Blog Post

TIme Warner Cable Is Nuts: $300 for 20 Mbps Broadband Connection

Updated: Time Warner Cable’s (s TWC) super-fast broadband roll out to the rest of its markets is under way — although we have no idea how fast since the company has not responded to my questions about the deployment details. However, earlier this week it said it was offering DOCSIS 3.0-supported business class service in Cincinnati with two tiers that cost more than $300 a month. The tiers are:

  • Up to 20 megabits per second (Mbps) downstream/2 Mbps upstream: $309.95
  • Up to 50 Mbps downstream/5 Mbps upstream $349.95

For that kind of money a customer gets the fast broadband, static IP addresses, more email accounts and better customers service, but is still on a shared line. However, I’m pretty sure plenty of business customers will take it, if only for the improved upload speeds. For example, in my market a T-1 line costs about that much and delivers 1.5 Mbps on a dedicated line. Update: However, Om points out that Comcast charges business customers $189 for 50 Mbps in San Francisco which makes TWC’s pricing crazy high. Gotta love that lack of competition.

Meanwhile, residential pricing or service hasn’t been announced yet, which has me thinking that Time Warner, which has said it will deploy DOCSIS 3.0 “surgically,” is still cherry-picking its markets and customers for super-fast broadband. Meanwhile, Comcast (s cmcsa) has deployed DOCSIS 3.0 to 38 million homes and will cover 100 percent of its footprint by the end of the year.

Related GigaOM Pro content (sub required):

When It Comes to Pain at the Pipe, Upstream Is the New Downstream

10 Responses to “TIme Warner Cable Is Nuts: $300 for 20 Mbps Broadband Connection”

  1. We just got Verizon Business Fios 35meg/35meg for $125/month with a static IP and a bunch of emails that we do not use. This service rocks the speed. We are in the Tampa, FL area.

  2. Having dealt with TWC before, having WORKED for TWC (well, RoadRunner back in the day)… the surprising thing is that anyone finds this surprising.

    The single biggest factor in the US having become the telecom backwater it is today is the semihemidemiquasiregulated duopoly (at best) where “up to” two companies “service” each metro area in a haphazard manner, carrying through on their commitment to continually innovate in the ways in which they can piss customers off. They get away with that, of course, because a) they know “customers” have no choice, and b) because even if the FCC were to somehow grow a backbone and start trying to bring about a pro-customer environment, the Best Congress Money Can Buyâ„¢ would immediately slap them down.

    Meanwhile, I sit over here in Second World Singapore with 14 Mbps down/2 up (DSL) for just under US$30 a month; the top plan currently available here is a cable connection, 100 Mbps down/10 up for US$88. And people routinely complain that prices here are high because all “successful” companies eventually become GLCs. American cities SHOULD be doing a heck of a lot better.

  3. dang, this is still happening? When, oh when will the US cable/phone companies stop gouging consumers, while the rest of the world pays a fraction of those costs for same speeds, phone, and TV???

  4. Business customers should beware – that UP TO clause has caused significant problems to customers who expect to come close to the advertised speeds and only get a small fraction of it.

    Look at the trouble BT got into by offering up to 8 megs, charging for 8 megs, and delivering 2 – 3 meg speeds.

  5. We had a TWC account for a year here in Texas, never could get the video feed to work properly, but the internet was great-though expensive. We moved a couple miles away and received the first AT & T U-verse line in our neighborhood-what a difference. Great video, SD and HD, and the internet connection smokes TWC. Oh, and TWC customer service is almost as shoddy as Verizon’s, I didn’t think anyone could be as bad as that!

  6. @Stacey,

    I’m sure that Time Warner’s pricing will come down when Verizon and AT&T enter the “cherry picked” markets with their own fiber based services. The big question of course is when?

    This article has actually made me realize that the pending national broadband policy may lack teeth if it doesn’t address local duopolies.

    My $.02,