Charter Stops Supporting Customer Owned Modems And More Changes Customers Aren't Happy With Following on the heels of Charter's past history of dubious modem ownership record keeping and bricking of customer modems, Charter Sunday confirmed rumors - first leaked here in the Broadband Reports forums - that they will no longer be supporting customer-owned modems. Existing modem owners will be able to use their current modem until a package/price change occurs. New customers and customers that change their service as of Tuesday the 26th appear to be locked into a Charter modem. While no Internet package price details are available yet, the current $7 modem rental fee will go away and most likely be absorbed into the regular monthly fee. Other changes include: •No more Charter supported WiFi (temporary) •No more multi-room DVR • No more stand-alone Charter phone service•New TV Packages As someone who has personally struggled with Charter's inability to recognize I owned my own modem -- reverting my owned modems to "leased" status (which was comical as one even had "Comcast" - not Charter - printed right on the modem!) I see this move as a way to simplify operations. As Charter puts it: 1) We want every Charter Internet customer to have the best on-line experience possible. 2) We thoroughly test every modem that we issue to customers to ensure they will perform optimally on our network. 3) By providing the modems, we can ensure that they all have the most up-to-date firmware. 4) As technological advancements are made, we can make sure every customer’s modem is upgraded accordingly. The only problem in my opinion: Cable pricing has historically outpaced the rate of inflation many-fold, and this appears to be a thinly-veiled attempt at justifying what most certainly will be a price increase - stay tuned as you can bet the $7 modem rental fee will simply find it's way into the base price. More details should be forthcoming on Tuesday.
|
  CheesePremium
join:2003-10-26
Naples, FL
kudos:1 | Lame.... Lame and Lame.... | |
| | | FCC Regs? Isn't there some kind of FCC regulation that specifies cable operators are required to allow customers to bring their own modems? | |
|  | | | Re: FCC Regs? That is a good thought, but I think it might only apply to cable cards and not modems. I could be wrong though. | |
| |  TransmasterDon't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus
join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY
 ·CenturyLink
| Ya right "best on-line experience possible" This is just like Exlax's "We want the customer to have the best experience possiable, no cramps 
If I had a modem I purchased myself I would have no expectation of any customer support for it, hell I wouldn't call for customer support even if the moden was rented. You get some poor person in India getting paid chicken feed to read a script back to you.
--
I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man's reasoning powers are not above the monkey's.
- Mark Twain in Eruption | |
| | | patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | Re: Ya right Chicken feed to eat, or chicken feed to feed the family chickens? | |
| | | | | | | | I worked for Charter for years and there are no call centers in India. I worked at the one in Louisville, KY., and the overseas call centers are in Panama, Mexico City, Cainta Philippines, a couple in Canada, and maybe one in Brazil. The ones overseas are tiny. We had 2 in the Philippines but 1 was washed away in a Typhoon during a "state of calamity". The other 1 is a billing call center which I'm sure is to upset customers and force them to forget trying to get billing information since I couldn't even understand them. If anyone needs an expert witness on billing issues with Charter feel free to contact me. No one is trained on billing calls and you will get a different answer every time you call about a billing question. I worked tech support but as with all the call centers the primary directive is to get you to buy stuff you don't want and probably doesn't work. Good luck to all of you. | |
|
| | | Re: FCC Regs? said by knewman:Isn't there some kind of FCC regulation that specifies cable operators are required to allow customers to bring their own modems?
I believe that only applies to cable TV equipment, not cable modems.
It doesn't apply to CableCARDs. The cable company doesn't have to offer it for purchase, but they have to lease them. | |
| | | Reviews:
 ·RoadRunner Cable
 ·Clearwire Wireless
·Clear Wireless
·AT&T Southwest
| Re: FCC Regs? said by fifty nine:said by knewman:Isn't there some kind of FCC regulation that specifies cable operators are required to allow customers to bring their own modems?
I believe that only applies to cable TV equipment, not cable modems. It doesn't apply to CableCARDs. The cable company doesn't have to offer it for purchase, but they have to lease them. Correction they are NOT REQUIRED to lease Cable Cards or Tuning adapters. They are required to make Cable Cards available. They may charge a nominal fee for the card (not required to) Cable companies tend to just make the (POS) Tuning Adapters free. Next year they must make cable cards TWO WAY allowing people with equipment like TiVo to watch on demand content.
--
---- Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
---- Albert Einstein
-- DLink DIR-825 (B1) fw2.06NA / DAP-1522 (a1) fw 1.31 {2@5ghz bridge mode} / Clear Modem series G | |
| | | | | | Re: FCC Regs? They already have two way cable cards.
I have had for the past two years now one of the few Tru2Way televisions - which uses a two way cable card. I rather enjoy it, but is seems that I need to contact Comcast again to get the on-demand working again. | |
|
| patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | No. The closest to FCC cable modem regulation is that TWC must offer competing Cable ISPs because of the AOL/TW merger years ago. The Cable ISPs for TWC are atleast Earthlink and possibly 1 other company depending on market. | |
| | | | | Re: FCC Regs? and nobody still knows the full details of that deal as nothing was released. And still in many areas you don't get a choice- especially in the markets that TWC took over from Adelphia and Comcast. You can go to Earthlink all you want to sign up and they'll tell you no service- and TWC will basically tell you the same- but why go with a 3rd party when you're limited to what speeds you're going to see. | |
|
| | | How can this be legal???
New customers and customers that change their service as of Tuesday the 26th appear to be locked into a Charter modem. | |
| | | openbox9Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2 | Re: FCC Regs? Don't become a new customer and it won't be a problem  | |
|
| | | they could allow you to bring your own modem- but you'll be on your own if anything happens. Meaning if they see your modem; your SOL. As it should be.
They also could tell the FCC to take a hike if they wanted to go to court; and as history shows- the FCC does not normally win in court. | |
| | | | | Re: FCC Regs? that makes sense. you bring your own modem and charter will do their part by not blocking it. but if its busted then its your problem. for some reason I read this as charter will block all customer owned devices from their network. | |
|
| | As a Charter Customer I'm upset My and family and I have been Charter customers for over 10 years now and this change is down-right awful. We have used our own modem for over the past 5 years and have not had a single issue caused by the modem. In fact the only time we did have an issue it was caused by a Ubee modem they had given us when we upgraded to 25/3 package in 2010 (never tested over 9/2, while an old Docsis 1.1 tested at 22/2.5 on an 18/2 plan).
Fortunately for me I will be turning in my Charter equipment today as my wife and I are moving out of a Charter area, but I'll be sure to give my parents my SB6121 tonight so they can try to avoid that inevitable price increase.
I was actually going to have my in-laws switch to Charter internet and cable and ditch their Dish and Centurylink combo they currently have, but without Whole House DVR I don't see that as much of an option. Sure they are lowering the cost of DVRs, but then you can only watch the program in the room you recorded it in, that isn't nearly as convenient. | |
| | | | Re: As a Charter Customer I'm upset So if you're moving out of a Charter area anyway, aren't you just complaining for the sake of complaining?
Verizon and AT&T don't let you buy equipment for FiOS and U-Verse. | |
| | | | | Re: As a Charter Customer I'm upset No I'm complaining because I will likely be moving back into a Charter area within the next year, and obviously as I stated my parents still have Charter service at their home and my in laws were considering it.
How are you trying to compare FiOS and UVerse to cable internet? Besides Comcast Business class (which by the way you can now add your own modem), this is the first time I've ran across a company who would not allow you to install your own modem. Even Comcast said you would not be charged for a modem since they made you have it, oddly enough whenever I would add my own modems at their locations my bill would drop $7.
Also with UVerse you can purchase the modem for $100, which they often time will send you a rebate check for. | |
| | | | | | Re: As a Charter Customer I'm upset The point is very simple. Verizon controls their network, and they can let whatever they want as a device to be accepted on it.
Charter can do the same. And Time Warner Cable has until recently, not allowed customer-owned modems in many regions.
And I'm not aware of any provider allowing you to use your own modems with internet/phone service. I know Comcast doesn't, I know my provider doesn't. | |
| | | | | | | Re: As a Charter Customer I'm upset said by osravens:The point is very simple. Verizon controls their network, and they can let whatever they want as a device to be accepted on it.
Charter can do the same. And Time Warner Cable has until recently, not allowed customer-owned modems in many regions.
And I'm not aware of any provider allowing you to use your own modems with internet/phone service. I know Comcast doesn't, I know my provider doesn't.
so you be ok with only being able to rent a locked down Verizon PC at a high price and having to use the Verizon app store with high prices. | |
| | | | | | | | Re: As a Charter Customer I'm upset I didn't say my opinion on the matter.
But the point is if Charter wants to lock down their network and only allow their equipment, there's precedent in the market that allows for it that hasn't been stopped as of yet.
I have no problem with what Charter did as long as they're not going to then force everyone to pay the $7/month. If they're going to give you the modem for free, then great. If they did that as a cash grab, then that's a different story. And that I'd have a real problem with. | |
|
| | | | | | TWC doesn't allow you to bring your own modem for Phone/Internet either. | |
| | | | | | | said by osravens:The point is very simple. Verizon controls their network, and they can let whatever they want as a device to be accepted on it.
Charter can do the same. And Time Warner Cable has until recently, not allowed customer-owned modems in many regions.
And I'm not aware of any provider allowing you to use your own modems with internet/phone service. I know Comcast doesn't, I know my provider doesn't.
suddenlink i believe does, with internet and phone..., i know theyve let us for years you our own modem, and heck you can go buy one and use it on their system u just have to call them and give them the serial and all that | |
| | | | | bemis
join:2008-07-18
Reading, MA Reviews:
·Comcast
 ·Verizon FiOS
| said by osravens:The point is very simple. Verizon controls their network, and they can let whatever they want as a device to be accepted on it.
Charter can do the same. And Time Warner Cable has until recently, not allowed customer-owned modems in many regions.
With FIOS it's often a 2 device install, the ONT and the Router. You don't NEED the router as long as you're internet only and have cat5. You need the router for the TV if you've got the on-screen schedule guide.
There is no additional charge, beyond service, for the internet/phone equipment...
I don't think I'd have a problem with Comcast requiring me to use their equipment. Though I would have a problem if they told me my service would cost $50/mo and also I had to pay a required $7 equipment fee.
I think that's the problem. You can't run a restaurant where you sell a bowl of pasta for $10 and then charge $3 for a fork while not allowing customers to bring their own fork. | |
| | | | |  trebaczPremium
join:2003-01-03
Mchenry, IL | Just jumping in on the Comcast Triple Play - with your own modem. I have a purchased modem with Comcast cable, phone, and internet -and love that I had the choice to avoid the $7 rental fee.
Did it last January and wrote the detail about it in this blog post:
»blog.trebacz.com/2012/01/comcast···ris.html | |
| | | | | | | said by osravens:The point is very simple. Verizon controls their network, and they can let whatever they want as a device to be accepted on it.
Charter can do the same. And Time Warner Cable has until recently, not allowed customer-owned modems in many regions.
And I'm not aware of any provider allowing you to use your own modems with internet/phone service. I know Comcast doesn't, I know my provider doesn't.
I have comcast and was allowed to use my own SB 6121 Comcast residential will allow you use any modem as long as its on their approved list. Saved the $7 modem rental fee, so before you make up something about a provider you don't have you should research better | |
|
| | | | | |  GbcueP.E.Premium
join:2001-09-30
Santa Rosa, CA
kudos:8 | Re: As a Charter Customer I'm upset said by David:said by osravens: AT&T don't let you buy equipment for U-Verse.
That's not true, as long as you have a modem that has the proper credentials you can put it on the VDSL/IPDSL line and have it provisioned. I just purchased a 3600HG unit from ebay and it will be provisioned with my self install order in 2 weeks (I set the due date that far out, that was my choice as my contract will end on regular DSL). Do you get charged the "high speed technology" fee with this setup? | |
| | | | |  DavidNow accepting new patientsPremium,VIP
join:2002-05-30
Granite City, IL
kudos:78 | Re: As a Charter Customer I'm upset I shouldn't, but I can't speak with experience as of yet, as I haven't seen the first bill. | |
| | | | | | GbcueP.E.Premium
join:2001-09-30
Santa Rosa, CA
kudos:8 | Re: As a Charter Customer I'm upset I might have to buy my own RG when I move so I can save more $. | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: As a Charter Customer I'm upset I have this modem and they don't charge any extra monthly fee for standalone Internet service like cable companies do.
If you add TV, then they don't offer you to purchase RG but rent one. I don't know how much they charge. | |
|
| | UnnDunnPremium
join:2005-12-21
Brooklyn, NY | On FiOS, there is nothing stopping you from using your own routing equipment. You just can't call them for help if you need it. | |
| | | | |
| |  aaronwtPremium
join:2004-11-07
Woodbridge, VA
·Verizon FiOS
| said by osravens:So if you're moving out of a Charter area anyway, aren't you just complaining for the sake of complaining?
Verizon and AT&T don't let you buy equipment for FiOS and U-Verse.
FiOS does. I use my own router that can handle any of the speeds that FiOS offers. I also use TiVos instead of their DVRs. | |
|
|  BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | said by daake07: Sure they are lowering the cost of DVRs, but then you can only watch the program in the room you recorded it in, that isn't nearly as convenient.
Oh my what a burden. for shame that you must suffer through that. | |
| | | rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO | Re: As a Charter Customer I'm upset Charter does offer at least one remote DVR unit that will allow multi-room playback of content recorded on a single DVR. (I have this.) When I got it, I believe they said you can add additional remote playback boxes. I'm not sure how many.
It works well except control of what the DVR records can only be managed from the actual DVR.
Having multi-room playback is a legitimate feature and something that DirectTV heavily advertises. Regarding my personal situation, it's very desirable because my kids are frequently in the living room watching their DVR programs. I routinely send them to the basement (finished and very comfortable) to continue their viewing experience when I want to watch the news.
If each DVR was independent, that wouldn't be possible and it would be confusing to try and maintain the same scheduled recordings on two units, let alone more than two. There's also "on-demand" recording when something interrupts live TV and you don't want to miss the rest of the program. Inevitably content would be on the wrong DVR. | |
| | | | BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Re: As a Charter Customer I'm upset said by rradina:Charter does offer at least one remote DVR unit that will allow multi-room playback of content recorded on a single DVR. (I have this.)
They will stop offering this tomorrow. | |
|
| | mogamer
join:2011-04-20
Royal Oak, MI | said by BF69:said by daake07: Sure they are lowering the cost of DVRs, but then you can only watch the program in the room you recorded it in, that isn't nearly as convenient.
Oh my what a burden. for shame that you must suffer through that. That's an a*****e response. He didn't say he was suffering. Pay-tv is a luxury for most people in the first place. Nothing wrong with wanting all of the bells and whistles if you can afford it. | |
| | | | | But as it has been said, Charter offered the service because people wanted it. Now every major player also offers the service so why is Charter dropping it.
Most people do not watch all their TV on the same set, especially if you have family and kids who also want the TV. Whole house DVRs are a great option and I paid a premium for it (extra $2 -- $7 a month for the remote STB), so why get rid of it.
I think one of the reasons was a shortage of boxes available, I know many people were unable to get it because of that. I know when I got it installed in February, I received the last box they had available in Nebraska. | |
|
| | .... If they're not going to force you to pay the $7 fee, then what's the problem here?
How many customers are really providing their own modems in the first place?
Also I wasn't aware that any cable company provided standalone VoIP. Considering it's voice over internet protocol, doesn't that pretty much require it to have internet access in the first place? | |
| |
See 10 replies to this post | |
 PhoenixDown-- Wants FIOSPremium
join:2003-06-08
Fresh Meadows, NY
kudos:1 | Cost aside, where's the issue? If they eliminate the $7 a month rental fee, where's the real issue? | |
| |
See 16 replies to this post | |
mogamer
join:2011-04-20
Royal Oak, MI | No WHDVR? Why are they going backwards with their service? Everybody and their brother is offering a WHDVR and Charter is eliminating theirs? Doesn't make any sense at all. Even if they are going to introduce a new system, why get rid of the current one and leave people with nothing in the meantime? | |
| | bshellyPremium
join:2002-02-17
Conover, NC | Re: No WHDVR? Agreed, their justification is ridiculous. I won't leave DirecTV simply because the WHDVR is of utmost importance to me. | |
|
| | Here's to hoping... Cablevision in the North East doesn't charge modem fees, hell when I called up to activate my Motorola SB6180 they promptly reminded me I can just return that modem and i'll get one from in the mail overnighted for free and no montly fee. The service price also haven't changed since forever also as it's still 29.99 for the first year of internet, then after that it goes to the regular $45.95. This is how it's been for the past 5yrs or so. When I first signed up in 1998 we had to buy our own modems from Nobody Beats the Wiz - Had a 3Com Sharkfin then for my 10/1Mbps service.
Saying all that to hope Charter is thinking of doing the samething, so cross your fingers. | |
| | | | Re: Here's to hoping... said by SHoTTa35 :Cablevision in the North East doesn't charge modem fees, hell when I called up to activate my Motorola SB6180 they promptly reminded me I can just return that modem and i'll get one from in the mail overnighted for free and no montly fee. The service price also haven't changed since forever also as it's still 29.99 for the first year of internet, then after that it goes to the regular $45.95. This is how it's been for the past 5yrs or so. When I first signed up in 1998 we had to buy our own modems from Nobody Beats the Wiz - Had a 3Com Sharkfin then for my 10/1Mbps service.
Saying all that to hope Charter is thinking of doing the samething, so cross your fingers.
charter is seeing the other cable companys get away with stuff, if you think cablevision aint lookin into caps or somthin like that you got another thing comein | |
|
| |  PeteC2Got Mouse?Premium,MVM
join:2002-01-20
Bristol, CT
kudos:6
·Comcast
·AT&T Yahoo
| Re: Who's to blame? said by Nightfall:If anyone is to blame for this decision, its the users who can't properly troubleshoot their networks. I think that it is a part of the equation to be sure. A lot of folks get upset over the $7 a month rental charge, which yes, will most likely be absorbed in the general rates in the future...why list a rental charge when all future customers have a Charter-supplied modem?
However, to me (I have Comcast not Charter, but same $7 a month rent), although certainly they make a profit on the equipment rental, it is not all that great when you take into account that they are responsible for those units, including replacing defective units, and upgrading when new technologies render the previous ones obsolete (such as Docsis 3.0).
It does simplify CS issues when one has tighter control over what equipment is out in the field being used.
Comcast, which I have, is okay with your own modem as long as it appears on their approved list, but if you have internet & voice, the option to self own eMTAs is very limited, and not really worth the cost (one approved model, from one approved vendor...and only in certain markets!).
Considering the number of both DSL and cable modems that I have owned, I probably have saved little or nothing over simply "renting" their unit.
My only proviso would be if I had to use a crappy (most of them are!) wireless gateway. I want to be able to control my wireless network environment.
--
Deeds, not words | |
| | | Reviews:
·Charter
| Re: Who's to blame? said by PeteC2:Considering the number of both DSL and cable modems that I have owned, I probably have saved little or nothing over simply "renting" their unit.
Lets do some math then, shall we? Lets see, you pay $7 per month for a modem rental fee. If you rent it for 3 years(since most people stay with their ISP for a long time due to contracts), thats $252. Thats about $200 more than just buying your own. Yes, $200 a year might not be a lot to you, but for me, its a car payment, or another months services. Figure, you save on average $80 per year with your own equipment, over the course of 5 years, without factoring the initial purchase, its $420.
said by PeteC2:However, to me (I have Comcast not Charter, but same $7 a month rent), although certainly they make a profit on the equipment rental, it is not all that great when you take into account that they are responsible for those units, including replacing defective units, and upgrading when new technologies render the previous ones obsolete (such as Docsis 3.0).
Actually, im sure they make a boatload on cable modems, since if they get a defective unit, the manufacturer replaces it at no cost to them, and it only takes a few minutes in a truck roll to replace a modem, so, they are definitely making money, and lots of money, since they pay wholesale prices for the modems in the first place(maybe around $30 per modem), and they are raking in $84 per year, per rented modem, and with considerable improvements in quality, and quality control, I'm betting that they rarely have to replace a modem unless it was hit by lightning or damaged by a customer(at which point, they charge full MFG suggested retail prices to replace it, so $125 for a SB6121). Its just a gross ripoff, and always has been. They pay for those modems once, and use them over and over until they dont work, and then get free replacements if its defective, so, saying they "dont make a lot of money on the modem" is outright crap if you look at the numbers. | |
| | | |  NightfallMy Goal Is To Deny YoursPremium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI
·Comcast
 ·Callcentric
 ·Site5.com
| Re: Who's to blame? said by Chubbysumo:said by PeteC2:Considering the number of both DSL and cable modems that I have owned, I probably have saved little or nothing over simply "renting" their unit.
Lets do some math then, shall we? Lets see, you pay $7 per month for a modem rental fee. If you rent it for 3 years(since most people stay with their ISP for a long time due to contracts), thats $252. Thats about $200 more than just buying your own. Yes, $200 a year might not be a lot to you, but for me, its a car payment, or another months services. Figure, you save on average $80 per year with your own equipment, over the course of 5 years, without factoring the initial purchase, its $420. said by PeteC2:However, to me (I have Comcast not Charter, but same $7 a month rent), although certainly they make a profit on the equipment rental, it is not all that great when you take into account that they are responsible for those units, including replacing defective units, and upgrading when new technologies render the previous ones obsolete (such as Docsis 3.0).
Actually, im sure they make a boatload on cable modems, since if they get a defective unit, the manufacturer replaces it at no cost to them, and it only takes a few minutes in a truck roll to replace a modem, so, they are definitely making money, and lots of money, since they pay wholesale prices for the modems in the first place(maybe around $30 per modem), and they are raking in $84 per year, per rented modem, and with considerable improvements in quality, and quality control, I'm betting that they rarely have to replace a modem unless it was hit by lightning or damaged by a customer(at which point, they charge full MFG suggested retail prices to replace it, so $125 for a SB6121). Its just a gross ripoff, and always has been. They pay for those modems once, and use them over and over until they dont work, and then get free replacements if its defective, so, saying they "dont make a lot of money on the modem" is outright crap if you look at the numbers. Your logic would make sense if modems costed "$52", but they don't. A good motorola modem costs $80-$90 for a D3 modem. Your logic would also make sense if you payed once and didn't upgrade again. My dad rents his modem and he gets a new one every 2-3 years.
Based on that math, the cost is minimal, plus you don't have to worry about the pain point of a dead modem if the company is taking care of it.
--
My domain - Nightfall.net | |
| | | | | | said by Chubbysumo:said by PeteC2:Considering the number of both DSL and cable modems that I have owned, I probably have saved little or nothing over simply "renting" their unit.
Lets do some math then, shall we? Lets see, you pay $7 per month for a modem rental fee. If you rent it for 3 years(since most people stay with their ISP for a long time due to contracts), thats $252. Thats about $200 more than just buying your own. Yes, $200 a year might not be a lot to you, but for me, its a car payment, or another months services. Figure, you save on average $80 per year with your own equipment, over the course of 5 years, without factoring the initial purchase, its $420. said by PeteC2:However, to me (I have Comcast not Charter, but same $7 a month rent), although certainly they make a profit on the equipment rental, it is not all that great when you take into account that they are responsible for those units, including replacing defective units, and upgrading when new technologies render the previous ones obsolete (such as Docsis 3.0).
Actually, im sure they make a boatload on cable modems, since if they get a defective unit, the manufacturer replaces it at no cost to them, and it only takes a few minutes in a truck roll to replace a modem, so, they are definitely making money, and lots of money, since they pay wholesale prices for the modems in the first place(maybe around $30 per modem), and they are raking in $84 per year, per rented modem, and with considerable improvements in quality, and quality control, I'm betting that they rarely have to replace a modem unless it was hit by lightning or damaged by a customer(at which point, they charge full MFG suggested retail prices to replace it, so $125 for a SB6121). Its just a gross ripoff, and always has been. They pay for those modems once, and use them over and over until they dont work, and then get free replacements if its defective, so, saying they "dont make a lot of money on the modem" is outright crap if you look at the numbers. That whole last paragraph is what this is all about! Easiest money in the world to suck out of people is modem rental, and that paragraph sums it up just about perfectly. Nothing but pure profit.
--
The Firefox alternative.
»www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/ | |
|
 IowaCowboyWant to go back to IowaPremium
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA
·Comcast
·Verizon Broadban..
| Glad I'm in Comcast territory I live in Comcast territory (Springfield, MA) but some of the surrounding towns (Chicopee, Ludlow, Wilbraham, and East Longmeadow) are in Charter turf. I have read on some of the local forums that Charter is worse than Comcast. Around here, Charter uses the Scientific Atlanta boxes, which I don't like as much as Motorola hardware. I personally have TiVo boxes for DVR, and I have few complaints about Comcast other than getting things fixed can be like pulling teeth (such as taking six different truck rolls to fix a constantly dropping Internet connection). I personally have not had Comcast miss an appointment but have had a few late techs.
Charter has been known for predatory business practices like locking customers into lengthy contracts with steep ETFs and rock bottom customer service. It got so bad that the mayor of Chicopee once said a few years ago that he'd offer Verizon a CATV franchise if they'd build FiOS in that community. | |
| | BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Re: Glad I'm in Comcast territory said by IowaCowboy:Charter has been known for predatory business practices like locking customers into lengthy contracts with steep ETFs and rock bottom customer service.
That's bullshit. Contracts are OPTIONAL and yes there is ETF if you back out of a contract like there is in ANY business. Back out of cell phone contract or DirecTv contract. See what happens. The ETF is stated VERY clearly BEFORE you sign a contract.
Comcast bashing Charter about customer service is a joke. I don't read stories about Charter employees blowing up houses or committing murder. | |
| | | JTY
join:2004-05-29
Ellensburg, WA | Re: Glad I'm in Comcast territory When I had Charter at my previous home, I was under contract. Decided to cancel and switch to a local ISP. They waived the ETF on the cancellation, and thanked me for being a customer. | |
|
| | ugh That explains why Charter cut a bunch of stations off the Analog cable. | |
| | BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Re: ugh said by lightning10:That explains why Charter cut a bunch of stations off the Analog cable.
They cut off some analog so they can increase HD. What is the problem with that? | |
|
BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | I'll defer judgement until tomorrow I'll wait until tomorrow and see if internet rates are going up or not. If not then fine. If they are the that's BS.
Luckily I'm locked in for another year on my pricing. | |
| |
See 10 replies to this post | |
siech0
join:2001-03-20
Warrensburg, MO | Upload speed!@# Give me more upload speed and I won't bitch | |
| rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO | Somewhat Makes Sense I have a friend who owns their own modem. They live about 1.5 miles from me. Earlier this year they were told by Charter they would have to buy a DOCSIS 3 modem Charter told them their system was getting crowded and they needed DOCSIS 3 to resolve the issue.
I am on the same system and I still have a DOCSIS 2 modem. Charter has never approached me with the upgrade request.
My guess is their node was getting crowded and Charter decided to employ DOCSIS 3 to resolve the issue.
First, this scenario probably occurs frequently and it's probably a nightmare for Charter to get everyone to upgrade their modem to DOCSIS 3. While not a huge expense, I'm sure people complain about spending $50 or $75 on a new modem -- especially if they just bought a new DOCSIS 2 modem. This leads to customer service complaints and unhappy customers.
Second, since Charter has to give folks time to upgrade, they aren't in control of how fast they will resolve the problem. This could put the system's performance in jeopardy and cause more customer complaints. (They cannot just go to DOCSIS 3 if customer equipment is still on DOCSIS 2 -- or they might strand those customers with no service.)
Bottom line: I understand why Charter is doing this and if they include it in the price, fine. If they want to raise the prices and I no longer have the option, then I'm not going to be happy. | |
| |  yaplejPremium
join:2001-02-10
White City, OR | Modem included in price now? So with this change will the advertised price include the modem? Before they were able to skirt around including the modem "rental" in the advertised price because technically it was optional. You could buy your own and use that.
Now that its not an option will the modem rental price have to be included in the base advertised price of the service?
I would hope so. | |
| | | BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Re: Illegal by precedent said by nunya:From the 1940's all the way until the 1984 divestiture (break-up), the DOJ vigorously pursued AT&T for these same practices (Bell System Property - Not For Sale).
Another example would be cable cards and cable boxes. Though it failed miserably (thanks to the cable companies efforts).
This is a money grab. Charter isn't stupid. I'm sure they have a lot of highly paid lawyers who have looked at this and said, "yep, it's illegal".
The goal is to reap as much cash as possible before the racket gets shut down and the jig is up.
Charter puts themselves in the "cat-bird-seat" by crowning themselves king of all the equipment in their geographic territory. Now, equipment manufacturers will be fawning at Charters feet trying to get that contract to be the "the one". Charter will get ridiculously low pricing on equipment. I'm sure they will be passing those savings on the consumer, right?
Maybe the DOJ should get a head start on this.
Please. Yeah that why they are LOWERING the cost of their TV services. Because they want to fuck over the customer.
Hmmmm let's see
My current package without special deals.
Digital Home $64
HBO/Cinemax $20( don't really care about Cinemax but I am force to have it )
2 HD boxes $15( $5 for the first $10 for 2nd )
Broadcast fee 1.47
Total $100.47
Tv Select( same as Digital Home ) $60 and INCLUDES broadcast fee
HBO $15( no longer forced to get Cinemax )
2 HD boxes $10( all boxes are $5. no discount for 1st box anymore )
Total $85
Oh and come July 13. I'm getting over 30 more HD channels added.
yeah Charter is really trying to fuck people over. | |
| | | | | Re: Illegal by precedent said by BF69:said by nunya:From the 1940's all the way until the 1984 divestiture (break-up), the DOJ vigorously pursued AT&T for these same practices (Bell System Property - Not For Sale).
Another example would be cable cards and cable boxes. Though it failed miserably (thanks to the cable companies efforts).
This is a money grab. Charter isn't stupid. I'm sure they have a lot of highly paid lawyers who have looked at this and said, "yep, it's illegal".
The goal is to reap as much cash as possible before the racket gets shut down and the jig is up.
Charter puts themselves in the "cat-bird-seat" by crowning themselves king of all the equipment in their geographic territory. Now, equipment manufacturers will be fawning at Charters feet trying to get that contract to be the "the one". Charter will get ridiculously low pricing on equipment. I'm sure they will be passing those savings on the consumer, right?
Maybe the DOJ should get a head start on this.
Please. Yeah that why they are LOWERING the cost of their TV services. Because they want to fuck over the customer. Hmmmm let's see My current package without special deals. Digital Home $64 HBO/Cinemax $20( don't really care about Cinemax but I am force to have it ) 2 HD boxes $15( $5 for the first $10 for 2nd ) Broadcast fee 1.47 Total $100.47 Tv Select( same as Digital Home ) $60 and INCLUDES broadcast fee HBO $15( no longer forced to get Cinemax ) 2 HD boxes $10( all boxes are $5. no discount for 1st box anymore ) Total $85 Oh and come July 13. I'm getting over 30 more HD channels added. yeah Charter is really trying to fuck people over. way better than suddenlink.. gettin charged 160 for nothin
10mbps, 1 up 37
tv digital 115 or so
boxes 5 bucks a piece only have 3 (1st one is free)
then they hit u with the broadcast almost 5..
and dont even have hbo or cinemax on the digital u have to pay extra for the crap..
haha looks like yall dont have it so bad | |
|
|  chambercPremium
join:2008-08-05
Irving, TX
·Time Warner Cable
| said by nunya:From the 1940's all the way until the 1984 divestiture (break-up), the DOJ vigorously pursued AT&T for these same practices (Bell System Property - Not For Sale).
Another example would be cable cards and cable boxes. Though it failed miserably (thanks to the cable companies efforts).
This is a money grab. Charter isn't stupid. I'm sure they have a lot of highly paid lawyers who have looked at this and said, "yep, it's illegal".
The goal is to reap as much cash as possible before the racket gets shut down and the jig is up.
Charter puts themselves in the "cat-bird-seat" by crowning themselves king of all the equipment in their geographic territory. Now, equipment manufacturers will be fawning at Charters feet trying to get that contract to be the "the one". Charter will get ridiculously low pricing on equipment. I'm sure they will be passing those savings on the consumer, right?
Maybe the DOJ should get a head start on this.
The purpose of business is to make money... Period. | |
|
 Tel
join:2001-10-12 | What a Joke Having previously used Charter for over 10 years I see nothing wrong with this. Those idiots couldn't support their own modems, much less a customer owned one. | |
| Reviews:
·Charter
| are they going to refund the price of my modem for me? Since I already purchased it, I planned on using it for quite some time, because its D3 SB6121, so, are they going to refund the price of my now useless purchased modem, and still charge me for those shitty modems they love to use? This is just a thinly veiled attempt at raising the prices. Yes, it will streamline operations, since they dont have to deal with any customer owned equipment, but at what point will it turn into "you have to use our wireless, you cant use your own"? This is a step in the wrong direction, and a rate hike without a doubt. | |
| | BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Re: are they going to refund the price of my modem for me? said by Chubbysumo:Since I already purchased it, I planned on using it for quite some time, because its D3 SB6121, so, are they going to refund the price of my now useless purchased modem, and still charge me for those shitty modems they love to use? This is just a thinly veiled attempt at raising the prices. Yes, it will streamline operations, since they dont have to deal with any customer owned equipment, but at what point will it turn into "you have to use our wireless, you cant use your own"? This is a step in the wrong direction, and a rate hike without a doubt.
current customers can keep their own modem. | |
| | |  vaxvmsferroequine fanPremium
join:2005-03-01
Wormtown
·Charter
| Re: are they going to refund the price of my modem for me? said by BF69:said by Chubbysumo:Since I already purchased it, I planned on using it for quite some time, because its D3 SB6121, so, are they going to refund the price of my now useless purchased modem, and still charge me for those shitty modems they love to use? This is just a thinly veiled attempt at raising the prices. Yes, it will streamline operations, since they dont have to deal with any customer owned equipment, but at what point will it turn into "you have to use our wireless, you cant use your own"? This is a step in the wrong direction, and a rate hike without a doubt.
current customers can keep their own modem. If they are going to force me to use their equipment I want them to pay me the MSRP for the modem I can no longer use. They can have it after paying me. I shouldn't have to go thru the hassle of selling it on eBay or Craigslist or other at a reduced price. | |
|
|  koma3504AdvocatePremium
join:2004-06-22
North Richland Hills, TX | said by Chubbysumo: but at what point will it turn into "you have to use our wireless, you cant use your own"?
They would never be able to do this. That's why you set up a Private network behind the modem so that it looks like only one computer and only one computer. lol | |
|
| | PeteC2Got Mouse?Premium,MVM
join:2002-01-20
Bristol, CT
kudos:6 Reviews:
·Comcast
·AT&T Yahoo
| Re: What no BYOB option? said by PamelaTS:Thankfully I don't live in their area as I'm greatly opposed to being forced to us someone else's equipment. I have DSL modems I will never use again. But they are mine, I have a SurfBoard cable modem not currently in use but it's mine. Likewise I opted to NOT lease a cable/DVR. I own my TiVo w/Lifetime Sub.
It should be a customers right to OWN their own equipment BYOB!
Eh? Of course it is your right to own modems...be they cable or DSL! Hell, I've got a small grave-yard of old dsl equipment...want to buy any of it off me? No? Can't blame you, most of it is of very limited value...but then, by your admission, you have both dsl and cable equipment that you bought...sitting around being essentially...worthless. Where is the economic benefit to equipment sitting on a dusty shelf in the closet? 
Now, I rent my eMTA (voice and internet) off of Comcast. $7 a month? No biggie. An eMTA costs $149.95 new...by the time that is "paid off", it is already on its way towards obsolescence, a year or two away from newer equipment more often than not.
Meanwhile, if my eMTA dies a premature, grizzly death, I call Comcast, and they swap me out a new one, and if there is a new roll out of upgraded equipment, I don't end up the proud owner of a useless plastic box with pretty lights (like I said, got lots of those already, thank you!)
I get it that folks obsess about the cable/dsl companies making even a dime more off our hard-earned incomes...I really do, but this is not nearly the big deal that it is made out to be. I do support folk's rights to own anything that they want, but seriously, buying any electronic equipment is never an investment...it is marching towards irrelavence from the moment you plunk down money for it...so renting is not all that terrible an alternative.
Look, I see folks here talking about their Motorola SurfBoard SB16121s (and SB16120s), which are "only" 4x4 channel D3 models...already behind the "curve". Good modems to be sure, but destined to be in the back of many a cable-user's closet in the not so distant future.
--
Deeds, not words | |
| | | | | Re: What no BYOB option? Well the Surf Board (6141) cable modem is brand new I'm waiting for my Clear commitment to run out.
My TiVo works OTA and OTI as well | |
|
| | | said by PamelaTS:Thankfully I don't live in their area as I'm greatly opposed to being forced to us someone else's equipment. I have DSL modems I will never use again. But they are mine, I have a SurfBoard cable modem not currently in use but it's mine. Likewise I opted to NOT lease a cable/DVR. I own my TiVo w/Lifetime Sub.
It should be a customers right to OWN their own equipment BYOB!
Why would you want to shell out $100 On something Charter includes In it's new pricing plans? The cost of Internet has not gone up, in fact it now includes all the taxes in addition to the equipment. I don't understand why everyone is so upset about getting a better deal... If you own a modem it still works, but if you have an older sb5100 why would you not take the free sb6100 d3 modem from Charter for free? Is it the principal that you paid for your sb5100 a few years ago, if so, you're dumb.... You can rest on your principles, I will enjoy my free 15mbps upgrade and toss the sb5100 into the boneyard where it belongs. | |
|
| | Charter Sucks Ass Analog cable? Crappy customer service? Outdated DVR with NES interface and no whole home? Node crowding? Overpricing? Capped connection? And now the modem I spent $100 on is useless? Hell no, no thanks! Screw Charter I'm perfectly happy with my Dish TV (3 Hoppers, 2 Joeys!) and U-verse 24/3 (uncapped! free modem! no modem fee!) | |
| | | | Re: Charter Sucks Ass depends on what part of the country you are in.
I have a 20/4 plan, i get usually 44-50mb down at about 80% of the time. i can do a couple 100gb a month with streaming, gaming, and downloads.
plus the weather here is a pain in the but sometimes, heavy rains and winds from spring till fall and tons of snow in the winter. which ive personally seen at peoples houses that have satellite that the image will go all snow every-time the weather sucks.
and techs are always a crap shoot but that's for any ISP | |
| | | | said by WhyMe420:Analog cable? Crappy customer service? Outdated DVR with NES interface and no whole home? Node crowding? Overpricing? Capped connection? And now the modem I spent $100 on is useless? Hell no, no thanks! Screw Charter I'm perfectly happy with my Dish TV (3 Hoppers, 2 Joeys!) and U-verse 24/3 (uncapped! free modem! no modem fee!)
I just re-signed for the 24 month price guarantee, which hasn't increased in price for me from two years ago. I think Charter has done a great job.
Their issue has to be the fact that they don't want to be reliant on some Taiwanese company to cough up firmware. If you remember back to the dial-up ISP days (I do, I worked for one), shitty drivers drove these people nuts as they tried to keep their customers connected. An update to their Portmaster or USR Total Control systems and suddenly a third of their customers could not connect.
I'm sure Charter is tired of the same game; waiting for manufacturers to update or their customers to upgrade in order to properly manage their network.
Charter isn't perfect, but the value right now is with bundling internet and TV. Certainly, DirecTV has a better product, but I'm not paying $120 a month for it. Charter pretty much gives their TV away to keep me as an internet customer. | |
| | | | | Re: Charter Sucks Ass said by jjohnson :depends on what part of the country you are in.
I have a 20/4 plan, i get usually 44-50mb down at about 80% of the time. i can do a couple 100gb a month with streaming, gaming, and downloads.
plus the weather here is a pain in the but sometimes, heavy rains and winds from spring till fall and tons of snow in the winter. which ive personally seen at peoples houses that have satellite that the image will go all snow every-time the weather sucks.
and techs are always a crap shoot but that's for any ISP
Yeah yeah... My Dish satellite has been more reliable than my neighbor's Charter, and back when I had Charter, it would go out just because it was sprinkling outside. With Dish an outage is 15 minutes at most. When Charter (inevitably) goes out it can take hours to days. Back during the tornado outbreak, when the power got back on I had Dish going while everyone with Charter was waiting 2 weeks! So yeah... Dish is more reliable for me.
I also doubt that you get 44-50Mb except for maybe PowerBoost... I'd rather no caps though.
said by desarollo:said by WhyMe420:Analog cable? Crappy customer service? Outdated DVR with NES interface and no whole home? Node crowding? Overpricing? Capped connection? And now the modem I spent $100 on is useless? Hell no, no thanks! Screw Charter I'm perfectly happy with my Dish TV (3 Hoppers, 2 Joeys!) and U-verse 24/3 (uncapped! free modem! no modem fee!)
I just re-signed for the 24 month price guarantee, which hasn't increased in price for me from two years ago. I think Charter has done a great job. Their issue has to be the fact that they don't want to be reliant on some Taiwanese company to cough up firmware. If you remember back to the dial-up ISP days (I do, I worked for one), shitty drivers drove these people nuts as they tried to keep their customers connected. An update to their Portmaster or USR Total Control systems and suddenly a third of their customers could not connect. I'm sure Charter is tired of the same game; waiting for manufacturers to update or their customers to upgrade in order to properly manage their network. Charter isn't perfect, but the value right now is with bundling internet and TV. Certainly, DirecTV has a better product, but I'm not paying $120 a month for it. Charter pretty much gives their TV away to keep me as an internet customer. That's fine if you like Charter, I just can't stand them however I'll have to use them if U-verse ever gets caps... | |
|
| |
|
|
·
Remember the Zoom issue with Comcast?