Since I’m a cable modem user, I have to share my bandwidth with my so called data gobling neighbors…yes, the one that lives next door and spends all day downloading P2P content on his 15 servers…Yes, my network acutally speeds up when he’s not at home. He should have to pay for putting stress on the network just like I would have to for putting 15 Margaritta machines outside by my pool and making his lights go dim when I’m sucking the power during all night rage parties..LOL

Now, Charter or any other cable company will have to start figuring out a way to make money since more and more people are cancelling their cable programing service ($75 month).I can watch all my shows online (Hulu and Netflix), so I’m real close to cancelling the “TV” side of Charter service. This is a growing trend. Just like the “home” phone is becoming a thing of the past. I dropped my home phone years ago, cable TV is next…but I still need the Internet, and Charter KNOWS this…and like any other company with a vampire like business attitude, WILL profit off our high-usage…and that usage will keep growing and growing…HELL, my dam refrigerator has a Wifi option..WTF??

Yes, for those of you that like to correct my spelling or grammer..go ahead..there’s always one idiot that get’s clowned on a forum and has to complain about it…I’m sure I mispelled something.

I’ve traveled around the world on business and this is normal….

Don’t get me wrong, I agree with goldflowpoints that a usage charge would be appropriate as it is in any industry. It regulates the service to accomodate the 98% of customers to have fair access as to not be interrupted by the 2% hogging bandwidth. The matter is the arbitrary usage measures that the cable companies have initiated. Are they accurate and reprsentative of overall customer usage? With new technologies being implemented, the amount of customers utilizing streaming data will increase dramatically. Without a proper cost measuring process in place, “normal” customers are likely to recieve exorbitant bills. (It seems the definition of a “normal” or “average” customer will soon be redefined in the internet community via netflix, hulu, etc..).

As for Stop the Cap, it seems oddly similiar to those fighting copyright protection rights of musicians over P2P file copying. Which ultimately broke down to someone wanting something for free. Although, I would support their overall mission to protect customers from a corporation becoming abusive. Freedom of Speech.

Oligopolies are annoying, no doubt about it. However, with the increase usage of fiber optics, wireless telecommunication, and satellite, I find the cable companies will have less of a competitive advantage to take advantage of customers and their limited options.

As for the account suspension, I am not sure how that is going to result. To suspend for 6 months as the next post demonstrates, immediately eliminates 6 months of future cash flows. This could only be justified if the expense of providing service to this customer has a present value exceeding the net present value of future cash flows. I wonder how the stockholders feel about this?

2 cents.

After talking to numerous people on the phone, they are basically using the 3 strike rule. They will let me know 3 times that I went over the limit, and on the 4th time they suspend my account for 6 months.

Going from unlimited to a cap really feels like I am sitting in the “internet taxi cab” where the meter is always running, and I now question everything I do.

Stop the Cap!’s the coordinating center for consumers livid about usage caps and working together to fight them. We were successful in beating back Time Warner Cable’s usage caps in April 2009 on behalf of consumers and we invite Charter customers to get involved in the fight.

Phillip Dampier
Editor, Stopthecap.com