Thanks To No Competition, Broadband Satisfaction Scores Plummet

from the this-is-why-we-can't-have-nice-things dept

For years now we've documented the shitshow that is broadband industry customer satisfaction. That shitshow is generally thanks to a continued lack of real competition in the space, which lets these companies not only mindlessly raise rates like it's going out of style, but it gives companies like Comcast the leeway to experiment with terrible, anti-competitive practices like arbitrary and punitive usage caps and overage fees. And that's of course before you get to the clown car that passes for customer service at many of these companies, which routinely makes headlines for all the wrong reasons.

Year after year we witness a rotating crop of bizarre stories highlighting how terribly these entrenched monopolies treat their subscribers. And each year industry executives insist that they've learned the error of their ways and have dedicated themselves and their budgets to fixing the "consumer experience."

Except because these companies all but own state and federal lawmakers-- and see virtually no competition in their markets (especially at higher speeds)--things never actually get better. Case in point: the American Customer Satisfaction Index has released their latest analysis of customer satisfaction with the broadband industry. And what they found isn't pretty. In short, every single major ISP but one saw a decline in customer satisfaction over the last year:

Note that these scores are worse than every other industry the ACSI tracks, including the airline, insurance, and banking sectors. And these scores are even well below consumer satisfaction with many government agencies, including the IRS.

Comcast in fact is the only company to see no change whatsoever (though its TV services saw a 1 point decline), which is still notable given its 2014 promise that the hiring of a customer experience VP and other well-hyped improvements were going to "revolutionize" the way Comcast consumers were treated. Other companies like Charter (Spectrum) are in absolute free fall, dropping 8% year over year thanks to the poor service, rate hikes and empty promises in the wake of the company's bungled $89 billion acquisition of Time Warner Cable and Bright House Networks.

And while things like gigabit broadband get a lot of media hype, we've noted that the lack of competition driving this problem is only getting worse. Numerous telcos have all but given up on residential broadband to shift their focus toward video advertising and enterprise services. And as they refuse to upgrade millions of DSL subscribers they don't actually want, cable companies like Comcast and Charter are securing a greater monopoly over broadband than ever before.

Some like to claim new wireless technologies (like 5G) will emerge to magically provide competition to these providers. But while 5G wireless will provide faster, lower-latency and more resillient networks, it won't fix the business data service monopoly that drives high prices and many of the competition issues in the wireless sector. Nor will it address the industry's plan to keep putting ma bell back together via an endless array of competition-reducing megamergers. And however promising 5G is, it's not a substitute for uncapped, fixed broadband -- especially in more rural areas and less affluent cities.

While cable secures a growing monopoly over fixed-line broadband, monopoly ISPs (with the Trump administration's help) are gutting all FTC, FCC and state oversight over their regional monopolistic fiefdoms. All while regulators like Ajit Pai whisper sweet nothings about how eliminating popular consumer protections like net neutrality will magically improve sector investment and competition. Surely this all works out well for the consumer, right?


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    Ninja (profile), 4 Jun 2018 @ 6:39am

    Expect it to get worse in the short term and don't expect anything much better in the long term. The bipartisan system and the huge amount of influence corporations have over the US govt aren't going to make things better any time soon.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 4 Jun 2018 @ 7:08am

    Richard Bennett to the defense in 3, 2, 1...

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 4 Jun 2018 @ 7:10am

    <> "...because these companies all but own state and federal lawmakers"


    Ahhh -- there's the core problem. You have a corrupt American political system where most lawmakers can be bought by big-money special interests.

    You can't buy what is not for sale. Why are our lawmakers for sale.

    Endless bitc_ing about big corporations accomplishes nothing -- fix the suffocating corruption in U.S. politics.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 4 Jun 2018 @ 7:18am

    "And each year industry executives insist that they've learned the error of their ways and have dedicated themselves and their budgets to fixing the "consumer experience.""

    Lies

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 4 Jun 2018 @ 7:22am

    Google Fiber

    I was hoping to see Google Fiber on that list, if only for comparison. Though maybe it was all just a publicity stunt, and Google never really planned to create a nationwide ISP like they originally promised.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 4 Jun 2018 @ 7:27am

      Re: Google Fiber

      Sorry to say Rip Van Winkle but google fiber was pretty much abandoned already because it was too much work to fight entrenched telecoms tooth and nail for every inch of fiber.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      JoeCool (profile), 4 Jun 2018 @ 7:29am

      Re: Google Fiber

      They actually did want to, but they spend more money in court fighting the incumbents than building fiber, so you can see why they're jaded and retreating from the issue.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 4 Jun 2018 @ 9:49am

        Re: Re: Google Fiber

        They actually did want to, but they spend more money in court fighting the incumbents than building fiber, so you can see why they're jaded and retreating from the issue.

        REALLY "JoeCool"? Google spent BILLIONS in court?

        'Cause a minion has stated "Google, which is spending billions on wireless service and fiber to the home":'

        https://www.techdirt.com/blog/netneutrality/articles/20151001/06351732404/isp-announces -blocking-all-facebook-google-ads-until-companies-pay-troll-toll.shtml

        No. You are FLATLY WRONG, kid. Typical Techdirt.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 4 Jun 2018 @ 10:02am

          Re: Re: Re: Google Fiber

          someone needs some antipsychotic meds...

          Dude was just making a hyperbolic statement and not being adamant at all about the actual dollar amount. chill

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 4 Jun 2018 @ 10:15am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Google Fiber

            Since Google has over a hundred billion dollars in the bank (and could no doubt borrow a far greater amount) it might be worth noting that the company only spent a tiny fraction of what it easily could have spent on it's much-balleyhooed FTTH buildout.

            https://www.benzinga.com/trading-ideas/long-ideas/18/04/11567157/19-companies-google-could- buy-with-its-102-billion-in-cash

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • identicon
              Anonymous Coward, 4 Jun 2018 @ 10:25am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Google Fiber

              Their problem was that were not able to spend money on the build out due to various obstructive tactics by the Incumbents.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • identicon
                Anonymous Coward, 4 Jun 2018 @ 10:29am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Google Fiber

                Google should have enough money to buy out the Incumbents, and probably every judge in the country that might get in the way.

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                • icon
                  JoeCool (profile), 4 Jun 2018 @ 11:07am

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Google Fiber

                  Do you really think GOOGLE would be allowed to buy Comcast, TWC, Charter, AT&T, etc? Really?? Sure, they COULD buy out all the incumbents... on paper. In reality, this ULTRA-MEGA-merger would never be allowed.

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  • icon
                    That One Guy (profile), 4 Jun 2018 @ 12:34pm

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Google Fiber

                    Yeah, I find it kinda funny that they seem to have a problem with the company, and when backed into a corner they came out with a suggestion that would make the company vastly more powerful.

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                • identicon
                  Anonymous Coward, 4 Jun 2018 @ 11:15am

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Google Fiber

                  In what world do you live in where that would be even remotely possible?

                  Buying out Charter, Comcast, ATT, and Verizon alone would be such a huge violation of antitrust laws, no one in their right mind would even go near to approving that. Granted we've got some messed up situations but that is an entirley different level of messed up that would never happen in today's business and political climate.

                  And buying judges, you must think every judge is crooked then? Because they would pretty much have to buy every judge in the country to get away with it.

                  Please take your logical dissonance elsewhere. Better yet, ditch it and come back to reality.

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  • identicon
                    Anonymous Coward, 4 Jun 2018 @ 2:44pm

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Google Fiber

                    No need to get upset about a hyperbolic argument that was basically trying to make the point that Google had more than enough resources to wage war to defeat whatever roadblocks got in the way of getting its gigabit network built. But that's assuming that the company considered Google Fiber to be a high priority in its overall business strategy, which was obviously not the case, considering how they basically threw in the towel when they could have easily continued the fight.

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                    • identicon
                      Anonymous Coward, 5 Jun 2018 @ 8:20am

                      Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Google Fiber

                      Hyperbolic, sure, whatever.

                      Contrary to your belief, Google doesn't have unlimited resources to do whatever it wants and it does still have to do a cost benefit analysis. If they have to spend billions (by your assertion) in every city just to have the right to build out their fiber network, I'm sorry but that's not a sustainable business model, even for Google. Sure they could fight in a few cities (and did) but if they have to do that in every city across America, that's not just going to cost them billions but trillions or more! Google isn't that rich, no company is.

                      The only thing Google is at fault for is underestimating how crooked and sleazy incumbent ISPs really are, how much they hate competition and how far they are willing to go to block other competitiors.

                      Again, drop your logical dissonance, bad facts, and come back to reality. The unabashed love for letting incumbent ISPs screw over their customers and any competition is not a good look for you.

                      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 4 Jun 2018 @ 11:08am

          Re: Re: Re: Google Fiber

          REALLY "JoeCool"? Google spent BILLIONS in court?

          Actually, Joe didn't say anything about billions or any other amount. He just said they spent more in court than building infrastructure. You're the one who brought up billions and jumped down his throat for being "wrong".

          And honestly, so what? Your post doesn't prove him wrong and if Google is as rich as you say then they can spend billions in court and billions in infrastructure.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 4 Jun 2018 @ 6:12pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Google Fiber

            The issue is that even if Google was actually rich enough to buy out its adversaries and wear them down through attrition then the original Techdirt troll would actually have a point: that Google is the top lobbyist in politics, compared to the likes of the MPAA who decided it'd be a great idea to cuddle with Jim Hood until the Sony hack fucked that plan over.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Hero, 4 Jun 2018 @ 7:51am

    This reminds me a lot of presidential elections in the USA. No good choices, awful service (both candidates were narcissistic, compulsive liars), and dismal approval ratings.

    The RNC and DNC act like a cartel, only allowing committee-approved candidates in to the presidential election to stifle competition.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 4 Jun 2018 @ 9:52am

    You ran nearly this SAME trivia last week!

    It's deja vu, rechaufe, re-re-written. Not even worth my going back to prove, though, so little interest.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 4 Jun 2018 @ 11:19am

      Re: You ran nearly this SAME trivia last week!

      World War 2 lasted for years. You don't think a lot of similar news pieces were run about that? If something of note is still happening, it is worth writing about until it stops being relevant. This is still relevant so what's the problem?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 4 Jun 2018 @ 6:10pm

        Re: Re: You ran nearly this SAME trivia last week!

        The problem is that out_of_the_blue is a closet corporatist and really hates, hates, hates it when a not-Google corporation is being criticized.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 4 Jun 2018 @ 10:24am

    And these scores are even well below consumer satisfaction with many government agencies, including the IRS.

    When it comes to taking my money from me, the IRS is far more transparent about how much they're taking and easier to understand the reasons why compared to Comcast.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 4 Jun 2018 @ 1:09pm

    Cox only went down -5% after slapping 1 TB datacaps on end users that are already paying $100 a month for 50-100 meg internet service. Then they have the nerve to offer a new "unlimited data" plan for only $50 more a month. I find it hard to believe that many users still approve of Cox. We have no competition though other than crappy, slow DSL.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Coyne Tibbets (profile), 4 Jun 2018 @ 2:22pm

    ...companies not only mindlessly raise rates like it's going out of style...

    Wait...cable is going out of style, isn't it?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Dan Guisinger, 4 Jun 2018 @ 10:37pm

    COX and CenturyLink

    Surprised that both didn't fare significantly worse. Recently left my landline phone/internet provider, CenturyLink, and moved to Cox (to reduce monthly cost $40). Sad, to put it mildly. Half dozen phone calls and/or online chats to BOTH, to successfully terminate one, and start with the other. Was a comedy of errors, the likes of which I've never experienced. Took two weeks to get it right. Hands down, the absolute worst customer service I've experienced in my 73 years — from both.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 5 Jun 2018 @ 7:30am

    *"They all kind of had a little chuckle about it but they wanted him to understand you could see how other people could see it as a threat.”*

    Sorry, but no. Unless your name was Sheldon Cooper (and even then I'd have doubts) I fail to see how any rational human being could view that as a plausible threat.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    John Thacker, 5 Jun 2018 @ 7:50am

    The problem with "local and state oversight of ISPs" is that it tends to be used to bolster monopolistic fiefdoms, not ensure competition. They have loved for years to sign exclusive franchises, starting with cable TV, partially because by guaranteeing exclusive franchises you can extract promises like universal coverage. With regulated monopolies, monopolistic profits in wealthier areas can subsidize service in poorer areas. Competition and good rates near marginal cost in the wealthier more educated areas can mean no service in the poorer areas. Local oversight of ISPs created so many conditions on FIOS that Verizon took much much longer to bring it to Baltimore and Boston. The regulation meant that when it did come it may have been more equitable instead of going to just wealthier areas first (the same way that Google Fiber did through their signup "fiberhood" strategy), but it did mean less competition.

    When a natural monopoly exists, there's room for regulation. But regulation (which is something separate from antitrust) also tends to decrease the number of viable competitors and encourage monopolies. Regulation is a good alternative when competition can't exist, such as when there's a natural monopoly and antitrust won't work, but don't confuse it for antitrust.

    It's quite difficult to simultaneously achieve universal service and equity along with competition and reasonable, close to marginal cost rates in educated and wealthier areas, as those goals conflict.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    nonW00t, 5 Jun 2018 @ 2:15pm

    heh

    The only winning move is not to pay.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 7 Jun 2018 @ 11:02am

      Re: heh

      Oh yeah, brilliant suggestion. Here, let me cut myself off from my ability to do banking, manage my health, DO MY JOB, submit homework, and any other thing that life now requires people to have an internet connection for. THAT will show those greedy ISPs!

      Ever heard of the saying "don't cut off your nose to spite your face"?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Special Affiliate Offer

Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.