Time Warner Cable: Demand Not There for Google Fiber - Insists That if People Want 1 Gbps, They'll Provide it.

Time Warner Cable: Demand Not There for Google Fiber Insists That if People Want 1 Gbps, They'll Provide it. "If there is demand for [1 Gbps] service we will provide it," Time Warner Cable chief operating officer Rob Marcus told attendees of a conference this week while discussing Google Fiber. Speaking at the Broadcast and Cable/Multichannel News OnScreen Summit yesterday, Marcus stated that while the company may eventually have to raise speeds to compete with Google Fiber, so far the company hasn't had to.Granted at the moment Google Fiber's footprint is minuscule. Marcus claims that Google Fiber's deployment currently only impacts about 100,000 broadband customers, and around 100,000 cable TV customers. The COO also spent plenty of time downplaying the need for 1 Gbps services, and questioning consumer demand for such speeds. "It will be interesting to find out whether there are applications that will take advantage of a 1 Gbps service," Marcus said. "If there is, we will provide it. Our infrastructure has the ability to provide much faster speeds today. We're prepared to compete head to head with Google." If you've followed Time Warner Cable comments in the past, you'll know it's probably untrue the company is willing or even capable of offering symmetrical 1 Gbps connections, much less at $70 a month. This is a company that has consistently insisted that the demand just isn't there for even 50 Mbps speeds, though with little to no competition pressuring them in the vast majority of their markets, they've had the luxury of keeping the price high for their fastest tier, while deploying DOCSIS 3.0 more sluggishly than companies like Comcast. Were Time Warner Cable to lower the prices for their high end product, they'd seen the demand the company claims doesn't exist miraculously skyrocket. As noted previously serious competition is unfamiliar territory for Time Warner Cable, who also sees pressure from Verizon FiOS and AT&T U-Verse in a minority portion of their network. The company's attempt to compete with Google Fiber so far has consisted of trying to lock down locals into long term contracts. One local says Time Warner Cable is even offering locals free tickets to the new Twilight movie if they stayed with the cable operator. That's more "competition theater" that seriously competing, and Time Warner Cable will inevitably have to boost speeds and lower prices in Kansas City, even if they continue to pretend that nobody wants a symmetrical 1 Gbps line for $70 a month.

Time Warner is smfart! No body wants 1gbs service when the rest of the nation is locked to monopoly slow speeds and providers are locked to even worse pricing bandwidth scales. Take it from the horses mouth in the article. They are now providing 5GB capped service with high overages for $5 less/month (after bi-annual price hike, modem rental fee, and modem obsolescence fee). This VALUE is something EVERY customer has asked for and true to their word they will "provide" it to every one of their customers. We've been BEGGING for this don't you know! We as customers have NEVER requested SPEED with BANDWIDTH to use it???!! Unfortunately monopolies only listen to one thing: "stfu you have no choice but pay the bill" or live like the Flinstones. They paid big to be allowed to have a monopoly now it's our turn to pay for allowing it. "We're prepared to compete head to head with Google." Translation: "This is one small set up. We can easily use predatory pricing to make sure people stick with the status quo here while we continue to gouge the rest of the nation for slow service." Re: Stupid ISP's said by Justsayin : Who is he to question the demand for 1GB service. They don't need to know what customers are using it for. I hate when ISP's try to snoop I had more than one DSL lines installed and was questioned as to why I needed more than one. My reply was because I want them and it was non of their business If you care about what the isp knows of then why go with google? Google is in it for users data Beans join:2005-07-16 united stateReviews: ?Verizon Online DSL Re: Time Warner Cable: "We refuse to compete" I'll take 'stuck up there ass' for 1200. Reviews: ?RoadRunner Cable Re: Time Warner Cable: "We refuse to compete" I agree - TWC is selling/supporting many millions of customers vs a single area as a 'project'. I doubt that Google has a large scale (many millions) at their current price. In fact, Google 'could' pull the plug and walk if they wanted to ( and may after their project is done). I typically don't like TWC prices, and would sure love to have 1Gbps for $70... but I don't think Google or anyone else will offer it here in SoCal. Reviews: ?Comcast Re: Dearest Time Warner said by mob: ... If you give me service equal to Google Fiber - unlimited use, 1Gb/s symmetrical connection for $70 a month - ..... Umm he didn't say for $70 per month, he said if there was demand for symmetric gig service. The real price of providing that service is likely well above google price even with the preferred treatment/franchise terms google finagled. So would you (and a high percentage of your neighbors) sign up for the long term (2 years isn't long enough too begin paying down the capital cost) if they told you it was twice what google charges ($140)? 3 times? 4 times? Suppose they let you see their books, and they would still net under 10% profit at those rates, would YOU commit for the long term? Reviews: ?Windstream Re: Dearest Time Warner I would be more than happy paying $140 a month for 1 GB/s symmetrical connection. However, if their contract didn't include things like "we can do whatever we want to do, like raise prices and such" without any way out other than eat an ETF, then I wouldn't go for it. I'm not stupid. Besides, Marcus said what he said because he knows that most don't necessarily care about speed, but about price and TWC hasn't really been known for low prices. -- "We will evaluate these integrals rigorously if we can, and non-rigorously if we must". ---Victor Moll, invited talk, Tom Osler Fest (April 17, 2010) Reviews: ?Atlantic Broadband Such Value People who want to keep criticizing Google Fiber saying that no one wants a Gbps connection, and no one wants to pay $70 for internet, remember that 95% of people are not cord-cutting, and want TV. $120 for every channel in the book and a ridiculously fast internet connection should terrify TWC. They wouldn't even offer you that at a promotional price now. Yes, people vote with their wallets. And Google has given them every incentive to make the switch. And for the people who won't desire straight internet, TV is the great incentive. No contracts, no expensive installation charges, the constant shuffling between promotional and contract pricing, the endless games and hoops to jump through, Google is avoiding all that. You don't think people will find that appealing? I sure as hell do. As long as they develop a customer service presence, TWC should be absolutely terrified. And of the major cable operators, they're probably the best one overall in terms of TV offerings and uncapped broadband at the moment. Unless you're just dying for 100Mbps+ broadband (and it's capped), Comcast is largely inferior to TWC, IMO. Re: Such Value said by osravens: As long as they develop a customer service presence, TWC should be absolutely terrified. That is the key question, isn't it? Google has to be close to worst in the US of large companies in customer service. If, and that is a real big if, they actually deploy live human beings for cust service, instead of just their pathetic email/forum support, they will be a real threat. We will have to wait and see. -- A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasury. Reviews: ?Verizon FiOS ?voip.ms ?PHONE POWER ?Time Warner Cable Baloney TWC is JUST getting around to bonding their upstream. 15/1 is the new normal, and 1 is 1,000 times SLOWER on the upstream. Their current technology cant provide 1/1G, but they can't say that. Google pitches the cloud (which is HEAVY upstream), so to put it bluntly, TWC is caught flat footed on this one and they know it. As an incumbent, you always dismiss the disruptive force because of their superior technology or approach. You can't say 1/1GIG is 10 years ahead of its time and our product is sh**t compared to it. C'mon guys. And to those who think GOOG isnt making money, think again. They not only employed superior technology, but superior logistics and that lowers cost. Of course they tore up the franchise model, which is a good thing, because communities are not homogeneous and should not be treated as such. Yes GOOG customer service really sucks, but this is why they start out small, so they can get better at it. This whole Google Play fiasco is proof that dropping ads or beta software is different than direct to consumer model. Then again when I used to call TWC it was no ride in the park either....and they have been at it 40+ years. Google to deploy beyond KC? ?blogs.barrons.com/techtraderdail???apstone/ quote: Rory Maher with Capstone Investments today writes that his meetings Monday with Google (GOOG) management suggest the company will expand its fiber-optic home networking service beyond the current test market of Kansas City, though it is not clear what the next city might be. Do not have a reliable source but word in KC it is Houston. Reviews: ?Frontier Communi.. The cost It is true Time Warner is willing and can provide 1Gbps service. The question is, what will be the cost of it for 1Gbps/1Gbps? Will it cost $250,000 to run a fiber line to my home and then another couple grand a month for the actual data connection itself not including any additional costs associated with such circuits? Google is obviously by design doing a massive amount of overselling for Residential service, and besides Fiber and other mediums, Time Warner really only has the DOCSIS network to work with. 1Gbps/1Gbps is going to be quite a feat to accomplish at current times on the plant in many areas if the proper gear isn't in a "Lab" status. I'd like to be proven wrong but it's the reality of it. If Time Warner will give me 1Gbps/1Gbps via Fiber for even $200 a month and also run Fiber without having to take out a mortgage for it, they've got me right away. axus join:2001-06-18 Washington, DCReviews: ?Verizon Online DSL Re: The cost Why do you think it would cost so much to provide a gigabit connection? You can rent a server with Gigabit speeds for like $20/mo, the hardware cost to Google is probably on the level of the server price. Maintaining a fiber network is cheaper than a copper one, right? I think Time Warner is actually right, high demand is not there for Gigabit. People want cheap. But, there is a free 5Mbps connection. How many people are paying $70/mo instead of free? Most people don't want 5Mbps, no matter how cheap it is. Google proved it. They want something better, why not make it Gigabit. What is Time Warner giving for $70? JTR join:2012-05-19 Carbondale, ILReviews: ?Mediacom Re: The cost said by axus: Why do you think it would cost so much to provide a gigabit connection? You can rent a server with Gigabit speeds for like $20/mo, the hardware cost to Google is probably on the level of the server price. Maintaining a fiber network is cheaper than a copper one, right? You are wrong on every single one of those points. First of all, the server. Go find me a truly unlimited gigabit dedicated server with a decent BGP blend of bw providers for under, let's say, $500/mo. Good luck, because such a thing dosn't exist. There's only a handful of dedis in this price range, all of which have extremely terrible networks. That $20 server? Shared gigabit line, low bandwidth, probably oversold, and a budget transit or single-homed network. And that's being optimistic. Datacenters are NOT a good comparison to use. They do not have to maintain their own fiber rings/backbones, last-mile networks, nodes, infrastructure, etc. They do not have to pay for modems for every customer, they do not have to run miles and miles of fiber through a large city, they do not have to pay for permits to run said fiber... They need a building, stable power, some pricy UPS/genset systems, a few fiber lines, and a ridiculous cooling system. Also, good luck finding a dedicated server at $20 with a gigabit line. Online.net is the only provider offering gigabit at that price, and their gigabit has exceedingly bad international transit (as well as a impressively bad network). Kimsufi doesn't count, they use 100Mbit lines with 5TB limits. An ISP has WAY more infrastructure to maintain than a server provider. Comparing the two directly is idiotic. Reviews: ?Frontier Communi.. said by axus: Why do you think it would cost so much to provide a gigabit connection? You can rent a server with Gigabit speeds for like $20/mo, the hardware cost to Google is probably on the level of the server price. Maintaining a fiber network is cheaper than a copper one, right? I think Time Warner is actually right, high demand is not there for Gigabit. People want cheap. But, there is a free 5Mbps connection. How many people are paying $70/mo instead of free? Most people don't want 5Mbps, no matter how cheap it is. Google proved it. They want something better, why not make it Gigabit. What is Time Warner giving for $70? The reason being is I'm not so much in the sticks, but out here we have DSL or Cable, with some blend of one or the other only being available. Go a half a mile North and you'll find homes that can't get anything but spotty LTE, 3G, or Satellite (or Point to Point Wi-Fi if those providers are still around in this area). Time Warner supplies the Fiber going to all of the schools in this area and to many other large organizations out here, and they have Gigabit connections but I do know they pay a fortune for them, but work well when their IT Departments aren't breaking things with overly restrictive security policies on their Firewalls. The cost of getting the fiber isn't accounting for everything, but Time Warner would have to get the needed equipment to me, bury some fiber for some time, run some aerial fiber, and get me a connection back to their office. From there, the bandwidth has to be paid for at least to their interconnection. If they're going to give me a dedicated line so to speak but mix in traffic back at the office, that's basically taking you to the price of an enterprise circuit. I do pay $450 a month for a rented, custom order dedicated server out in Chicago with a Gigabit connection that is unmetered, which also includes a private 1Gbps circuit which is also unmetered if I get another server with the provider. Their main providers for bandwidth is AboveNet and PNAP. But yes Datacenters are an unfair comparison. Not surprising That a cable exec doesn't "get it". It's not about "1 Gbps". It's about having a real network--symmetrical speeds and no caps. It's about having current technology for the same price--or less--as older, slower technology. It's about a lot of things that have little or nothing to do with "1 Gbps". Big "BUT" "...Our infrastructure has the ability to provide much faster speeds today. We're prepared to compete head to head with Google."** **For enterprise customers only. Speeds up to 1 Gbps and 500GB usage per month, with overage charge of $9.99 per GB. $299 a month after a one-time $399 installation fee with a three-year contract. Modem rental fee of $8.99/month applies as well as HSI surcharge of $4.99. 1 edit GOOG to charge small biz? Heard a bit about the goog considering charging some small biz for things like gmail & use of their docs stuff. Don't have time for find a link today. That's all TW squid needs to see. 16:08 News Bot: EU said to draft plan to censure Google (GOOG) over privacy according to the NY Times Full article: ?www.nytimes.com/2012/12/08/techn???les.html (NYT)

Source: http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Time-Warner-Cable-Demand-Not-There-for-Google-Fiber-122337

Long Island Medium Alfonso Ribeiro cbs sports adam sandler cbs College Football Scoreboard nfl scores