I got a call from someone who had obviously not really read the email (she pretty much stated so in her call). She basically was trying to see if giving me a one-time credit would resolve the situation. But that wasn’t what I was looking for. Now I’m looking forward to Verizon arriving next week…

They might have to start charging extra ordinary amounts of money, for the charge more, do not have caps to work, or the caps would have to be much lower.

i think the big(ger) problem is lack of competition. cable and phone have what used to be called (as i recollect) a natural monopoly. technology develops alternatives like wireless, but bad policy (lobbying) takes them away…

There’s a class of customers that would be very happy to embrace this solution. And we’re being told to go away. It’s one of the strangest marketing decisions I’ve ever seen.

I’m a remote worker. I was on a long call for work (both on my Voip landline and online) when my service went down this week. I had violated the 250 GB cap. (Totally my fault- I’m not going to feign ignorance on this. I had bought an iPad last month, and really enjoyed my Internet last month without paying attention to bandwidth.)

For an hour, I was dealing with this outage. The first rep treated it like a tech support call for twenty minutes, then cold-transferred me to their security team- which put me on hold for ten minutes, then hung up. It took two more calls to get the issue resolved.

I understand that I agreed to a cap, and that I went over the cap. But Comcast made it nearly impossible to resolve. And that’s why I switched this morning to Verizon FiOS.

By the way, I did ask about business service. I was told that the only thing that I could get would be enterprise-level service, which would run thousands a month. I’d be willing to pay more for a service aimed at my needs, but it doesn’t appear that they offer such a service. Pity.

The bottom line is Comcast’s policies are stupid. Not because there is a cap, but because there is apparently no way to buy your way beyond the cap.

Sorry, but if <1% of the customer base is consumer at the cap, it's almost by definition reasonable. And, yes, the caps will need to increase over time. But Comcast is well served to look to Uverse's pricing here for some guidance:

250GB — Pay the price
up to 350GB — Pay $10 more
up to 450GB — Pay another $10

I know some of you find this unreasonable. Quite frankly your arguments are entirely unpersuasive. The fact of the matter is much of the world is priced based on usage: gasoline, electric power, food consumed, shoes worn out, airline trips taken, cell phone minutes, et al. It's just not unreasonable for ISPs to ask their hungriest customers to pay a bit more. Sorry.

What is unreasonable is for ISP to cut off their hungriest customers without offering them an easy, fully comprehensible method for paying their freight. No cell phone company does something this stupid. As I said, Uverse has figured this out as well. It's really unclear why Comcast can't figure it out, too.