Cable lobby group NCTA-The Internet & Television Association claimed that the commission's "micromanagement of advertising in today's hyper-competitive marketplace will force operators to either clutter their ads with confusing disclosures or leave pricing information out entirely."
Or, you know, you could just tell the truth.
hyper-competitive marketplace
Ah yes, when I think of "hyper competitive" I think of the one and only one cable provider who services my neighborhood.
Comcast calls me all the time trying to sell me on their Trojan horse streaming box or their cell service. I’m polite to the caller cause I know it’s just a gig for them but I always calmly tell them I only have Comcast as I have no other choice and I’d rather peel off my finger nails than give them any other business. It speaks to how bad things are that I’m dying for Verizon of all companies to come “save” me. Hyper-competitive, fucking lol.
Verizon FIOS is like a unicorn. Service is stable, price hasn't moved, support is available, clear and friendly. Install and repair dates are quick.
one day the shoe will drop, been waiting for it for years, but in my little corridor they just keep kicking comcast's ass.
The shoe dropped on most of Verizon's former territory. Basically anywhere they had DSL but didn't want to lay fiber they sold off instead of even trying.
Yeah, if you ended up with frontier or anyone else they sold to you're going to have a bad time.
I had them when I rented and I was also surprised by how few complaints I had
I was so happy when I was able to tell Comcast/Xfinity to suck toads after moving to an area with Google Fiber. Google may be a shit company, but I gotta admit I really love symmetrical gigabit service for $70/month.
There's a local company in my city that offers fiber to the home. I'm so happy not to be stuck with Comcast!
Same! I've lived 3 different places in this city and this is the first one that had an independent fiber internet provider.
It's hilarious getting Comcast/Xfinity mailers advertising internet offers that are higher priced and slower than what I have.
I only have Comcast as I have no other choice and I’d rather peel off my finger nails than give them any other business
I would hope this would also apply to the live TV streaming services like Hulu+live tv, Fubo, YouTube TV, etc. I looked into some of them, and the added fees took the monthly bill from like $83 a month to over $100 a month, but you don’t know that unless you read the disclaimers since they advertised it at $83 a month.
Seems like it certainly needs to. I haven’t noticed any such added fees for the services I subscribe to. If true, that’s a good indication someone is seeking a competitive advantage by misleading potential customers, and good reason to act
isn’t the worst offender I’ve seen, but it’s still bullshit. They should never be able to advertise it at $84.99 when there are $30.99 in required fees
That would go immediately on my list of “never do business”
And the thing about regulation like this is that it just resets the bar height for everyone. It's not like this doesn't apply to all competitors.
Unless we mean non-cable competition, i.e. streaming. Maybe that's not under the jurisdiction of FCC? If not, though, then I have to wonder why this has to be an FCC thing in the first place. This is about truth in advertising, in general.
Whoa whoa whoa, have you been playing too many online games recently? Because your views are sounding a little bit extreme there...
As an autist who doesn't always catch sarcasm, I have to ask: what alien robot downvoted you?
Beats me, but I seem to have attracted some pretty dedicated haters on this site recently, so I'm assuming one of them.
What competition?
Isnt there like..only two cities in the whole country where cable companies actually have to compete with each other? (and consequently the customers see the lowest prices in the country.. weird how that works?)
The proliferation of home cell internet and Starlink's internet has had a nice downward pressure in many markets. Both are often surprisingly good, even for heavy internet users. They are something worth checking out in your area.
Edit: Note, if you look into satellite internet, Starlink is pretty much the only one that doesn't suck. This is due to the satellites being in low earth orbit (fairly close) rather than way, way off in geostationary orbit.
Starlink is the disposable plastic of internet though. they are constantly losing satalites due to that low earth orbit, which are constantly being replaced.
also being owned by a raging right wing fucktard that turns them off and on to suit his political whims does nothing to endear me to the service
The former is more of a technical one. LEO has (some) air drag, so anything there is temporary; and you need them in LEO to not have pings measured in seconds. But, as you stated, the CEO is......fucktarded. I'll fully agree there!
But, more importantly, that's why I also mentioned cell networks. In the US, TMobile and Verizon home cell internet is competitive in quite a good percent of the country and worth looking into if you don't like your current provider. TMobile's is $50/mo, for example.
So I have to actually do research instead of being baited in? That's fine too.
Nothing better than Verizon advertising $65 a month, which is already too much, then when you actually try to sign up it's not just more; they straight up refuse to tell you what it will be (yes, I tried asking).
I know that's not cable but they both play the same games. No, it's not impossible for you to just tell a customer what you're going to charge them.
So it's like going to the hospital. Arghh
The best part?
I ended up actually signing up for visible (Verizon has the best service in my area). It's Verizon, reselling their own service, for $45 with everything included. (That's 50GB before they deprioritize you. There's a $35 that's less but still fine for most people.)
It seems like it is actually possible to include those fees in their price.
micromanagement of advertising in today's hyper-competitive marketplace
Well good news: any competitors have the same restrictions so I don't see the relevance.
Or, you know, you could just tell the truth.
Ah yes, when I think of "hyper competitive" I think of the one and only one cable provider who services my neighborhood.
Comcast calls me all the time trying to sell me on their
Trojan horsestreaming box or their cell service. I’m polite to the caller cause I know it’s just a gig for them but I always calmly tell them I only have Comcast as I have no other choice and I’d rather peel off my finger nails than give them any other business. It speaks to how bad things are that I’m dying for Verizon of all companies to come “save” me. Hyper-competitive, fucking lol.Verizon FIOS is like a unicorn. Service is stable, price hasn't moved, support is available, clear and friendly. Install and repair dates are quick.
one day the shoe will drop, been waiting for it for years, but in my little corridor they just keep kicking comcast's ass.
The shoe dropped on most of Verizon's former territory. Basically anywhere they had DSL but didn't want to lay fiber they sold off instead of even trying.
Yeah, if you ended up with frontier or anyone else they sold to you're going to have a bad time.
I had them when I rented and I was also surprised by how few complaints I had
I was so happy when I was able to tell Comcast/Xfinity to suck toads after moving to an area with Google Fiber. Google may be a shit company, but I gotta admit I really love symmetrical gigabit service for $70/month.
There's a local company in my city that offers fiber to the home. I'm so happy not to be stuck with Comcast!
Same! I've lived 3 different places in this city and this is the first one that had an independent fiber internet provider. It's hilarious getting Comcast/Xfinity mailers advertising internet offers that are higher priced and slower than what I have.
Literally me and cox communication
I would hope this would also apply to the live TV streaming services like Hulu+live tv, Fubo, YouTube TV, etc. I looked into some of them, and the added fees took the monthly bill from like $83 a month to over $100 a month, but you don’t know that unless you read the disclaimers since they advertised it at $83 a month.
Seems like it certainly needs to. I haven’t noticed any such added fees for the services I subscribe to. If true, that’s a good indication someone is seeking a competitive advantage by misleading potential customers, and good reason to act
That would go immediately on my list of “never do business”
And the thing about regulation like this is that it just resets the bar height for everyone. It's not like this doesn't apply to all competitors.
Unless we mean non-cable competition, i.e. streaming. Maybe that's not under the jurisdiction of FCC? If not, though, then I have to wonder why this has to be an FCC thing in the first place. This is about truth in advertising, in general.
Whoa whoa whoa, have you been playing too many online games recently? Because your views are sounding a little bit extreme there...
As an autist who doesn't always catch sarcasm, I have to ask: what alien robot downvoted you?
Beats me, but I seem to have attracted some pretty dedicated haters on this site recently, so I'm assuming one of them.
What competition?
Isnt there like..only two cities in the whole country where cable companies actually have to compete with each other? (and consequently the customers see the lowest prices in the country.. weird how that works?)
The proliferation of home cell internet and Starlink's internet has had a nice downward pressure in many markets. Both are often surprisingly good, even for heavy internet users. They are something worth checking out in your area.
Edit: Note, if you look into satellite internet, Starlink is pretty much the only one that doesn't suck. This is due to the satellites being in low earth orbit (fairly close) rather than way, way off in geostationary orbit.
Starlink is the disposable plastic of internet though. they are constantly losing satalites due to that low earth orbit, which are constantly being replaced.
also being owned by a raging right wing fucktard that turns them off and on to suit his political whims does nothing to endear me to the service
The former is more of a technical one. LEO has (some) air drag, so anything there is temporary; and you need them in LEO to not have pings measured in seconds. But, as you stated, the CEO is......fucktarded. I'll fully agree there!
But, more importantly, that's why I also mentioned cell networks. In the US, TMobile and Verizon home cell internet is competitive in quite a good percent of the country and worth looking into if you don't like your current provider. TMobile's is $50/mo, for example.
So I have to actually do research instead of being baited in? That's fine too.
Nothing better than Verizon advertising $65 a month, which is already too much, then when you actually try to sign up it's not just more; they straight up refuse to tell you what it will be (yes, I tried asking).
I know that's not cable but they both play the same games. No, it's not impossible for you to just tell a customer what you're going to charge them.
So it's like going to the hospital. Arghh
The best part?
I ended up actually signing up for visible (Verizon has the best service in my area). It's Verizon, reselling their own service, for $45 with everything included. (That's 50GB before they deprioritize you. There's a $35 that's less but still fine for most people.)
It seems like it is actually possible to include those fees in their price.
Well good news: any competitors have the same restrictions so I don't see the relevance.