Advertisements Glad you replied, I was and still am trying to tone things down a notch and still get information. To recap, this whole thing started I think when I brought up Internet as a possible competitor to cable in the premium TV market and the possibility that the ISP side of their business could be wanting to imposing caps to kill some competition before it grew too big. Its gets real complicated real quick because what has traditionally been 2 very separate and distinct markets are starting to merge (Premium TV and Internet usage side). To complicate them further The Major providers of Premium TV (Cable Satellite, and now the phone companies (with Verizon Fios and ATT U-verse) service are also the big players in broadband internet as providers. If that wasn't the case an ISP that was truly independent of premium TV content wouldn't care that the bits going thru there lines were HD video, they would be in the business to make money making sure those bits get from point a to point b. It is the conflicting markets, TV vs internet, that these companies own, that concerns me. The TV side of the cable company which is what we have been disusing has traditionally been their cash cow, the data side of the company was icing on the cake. I am not accusing the industry of anything at this point, but when they make that large a change in their pricing policy you have to wonder why? I think that in recent years the people that traditionally had their High end TV service and also had their High end internet service were dropping the TV service and their internet usage spiked and this worries the TV providers. And I feel a reasonable conclusion could be they want to save their big money maker from what they are seeing as a threat. That is where the talk of monopolies came in. I don't think we will ever come to an agreement on if they are or aren't. I think they (the cable companies) are some kind of monopoly because of the overwhelming market share they have, or at least all the current big players are acting in cartel like fashion to circle the wagons. If I understand your reasoning you don't think their can be a monopoly because no matter where you live satellite is an effective competitor. I guess we will just have to disagree about it. Hopefully that summarizes what we have been discussing (It is how I saw it anyway) free of all the posturing and emotion and with implying anyone is a cry baby or a troll. At this point can we just say we disagree on the matter and not imply anyone is wrong or right? Or do you want to debate further as long as we are respectful I actually enjoy a well thought out argument, it challenges my own thinking on a subject. You might be right about the separable security thing with satellites. Oh and a piece of information I used satellite for like 12 years and I did forget about them in this discussion (but it doesn't matter), and I still think that if a cable company can influence where I live to get a different provider that they are a monopoly.