Newsletter
Google Left Banner
Comcast Brings Wideband to the Northwest
17 Nov, 2008Comcast continues its rollout of DOCSIS 3.0, or wideband as they call it. Pacific Northwest markets of Washington and Oregon will soon join the Twin Cities in Minnesota and certain Northeastern markets with the 50 Mbps capable broadband service. Approximately 1.8 million subscribers should gain access to the service in early December. Comcast has committed to wiring 20% of its footprint by the end of 2008. Comcast wideband tiers include the "Extreme 50" which offers 50 Mbps down/10 Mbps up for $139.95 per month. Next in line is the “Ultra" tier which offers 22 Mbps down/5 Mbps up for $62.95 per month. Comcast will also offer a wideband business package which includes the Extreme 50 tier and bundles firewall/anti-virus and a Microsoft powered unified communications package for $189.95/month. All tiers are best effort, and can be impacted by traffic on the network. Consumer services are also subject to Comcast’s 250 GB per month bandwidth cap. It's not quite clear how Comcast will integrate wideband into it's double and triple play bundles.
An added benefit for existing subscribers in new wideband markets is an uptick in speeds for existing cable modem subscribers at no additional cost. Existing 6 Mbps down/1 Mbps tiers are doubled to 12 Mbps down/2 Mbps up, while the 8 Mbps/1 Mbps tier is also doubled to 16 Mbps down/2 Mbps up. Their Powerboost service, which adds a quick boost during downloads, remains as well. The move to wideband creates competitive pressures on all broadband providers within and close to these new markets. As Comcast blankets a new wideband market with advertising, they create a potential “wideband itch” among consumers, raising broadband expectations for all providers, regardless of whether they actually compete with Comcast directly or not.
missing the point
it's not the 22 mbps you have to worry about - at least not initially - it's the doubling of the existing tiers to 12 mbps for the same price. how many of those existing subs are going to switch to a dsl product? you'll have to undercut them on price so much, it won't be worth it.
Post new comment
About Telecompetitor
Channel
Webinars/Events
Upcoming Events
NTCA Wireless Symposium
Jan 7-9, 2009 - Austin, TX
Featured Article
Should Telephone Service be Free?
12 Oct, 2008
Comcast announced a new promotion last week that offers 12 months of free basic cable service for new customers who also sign up for an additional service. Customers who don’t want an additional service can get Comcast’s basic service of about 20 -30 channels for $10/month. The promotion is tied to the digital TV transition of February 2009 and entices potential customers to avoid the transition “hassle” by getting “free” cable service. “The simple fact is that basic cable is the easiest path through the digital transition and now consumers can get it for free,” said Derek Harrar, General Manager and Senior Vice President, Video Services for Comcast in a company statement. This move is similar to strategies pursued by other video service providers, who are hoping to leverage the digital TV transition for new subscriber additions.
But is this strategy a leading indicator for the future? Should basic core services like basic cable and basic telephone service be offered for free, used as a “carrot” to entice customers to buy “more important” services like broadband? Maybe a very basic phone service, with no LD, access to landline 911, and maybe outgoing service only (to avoid telemarketers) should be a free component of a bundled offering. Such a wireline service may appeal to a customer who previously cut the cord for wireless only, but also needs broadband. There is a growing portion of the population who find the value of traditional wireline phone service elsewhere – either through wireless or broadband/IP services. But, if they could get the security of landline 911, and an extra dial tone in their home as a free value add for subscribing to broadband (or video from a telco’s perspective), maybe a telco’s bundled offering may look more attractive than a comparable cable offering. I realize this idea is not appealing to the hundreds of ILECs who are a part of the current access/settlement system (in fact, it couldn’t work in the context of today’s regulatory structure), but I wonder whether it’s inevitable. In this possible future scenario, the current settlement system adapts to broadband as the underlying service, as opposed to voice.
This scenario cuts both ways. From a cable company’s perspective, a growing portion of the population is turning to the Internet as a source for their video content, and no longer see value in paying for a broad package of video as a part of a traditional subscription pay-TV service. But, if they could receive basic TV (which includes local broadcast affiliates) as a free value add for buying broadband, maybe the cable bundle is more attractive. In a true IP/broadband world, very basic phone and video service is relatively easy to deliver, and has little impact on bandwidth and network performance. Maybe the digital transition is opening the door to a future where free basic services are a regular component of a bundled offering. Thoughts?

digg this story
google

pricey
seems pricey to me - will a lot of people leave dsl at 7 mbps and basically double their cost to get 22 mbps. maybe, but i'd like to see the evidence before shaking in my pants.