[DoroKickcrofe]

I'm writing a case study on Comcast's strategies in the past. Now I don't live in the US so I'm not so sure about the competition. In the case study it mentions that Comcast acquired AT&T broadband in 2002, but when I google now it says that AT&T is Comcast's strongest competition at the moment when it comes to internet connections.. So what's the deal here?

[YonkFiorc]

I'm writing a case study on Comcast's strategies in the past. Now I don't live in the US so I'm not so sure about the competition. In the case study it mentions that Comcast acquired AT&T broadband in 2002, but when I google now it says that AT&T is Comcast's strongest competition at the moment when it comes to internet connections.. So what's the deal here?

That depends on your region in the US. Some places in the US doesn't have a strong presence at all. Either due to a pre-existing company, or that their infrastructure hasn't been updated yet.

Here in the Chicagoland portion of IL, Comcast is pretty much the ONLY game in town for people. Verizon FIOS is fast, but very few people can get it. AT&T DSL is common, but many houses have insufficent wiring to support high speeds, and the speeds aren't as good as could be.

I've never heard of comcast owning any portion of AT&T.

[DoroKickcrofe]

thanks for the info.. here's some information about comcast acquiring AT&T broadband back in 2002

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...2/ai_94843240/

I'm just wondering if they split up again?

[TyncTyncSah]

Where I live, Comcast and AT&T have been rivals since ever I can remember first getting broadband in like... 2001 or something? I don't know about a merger, I never heard anything about that, but whether or not they were ever in any kind of partnership, but I'm fairly certain in my area their services have always appeared to be rival services. But then, one offers DSL and the other offers cable, not exactly the same thing.

Comcast, AT&T, and Clear are pretty much the only options I have here. In addition to lackluster and unreliable service, AT&T screwed me over to such an extent that I refuse to ever have anything to do with them ever again.

The only real problem I have with Comcast is their non-negotiable 250GB bandwith cap, which goes by pretty fast these days. Over the last year or two they appear to have become more helpful over the phone, and much more responsive and flexible in terms of sending their technicians out. That and they've never called me a liar over the phone.

[mosypeSom]

I suppose it's possible they split up again at some point, or were forced to, I don't remember ever hearing about them taking over any portion of AT&T either.

I think as far as cable TV and internet go nowadays, Comcast enjoys success simply because of the lack of competition in areas where they have presence, and their oh-so-wonderful misinformation marketing tactics where they target competing companies & technologies. It seems many of the smaller companies just couldn't compete and were either bought up or forced out. I don't know if having multiple cable companies share the same cable infrastructure or not, as I really don't know enough about the technology.

I love my FIOS, and I'm so glad I moved to a place that had the service available.

I could tell you how much I hate Comcast and why though if that will help your case study haha...

[Goseciwx]

maybe... www.dslreports.com might help.. /shrug

[DoroKickcrofe]

thx for the info everyone.. It says that comcast took over AT&T broadband, this probably means that the ADSL side of AT&T is still part of AT&T and that comcast took over the cable activities.. at least that's what I gather from the info and the case study

[CHEAPPoem]

Yo,

As far as I understand it:

There once was AT&T broadband and that was acquired by Comcast. Then AT&T took over for a DSL company called SBC which serves the same area that AT&T Broadband used to.

In my area I have a choice of:

AT&T U-Verse - which is VDSL-based cable TV, phone and Internet

OR

Comcast Xfinity - which is also cable TV, phone and Internet but uses the cable TV infrastructure.

Hope this helps.

[TyncTyncSah]

I think as far as cable TV and internet go nowadays, Comcast enjoys success simply because of the lack of competition in areas where they have presence,

I'm curious how cable competition works... everywhere I've lived in the US, or even thought about living, there was only ever one cable provider, and I believe one DSL provider, in any particular place. It almost seems to me that as far as each type of service goes, the competition is done at a higher level rather than the consumer level, leaving most people with very little say in what they use to begin with.

[ffdfriendforurr]

The only real problem I have with Comcast is their non-negotiable 250GB bandwith cap, which goes by pretty fast these days.

Pay for a business line, and you don't even have to negotiate anything; just pay for it!

[DoroKickcrofe]

thx again

[mosypeSom]

May be relevant : Government OK's Comcast's purchase of NBC

[zlopikanikanz]

I'm curious how cable competition works... everywhere I've lived in the US, or even thought about living, there was only ever one cable provider, and I believe one DSL provider, in any particular place. It almost seems to me that as far as each type of service goes, the competition is done at a higher level rather than the consumer level, leaving most people with very little say in what they use to begin with.

Here, Comcast has been by itself for a very long time. The only cable provider for TV and Internet. The county 2 miles down the road is controlled by Charter, but it took Charter a long time to expand out to areas like where I am.
Comcast was the only cable, with ATT and CenturyTel doing the DSL and phone.

A couple years ago? Comcast started doing phone as well.


In 2010, Comcast got competition from the City that rolled out Fiber Optics TV, Cable and Phone and at the same time ATT launched their U-Verse, some DSL based stuff?. A long with DirectTV and Dish Network for Satellite TV.

I know for at least internet and tems of pricing/speed Comcast is now 3rd place when they used to be the one and only.

[XinordiX]

There once was AT&T broadband and that was acquired by Comcast. Then AT&T took over for a DSL company called SBC which serves the same area that AT&T Broadband used to.

close. AT&T basically went bankrupt because they could no longer make any money off of long distance service. Southwestern Bell, the largest of the baby bells (way back, when ATT was forced to split the local service off for monopoly reasons) became SBC... but no one knew who SBC was, so they acquired the ATT trademark. So while the company is called ATT, it is really SBC's old network and their service is Uverse.

[zlopikanikanz]

Which was originally ATTs network.

U-Verse came at a later date. The purchase of ATT was in 2005, and U-Verse was not announced until 2007, of which in 2010 it was actually rolled out. Sense 2005, the New ATT has been buying buying buying. Hopefully they can get their wireless service upgraded sometime soon.
I think that I read somewhere that 15% of ATT users are going to jump ship to Verison, and I am sure that could drastically increase as contracts run out if ATT can't offer better service.

[orbidewa]

I'm curious how cable competition works... everywhere I've lived in the US, or even thought about living, there was only ever one cable provider, and I believe one DSL provider, in any particular place. It almost seems to me that as far as each type of service goes, the competition is done at a higher level rather than the consumer level, leaving most people with very little say in what they use to begin with.

It's your local government/state government negotiating for you on your behalf. Its a monopoly that is allowed to happen because of the nature of how cable works. Its more logical to have 1 publicly regulated monopoly and fewer utility lines than having a bazillion miles of cable being piped around our neighborhoods by 10 different competing providers.

[XinordiX]

It's your local government/state government negotiating for you on your behalf. Its a monopoly that is allowed to happen because of the nature of how cable works. Its more logical to have 1 publicly regulated monopoly and fewer utility lines than having a bazillion miles of cable being piped around our neighborhoods by 10 different competing providers.

not to mention 10 different companies tearing up the roads/sidewalks/backyards to repair/upgrade em.

[toponlinecasinoer]

It's your local government/state government negotiating for you on your behalf. Its a monopoly that is allowed to happen because of the nature of how cable works. Its more logical to have 1 publicly regulated monopoly and fewer utility lines than having a bazillion miles of cable being piped around our neighborhoods by 10 different competing providers.

At least on the telecom side the ILEC's are forced to open their copper and fiber to CLEC's both resale and facility based. They can resell the products at a price cheaper than what the ILEC charges. I remember seeing orders requesting restricted retention only offers on new CLEC customers because we can't legally deny them any of those products...it was quite ludicrous actually.

Cable companies should be forced to do the same. Even though they weren't as subsidized as the telco's they're still a monopoly/utility and need to open up to resellers who want to lease lines.

ATT bought out Centennial wireless (a locally based GSM provider, not all that big) and afterwards a LOT of customers jumped ship. No more free incoming, internet was like 5x the price, and the plans were in general far more expensive. Not to mention all aspects of the service (signal, data, customer service) went down the crapper. That should NEVER have gotten approval. Centennial Wireless provided an excellent product at a fair price, and now ATT gives less than half what they offered at a bigger cost. Lots of people jumped ship.


As for Comcast, check out "Xfinity". Comcast is so crappy they've changed their name to avoid the bad reputation associated with Comcast. They've had lots of strategies, like putting a strangehold on territories by buying out the local government and having them block any other HSI provider from moving in. They also engaged in that wonderful "we're fiber too" deception tactic the cable providers were all using to downplay FTTH like Verizon's FIOS. Yeah, your coax is really up to fiber standards, which is why we were seeing 50mbit speeds at home at a price lower than their 10-15, lawl. Then fairpoint came and it was like "oh man, wtf, this bites"

[Lunims]

It all depends on the area you live in. Comcast is one of the oldest cable companies around if not the first.

Depending on the State or area you live in, you either only have Comcast or you have more options. Point being; if you live in the woods and there is Comcast, most likely you have no other option but Comcast.

If you live near big city as Wash DC like i do, then we have many options besides Comcast. AT&T, Verizon, and bunch of small companies whos name you will never hear of in your life time.

I live in a South part of State of Maryland, only few miles from the State line of Virginia. And in the state of Virginia, Cox Cable is the largest cable company. I dont know if Cox Cable is affiliated in any way with Comcast. But more south you go in to Virginia the less choices you have besides Cox Cable, simply because Cox Cable has been around way before other companies like Verizon or ATT who provide internet and TV. Cox Cable uses same equipment as Comcast, but the name on the box is changed simply because its all made in china.

There is also Warner Cable if you go more West.

[zlopikanikanz]

It's your local government/state government negotiating for you on your behalf. Its a monopoly that is allowed to happen because of the nature of how cable works. Its more logical to have 1 publicly regulated monopoly and fewer utility lines than having a bazillion miles of cable being piped around our neighborhoods by 10 different competing providers.

I'd agree with you to a point, but larger cities have better competition, more lines of cable. I go to California often, and they have HUGE bundles of communication lines on all their poles. Their already is a bazillion miles worth of cable piped around everywhere, a little bit more isn't going to hurt. In these larger cities, that is where you really tear up roads, sidewalks and backyards cause more of the infrastructure is going to be underground, and this is where you will find most of your competition. Further outside the city you go, only thing under ground is sewage and water lines but you have less competition.
I'm not sure in those areas in California how many companies had lines up in those power poles, but here, we have EPB, Comcast, ATT and Century Tel and our lines anywhere in Chattanooga do not come close to what is seen in most of California.

I can understand wanting to keep the power lines clean and not huge, but only allowing 1 company up on those lines is just retarded and smells more like some local government lining their pockets with green. Their is absolutely no reason why 2, 3 or 4 businesses couldn't be running cables. Sh/t, at least 2.

It all depends on the area you live in. Comcast is one of the oldest cable companies around if not the first.

Depending on the State or area you live in, you either only have Comcast or you have more options. Point being; if you live in the woods and there is Comcast, most likely you have no other option but Comcast

Even if you live out in the back woods, you still have DirectTV and Dish Network as TV options. Of which DirectTV is better than Comcast, at least in this area imo.
Used to be a big Comcast fan, but the past few years it seems like they have just been getting worse overall.

Because of those 2 sattelite services, I think that the real strangle hold is internet service.