1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Official Time Warner Cable Thread

Discussion in 'TiVo Series3 HDTV DVRs' started by tunnelengineer, Sep 14, 2006.

  1. Dec 5, 2011 #5481 of 6277
    dlfl

    dlfl Cranky old novice

    6,996
    16
    Jul 6, 2006
    Near...
    Experiences are many and varied.... just do a quick scan going back in time of this thread and the TWC Tuning Adapter thread to get the picture.
     
  2. Dec 5, 2011 #5482 of 6277
    jmelan

    jmelan New Member

    18
    0
    Dec 3, 2011
    I understand what you are saying, and I think the cable company would agree with this sort of logic.

    however, reading throught the full details of the FCC ruling, it is clear they went out of their way to oppose all of these scenarios, even saying that discounts must also be given for packages that include "free" DVRs.

    "•Pay only for equipment you have. Your operator must give you a discount on any packages that include the price of a set-top box if you choose to use your own CableCARD-enabled device. FCC Rule 76.1205(b)(5)."

    Not some packages, not only ones that do not include a DVR, does not say it excludes customers that already have a plan, not only if you also rent a STB in addition to your cablecard etc.

    This is exactly why the FCC complaints link is given at the end of the info page.

    What I don't understand is why Time Warner is willing to get cited by the FCC in order to make a little extra money on less than 1% of its subscribers. They will get away with it as well if enough complaints are not filed.
     
  3. Dec 5, 2011 #5483 of 6277
    jmelan

    jmelan New Member

    18
    0
    Dec 3, 2011
    ........Note it does not say anywhere that operators can exclude you from all package pricing if you do not use their DVR

    As above, the cable company cannot discriminate against a cablecard user because they do not use "operator-supplied equipment", seems rather clear to me.
     
  4. Dec 5, 2011 #5484 of 6277
    Eccles

    Eccles Mostly harmless

    350
    0
    Dec 27, 2001
    Austin, TX
    Interesting discussion. I'm not seeing any credit on my bill, but I'm on a "price-lock guarantee" deal that prevents any increases for two years; I expect they would argue that it also prevents any /decreases/.
     
  5. Dec 5, 2011 #5485 of 6277
    jmelan

    jmelan New Member

    18
    0
    Dec 3, 2011
    http://www.edwardswildman.com/files...d9cea5b/2011-CA-FCC-RestrictsBundledCable.pdf

    here is a nice analysis from a legal perspective, somewhat complex but in no way supporting what Time Warner is doing in my area.

    main recommendation is that cable company should not bundle equipment into packages, however if they do, then the least amount offered to cablecard customers should be:

    (normal cost of equipment)x(1-discount offered on bundle)

    so for a total bundle price that includes a 10 percent discount over the individual components, with a cable box that normally costs 10, it would be ($10)x(1-0.1) = $9

    they recommend against trying to claim that the DVR is given for free as part of the bundle as "Indeed, this would appear to be precisely the sort of “subsidized” offering that the FCC rule is intended to prevent."
     
  6. Dec 6, 2011 #5486 of 6277
    NCTony5905

    NCTony5905 New Member

    6
    0
    Nov 9, 2011
    NC
    I have two Tivo's and still got a bundle price for phone, TV and Internet, the install is painful as most installers have trouble with the cable card and switched video adapters. Also just finding cable cards and switched video adapters is a pain. But to me it was worth it to not have the TWC DVR.
     
  7. Dec 6, 2011 #5487 of 6277
    dlfl

    dlfl Cranky old novice

    6,996
    16
    Jul 6, 2006
    Near...
    The referenced "Client Advisory" is interesting and it probably does represent the intent of the regulations. However, intent doesn't completely determine how laws are actually implemented. I can picture TWC's lawyers reading this, laughing, and saying "well they're entitled to their opinion!". I suspect the law firm that published this is trolling for clients who want to bring actions against the cable cos on this issue.

    The document mentions the Cable Co's "Rate Card". Have you seen or requested said card from your TWC provider?
     
  8. Dec 6, 2011 #5488 of 6277
    frankincensed

    frankincensed New Member

    28
    0
    May 3, 2009
    I wish TWC,would just offer the ability to rent a tivo from them, if one would so choose
     
  9. Dec 6, 2011 #5489 of 6277
    jmelan

    jmelan New Member

    18
    0
    Dec 3, 2011
    the intention of the law is the law (as stated in the legal discussion), same as with the IRS and taxes, it is irrelevant if their lawyers are paid to argue otherwise, the FCC has defined the intention of the law and other cable companies have changed their policies to be in compliance.

    The intention of the FCC is clearly stated here:
    http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-07-08/pdf/2011-16869.pdf

    normal cost of equipment (rate card costs) is easy to find if you begin to sign up as a new customer and try to add additional DVR/cable boxes to your order. Otherwise you can just call up customer service and ask - they are happy to tell you.

    To be honest, I am surprised at the defense of Time Warner here? aren't we all in support of consumer rights?

    Time Warner's policies at this point in time are discriminatory to the cablecard community (exclusion from packages, equipment costs, subsidizing services, etc).

    If everyone would work together in support of their rights, these issues would cease to exist. Time Warner has put up a BYOB discount application (because obviously they know they are supposed to) and not given it to anyone. Why not just file a complaint and support everyone here? It might not be resolved tomorrow, but it will never happen if we just sit here and take it.

    I posted here to try and raise awareness of the law and the relevant details, so that the larger community could help effect change for the benefit of all.

    http://www.fcc.gov/guides/cablecard-know-your-rights
    http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1373A1.pdf
    http://www.hallikainen.com/FccRules/2012/76/1205/

    http://www.fcc.gov/complaints

    I am pursuing multiple paths to get my own situation resolved.
     
  10. Dec 6, 2011 #5490 of 6277
    dlfl

    dlfl Cranky old novice

    6,996
    16
    Jul 6, 2006
    Near...
    Yeah, well TWC hasn't always done what the other cos have done, and they've gotten away with it a lot.
    Ultimately the intent of the law is argued out in legal proceedings. The intent of the framers of the law is subject to interpretation and the end result may not agree with your interpretation. i.e., what you perceive as the "clearly stated" intent of your linked reference.
    What a joke. Take a casual scan of my posts in this and other threads on this forum and see if you think calling me a defender of TWC is fair. I'm in favor of realism, logic and rights for all parties, including consumers.
    Their policies have always attempted to discriminate against TiVo's because they are a PITA to them and cost them profits. The question is (1) whether they are violating laws and (2) whether they can be penalized or made to change their behavior. They have a long history of getting away with it so I wouldn't bet on things changing.
    I agree in principle. In fact if you'll check out this thread you'll find I have acted on this principle in the past:
    http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=450967
    I will file a complaint on this and we can hope for the best .... but it's naive to expect the best. That would be underestimating the cleverness of TWC's lawyers -- and overestimating the capabilities of the FCC. Remember, TiVo owners comprise about 0.5% of digital cable subscribers so "everyone" is not a huge political factor.
    Yeah, I know .... see my previous linked thread!
     
  11. Dec 7, 2011 #5491 of 6277
    jmelan

    jmelan New Member

    18
    0
    Dec 3, 2011
    sorry, not trying to accuse you of anything, it just seems hard to defend Time Warner unless you really want to. I can't blame you for being pessimistic after how much of a disaster cablecard has been so far.

    Since the FCC is the enforcing agency of these regulations, I would hope that their stated intention in the current regulations is likely to be backed up, but maybe not - at least we can try.

    It does look like the FCC used the comments or very similar ones from the referenced thread at least in part to craft the current guidelines, which is a monumental step forward if adhered to.

    Why don't we try and get a sticky with an FCC complaint form letter posted so that it is more likely that people can submit a complaint without too much trouble or confusion.

    For example,

    Reasons for an FCC complaint:

    1. You are paying for any TWC equipment that you do not use or want to use, and you use a cablecard device.

    2. You filled out the BYOB form (which is a violation in itself) and have not received a credit, or the credit is significantly less than the amount charged for a standalone box.

    3. TWC has excluded you from any package or bundle due to your use of a cablecard rather than TWC equipment.

    4. TWC has imposed any additional service charge on cablecard customers in your area aside from the $2.00 - $2.50 charge for the cable cards.

    5. TWC did not tell you that self install was an option, or TWC refused to provide a self install kit (after August 8, 2011).

    The form letter can then include sections to include each situation and each member can choose what to include for their situation.

    This can then be crossposted to avsforum, ceton, silicondust, hauppaugge, etc. in order to mobilize a larger number of users.
     
  12. Dec 7, 2011 #5492 of 6277
    dlfl

    dlfl Cranky old novice

    6,996
    16
    Jul 6, 2006
    Near...
    I know it pains most readers of this thread to hear anything in defense of TWC in regard to this BYOB situation, but consider this:

    They have to furnish Tuning Adapters free of charge to a large proportion of their TiVo customers. These appear to be a box with production cost that would be similar to a STB but the true per-unit cost (including fixed up-front engineering costs) is probably higher than an STB because of the much lower volume of TA's. Perhaps in fairness the BYOB credit should be reduced by the cost of the TA -- which might reduce it to nothing.

    But then we don't have any evidence they've ever given a BYOB credit. :rolleyes:
     
  13. Dec 7, 2011 #5493 of 6277
    dlfl

    dlfl Cranky old novice

    6,996
    16
    Jul 6, 2006
    Near...
    For an example of how slippery things get when you accuse TWC of violating BYOB, see this recent FCC filing by TWC:
    http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7021708586
    Note their response as follows:
    Now I have to wonder: Does the customer's invoice explicitly list a $7.75 discount? And how would anyone other than TWC determine he was actually paying that much less than another customer with the same service using a STB?

    Also, the letter is laughable in the way it insinuates that instances of wrong information being supplied by TWC reps to TiVo users are isolated.
     
  14. Dec 7, 2011 #5494 of 6277
    cwoody222

    cwoody222 Active Member

    11,132
    0
    Nov 13, 1999
    Buffalo, NY
    I think what's being confused here are two distinct things.

    I read the new FCC rules to read that IF a cable co is offering a bundle that includes a STB they must offer CableCARD customers a refund based on the included "price" of that STB.

    But I don't read that to infer that cable companies MUST offer all bundles to all customers, regardless of their use of a CableCARD.

    Just by saying "if you're doing X, you must do Y" does not prevent the cable card from saying, "we don't want to do X".

    I read the FCC rules to prevent customers from paying for equipment they're not using, and to prevent customers with the same package - and paying the same rate - from getting different services.

    But I don't read it to mean that the FCC is saying that every customer must be offered the same packages, regardless of their hardware requirements.
     
  15. Dec 7, 2011 #5495 of 6277
    cwoody222

    cwoody222 Active Member

    11,132
    0
    Nov 13, 1999
    Buffalo, NY
    Also, just to clarify:

    I am NOT receiving a BYOB discount because I do not have any bundle (I was told in July of 2010 I did not quality - I was a new customer) that includes a STB.

    I pay significantly more than STB customers I know with similar channel lineups.

    I have filled out FCC complaint forms on TWC... in relation to my SDV box not working 100% of the time. Of the 3 complaints I filled out, TWC called me back on one of them. I tried once to return the call and got a voice mail. I never tried to call back again and neither did they. No nothing really happened.

    I've complained to CSRs about the same SDV situation but all they can recommend is sending a truck roll which we all know will not fix the problem at all.

    My missed SDV tunes are very rare (1-2 month, if that) so I can live with it. But it still sucks and I would love it to work 100% of the time - like it should.

    But I guess if I had their STB I'd probably miss that many recordings for other stupid reasons since their box sucks.
     
  16. Dec 7, 2011 #5496 of 6277
    jmelan

    jmelan New Member

    18
    0
    Dec 3, 2011
    I think that the exclusion from package deals is a major form of discrimination and specifically referenced here (http://www.hallikainen.com/FccRules/2012/76/1205/)

     
  17. Dec 7, 2011 #5497 of 6277
    jmelan

    jmelan New Member

    18
    0
    Dec 3, 2011
    Exactly what my complaint is, TWC told me that my current package would be invalidated and my rate would go up by $20 - $30 per month if I try and return my equipment.

    They may get away with this once, but the FCC will not fall for it over and over again, especially if the reasons they were able to argue this one are preliminarily addressed.

    In this case, I would guess that they are claiming that the normal package discount counts as the BYOB discount, which it obviously does not.
     
  18. Dec 7, 2011 #5498 of 6277
    frankincensed

    frankincensed New Member

    28
    0
    May 3, 2009
    Im always glad I come to this fourm everytime I think about getting a Tivo. I read all the hoops & hassles one has to go through to get a stupid dvr & again realize, its not worth the stress. Thanks all
     
  19. Dec 7, 2011 #5499 of 6277
    L David Matheny

    L David Matheny Active Member

    1,588
    1
    Jan 29, 2011
    SE Ohio
    Cable companies make a lot of money on equipment rentals, so they want to force you to to rent their equipment whether you need it or not (or whether it provides value for you or just serves their needs, like a tuning adapter). It's similar to cellular providers insisting that if you want to use a PDA-style cell phone, even one you purchase elsewhere with no subsidy, you must sign up for a data plan, whether you intend to use it or not.
     
  20. Dec 7, 2011 #5500 of 6277
    L David Matheny

    L David Matheny Active Member

    1,588
    1
    Jan 29, 2011
    SE Ohio
    Interesting perspective. You do realize that "all the hoops & hassles" are put there by the cable companies, right? When I read about them, I thank my lucky stars that my TiVo is receiving free and trouble-free OTA only. Since the digital conversion, more and more viewers have been enjoying a golden age for over-the-air broadcast TV, and that should continue unless the cable lobby can pay legislators enough to cripple or kill their competition.
     

Share This Page