Well the latest Consumerist award for the Worst Company in America has been rewarded. The Winner? Why Comcast!! The cable company that people seem to love to hate. But you know, there is something worse than being that winner. Being the company that rubs another’s nose in it –

For anyone who thought that mammoth megacorporations behaved anything like adults, they should just check out the Twitter account for Verizon, who saw fit tonight to have a little fun at the expense of Worst Company In America winner Comcast.

Follow the link to the Consumerist site to see the adult attitude from Verizon.

Linky.

Has Art Brodsky lost his grip? His posting over at Public Knowledge has to be one of the lamest lines of defense ever offered as a basis for over turning the Rule of Law. Kindness of Strangers be damned!

Mr Brodsky starts with using the Ides of March reversal technique –

Of course, the story isn’t all that simple, is it? Because the hidden story of Comcast’s glorious victory is that if Comcast were smart, it wouldn’t in the first place have brought the case, which challenged the FCC’s authority over the company’s high-speed Internet service. Some in the telecommunications industry, perhaps even huge companies with three letters in its name, urged (begged?) Comcast not to take the FCC’s ruling to court, because of the possibility that Comcast could actually win and, potentially, win big —which is what happened.

The reason that the Telcos like the arrangement Art is that it extended their LATA boundary relationships into the non regulated digital environment without so much as a legal skirmish. And what’s this dismissive alluding but not naming? Its AT&T, VZ, Sprint. Don’t be so damn coy.

But where is the standing on damages to the industry that Mr. Brodsky intones? He offers two — Depend on the Kindness of Strangers, and Waiting for Godot. In the former case he charges that depending on the big firms for telecommunications advancement has led us on a downward spiral in terms of global competitiveness. There is some truth to that but not the whole truth. For who is the hand maiden leading the spiraling down the drain but the FCC itself. Then in the latter case we have this –

We can’t depend on unelected bureaucrats to deal with topics as essential as broadband, because the result could be “excessive and burdensome regulation” on those humble, hard-working telephone and cable companies who unfairly change the rules without any reason at all.

And to you I say, NO we cannot trust bureaucrats with damn near anything including telecommunications. If for no other reason that the concept of the Lack of Sufficient Knowledge on a continuing basis.

But thru all of Mr. Brodsky’s missive is this gem –

… Practically speaking (even if there is a very slim legal opening), broadband is free from regulation – a nirvana that the telecoms industry might once upon a time have gratefully accepted as its due, but now looks upon it with some trepidation because now the door has swung wide open to a full-scale discussion of bringing Internet broadband access services back under reasonable regulation.

Two counts here. Brodsky’s ox has been gored by this ruling yet now the door has been swung open for reasonable regulation? By what variant of a pharmaceutical does he come to this conclusion? Its an election year fella. The chances of a Democratic Congress taking this up is slim to none. Plus if the tea leaves are right the Republican Congress next year won’t have the cycle time to touch it either. The second is under proper procedure, the FCC being a creature of Congress should make the necessary request for an expansion of its authority by the proper means, not some gerrymandered legal trick with a wink and a nod. But Mr. Brodsky the FCC DOES NOT possess the authority to overstate its intended alloted powers. Or do I assume you are willing to abrogate the rule of law to achieve your statist aims under the color of consumer protection. How Stalinist.
More on Balderdash!

Its the big item on Drudge right now. Its all abuzz on the Tech Blogs. But if you had been a consistent ThirdPipe reader you would have known the likely outcome of all this back on Jan 10. That is when I posted this piece. And since we knew this already, we can’t add ‘unexpectedly’ to the title of this posting.

And there are no surprises. It went down pretty much as the Court drafted in their memorandum back to the FCC. So what now? Well probably nothing unless the powers that be start edging Congress to expand the FCC’s statutory authority. However I don’t see that happening in a political election year.

So welcome back to the future — 2004 edition!

There’s a mind set in the cable side of the broadband duopoly that refuses to sell us what we want and demands the we buy what they are selling. It’s the conventional wisdom among the management in the world of coax as demonstrated by Comcast COO Steve Burke:

Speaking at the CTAM cable marketing convention in Denver, Colorado on October 25, Burke described his fears if the industry does not move ahead to form new business models. The industry-wide TV Everywhere authentication project is a way to try to “take the cable industry and put it ahead of the internet and try to not let it roll ahead of our industry,” he said.  Burke also illustrated some frustration with those in the business who were not lending a hand.

“Some people’s business models are going in the wrong direction,” he said, a likely reference to News Corp, Disney and NBC Universal who are partners in free online video site, Hulu that is considering putting some content behind a pay-wall.  “I’ve yet to meet a content provider who doesn’t worry about cord cutting and doesn’t see the wisdom of trying to get ahead of that. Stop talking about how hard it is and start figuring it out,” he said. (Broadcast and Cable)

Let’s see, cable needs to get ahead of the internet with a more limited, restrictive, and expensive product? It’s amazing Comcast’s shareholders tolerate this kind of leadership. Video on demand has become as common as email on the internet. Both free and paid models are succeeding growing and delivering profits. Instead of burning a pile of money building a whole new technology like TV Everywhere that consumers don’t want, why not offer more of what they are actually buying. Netflix, Amazon and iTunes are having no problem finding people who are willing to pay for content. If Comcast would simply discover the big dumb pipe, and deliver content via the internet to anyone with a broadband connection, it really would be ahead of the trend. But that would require some profoundly arrogant folks like the cable industry  to start their customers what they really want. Cable isn’t accustomed to doing that.

LA Times has a piece of Comcast sniffing around the behind of NBC Universal. The question for Comcast is the property a pig in a poke –

Cable giant Comcast Corp. is kicking the tires of NBC Universal, according to people familiar with the situation.

Comcast, the nation’s largest cable operator with almost 25 million subscribers, has been looking to increase its content holdings for several years. In NBC Universal it would get its hands on not only a big broadcast network and movie studio, but also several powerful cable channels, including USA, Syfy, CNBC, MSNBC and Bravo.

NBC parent General Electric has often denied that it is interested in selling its entertainment holdings. Of course, if history is any guide, Comcast doesn’t necessarily wait for an invitation before making a play. Five years ago it made an unsuccessful run to buy Walt Disney Co. for $54 billion.

Even smart money can be dead wrong at times. This might be one of them. Consider that NBC proper, is a TV property that like its competitors has seen better days. These are the twilight years of on air content. Then there is MSNBC cable. Its ratings are so low that their total viewership on any given night does not even beat Greta Van Susteren a Fox property. SyFy and USA Network are probably the only two pieces with any lastings prospects. But would you plunk down $30Bn or so on that basis?

What a NBCUniversal deal does do for Comcast is seal up some cable content for themselves. Which considering that channel providers might bolt to Hulu or YouTube makes it a fair defensive play. The question of course, is it worth the money?

Good luck there Comcast. More here.

Comcast may have been feeling a little pain from power user flight when Qwest ramped up its ADSL2 speeds.  By deploying a few dirt cheap upgrades that would have been made available years ago in a more competitive market, Comcast now owns the speed advantage once again. Top tier customers will pony up $100 a month for what most French and English pay about $30 for. Nice to see the speed boost, but the lack of competition is a national tragedy.

Comcast continues its roll-out of DOCSIS 3.0 wideband, announcing that its two fastest tiers are immediately available in more than half of the Denver metro area. The company expects wideband to be available in the remaining metro area as well as southern, northern and mountain areas later this year. (Cable 360)

If your are a Comcast customer, you can look forward to paying more to rent that $30 lump of plastic that connects you to it’s network.

Washington State users already experienced this as part of a suite of other Comcast rate hikes, but the cable giant now says they’ll be increasing their cable modem rental fee from $3 to $5 nationwide. “We continually invest in providing customers with next-generation equipment and technology that delivers advanced voice and Internet services with enhanced capabilities,” said Comcast in a statement. (DSL Reports)

The assumption that physical plant upgrades require a customer surcharge is something that only comes from the perverse world of a duopoly. I’m betting this increase will temporarily fix the gaping hole in Comcast’s balance sheet created by fleeing pay TV subscribers.  I’m  certain we’ll see the rest of the cable guys follow the big C’s lead.

A judge has given one of the least customer oriented monopolies in the country the to OK to get bigger. No strings attached.

Comcast Corp., the biggest U.S. cable-television provider, won a legal victory as a court threw out a rule limiting cable companies to 30 percent of the market.

The Federal Communications Commission failed to fully consider competition from companies such as DirecTV Group Inc. and Dish Network Corp., the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington said. It called the FCC’s action “arbitrary and capricious” and vacated the rule.

The ruling could spell an end to FCC attempts to limit the growth of cable companies, said Andrew Lipman, a Washington- based attorney. The court didn’t offer the agency a chance to provide better reasons for the rule, as it did when judges rejected the limit in 2001, Lipman said in an interview. (Bloomberg)

Don’t look for Comcast to go searching for new, underserved and unserved markets. The company has grown entirely through acquisition.  With the sputtering economy, many smaller operators will sell for historically low prices. For that reason, the timing of this ruling can’t be entirely coincidental. What really troubles me is that all of the discussion I’ve seen on this case focuses entirely on pay TV.  Closed system pay TV is in need of some of  Obama’s end of life counseling. The real issue is internet access. Letting the biggest and baddest of the cable guys control more than 30% of the cable internet with no provision to enable new competition isn’t just a bad idea. It’s criminal!

It what seems like an annual right of passage these days, Comcast is yet again this year caught with its pants down. Well I should say with its pornorgraphy on display. This time during a second half of the Super Bowl. –

Comcast continued this morning to investigate how pornography interrupted its feed during the final quarter of the Super Bowl on Sunday.
It is unclear how many viewers were affected by the clip, which lasted about 30 seconds, and featured full male nudity, said Kelle Maslyn, a Comcast spokeswoman.
“We are mortified by last evening’s Super Bowl interruption, and deeply apologize to our customers for the inappropriate programming,” Maslyn said in a statement. “We are aggressively investigating the situation including the possibility of foul play.”
Comcast is working on a plan to compensate customers, but nothing has been set in stone, Maslyn said.
The pornography clip was from Club Jenna, an adult cable television channel.
The Star newsroom was flooded with calls from irate viewers who said that the porn cut into the game with less than three minutes left to play, just after Arizona Cardinals player Larry Fitzgerald scored on a touchdown pass from Kurt Warner to put the team in the lead.

Callers said that the clip showed a woman unzipping a man’s pants, followed by a graphic act between the two.

Its hard to believe they can’t keep a feed where if belongs. But then they are the butt of the industry.

Linky.

Comcast, the net provider that it seems everyone loves to hate is being quizzed by the FCC on their yet again mode of network management. This time it lies in the fact that Comcast sent a letter of compliance earlier last year only to be contradicted by their very own website on the matter. FCC letter here

Now Comcast has had a reputation for being contentious to the FCC and arrogant to their customers. So this is no surprise. However it does go to show the depths of stupidity swirling around that Corp. This whole issue would not have arisen had somebody in Public Affairs reviewed their website for contradictory statements to their regulatory positions. Would it be airbrushing? Sure. But damn. If you are going to steal or lie at least make a good faith effort.

Linky.