ISPs Are No Longer Even Bothering To Provide Bogus Excuses For Their Expanding Use Of Bullshit Usage Caps

from the pay-more-money-for-the-same-exact-service dept

A few years ago, large ISPs began taking advantage of a lack of competition in the broadband market by imposing arbitrary, unnecessary and confusing usage caps and overage fees. Initially, these companies tried to claim that this was necessary to manage congestion on their networks. As data emerged indicating that this claim was bullshit, large ISPs were ultimately forced to acknowledge as much and back away from the claim.

Shortly after that, ISPs instead began claiming that these glorified price hikes were necessary as a simple matter of “fairness,” and the industry narrative-du-jour became that it only made sense that heavier users should pay more money for broadband.

This excuse was bullshit too; Americans already pay some of the highest prices for broadband of any developed nation under the flat-rate pricing model, which any large ISP earnings report will show you is perfectly profitable. And if “excessive consumption” really was a problem, it was a problem caused solely by a small number of users that could easily be shoved toward business-class tiers. It didn’t require saddling everyone with confusing and expensive surcharges.

These days, after being hammered for years for bogus justifications, large ISPs no longer even provide a reason for these rate hikes. Take Cox Communications for example. The company has quietly announced it would be expanding usage caps into several new markets, charging users $10 per each additional 50 GB of data users consumed over a one terabyte limit. The e-mail being sent to users, which is getting widespread attention on Reddit, doesn’t even really bother to offer a justification for the price hike:

Several news outlets and reporters (including myself) tried to get Cox to explain its reasoning for the hikes, and the company simply refused. Of course there’s a simple reason ISPs no longer try to justify this behavior: they don’t have to.

Consumers in captive markets can’t vote with their wallets, and cable providers are slowly but quietly enjoying a growing monopoly over next-gen broadband as telcos refuse to keep pace and upgrade their DSL networks. The end result is the ability for these companies to impose massive new rate hikes that not only result in users paying more money for the same-exact service, but help incumbent ISPs penalize the use of would-be streaming competitors. Zero rating an ISPs own services — while still penalizing competitors like Netflix — adds another layer of anti-competitive adventure to the proceedings.

But fear not! Cox did tell some news outlets that the company would soon be letting users avoid the caps and subscribe to an unmetered connection, for an added, unspecified cost. In other words: if you don’t want to pay us more money for the exact same service, please pay us more money for the exact same service. Why? Because we can, and regulators couldn’t care less.

Whenever the conversation about broadband caps pops up, many people quickly get bogged down in debate over whether or not a terabyte is fair, losing sight of the fact that these limits are utterly unnecessary, and we wouldn’t be seeing them at all in a healthy, competitive market. What’s deemed “fair” today won’t necessarily be fair in the multi-user 4K streaming households of tomorrow. And without competitive pressure, there’s nothing ensuring these caps scale with use. In fact, ISPs are incentivized to tighten the noose further once you’ve agreed to have your usage metered.

And with the current Ajit Pai-led FCC clearly intent to turn a blind eye to both a lack of competition and the predatory behavior that results from it (be it violations in privacy or net neutrality), there’s plenty more anti-competitive shenanigans and feebly-justified nonsense waiting in the wings.

Filed Under: , , ,
Companies: cox

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “ISPs Are No Longer Even Bothering To Provide Bogus Excuses For Their Expanding Use Of Bullshit Usage Caps”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Jason says:

If there was any actual issue with network congestion, management, excessive consumption, or "fairness" that had to be dealt with by caps and extra fees, then the ISP should also be able to pass along a refund to each and every user who doesn’t hit their cap every month.

After all, if their networks are so full that 1.05 terabytes costs $10 more than 1.00 TB, then if I only consume 500 GB in a month I ought to be getting a huge payback for all that bandwidth I’m not using.

JoeCool (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Caps are proof the ISPs have no competition

You need to mix it up a little. Your spiel was funny the first time, now it’s just sad. Remember one of the fundamental rules of comedy: once – you’re a wit, twice – you’re a nitwit, thrice – you’re a half-wit… and you’ve used this same post far more than three times.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re: Caps are proof the ISPs have no competition

That is not true. Most american people are good people that just want to work and have a happy life, but they have been lied to, manipulated, brain washed, scare-mongered and etc by some evil few fuckers that really want everything for themselves and don’t like others having as much as them.

War is war. And peace is peace. And America has never been at peace, despite the majority wanting peace.

Lack of regulation is lack of regulation. Regulation is good but has been played, abused, lobbied and corrupted by few huge companies with huge corrupting pockets.

The problem is not regulation.The problem is the conspiracy between corporation and government officials to rig the laws, in their writing, in their interpretation and in their application, for their own benefit.

Bergman (profile) says:

Re: Caps are proof the ISPs have no competition

Back in the 1990s, everybody had caps. And then it became clear that the real money was in unlimited, always on internet. The companies that offered that sort of service got filthy rich.

Well, it’s a new generation and all of those companies that got rich off of unlimited service are now wondering why they offer such a thing when they can make people pay for every byte. I expect that in a decade or so, some brilliant young MBA will have the novel idea of providing unlimited internet, and running all of their competitors out of the market.

Anonymous Coward says:

I don’t mind the idea of data caps, but I hate spending months or years well under the cap but getting no credit for it when I bust the cap on very rare occasions and then have to pay through the nose.

It would be nice to be able to resell my unused bandwidth, or at least join a pool of other users to equalize usage so no one would ever gets hit by a surcharge.

Ninja (profile) says:

Re: Re:

“It would be nice to be able to resell my unused bandwidth, or at least join a pool of other users to equalize usage so no one would ever gets hit by a surcharge.”

Isn’t it easier to ditch data caps so you can use the whole capacity of the pipe you hired (ie: your speed) to the fullest if you so desire?

Everybody is paying for an allocated speed (or pipe capacity) and the ISPs are denying such use as the customer sees fit.

Anonymous Coward says:

What I would like to see...

I would like to see a requirement for ISPs that insist on having data caps that they have to include how long you get at maximum speed before you hit the data caps.

With Century Link at the 50mbs speed I could hit the data cap in a day and a half. (Even more interesting was that their data cap policy was a cut and paste from Comcast’s data cap policy.)

Part of this is to move high bandwidth users to the much more expensive business class service which has no data caps.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: henceforth

Until you or someone you love gets killed by some psychopath police asshole…

We are greedy and savage bastards, what you gonna do about it?

That is terrorist thinking you idiot.

We put bombs in public places and kill innocent because we are savages what you gonna do? We do it because we heard the same: “We are the american government and we will invade you for your oil and what you gonna do?”.

Anonymous Coward says:

Mobile Carrier Dejavu

This is dejavu from what happened with the cellular carriers. Unlimitted, usage tiers, competition (t-mobile) comes in with unlimitted, and now unlimitted (throttled) is back with every carrier.

The $10 BS will be a thing until a real other option (ie. 5G) comes. Then watch the overcharge transition to a rate limiting throttle after you consume your full speed tier.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Mobile Carrier Dejavu

It was worse with cellular, particularly in the pre-Iphone era, when all the service providers pushed “unlimited” service of the kind that had a semi-secret cap (with shocking overcharges) buried deep in the fine print of their TOS, which basically gives the company the right to essentially do anything as they see fit.

Anonymous Coward says:

Unlimited Mobile Internet at a low price is the ultimate frontier people.

Once we get that we will be able to use same connection aka the same same fee, for everything:
– different places, different houses
– your cell or your laptop or any other device
– use it mobile while out or as wifi while at home

Once this is achieved, the ISPs business model will stop booming and it will flat out. There will be no more growth in this and they will be forced to either conform or to provide other services for continued revenue growth. And this requires actual hard work, actual innovation and actual competition.

It is not a matter of if this will happen or not. It will happen. The question is when and how. We need to do everything in our power to accelerate this as much as possible and at the lowest price.

It has to be unlimited, it has to be unrestricted, it has to be mobile, and the low price component is to give EVERYONE access. No point of having the best internet ever if no one or almost no one can make use of it.

Leave a Reply to Chip Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Older Stuff
09:37 British Telecom Wants Netflix To Pay A Tax Simply Because Squid Game Is Popular (32)
04:55 Axios Parrots A Lot Of Dumb, Debunked Nonsense About Net Neutrality (54)
10:50 NY AG Proves Broadband Industry Funded Phony Public Support For Attack On Net Neutrality (10)
06:24 The GOP Is Using Veterans As Props To Demonize Net Neutrality (22)
06:03 Telecom Using Veterans As Props To Demonize California's New Net Neutrality Law (12)
09:32 AT&T Whines That California Net Neutrality Rules Are Forcing It To Behave (11)
06:23 The New York Times (Falsely) Informs Its 7 Million Readers Net Neutrality Is 'Pointless' (51)
15:34 Facebook's Australian News Ban Did Demonstrate The Evil Of Zero Rating (18)
04:58 'Net Neutrality Hurt Internet Infrastructure Investment' Is The Bad Faith Lie That Simply Won't Die (11)
05:48 Dumb New GOP Talking Point: If You Restore Net Neutrality, You HAVE To Kill Section 230. Just Because! (66)
06:31 DOJ Drops Ridiculous Trump-Era Lawsuit Against California For Passing Net Neutrality Rules (13)
06:27 The Wall Street Journal Kisses Big Telecom's Ass In Whiny Screed About 'Big Tech' (13)
10:45 New Interim FCC Boss Jessica Rosenworcel Will Likely Restore Net Neutrality, Just Not Yet (5)
15:30 Small Idaho ISP 'Punishes' Twitter And Facebook's 'Censorship' ... By Blocking Access To Them Entirely (81)
05:29 A Few Reminders Before The Tired Net Neutrality Debate Is Rekindled (13)
06:22 U.S. Broadband Speeds Jumped 90% in 2020. But No, It Had Nothing To Do With Killing Net Neutrality. (12)
12:10 FCC Ignores The Courts, Finalizes Facts-Optional Repeal Of Net Neutrality (19)
10:46 It's Opposite Day At The FCC: Rejects All Its Own Legal Arguments Against Net Neutrality To Claim It Can Be The Internet Speech Police (13)
12:05 Blatant Hypocrite Ajit Pai Decides To Move Forward With Bogus, Unconstitutional Rulemaking On Section 230 (178)
06:49 FCC's Pai Puts Final Bullet In Net Neutrality Ahead Of Potential Demotion (25)
06:31 The EU Makes It Clear That 'Zero Rating' Violates Net Neutrality (6)
06:22 DOJ Continues Its Quest To Kill Net Neutrality (And Consumer Protection In General) In California (11)
11:08 Hypocritical AT&T Makes A Mockery Of Itself; Says 230 Should Be Reformed For Real Net Neutrality (28)
06:20 Trump, Big Telecom Continue Quest To Ban States From Protecting Broadband Consumers (19)
06:11 Senators Wyden And Markey Make It Clear AT&T Is Violating Net Neutrality (13)
06:31 Net Neutrali-what? AT&T's New Streaming Service Won't Count Against Its Broadband Caps. But Netflix Will. (25)
06:23 Telecom's Latest Dumb Claim: The Internet Only Works During A Pandemic Because We Killed Net Neutrality (49)
13:36 Ex-FCC Staffer Says FCC Authority Given Up In Net Neutrality Repeal Sure Would Prove Handy In A Crisis (13)
06:27 Clarence Thomas Regrets Brand X Decision That Paved Way For The Net Neutrality Wars (11)
06:17 The FCC To Field More Comments On Net Neutrality. Maybe They'll Stop Identity Theft And Fraud This Time? (79)
More arrow