250GB Bandwidth limit with no way to monitor.

  • Question
  • Updated 3 years ago
Comcast sets 250GB bandwidth cap without giving any way to check bandwidth usage? How is that legal? When can I expect Comcast will have a bandwidth monitoring tool available?

I know the FAQ tells you how to download a tool on a single computer and I know I can install 3rd party firmware to monitor all network traffic. That does not suffice. I need to know at any time what Comcast is reading on my internet usage so I can make internet usage choices accordingly.
Photo of Zane Perry

Zane Perry

  • 34 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
  • pissed

Posted 7 years ago

  • 14
Photo of

  • 2 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
What I want to know is how this is going to affect people like me who are telecommuters and work on the computer from home? My work requires me to be on the computer for at least 8 to 10 hours, a good portion of that is spent viewing live streaming video and quotes in real time. I'm already paying for 'premium' service. And unfortunately there's not a lot of alternatives in my area. So what then? When I need to make a split second decision I'm going to be downgraded for 20 minutes? That would cause loss of income. And then if I decide to watch a movie on line through iTunes or Netflix I get screwed again.

On one hand we've got companies providing more and more for us on line and then we have the cable and telephone companies going completely backwards.

But I'm not sure what the solution is. I'm just fairly positive that something's going to give and I don't think it's going to be pretty. They need to figure out something soon and change their business models.
Photo of neal2222

neal2222

  • 3 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Hi Scott,
I got a call from Comcast threatening to cut off my internet service for using too much bandwidth but they offered no way to monitor bandwidth usage nor could they tell me how much bandwidth I used. I called 888-565-4329 and Ronald, the rep who I talked to, and who was not particularly friendly, said I should search the internet and download a bandwidth monitor. I asked how much bandwidth I used in February to date and he said he had no way of telling me. He said the first notice I will get is a suspension of service for a year. Why is there no bandwidth monitor on Comcast's website? Why can't a Comcast rep tell a customer how much they have used?

It is like ATT not giving customers access to how many minutes they have used.

He could not even suggest a site to use to monitor bandwidth. This is an unfair and I think illegal process for Comcast and does nothing to build customer relations.

Neal Gilbert
Photo of Scott Westerman

Scott Westerman

  • 23 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
At this point, less than 1% of Comcast customers use more than 250 gig of bandwidth per month.

250 GB is a ton. A typical residential high-speed Internet user doesn’t even come close to using that amount of data. To put it in perspective, currently, the median data usage by our high-speed customers is approximately 2 - 3 GB each month. 250 GB falls more into the excessive use category—going well above and beyond typical Internet usage.

To reach 250 GB in a month, for example, a customer would have to do any of the following:

* Send 50 million emails (at 0.05 KB/email)
* Download 62,500 4 MB songs (at 4 MB/song)
* Download 125 standard-definition movies (at 2 GB/movie)
* Upload 25,000 hi-resolution digital photos (at 10 MB/photo)

Lyric, my sense is that your won't have a problem, even with your telecommuting.

Another thing to remember: Over the years, Comcast has continually increased the speed of our flagship Internet service, without raising the price. As more and more bandwidth intensive applications come to the web, we'll be enhancing our networks to accommodate them. I can't predict the future, but if the past is any indication there's a good chance that, over time, the 250 gig cap will increase, too.

Thanks for writing,

Scott Westerman
Vice President
Comcast
scott.westerman@comcast.net
@comastscott on Twitter / Identi.ca
Photo of

  • 2 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Thank you for responding back!
Photo of

  • 12 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Sounds like a standard corporate response. So in essence, it sounds like based on the ecare response, that 250gb has always been in place. It's just now coming to light what that "baseline" "as a rule" cap is now being made available. Something tells me a technicality has been exposed, and Comcast is more or less having to define their threshold for notifying or potentially bumping abusers.

would also like to provide a bit of information so that you can better
understand what our bandwidth threshold entails.

250 GB/month is an extremely large amount of data, much more than a
typical residential customer uses on a monthly basis. Currently, the
median monthly data usage by our residential customers is approximately
2 - 3 GB. To put 250 GB of monthly usage in perspective, a customer
would have to do any one of the following:

Send 50 million emails (at 0.05 KB/email).
Download 62,500 songs (at 4 MB/song).
Download 125 standard-definition movies (at 2 GB/movie).
Upload 25,000 hi-resolution digital photos (at 10 MB/photo).

This is the same system we have in place today. The only difference is
that we will now provide a limit by which a customer may be contacted.
Photo of Denis K

Denis K

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
Well after actually monitoring my actual usage on TW not comcast I well absolutely surpassed the 250gb BW that comcast actually has set. Does transfering RAW files all day make me the "Bandwidth Hogger?".
Photo of

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
>the median data usage by our high-speed customers is approximately 2 - 3 GB each month

I'm sorry, unless there's a bunch of people who just don't USE the Internet at all, I simply don't believe this figure. Well known computer columnist John C. Dvorak put a usage monitor on his computer, and tracked his usage for a day. (check out "Cranky Geeks" and their latest podcast). He said he went to a few websites, checked email and a did few Youtube videos, he managed to do over 500 megs in day, no torrents, no "downloading" etc.. He averaged his "regular-guy" usage (as opposed to some senior who is paying $50 a month just to check email - get dialup grandpa) would be about 17 gigs a month. Not close to 250, but AT&T just instituted a layer of broadband service capped at TWENTY gigs... This "median usage" figure is bogus.

Here's what I'm worried about: future innovation. Future services to be developed like iTunes, AppleTV, Netflix streaming video, YouTube, Skype, etc. would probably not get off the ground if there are arbitrary limits.

I should point out that in Japan, for example, broadband service is more available, faster and completely unlimited. The US is not "number one" in technology, FYI.

And I just don't get the 250 gig limit as a raw number. The internet isn't like electricity - the hardware and electricity is used regardless of its usage, and I work with networking - you don't use any more electricity for your usage, the hardware doesn't wear out faster, etc. The cap is only justified as a function of lowering bandwidth at that time for other users. OK. I understand, however:

If one uses the "pipes" at a time when they're otherwise not being used (say 1-6am) to download videos from iTunes, for example, the "cost" to Comcast, unless I'm mistaken, is ZERO. The inconvenience to other users is ZERO. So the cap, by itself, doesn't make sense. These are COMPUTERS, right? Why can't a more sophisticated bandwidth usage model be used for those who may want to use the service more than the average?

If there was free and open competition for bandwidth users everywhere, the "market" would probably get to offer solutions (in the same way phone prices took almost 15 years to come down after divestiture). But as long as these providers have a monopoly in many areas, they should do a better job in providing all users options which will satisfy their needs.
Photo of neal2222

neal2222

  • 3 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Hi Scott,
I got a call from Comcast threatening to cut off my internet service for using too much bandwidth but they offered no way to monitor bandwidth usage nor could they tell me how much bandwidth I used. I called 888-565-4329 and Ronald, the rep who I talked to, and who was not particularly friendly, said I should search the internet and download a bandwidth monitor. I asked how much bandwidth I used in February to date and he said he had no way of telling me. He said the first notice I will get is a suspension of service for a year. Why is there no bandwidth monitor on Comcast's website? Why can't a Comcast rep tell a customer how much they have used?

It is like ATT not giving customers access to how many minutes they have used.

He could not even suggest a site to use to monitor bandwidth. This is an unfair and I think illegal process for Comcast and does nothing to build customer relations.

Neal Gilbert
Photo of Scott Westerman

Scott Westerman

  • 23 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Zane, to answer your question directly, I'm told that we are developing a suite of tools that will allow you to monitor your usage as you describe. As these come on line, we'll post the details.

Scott
Photo of

  • 12 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
This is a direct response from ecare Comcast. The "stance" in this email is that you can do a "search" on the internet for bandwidth monitoring tools. Yet you say that you are "told" tools are coming down the pipe. This sounds all too much like a government way of doing things, implement first, adjust later. I've had to find out about upcoming bandwidth caps being "made public" second hand in forums. Don't know how to monitor it beginning October 1st. This just seems like customer service mess. I just don't get this whole approach. There is a contradiction in what you say, and the letter VP of customer service at Comcast, which says you can find tools. Note the other part of my email response. Ecare actually had my local techs call me. They thought they could better explain the caps. Not true. They had no idea why they were getting told by corporate to call me at home and explain the whole cap business. They acted like they had no clue why they were having to call me. Very odd. Here's an excerpt from the Comcast ecare response from Rick Germano?

When you originally wrote in, our Representative felt that a call by our
Representative at your Local Level to explain our new system was a
better option than responding directly to your e-mail. That way, we
could personally allay any of your concerns in a free-flowing
conversation. Please accept our sincerest apologies that this
interaction did not resolve your issue. I will be more than happy to
forward your comments to the appropriate Development Team for further
consideration.

We appreciate your interest in making Comcast the best service possible.
Your opinion is important to us!

I would also like to provide a bit of information so that you can better
understand what our bandwidth threshold entails.

250 GB/month is an extremely large amount of data, much more than a
typical residential customer uses on a monthly basis. Currently, the
median monthly data usage by our residential customers is approximately
2 - 3 GB. To put 250 GB of monthly usage in perspective, a customer
would have to do any one of the following:

Send 50 million emails (at 0.05 KB/email).
Download 62,500 songs (at 4 MB/song).
Download 125 standard-definition movies (at 2 GB/movie).
Upload 25,000 hi-resolution digital photos (at 10 MB/photo).

This is the same system we have in place today. The only difference is
that we will now provide a limit by which a customer may be contacted.

There are many online tools customers can download and use to measure
their consumption. Customers can find such tools by simply doing a Web
search - for example, a search for "bandwidth meter" will provide some
options. Customers using multiple PCs should just be aware that they
will need to measure and combine their total monthly usage in order to
identify the data usage for their entire account.
Photo of Zane Perry

Zane Perry

  • 34 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
That is good to hear. Will this suite of tools be in effect by October 1st when you enable the caps?
Photo of Scott Westerman

Scott Westerman

  • 23 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
The goal is to have things available before the caps take effect.
Photo of Zane Perry

Zane Perry

  • 34 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Very Rational. Pending notification of such tools I will consider this issue closed.
Photo of Zane Perry

Zane Perry

  • 34 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Scott. If you could would you please login to the Comcast Forum and respond to the official thread on this issue. There are a lot of heated replies to Comcast capping without these tools in place. I copied and pasted your response here but a more official response from a V.P. would show 1. Comcast is listening to its clients and 2. That you are currently working on this issue.

Here is the link to the thread I am referring to: http://forums.comcast.net/comcastsupp...
Photo of Matt Fahrner

Matt Fahrner

  • 7 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I think the limits are entirely reasonable if like you say COMCAST posts the usage. If not, it's not only dubious, but asking for lawsuits.

Since COMCAST has to collect the information to enforce the limits, it should be relatively trivial to add it to the customers' "comcast.net" accounts or even the monthly bill.

Telling the users to use Google to "find tools" and add the usage together if they used shared connections is frankly insulting to the customer. It says COMCAST does not value them and does not see the burden this places on them. More importantly though it's asking for customers to end up with malware/adware/viruses since these "free" tools are rarely entirely "free". To note also, people who say carry a laptop back and forth to work are going to have "clock in and out" to accurately track their usage - which is just plain dumb.

COMCAST should absolutely not enforce this until monitoring tools are available to the customer that reflect the sum of usage on the cable modem port. I also think COMCAST should offer customers who hit the cap the option to "buy" more bandwidth (though this is a slipperly slope that will have us all paying by the gigabyte).

While personally my options are limited, COMCAST should realize the vast majority of customers have other choices and when they do something not well thought out like this (like suggesting users tally their own usage) they drive their customers away in a marketplace with a lot of competition.
Photo of

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
Scott - I've been searching the official Comcast forums, and their is still no response in them from a Comcast employee on this issue. Additionally, I made a call to tech support - and while they were friendly and tried to be helpful - their answer was Comcast has no way or plans to provide usage data to customers. If this is actually true that Comcast is working on a way to provide this data - you need to communicate this internally so that your people can tell your customers. Otherwise we just end upset. Telling people to download a bandwidth meter is an unacceptable answer, as no mater what tool is used it will never match the data that you are using to disconnect customers from what is now an essential service.
Photo of

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
Everyone who pays for high speed internet through the cable company will tell you we pay A LOT. Personally I pay for the most amount of bandwidth I can get without being considered a business account. I think it is absolutely WRONG that Comcast or any cable company should cap the customers who are making them rich. If they're having bandwidth problems perhaps they should upgrade their fiber optics. It's not as though they can't afford it. I pay WAY too much for them to constantly add more restrictions on top of unreliable service and CONSTANT rate hikes. If they go through with this cap I personally am switching cable providers, and I hope my fellow subscribers will follow suit, and voice their opposition as well.
Photo of

  • 14 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
This cap reminds me of the first dial up's. They charged per minute charges but soon learned it was a mistake when others came out with UNLIMITED ACCESS snagging the majority of new customers. Back in the day AOL over sold their network capabilities (modem to customers usage) and were ridden with loss of connections and lost thousands of customers to Earthlink.
Now in 2008 we have taken a step backwards because Comcast over sold their network. Perhaps Comcast may want to rethink this cap as Mr. Westerman realizes if the past is any indication there's a good chance that the cap would increase, but that could be because of the amount of customers they lost because of it.
Bottom line is: When I signed up for Comcast I did not sign for a capped connection. I pay a high price for this connection.

250 gigs sounds like a lot but I think those who share their connections with their children who play online games such as WOW, and add the possibility of having a VOIP account may find out it isn't. Without any way to monitor the usage you will find many unsuspecting customer being charged with the "Over Usage Charge" Hmmm sounds like a money maker.

Mr Westerman said, he was told that we are developing a suite of tools that will allow you to monitor the usage and also stated their goal was to have this implemented before the cap. My question is and I feel his position should be, if Comcast does not have the suite ready by Oct 1 the cap will be delayed until they do. Sounds fair to me on this unfair solution.

Mr.Westerman, stated that in the past Comcast increased their speed without a charge. That is true but it was not out of the goodness of their heart, it was to entice customers from signing up with DSL. Its all about speed!
We pay for speed, not a cap. I truly hope this move backfires in their face and customers move to alternative solutions. Fios is right at their heals.

Mr. Westerman, I am a MCSE and it is my opinion the Comcast network needs to be upgraded to accommodate the customers they have, not cap the customers who are signed up while still taking in more.
Instead of Comcast weeding out the true power user because he/she actually uses their system and the connection they pay for..And you label te power user as abusive knowing that the majority of people are computer illiterate and that is why they use their pathetic 3 gigs a month for the high price they pay.

This is cooperate greed at its finest and if the Comcast Customers stand by and let it happen it is truly sad. Without us there isn't a Comcast.
Photo of Scott Westerman

Scott Westerman

  • 23 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Hi Bob,

Yup.. we live in a competitive world. I'm a runner and appreciate having strong competitors on the road to push me along.

Comcast is investing in our networks to increase both speed and capacity. Here's a link to Brian Roberts' talk at this year's Consumer Electronics Show. http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/... It paints a picture of technology that continues to evolve and a company that is building a platform that can facilitate applications of both today and tomorrow. I'm confident that over the coming months we will see the kind of continued improvement that has been Comcast's forte throughout our history.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, the 250 GB cap effectively impacts less than 1% of our customer base. Comcast currently serves millions of Internet families, many with multiple computers and a variety of applications. Only a tiny segment runs into the ceiling.

Naturally, as more high bandwidth apps come on line, we will continue to rethink all of our high speed internet products and policies. The overall goal is to provide the best possible service to the largest number of customers.

As to your final statement, Comcast serves three key constituencies, employees, customers and investors. It's our fiduciary responsibility to do what we can to provide the best return on shareholder investment while maximizing a positive customer experience and providing a challenging and fun place to work.

We are always looking for ways to increase our revenue streams and our profitability. Today, Comcast actually offers more packages and price options than ever before, many of which are newer, lower priced alternatives.

Are some things more expensive today than they were five years ago? Definitely. At the same time, we have significantly enhanced the content our users enjoy. We have made substantial investments in our customer care infrastructure. And we continue to focus on the research and development activities that are key to ensuring our networks can support new products in the future.

Let me calibrate all of this by saying that my perspective is one of a line vice president in the field. I serve customers in our Southwestern communities and have enjoyed a lot of direct customer interaction through Twitter, the blogs and via email. The feedback I share with our senior team has been welcomed and your voices influencing the decisions we make.

As one who helps to execute our strategy, I have great confidence in both our senior leadership and our game plan.

Do we always get it right? Nope. With millions of transactions taking place every day, we're bound to blow a few. But building win-win customer relationships, one at a time, is the goal.

Thanks for the feedback. Glad to dialog directly with you.

Scott Westerman
Vice President
Comcast
@comcastscott on Twitter / identi.ca
Photo of

  • 12 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
As one who helps to execute our strategy, I have great confidence in both our senior leadership and our game plan.

Do we always get it right? Nope. With millions of transactions taking place every day, we're bound to blow a few. But building win-win customer relationships, one at a time, is the goal.

Scott, I hate to say it, but you are not building a win-win customer relationship with me. And dare I say, you aren't doing it with a fairly sizeable chunck of your HSI user base. Heck, it's even made it into the local Paducah Sun Newspaper, with a big headline about how people are unhappy with new Comcast Caps. That's pretty bad PR if you ask me, when it's a big headline in a newspaper. How can you be building win-win customer relationships one at a time on this one, regarding caps? You are alienating 99 percent of your customer base, even if not all 99 percent are aware they should feel that way. I do not have the same confidence in your leadership that you do. Of course I'm on the outside looking in. But, when did "customer's first" stop being a priority? We are screaming at your company and you all aren't listening. Again, people do NOT want another thing to keep up with in their lives. Another meter to monitor. Sheesh.
Photo of

  • 14 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Hi Scott,
Many thanks for the reply, I do admire you for taking the time to respond. Most people in your position couldn't be bothered.

I fully understand what you are saying about the customer, employee and surely we must not forget the share holder. All of the above take part in a successful business. I operate a business (Not the size of Comcast) but I never forget the fact that it is my customers whom I depend on the most. Whether it be my business or Comcast without the customer we aren't in business. Run that by the shareholder.

I read the article you directed me to and I found it quite interesting, With that I would like to say, Comcast still hasn't provided services to all the rual areas as promised and yet is talking about moving on toward bigger and better.

Truth is, none of what you said or the article addressed the fact that Comcast is throwing the burden of an over sold network on its customers by implementing a cap on its service.
Bottom line is Comcast would not be having any problems if your network was able to handle the amount of customers.
Your customers did not sign up for a capped connection so whether they use 250 gigs or 3 gigs should not be an issue. Again you are labeling the power user as being abusive when in reality they are just using there systems and there connection to the max.
Don't think that I am naive, I understand some are heavy into pirate software trading, but not all of us. We don't want to go into the P2P blocking so I will leave it at, It is the job of the BSA and RIAA to find out who these people are and put a cap on it.

I am assuming from a business sense Comcast is willing to give up the 1% power user in trade for the computer illiterate grandma who uses 2 gigs a month. Do the math sir. for each 250 gig user I get rid of I can sign on 125 new customers at the going rate and use the same bandwidth without having to fix anything. Good business move but I still find it sad, because if you look back, in the beginning when Comcast needed the customers, the power user was welcomed with open arms because they were the only ones signing on to Comcast, They understood about the speed and educated others still on dial up what it was all about.

Between all the could have's and should have's, my main questions were not address so I will ask again," will Comcast hold off on the cap until they implemented the software to monitor ones usage?"
Don't you feel that would be a fair solution to an already unfair action? One more question I would like to direct to you, If they are going to cap my connection and degrade what I signed up for, will they in return decrease the price I am paying accordingly?

It is a pleasure debating with you. Please don't take anything I write personal because it is not an attack on you.

PS Sorry about my last post, some of what I wrote did not come out the way I wanted it to. I hope you were able to read between the lines. I was in a hurry.
Photo of

  • 12 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I've been a Comcast High Speed internet customer for 8 years, going clear back to the @home days. Generally speaking, I've been happy with the service, and changes. For the first time, I'm extremely disappointed. It's the principle when it comes to 250gb bandwidth caps. If less than 1 percent of Comcast customers are abusing the network and well above the cap, then why the need for a cap at all? Get rid of the 1 percent. Yeah I'm sure there's some legal twist to that. But seriously. The cap sounds like a non issue. Comcast, please, leave the 99 percent alone. We have enough to do in our daily lives. I do not need to monitor yet another meter, or be concerned with something like this, especially when I'm paying premium price (42.95 per month) for such service. I'd expect this from something for 10 dollars a month.

One other thing I don't like, is this notion by Comcast that, ahhhh don't worry about it. Well, if I have 3 months in a year that I hit, say 320gb, because of either work related bandwidth, or additional video streaming, other legit uses of the services (not P2P, warez, etc.), I DO NOT want to have to worry about what will happen to my service. If I'm made to feel that way, I will switch High Speed Internet services. I feel a lot of other folks will too. Comcast, you are not listening to your customers. There is an overwhelming negative response to these CAPS. Be it from the principle of the matter, to lack of tools and notification ( I have yet to get an email, or anything in snail mail ) about these caps, and it's less than one month away. You MUST do a better job with customer service care and consideration. People do have a choice. I have a choice. I'd prefer to say with Comcast. But when I begin to feel knit picked and have to worry, I'm leaving.

Thanks for listening,
Chris
Photo of

  • 14 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Thanks for taking the time to post their response. Not even close to the response it should have been.
Photo of

  • 4 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Scott,

You're disregarding a key element of this discussion. The very act of a bandwidth cap and by proxy limitation of internet access/bandwidth is in itself anti-competitive. It relies on the assumption that the user by policy has no choice to bear it or leave. It is neither customer-friendly nor an integral action to meet your fiduciary responsibilities.

Comcast has never been popular with the media, that's no secret. But with this action the executive board, yourself and Mr. Perry included are alienating a very large portion of your customer base. Not because you're upsetting 1% of your overall customers (thanks for repeatedly towing the company line though...) but because you're restricting the internet, very possibly the last uninhibited arena left in the world today. It is neither Comcast's responsibility, nor right to dictate how a customer may or may not use the internet or the connection they pay for and certainly not after the fact by changing your AUP terms...

Bob made a very good point. Comcast oversold its network, and instead of exerting some of that fiduciary expenditure authority to invest back into your equipment and expand (dare I say upgrade?) your networks, you place the onus back on the customer? That's a political reaction, not one of a proper service company. Not only is that unequivocally irresponsible, it's an insult to your customers. Comcast at this moment is selling at 20.61 over a volume of 21M volume in shares. You CAN afford to take $500M-1B (much less expensive than a costly class action litigation, no? Some of us did waive the arbitration agreement.) and invest in some of the higher density areas of your network. That you CHOOSE not to in order to maintain your shareholder dividends is hardly a business justification. I am not a shareholder, I'm a customer. Your responsibility is to me BEFORE your shareholders. If I and enough of the customers leave, I'm sure your shareholders will have something to say as their remaining stock plummets.

As a Comcast customer, I am disappointed and saddened to see that it took an FCC regulatory committee to bludgeon Comcast into a customer-friendly action of full-disclosure. That is further compounded by the fact that your admonished network tactics as of this second are STILL active (yes, that would be Sandvine.) That means as of this moment, I am not only paying for a crippled internet connection, but also for one that within 30 days will have a bandwidth cap on top of that unacceptable practice. Do your customers have to get Kevin Martin to order Comcast to turn Sandvine off before Dec 31 as well? Or is it more profitable as a company to upset your customers and continue the practice for as long as you legally can manage? Your actions are unconstitutional and anti-competitive, your general counsel should be telling you as much. Your appeal will lose.

Your customers have told you this isn't what we want, you ignored us. We asked for you to explain it, we had to wait until the FCC ordered you to. We continue to stand through your non disclosed bandwidth measurement processes, even as your own executive on this very thread posts that the software isn't ready to be released. (I'm glad he considers the issue resolved afterward though, good for him. I won't.) Your customers are tolerating an awful lot for the privilege of PAYING Comcast right now.

I, and many others stay with Comcast because your networks reach areas Verizon Fios won't enter, and AT&T/Qwest are still working on providing delivery in the area for. I have no problem telling you now that the INSTANT a comparable speed service is available in my area, I will cancel with Comcast and schedule an install with someone else. Unfettered, unmonitored and non-throttled internet access is what I'm paying for. It is not what I'm being provided with by Comcast.

You can continue to tow the "only 1% of customers will be completely ignored" line, compare this action with X amount of MP3 downloads or X standard-definition movie downloads to give Grandma Jones a basis for comparison, but your customers don't have the kind of patience you seem to think we do. "Better caps are coming soon" is not an acceptable reply. Especially while I'm paying in the meantime.

Maybe I should "delay" my monthly payment to Comcast or cap it at $19.95. I'm sure it'll get where it's supposed to get to eventually, right?

As a Vice President, it is your job to make this situation right. The customers are telling your board of directors this is wrong. The FCC has told your board of directors the currently active "management" practices are not in good faith of your customers. What does it take for Comcast to treat its most valuable asset, its customers like we are its most valuable asset?

Think on these points, and remember that people who pay for the "best" high speed internet, expect the best. They don't expect "best" to be redefined when it is no longer convenient for Comcast's financials. Your actions as a company thus far have been reactive, not proactive and your customers are paying the price for Comcast lacking a sense of urgency.

Expand your infrastructure, turn off Sandvine, provide the service we're paying for and we will be happy. Two of those items, your board could make happen within the next 24 hours. It's time for Comcast to show where it prioritizes its customers.

Regards,

A Comcast customer tired of substandard service.
Photo of Zane Perry

Zane Perry

  • 34 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Don't put me in the Ranks of Comcast Senior Administration. I am working to get a tool in place to deal with the new bandwidth constraint. Your response is off topic as far as I am concerned. If you have an issue with the cap in general start your own topic. I don't believe I am capable of convincing Comcast to stop the cap so I am doing the next best thing and trying to get a way to monitor usage.
Photo of

  • 4 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
1. I didn't put you in the ranks of Comcast administration. I put you in the ranks of a loyal scout towing their bottom line.

2. Although I may be a Comcast customer, this is still a free internet (til Comcast throttles that too?,) I'll post where I please.

3. I'm glad you're concerned though. I've been concerned since my internet starting disabling itself on any download over 40MB processed by streaming data transfer.

4. The next best thing is for Comcast to do the right thing. The original best thing was for them to do it without having to be asked.

5. Think twice before you apologize for customers again. I have nothing to apologize for, I pay my monthly bill.

6. Your comment is sycophantic as far as I'm concerned.
Photo of Zane Perry

Zane Perry

  • 34 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Thanks for the countdown Kieth Olbermann. You seem to have no other intentions in your posts then to complain. I am trying to get feedback from an official representative. You call my posts servile. I call them respectful. Respect for strangers. There's a concept.

This is the only medium I have found where I have been successful at getting an acceptable response. I refuse to chase Scott away with posts like yours.

This is the internet and you are free to respond with whatever you want. Hiding behind an anonymous shortname like Jenova56 probably makes you more comfortable trolling around throwing your opinion everywhere. While you have the freedom to do that I also have the freedom to say you are off topic.
Photo of

  • 4 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
If the best you can do is attack a username, provide veiled insults and question my motives you've wandered too far into the wilderness. You get your feedback from Comcast, I'd rather give them mine. Revolutions give rise to change, not subservience.

Now go righteous someone else to death...
Photo of

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
You guys talking to Comcast are wasting your time. In my opinion, as their past actions have shown, they will do what is right only when ordered by the FCC or by a judge. The 250 cap has been exposed by the judge ruling in Florida.
I would save a bit of the money I would spend on Comcast services and hire some class action lawyers as Gilbert Randolph LLC and extend their current class action lawsuit against Comcast.
That will get results in my opinion and a better service for all the customer base.
Photo of

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
(To put it in perspective, currently, the median data usage by our high-speed customers is approximately 2 - 3 GB each month)
What are the customers doing checking there email only? I just watched 2 shows of burn notice on fox .com and used 2 Gb in 2 days.
Photo of

  • 12 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Scott. To follow up on Vangold's excellent comments and observations. So. Hypothetical. You have customers, that in the past, were not as likely to download, or stream a TV show, or download a movie (legally), because it would take longer than desired on say, your original 1.5 mbps tier. But now, you bring those speeds up to 6 and 8 mbps standard - enhanced by speed boost, enticing those that might not have downloaded such large files into doing so, because it will not take nearly as long. Now you are going to "cap" them. It's like, we want you to have excellent speeds, for how many movies and other large files "we" (comcast) want you to be able to have. Your company is even jumping into this business, but downloading from you will count against the cap.

I've got 3 computers on your network. Remember Comcast home networking?????? Does that mean 50gb per month for a family of 5???? My wife does ancestry work. I download and loop radar and satellite pictures as part of what I do. Those aren't terribly small files. My kids like to play fun, clean games online. The LAST thing I want to is have to monitor my bandwidth. That's just insulting to me (a customer for 8 years with HSI), and anybody else that uses your services for legit purposes. I will not monitor my bandwidth usage. I will wait for that first letter or call to the house from Comcast, and if it comes, I will drop your service that very same month, for one that is already available to me that does not have this CAP policy.

Scott. Do the big wigs get any wind of these comments? Do they care? As a customer of your HSI service, I DO WANT YOU TO DEAL WITH NETWORK ABUSERS. I don't appreciate them. But, if this is more an issue of your companies inability or not being proactive in keeping your infrastructure up to snuff to meet demand, then that is YOUR fault. Do not punish the loyal users of your services that use it for legit purposes.

Scott, hopefully you forward this and read this.
Photo of Scott Westerman

Scott Westerman

  • 23 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Thanks for these thoughtful comments. For me, this has been a productive dialog and you should know that our senior leaders are aware of and are reading what's been posted here and in our forums.

The goal has always been to provide the best possible Internet experience for the widest number of customers, even those of us (me included) who have multiple machines on a single cable modem and take advantage of the latest broadband applications.

I'm happy to continue to share what I know about our thought processes in this regard and am always open to your feedback.

Scott W.
Photo of

  • 14 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Between all the could have's and should have's, my main questions were not address so I will ask again," will Comcast hold off on the cap until they implemented the software to monitor ones usage?"
Don't you feel that would be a fair solution to an already unfair action? One more question I would like to direct to you, If they are going to cap my connection and degrade what I signed up for, will they in return decrease the price I am paying accordingly?
Photo of

  • 12 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I hate to say it Bob, but what they will counter with (and already have), is that they haven't increased the price of HSI, yet increased performance by raising speeds from, say 1500k down 256k up, to 6-8000k down / 384-768k up with speedboost. They'll tell you they've enhanced Comcast services on their website (Comcast.net). So they'll tell you about all the improvements, that technically you didn't sign up for, have happened without an increase in price. I'm on your side, but that's what they'll tell you. When it works, it works great, and they haven't raised my prices. That doesn't mean I have to like bandwidth caps. And I certainly condem their actions, and what led to the legal ramifications in the state of Florida. Again, they are going about this the wrong way, and have since the beginning. It's never been about 250gb (the number) of usage. It's been about how they have handled network abusers (whatever that means). What do they define as abuse??? Somebody that utilizes their services for legit purposes, such as photo uploads and downloads, document uploads and downloads, networking of multiple computers, all of which use the internet for legit legal purposes. Or do they consider abusers folks that bog down a node and affect numerous people in a given section of town, that leave their connection wide open for P2P file sharing, illegal song sharing, warez sites, Bittorrent bandwidth usage that's wide open. Etc. They need to devise a way to differentiate between the two (are you listening Comcast??), and punish those that utilize and bog down their networks for illegal purposes. People typically use P2P (not all) for illegal file trading and sharing. Same holds true for BitTorrent apps. That's what we need to get rid of (in my opinion).
Photo of

  • 12 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Well, I will say. I am glad and appreciative of your being in here and at least responding. I will also say this, going back to an earlier comment. I am glad that my HSI internet service has not gone up once in 8 yrs of service. I have touted that with folks I have had discussions with regarding high speed internet services. That's positive PR for your company and am very appreciative. In fact, I'd be willing to pay a little more (just a little) if it meant no caps, and the rightful elimination of network abusers. I'm not usually not a rant and rave guy. This topic however is rubbing most the wrong way.

A friend I shared this story with, and he also has Comcast HSI, said, this is almost analagous of when a convenience store would no longer allow him to write a check for, say 20 dollars over the purchase price, so he could get some cash. The clerk said, we had instances where persons checks were bad/bouncing, so we had to stop allowing cash back. My friends response was, so you risk losing honest customers, which the majority of us are because of a shameful few that take advantage of your business. Rather than deal with the individuals ( I don't know how specifically you do that ), you just broad brush say, we no longer cash checks above the amount. There are other ways to combat this. Anyway my friend, said, well the store down the street will still allow me to write over the amount for cash back. I'll just take my service down the street. And that's what he did.
Photo of

  • 53 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Unfortunately, in many places, there is no "down the street" when it comes to comcast. If you want HSI you can either get comcast, satellite (which has some major drawbacks), or DSL. None of them really compare to cable though. I think that's the biggest factor right now. comcast knows that you can't take your business elsewhere and they're taking advantage of it. That seems to be at the root of a lot of the problems I had with comcast.
Photo of

  • 12 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
That's very true SpicyLemon, and a sad reality. This was the case for me too up until about 1 year ago, when DSL became available. I would be willing to downgrade my speeds from 6 mbps with Comcast, to 2 or so mbps with DSL, for 10 dollars a month less, knowing there's no cap with the DSL service available in my area. But you are right with the limited options. Comcast is (in my opinion) just going about this whole bandwidth, use of network completely wrong. There has to be ways to deal with network abusers better, without having to drag the other 99 percent of us into this (i.e. monitor bandwidth, worry about how much, etc. etc.)
Photo of Zane Perry

Zane Perry

  • 34 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Scott Westerman,

I appreciate your continued participation in this topic. I apologize for those users who seem to have vented off topic. Back to the origional question can you please do more research on the Bandwidth monitoring tools that Comcast plans to have in place by October 1st. It is September 9th and if there are tools in development they would have to be near the final stages of deployment for delivery by October 1st. Information about these tools should be readily available to Senior Management such as yourself.
Photo of

  • 12 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
There's no need to apologize for me or the many other Comcast users that have issue with bandwidth monitor tools. Our point is, there's no need form them at all, because I for one will not use them, in direct response to my dissatisfaction with advertised caps, rather than them dealing with the real issues at hand. It's a perfect forum to express our unhappiness over having to even have bandwidth monitors in the first place. I could care less if they aren't ready by the 1st. That's Comcast's issue, not mine. If they do not provide the tools, I will not be liable for their CAP, and should not have to be in the first place. I don't think this is too far off topic. And no it doesn't seem legal, as stated in the AG case in which Comcast had to pay out 150,000 dollars in fines for those they cut off in Florida. I don't know how all that played out and don't claim to, but in appearance, it didn't make Comcast look good.
Photo of

  • 14 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Zane Please do not speak for me. I echo Meteorguy,
Photo of Zane Perry

Zane Perry

  • 34 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Ok, I do not apologize for "Bob" or "meteorguy". But you guys are working against my prior intentions and not making any progress on the issue I identified in the topic intro post. If you are against the cap please start a new thread and voice your opinion there.

I need a monitoring tool. I started this topic to get a monitoring tool. I don't care if you "will not use them". If that is the case then "250GB Bandwidth limit with no way to monitor." is probably not the topic for you.

If you start a new topic I will participate and share my opinions on the Cap in general. Feel free to post a link here to that topic for others to follow.
Photo of Matt Fahrner

Matt Fahrner

  • 7 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
The first question I have is COMCAST listening to (reading) this anymore? It may unfortunately be beating a dead horse...

Second, I'm one of the stuck ones who really has no good alternatives. Satellite is plain awful from the numerous people I know who've tried it and of course dial-up is a joke in this day and age.

Frankly I can live with the caps, though I think they're obnoxious at some level and I question continuing to advertise things like "PowerBoost", which seems to be encouraging bandwidth use, while at the same time instituting limits. That's just a little odd.

However my real issue is the lack of COMCAST supplied monitoring tools, particularly tools that aggregate total bandwidth use. As one poster here noted, many if not most users are sharing bandwidth via wireless etc., in which case being required to total aggregate usage is an unfair burden and frankly, again, insulting to customers (ie: we care so little about our customers' time that we won't even take the figures we *already* have and post them somewhere).

Moreover, again, asking people to download potentially malware laden "freeware" is not exactly very professional and makes COMCAST look pretty amateurish.

In the end it's kind of foolish. For relatively little effort they can avoid alienating their customers, however it looks quite possible that they may do so regardless. I expect better from a large corporation frankly.
Photo of Zane Perry

Zane Perry

  • 34 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Yes Comcast is being responsive. Scott's last response was only 10 hrs ago.
Photo of Matt Fahrner

Matt Fahrner

  • 7 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Zane Perry wrote:
> I am working to get a tool in place to deal with the new bandwidth constraint.

And thank for it!
Photo of Zane Perry

Zane Perry

  • 34 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Thx. We are all on the same team here working for a common goal. Hope to hear from Scott soon.
Photo of Matt Fahrner

Matt Fahrner

  • 7 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Ok, thanks Zane (and Scott)!