It is probably because here in Austin there is no Time Warner monopoly and there are 50,000 college students who follow tech news to tell all of their friends and family to switch from Time Warner to a faster and cheaper Fios or AT&T U-Verse. Time Warner probably lost close to 5,000 customers in the weeks following the announcement and if they don't let up on the caps it will just get worse for them.
No one who lives in an area with multiple ISP options should stick with Time Warner with the caps they are currently planning. Vote with your wallets people. They are starting to get the picture let's make it as CLEAR AS POSSIBLE for them.
Heh, here in the Dallas TX area if thet try to impose caps I am quite sure Verizon would not waste any time reminding me they are offering unlimited access.I have stuck with TW to this point but the moment they cap I move to FIOS.
Anyone with a choice will drop timer warner asap but they will screw anyone they have a monopoly on of course.
I want to see Timer Warner make a cap on how many hours of TV you can watch a week and put a cap on that....... o wait they would FUCKING NEVER do that because they make more money selling TV advertising but the internet they don't control so they will just limit access instead so people will watch more TV.
[citation][nom]bootleghooch[/nom]I read this as $90 for unlimited ($15 for lite plus $75 for max overages), unless they have other stipulations that they aren't stating. Much cheaper than buying the 100GB cap and paying overages.[/citation]
The only issue is the speed-cap on the $15 plan. If I recall the tiered plans include speeds as well. So the 100GB cap includes a 20Mbps download speed. The 1GB cap probably comes with a 512Kbps download speed, not really gonna download too much data there.
I am, in my area, already seeing clients leave TWC for AT&T DSL. Even though DSL is slower, they don't want to worry about hitting a cap.
And I shook my head at the notion that 30% of TWC customers use less than 1 gigabyte a month. Measuring that, loading a modern webpage once a day for thirty days will eat towards that point quickly. Watching a video on youtube hits that point within a few days. TWC, your money grab is going to cost you subscribers, stop with this nonsense that its incurring additional costs (your financial statements don't lie, even though you have attempted too).
I would have to agree with most of the comments. In any place where there is a remotely decent alternative people are going to switch over. No one wants to deal with risking side fees and charges if they don't have to. Its just one more thing to worry about on an already full plate for many of us.
Throttling down to a still reasonable speed would be much more stomach-able for me personally. But if I have a decent alternative I'd still switch.
The only scary thing would be if the other major providers followed suit. Then the consumer is pretty much screwed. Of course we have 5 RIAA lawyers in the government now so they might try to help push some shenanigans through as well.
In the mean time I sincerely hope that every last customer ditches TW before the 3 month "grace" period even begins. As Tayb said...send a message with your dollars.
Hellwig might be on to something, where the lowest tier is too slow to conceivably download 100GB in a month.
I live in San Antonio and made it abundantly clear to Customer Service here that not only would i discontinue all accounts with Time Warner but make sure as many of my friends as possible where aware of what was going on and where to find cheaper alternatives. My guess is alot of the other customers here did the same.
The San Antonio area practices proper free-market principles, so multiple ISPs are allowed to operate, so there is no monopoly. Because of that, the consumer is king. What he/she says goes, and consumers speak with their wallets. Enough people say "I won't do that, that's stupid. I'm just going to switch providers, and you won't get my money," and T-W has to concede their position in order just to stay alive in that market. Now if only New York could de-regulate like that, and let the market solve its own problems...