[Dslreports.com] Charter Implementing New Caps - Overclock.net

thiussat · 02-04-09

Quote:

Broadband Reports has learned that Charter will be updating their acceptable use policy (AUP) next week, setting the stage for clear usage caps and potential overage fees. A source familiar with the plans tells us Charter will be imposing a 100GB cap upon any Charter connection of 15Mbps or less, and a 250GB usage cap for broadband tiers "over 15 Mbps up to 25 Mbps." Documents shared with Broadband Reports make no mention of Charter's new 60Mbps DOCSIS 3.0 tier, which was launched last week in one market.

According to the insider, the policy will not be strictly enforced initially, but "it's only a matter of time." Like many carriers, Charter's AUP language has always given Charter the right to "adjust, suspend, or terminate" the subscriber's connection without warning. However, an as-yet published FAQ seen by Broadband Reports indicates Charter will now be more seriously enforcing these limitations. The new AUP will be a digital warning shot over the bow of the carrier's heaviest users.

There will not initially be overage fees, but the new AUP reserves the right to charge "additional fees in accordance with Charter's then-current applicable rates." If there's a company who could benefit from overage fees it's Charter -- the carrier holds more than $20 billion in debt, and faces rumors of a looming bankruptcy protection filing.

Charter CTO Marwan Fawaz told attendees of the CableNEXT conference in Santa Clara last year that "eventually, we will go to a usage-based solution." It's an idea being toyed with by several carriers; AT&T and Time Warner Cable are both currently conducting trials that charge users up to $1.00 per gigabyte. The idea appeals to investors who like the additional revenue, but it also allows carriers to monetize and/or control alternative video delivery.

The unreleased FAQ informs customers that these caps are necessary "to ensure that all users of the service are able to obtain optimal service levels." The FAQ promises users that only 1% of customers should be impacted -- with those customers contacted by either e-mail or phone. Our source says support agents don't yet have user bandwidth usage monitoring tools -- suggesting this should still be handled by the abuse department.

Cable carriers are concerned about being transparent in the way they handle congestion on their networks, given that in 2008, the FCC sanctioned Comcast for lying to consumers about their network management policies. With a new (and potentially more network neutrality focused) FCC boss in Julius Genochowski, cable carriers are making sure that whatever they're doing -- they're informing customers about it first.

"Our HSI AUP prohibits excessive bandwidth usage but does not expressly define excessive at this time," Charter spokesman Eric Ketzer told me when I asked for official comment. "I know many of our peers have established caps, and we are evaluating putting more definition around what "excessive" usage means." We'll offer more detail when the limits and new acceptable use policy are made official.

Source

Charter was one of the only U.S. broadband providers who did not cap bandwidth. That has changed. It looks like Verizon is the only major ISP who is not capping at all.

verbatim81973 · 02-04-09

Verizon is making its money cappin the Hades out of its wireless customers(5gb limit).

Diabolical999 · 02-04-09

Ugh, stop screwing with people's bandwidth. I hope they all lose customers. Comcast, Cox, Charter. ...Next cable company I get won't be starting with a "C". My Cox connection is already affected, I used to get a 2MB/s download speed, it now ALWAYS drops to 200-450 kbp/s or lower.

Kill Phil · 02-04-09

Quote:

Originally Posted by thiussat

Source

Charter was one of the only U.S. broadband providers who did not cap bandwidth. That has changed. It looks like Verizon is the only major ISP who is not capping at all.

This is pure nickel and dime-ing if I ever heard it. They can't run a decent broadband service so they squeeze their customer base for poorly defined fees because they fail to meet the demand that they advertise capacity for. Speaking as a former Charter customer (disclosure: Area network purchased by Wave Broadband, still only provider of broadband service in division) their bankruptcy is of no surprise to me. Dealing with customer service was emotionally taxing and repeated outages coupled with what I can only assume were scheduled maintenance cycles, never made public, made for a lackluster service.

Being the only provider in the area they were established to be the broadband monopoly yet were purchased by a more solvent competitor and now post potential bankruptcy. I hope the recession hits them where they earned it and now continue to earn it, sadly though I only foresee the recession tightening the broadband market and stifling upstarts. Ie: No competition anytime soon.

Although that feels like a rant I think it acts as a personal account of why they are insolvent as a company.

A-E-I-Owned-You · 02-04-09

FairPoint (ie Verizon) here and I dont have a cap. I dont see that lasting that long as Charter is the other major provider in the area. I may actually stop using the internet if they cap me TBH. I would be one of the few, but I will definitely take a stand however small it may be.

gex80 · 02-04-09

Quote:

Originally Posted by verbatim81973

Verizon is making its money cappin the Hades out of its wireless customers(5gb limit).

But you gotta remember that's different technology so it may not be as advanced. I goig to guess and say that cell phones don't have little hubs like landline connections do. I'm also going to say the load of data that the cell phone satellites handle is not close to the amount of downloaded traffic.

Then also factor in that verizon isn't the only one using the dishes up in space, he satellites are actually shared between companies and ran by the government if I remember correctly.

Also they aren't capping it, its you get to download up to 5 gigs for one price and when you go over you just pay more. But your still running at the same speed.

Besides those air cards weren't really made to be doing heavy downloading, they were made to just surf the web primarily

Blueboony · 02-04-09

I had Charter when I lived in California, and it was the worst service I've ever had in my life. The final straw was me getting double charged one month, which I noticed, because they sent me a past due notice, when I had already paid at the office. I went up there WITH my receipt of the payment, and they refused to refund my money, which they had tacked all kinds of fees on to. It came to a grand total of over $300.