AfterDawn: News

FCC Chairman has Comcast in his sights

Smarting from his failure to push through tighter controls on cable television providers, on Wednesday FCC Chairman Kevin Martin proposed a new rule that would cap the percentage of viewers a single cable company in the U.S. would be allowed to serve.

Martin has been the subject of much public criticism from cable companies, who argue that his tougher regulatory stance is out of step with the overall message coming from the President's office. Specifically, his latest proposal, which would limit any cable company to only serving 30% of TV viewers in any given area, appears to be aimed squarely at Comcast. If the proposal were to be passed Comcast would effectively be prevented from expanding further in many areas.



Earlier in the week Martin attempted to get commissioners to ratify another proposal that would have given the agency stricter regulatory control of U.S. cable television operators. That proposal was intended to enact provisions in a 1984 law that gives the FCC the responsibility to enact such controls when cable television is available to at least 70% of all U.S. households have the service available to them and at least 70% of those are actual cable subscribers. It was eventually withdrawn after objections by both cable industry representatives and FCC commissioners over the accuracy of a study Martin used to show market penetration.

Official discussion of his new proposal is scheduled for the Commissioners' December 18 meeting.

Source: New York Times

Written by: Rich Fiscus @ 2 Dec 2007 15:15

• Previous article

• Best Buy revamps operations to satisfy holiday shoppers

• Next article

• Blizzard to aquire Activision

• 8 comments

• badkrma

  Is it just me or is it widely accepted throughout companies with customer services that if you have radical ideas of how things should be done just because you perceive it as needed, that you are promoted to CEO and higher and are given control to royally screw with the vast populous.
  Seems everyday we hear more and more of individuals that are allowed to make policy and circumvent policy already in place, and push their own agenda through with no checks and balances from anyone with equal or greater authority.
  I could make some examples but it would be a long list. I am sure many of us here know of some of these "individuals" that are pushing what they want to upon us the population.

  2.12.2007 19:40 #1

• ZippyDSM

  So they want to prop up mini monopolies and not let competition enter into the equation,also this is ass backwards they are focusing on the wrong end cap and limit prices and be dogged as to how they can charge consumers not say "ZOMG we is gonna limit uu to some of ze markets so you can pillage and wape them all uu wants".
  
  
  Bad blind and ignorant regulation, first of they should cap this sht off
  
  Tie tax and line fees to the cap,also add 1 box to the package.
  
  Basic cable(10-20 channels) at no more than 12$.
  
  Extended basic (20-70 channels) at no more than 30$.
  
  Full packages of 60+ with premium channles 40-80$.
  
  Alacart should never be more than 50 cents a channel with a 5$ Alacart fee.
  
  Say you watch 10 channels and only want them thats 10$,20 channels is 15,40 channels is 25$.
  
  
  Indavenaul Premium channels can charge whatever they want,they are not the carrier raping the populace.
  
  Basic Boxs should never be over 3$ and a cap of 10$ a house at a max of 6 boxs.
  
  Basic DVRs never over 5$
  
  Normal Installation should never be over 40$ + 5$ a box.
  
  
  Screw limiting the carnage to limited areas, cap the price and let them duke it out.
  
  
  Now you ask what they can overcharge on???
  why premium sht of coarse, you want premium installation with premium cablings thats a extra 40$+,you want a fancy DVR or topbox thats extra, hell at these prices charge a 80 cent a remote a month if they want the cable company to replace and upkeep the remotes.
  
  SO basic with 3 boxs and 2 remotes is 16.60,extended basic would be 34.60.
  
  after 2 or 3$ in taxs+fees and the cable provider gets the rest.

  2.12.2007 19:46 #2

• ZippyDSM

  Originally posted by badkrma: Is it just me or is it widely accepted throughout companies with customer services that if you have radical ideas of how things should be done just because you perceive it as needed, that you are promoted to CEO and higher and are given control to royally screw with the vast populous.
  Seems everyday we hear more and more of individuals that are allowed to make policy and circumvent policy already in place, and push their own agenda through with no checks and balances from anyone with equal or greater authority.
  I could make some examples but it would be a long list. I am sure many of us here know of some of these "individuals" that are pushing what they want to upon us the population.thats how it works thos in ofice get bought by out by the same people that rack up their comanpies debt and hide thier mis gotten gains from it.

  2.12.2007 19:49 #3

• jemaric

  what they need to do is put limits on how many customers can be fed off fibre optic lines so the bandwith can increase

  2.12.2007 23:39 #4

• spydah

  I just think they need to stop Comcast from selling over priced and used circuits to people then blaming them for using all their bandwidth. Hopefully this FCC Chairman can regulate their services with limitations they can charge people per circuit based on how its allocated per area or mile range and so forth. It's sucks royally being one of their customers knowing your premium services get upped ranging from 50cents - $5.00 + every 3 months. Thats some serious capitalizing in profits for poor services all around the board.

  3.12.2007 12:07 #5

• justme81

  This is is a good thing. But what I would also want is this if a cable company wants to expand into new areas thats fine they just have to show that they have increased their capacity to accomidate the new customers. This is Comcasts argument why they use "network management" they want everyone to have the same experiance well if they did not over sell over hype and say words like "UNLIMITED" maybe they would not have to use "network management" put a cap on the amt of customers they can have untill they can show that they have added the capacity for those new customers. Simple easy. The cable company then can charge a little more like a $1.00 or $1.50 to make up the costs thats fair to consumers and the cable company.

  3.12.2007 13:55 #6

• bsweetca

  I find it interesting that the FCC chairman is concerned because the Cable companies are getting too big or dominating a market. In 2002 the FCC issued document 02-230 forcing TV manufacturers to include digital tuners in new products. Less than 20% of homes receive their TV over the air. The cable portion of the digital tuner has been rendered useless by ALL cable companies because they have chosen to scramble the signal which can only be descrambled by renting a black box from the all-powerful cable companies. What puzzles me even further is the American consumer who has rolled over and played dead while they pay for digital tuners they will never be able to use. The FCC tried twice to correct this by first issuing a 'must carry rule' then issuing a 'plug-n-play' rule, both of which the cable industry ignored. Keep paying your constantly growing monthly cable bill.

  13.12.2007 13:27 #7

• borhan9

  Quote:Official discussion of his new proposal is scheduled for the Commissioners' December 18 meeting.We will see what comes of this.

  22.12.2007 18:55 #8