.
- LargeCompanies 11y ago
  Yes, but Netflix has and is the defacto streaming service to your own personal device. No matter how it's delivered if it walks and quacks like a duck it's a duck. This is a bullet straight at Netflix and all other OTT services and the following Comcast rep to consumer conversation will go as followed.... Customer service rep, "Sure you can use Netflix and enjoy through any Internet device, but your going to have to be concerned about going over your monthly cap, which can get costly." "Though with our Stream TV you don't have to worry about that, you can stream all you want to your personal devices and it will never cost you more per month." Awful.. anti-competitive ... needs to be shot down now!

privacy101 11y ago

Couldn't Netflix setup IPTV as an option to the user to take advantage of the same loophole? or maybe the FCC could classify all streamed videos as IPTV...

izacus 11y ago
That's just kicking the same can down the road and letting Comcast think of some other expensive obstacle for Netflix to favor their own services.
- anon4 11y ago
  They'll run out of loopholes eventually...
- privacy101 11y ago
  Not sure if the FCC has a set definition for IPTV that would make Netflix not IPTV ... if they don't, it would just require Netflix to say "we are IPTV too".

us0r 11y ago

Their former chief lobbyist is now their chief regulator.

tzs 11y ago
If you are talking about Wheeler and the FCC, that is wrong. Wheeler has never been employed by Comcast. He was once the head of the main cable trade association--over 30 years, when (1) Comcast was insignificant, (2) there were no cable ISPs as there was no public internet yet, and (3) being a cable lobbyist meant being on the pro-consumer side since cable was the small underdog going against the big broadcasters.

themartorana 11y ago

It's not like anti-competitive, monopolistic situations are new for cable companies. When that behavior is already your business model, and not only legal but in some cases protected by local governments... Well, if it ain't broke...

skylan_q 11y ago

Over-deliver, you're anti-competitive. Over-charge, you're being a monopolist. Provide what everyone else provides at the price they provide it, you're colluding. Businesses are trying to make a buck. The people coming up with and enforcing regulations are also just trying to make a buck.

fweespeech 11y ago
But I wouldn't want to watch Comcast's service because its crap. So how are they "over delivering" as you put it?
- skylan_q 11y ago
  I'm not following. People are getting their bandwidth allotment AND additional services. Your contempt for them doesn't mean that they're anti-competitive.
  - fweespeech 11y ago
    I am not getting the service I care about. I am getting crapware.
anon4 11y ago
If Comcast ever over-deliver, I'll eat my hat.
- oldmanjay 11y ago
  I get more download and upload speed than my package includes, and I am a Comcast customer. use salt, hats are gross.
Dylan16807 11y ago
It's anti-competitive to use one business to over-subsidize another to get market share. Bundling IE, anti-competitive. Dropping the price below cost in a town that's getting fiber from someone else, anti-competitive. Comcast improving price or speed or caps over their entire network is what everyone wants. And if the caps had anything to do with infrastructure costs, they should be doubling every year or two. Instead we're up from 250GB in 2008 to 300GB in 2015.

schnable 11y ago

The thing is, it's _not_ an OTT service and that is why it isn't considered Internet traffic. It is offering a slimmed down cable tv package for a low price, and you use your own devices instead of a cable box.

LargeCompanies 11y ago
Yes, but Netflix has and is the defacto streaming service to your own personal device. No matter how it's delivered if it walks and quacks like a duck it's a duck. This is a bullet straight at Netflix and all other OTT services and the following Comcast rep to consumer conversation will go as followed.... Customer service rep, "Sure you can use Netflix and enjoy through any Internet device, but your going to have to be concerned about going over your monthly cap, which can get costly." "Though with our Stream TV you don't have to worry about that, you can stream all you want to your personal devices and it will never cost you more per month." Awful.. anti-competitive ... needs to be shot down now!