<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
<title>Engadget - Comments for Time Warner wants to know if it should get tough about rate hikes</title>
<link>http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/01/time-warner-wants-to-know-if-it-should-get-tough-about-rate-hike/</link>
<description>Engadget Comments for Time Warner wants to know if it should get tough about rate hikes</description>

<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only.</copyright>
<generator>Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/</generator><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Time Warner wants to know if it should get tough about rate hikes]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/01/time-warner-wants-to-know-if-it-should-get-tough-about-rate-hike/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/01/time-warner-wants-to-know-if-it-should-get-tough-about-rate-hike/</guid><description><![CDATA[Until they get the NFL Network I don't care what they do. How long has it been? 2 years? 3?<br><br>And hey, how about a la carte ordering and pricing? Screw TWC.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[sweet greggo]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Dec 1st 2009 2:21PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Time Warner wants to know if it should get tough about rate hikes]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/01/time-warner-wants-to-know-if-it-should-get-tough-about-rate-hike/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/01/time-warner-wants-to-know-if-it-should-get-tough-about-rate-hike/</guid><description><![CDATA[This is 100% a publicity stunt. They WILL jack up rates and they WILL lose channels. It's all about protecting their profit margins, and this is a way to "prevent" losing subs by cleverly misdirecting people away from the real issue. Smoke and mirrors!<br><br>Not to mention that in most all markets, consumers have little choice. In the NYC market, most citizens can NOT avail themselves of OTA or satellite. Yes FiOS was approved, but their roll out plan got totally frozen 2-3-4 months ago. TWC knows this, so NOW is the time to throw some smoke around so it can jack up prices, that may be very hard to do in 8-9 months.<br><br>It's clear this "stunt" heralds their last minute push to earn those multi-million dollar bonuses... ]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[riverside_guy]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Dec 1st 2009 2:34PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Time Warner wants to know if it should get tough about rate hikes]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/01/time-warner-wants-to-know-if-it-should-get-tough-about-rate-hike/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/01/time-warner-wants-to-know-if-it-should-get-tough-about-rate-hike/</guid><description><![CDATA[@(Unverified) So true... just a stunt. Why else would they send you to an "are you sure" type page if you click "roll over".<br><br>Frankly, I wish the cablecos would roll over and die... they screwed us with cablecards, encryption waivers for ClearQAM, and now they are trying to get SOC... all while raising rates and killing imagine quality by overcompressing everything. The best thing the FCC can do is to enforce line-sharing... that will whip them into shape FAST. I hope it happens.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Schwinn]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Dec 2nd 2009 10:30AM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Time Warner wants to know if it should get tough about rate hikes]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/01/time-warner-wants-to-know-if-it-should-get-tough-about-rate-hike/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/01/time-warner-wants-to-know-if-it-should-get-tough-about-rate-hike/</guid><description><![CDATA[@(Unverified) I absolutely agree. Competition (especially in metro cities such as NYC, Chicago, Miami, etc) is fierce these days. The problem is see though is that these cable providers need to get their head out of their rear ends if they want customers to truly want what they need. This nitpicking of channels is retarded, but I understand the business aspects of it: to get money you need to spend money. The more money they spend actually improving the infrastructure and marketing, they more likely that customers will come to them, but it comes at a one-two punch. You can't be stingy with profits, wanting them all the time. Customers pick up on that too easy, especially when they see a package price, and they think, my god why is this so much? Balancing profits w/marketing is perhaps the most difficult aspect of a business, IMO. If its attractive and reasonably,priced, they will come. - BLUEBOY]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[TBone]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Dec 5th 2009 12:08PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Time Warner wants to know if it should get tough about rate hikes]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/01/time-warner-wants-to-know-if-it-should-get-tough-about-rate-hike/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/01/time-warner-wants-to-know-if-it-should-get-tough-about-rate-hike/</guid><description><![CDATA[Except that once we get a la carte, there won't be enough interest in the specialty cable channels to keep them afloat. Either you'll pay HBO prices for every channel you want, "specialty" channels like SyFy will have to have more contest shows and pro wrestling to keep an audience, or content producers will decrease the number of channels, thus less opportunity to show the show you happen to like that doesn't get American Idol numbers.<br><br>Maybe my watching patterns aren't the norm, but I only watch 1-3 shows on any given cable network. The remote doesn't sit on a single channel, or even 4-6 favorite channels. In a world where more people watch the Kardashian wedding than Mad Men, I don't see how quality niche shows will survive in an a la carte world. Hopefully for those that really want a la carte, digital delivery will give them the selection and price savings they are looking for.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[David S]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Dec 1st 2009 2:51PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Time Warner wants to know if it should get tough about rate hikes]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/01/time-warner-wants-to-know-if-it-should-get-tough-about-rate-hike/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/01/time-warner-wants-to-know-if-it-should-get-tough-about-rate-hike/</guid><description><![CDATA[@Dalhectar If the network doesn't have enough viewers to sustain itself, then it *should* die.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Andrew Timson]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Dec 2nd 2009 8:00AM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Time Warner wants to know if it should get tough about rate hikes]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/01/time-warner-wants-to-know-if-it-should-get-tough-about-rate-hike/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/01/time-warner-wants-to-know-if-it-should-get-tough-about-rate-hike/</guid><description><![CDATA[@ATimson : Darn right. Notice that the TWC site doesn't tell you WHICH channels are jacking rates on them. If it's channels I don't watch, then yes, they should roll over and then drop the channel (I never wanted it anyway)... that's how TWC can exercise their leverage on the matter. They don't need us to do it for them, they have the leverage... they just think we want 10 shopping channels, 5 religious ones, etc... when the fact is only a small minority watch those channels.<br><br>Ala carte baby... let the stragglers die (or let the stragglers charge more if the people watching REALLY want it). IE, let the market decide.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Schwinn]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Dec 2nd 2009 10:26AM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Time Warner wants to know if it should get tough about rate hikes]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/01/time-warner-wants-to-know-if-it-should-get-tough-about-rate-hike/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/01/time-warner-wants-to-know-if-it-should-get-tough-about-rate-hike/</guid><description><![CDATA[I think this is a complete scam as well.  I dropped Time Warner cable all together and went to Off air HD. It is free and the picture is much better and with a home built HTPC my dvr has a 1.5 TB HD to record HD TV and I don't have to pay $5 or more a month for a crappy 80GB cable DVR.<br>Oh by the way Time Warner is increasing my Internet rate by $6 a month to $60 a month. There is no programing they have to pay for. What is the excuse to raise the rate? So this is just a PR stunt to place blame elsewhere. If the so called cable networks want John Q Public to watch their programing, well have them broadcast over the air for free. Put Cable out of business or have our government put a stop to monopoly cable companies. America wants a choice and remember the airwaves belong to the American public. Fair competition by offering multiple cable vendors, satellite, U-Verse is how it should be. My City only offers one cable company. We do not have ATT U-Verse or Verzion FIOS. The city next to me has 2 cable companies and the rates are lower. ]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Tom]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Dec 1st 2009 6:55PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Time Warner wants to know if it should get tough about rate hikes]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/01/time-warner-wants-to-know-if-it-should-get-tough-about-rate-hike/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/01/time-warner-wants-to-know-if-it-should-get-tough-about-rate-hike/</guid><description><![CDATA[Coming from someone who now has Time Warner after being stuck with Charter, I have to say how much I LOVE Time Warner.  Friendly, KNOWLEDGEABLE, customer suppot.  More reasonable rates, and FREE HD.<br><br>Charter can go suck a huge f'n fat one.  Thank god they're already in bankruptcy.  I hope the company goes under.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Jordan]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Dec 2nd 2009 1:02AM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Time Warner wants to know if it should get tough about rate hikes]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/01/time-warner-wants-to-know-if-it-should-get-tough-about-rate-hike/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/01/time-warner-wants-to-know-if-it-should-get-tough-about-rate-hike/</guid><description><![CDATA[I take it you HAVE to have the fastest internet connection they provide, right?  I mean how else are you paying 60 dollars a month for internet.  I haven't even seen Time Warner charge that much for internet, ever.  ]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Jordan]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Dec 2nd 2009 1:04AM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Time Warner wants to know if it should get tough about rate hikes]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/01/time-warner-wants-to-know-if-it-should-get-tough-about-rate-hike/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/01/time-warner-wants-to-know-if-it-should-get-tough-about-rate-hike/</guid><description><![CDATA[@Jordan <br>Nope just the middle of the road 3 Mb max. I do not have any bundles like cable or phone so my base rate is $54 soon to be $60.  I have net flix so I cant go slower,]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Tom]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Dec 2nd 2009 4:50PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Time Warner wants to know if it should get tough about rate hikes]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/01/time-warner-wants-to-know-if-it-should-get-tough-about-rate-hike/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/01/time-warner-wants-to-know-if-it-should-get-tough-about-rate-hike/</guid><description><![CDATA[I like the honesty of this, but I am doubtful our clicks really matter. ]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[IseWise]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Dec 2nd 2009 3:30AM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Time Warner wants to know if it should get tough about rate hikes]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/01/time-warner-wants-to-know-if-it-should-get-tough-about-rate-hike/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/01/time-warner-wants-to-know-if-it-should-get-tough-about-rate-hike/</guid><description><![CDATA[Ya, my dad's TWC bill just went up $7 for whatever reason, and while home for Thanksgiving I realized that the HD channels they promised months ago still weren't available. So of course when I called to ask where was ESPNU HD so I could watch my team in HD, they needed to send out someone the next day (really, you can just flip a switch, c'mon). And low and behold, no phone call and a no show the next day from TWC. So typical.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[THizzle7XU]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Dec 2nd 2009 3:58AM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Time Warner wants to know if it should get tough about rate hikes]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/01/time-warner-wants-to-know-if-it-should-get-tough-about-rate-hike/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/01/time-warner-wants-to-know-if-it-should-get-tough-about-rate-hike/</guid><description><![CDATA[Why don't they bring back HDNET it was the best HD movie channel.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Randall Lind]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Dec 2nd 2009 9:10PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Time Warner wants to know if it should get tough about rate hikes]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/01/time-warner-wants-to-know-if-it-should-get-tough-about-rate-hike/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/01/time-warner-wants-to-know-if-it-should-get-tough-about-rate-hike/</guid><description><![CDATA[This is just there way of covering themselves if they drop channels or raise rates.  If the majority choose "Get Tough" then when they drop a channel they'll say "You told us to get tough to keep your costs down so this is the result of your decision".  If the majority choose "Roll Over" then  when they raise rates they'll say "You told us to roll over so we paid more for the programming and are passing the cost on to you as the result of your decision".]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Mainiac]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Dec 2nd 2009 10:39PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Time Warner wants to know if it should get tough about rate hikes]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/01/time-warner-wants-to-know-if-it-should-get-tough-about-rate-hike/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/01/time-warner-wants-to-know-if-it-should-get-tough-about-rate-hike/</guid><description><![CDATA[Even in this economy the programmers are raising rates on channels like mad.  Food Network is currently $.15/mo/subscriber and they are wanting to charge $.75/mo/sub.  And they are bundling channels no one wants when a cable operator just wants one channel.  For example, to carry any MTV "Digital" network (i.e. MTV2, VH1 Classic, etc), you first have to carry MTV, VH1, Nickelodeon, and Boomerang on ANALOG;  and before you can carry any HD network of theirs, you have to carry the above and ALL the MTV Digital networks.    It's a totall ripoff by the programmers.   ]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Glenn Gore]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Dec 3rd 2009 7:01AM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Time Warner wants to know if it should get tough about rate hikes]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/01/time-warner-wants-to-know-if-it-should-get-tough-about-rate-hike/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/01/time-warner-wants-to-know-if-it-should-get-tough-about-rate-hike/</guid><description><![CDATA[get tough and drop all of those useless SD channels or offer a cheaper HD only service. drop fox and all the channels that do not broadcast in hd as well.<br><br>get tough and lower your rates and up the HD service]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Paul]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Dec 7th 2009 7:15PM</pubDate></item></channel></rss>
