OT: Just cut cable service to Comcast
- Thread starter Richard the LIONhearted
- Start date
I've had ATT Uverse for the last 6.5 years, fairly satisfied with the service but I had to negotiate every couple of years to keep the TV/Phone/Internet bill as reasonable as I could, most recently $185/mo including all movie channels and 18 meg internet.
Within the last month all my discounts ran out and my bill was going to increase to $275/mo and due to the ATT buyout of DirecTV they had no interest in keeping the Uverse TV costs low as they now want to move all Uverse customers to DirecTV.... they're basically going to phase out Uverse TV through attrition. So I signed up with DirecTV (dropping HBO) and increasing internet speed (ATT) to 24 meg and lowering my monthly bill to about $150 and that's fixed for two years.
Would get about the same monthly bill with Charter cable as a new customer but they don't have a whole house DVR yet, but Charter internet would be 100 meg for that price but they would only guarantee that for one year. ATT now offers "Giga Power" internet in my area at 1000 meg speeds, that would cost an extra $40/mo.... don't need all that speed
Last edited:
Thanks...good post. I often wonder if I should get the neighborhood, who has a homeowners association, to get that AT&T 100 meg service and share it across the homes. We could just have one person buy it through the association and then share it through repeaters. We could just publish a router password. 100 meg is a lot of stuff and would support a ton of streaming iPads.
Consider the payback on a Lifetime TiVo DVR.
At one point on sale, their top DVR had a payback of under a year, when dropping the monthly rental for a cable company DVR.
Last edited:
We're dumping FIOS...just too bloody expensive for the handful of channels we actually watch. Just bought the Amazon Fire TV. So far, it's great, but have to figure out what I'm going to do for next football season. Thanks to all of the suggestions here so far.
Well, the T&C's most likely do not allow sharing, but look into it.
I don;t think 100Meg is enough for a neighborhood though. In fact I think that has fail all over it
In some markets, you can get a package from Comcast called "Internet Plus" or "Internet Blast" or "Internet Pro." For us, it's 100MBps internet, local channels, HBO and a couple of cable channels -- AMC and I think COM -- for $69.95 a month, about $75 a month with tax.
Given that fast internet by itself costs about the same, I am happy with this deal. For us Comcast internet has been pretty reliable and most of the time downstream speed is great.
The hardest thing is negotiating with Comcast. If you already have a $150 or $160 cable package, the rep is not going to want to sell you a $69 package -- they are paid bonuses to upgrade people, and downgrading people looks bad on their record. So they will be very resistant to telling you about packages that cost less than your current package.
I'd suggest just eliminating all TV and taking internet. Or, if possible cutting all Comcast service entirely and try to find another solution for Internet for a month or two -- perhaps you can do it through your Verizon or AT&T phone plan.
THEN when you call Comcast, the rep will be much more likely to want to tell you about low-cost plans like Internet Plus.
I really hate PS Vue interface -- incredibly clunky, but it does work. And to subscribe for just football season to get BTN is expensive - $150 for three months. But it's cheaper than being stuck with a cable package that's $150 a month.
Anyway these are interesting times for sports fans. The landscape is rapidly changing and the option are different every six months, so stay nimble.
Given that fast internet by itself costs about the same, I am happy with this deal. For us Comcast internet has been pretty reliable and most of the time downstream speed is great.
The hardest thing is negotiating with Comcast. If you already have a $150 or $160 cable package, the rep is not going to want to sell you a $69 package -- they are paid bonuses to upgrade people, and downgrading people looks bad on their record. So they will be very resistant to telling you about packages that cost less than your current package.
I'd suggest just eliminating all TV and taking internet. Or, if possible cutting all Comcast service entirely and try to find another solution for Internet for a month or two -- perhaps you can do it through your Verizon or AT&T phone plan.
THEN when you call Comcast, the rep will be much more likely to want to tell you about low-cost plans like Internet Plus.
I really hate PS Vue interface -- incredibly clunky, but it does work. And to subscribe for just football season to get BTN is expensive - $150 for three months. But it's cheaper than being stuck with a cable package that's $150 a month.
Anyway these are interesting times for sports fans. The landscape is rapidly changing and the option are different every six months, so stay nimble.
Best feature of the Comcast X1 box you can set it to automatically switch to Hi-Def channel.
They put Lifetime units on sale at times.
One upfront purchase and no more monthly fees for DVR rental. Current non-sale offer for their high end unit appears to be...
An All-in plan, for a one (1)-time payment at the current rate of $549.99 (plus any applicable taxes).3
Comparing that to paying monthly DVR rental charges, it may be a reasonable payback for some folks. After that, it's all savings.
Mileage may vary of course, but know of an an old TiVo that saved thousands in cable DVR rental fees.
Interesting to look at all the options in the thread, to see what is possible.
Last edited:
Comcast you just need to be willining to sign a contract and call ever two years. Right now I pay $149.87 including all taxes and fees for two boxes and dvr with every channel including premium and sport pack, 200mbs internet and phone.
I just cut the cord. Switched to Comcast Internet for 29.99/month for a year. Will switch between Comcast and another ISP going forward to keep getting introductory rates (next door neighbor does this successfully).
I prepaid for 3 months of DirecTV Now at $35/mo to get the free Apple TV ($149 value). You can sign up at an ATT store and walk out with the device instantly. DTV Now experience with live TV has been great. Buffers less than half a second when I switch channels. Picture quality is outstanding. DTV Now on-demand is a buffering and freezing nightmare. Also there's no DVR yet. I plan to switch to PS Vue after my three months are up.
I get CBS/NBC/Fox IN crystal clear HD over antenna. ABC is more difficult, but I can watch ABC live (Houston affiliate for some reason) on the Apple TV Watch ABC app after authenticating with my DirecTV Now credentials.
Netgear Nighthawk changed my life a few years back. No more dead spots and inconsistent speed. Great devices.
I prepaid for 3 months of DirecTV Now at $35/mo to get the free Apple TV ($149 value). You can sign up at an ATT store and walk out with the device instantly. DTV Now experience with live TV has been great. Buffers less than half a second when I switch channels. Picture quality is outstanding. DTV Now on-demand is a buffering and freezing nightmare. Also there's no DVR yet. I plan to switch to PS Vue after my three months are up.
I get CBS/NBC/Fox IN crystal clear HD over antenna. ABC is more difficult, but I can watch ABC live (Houston affiliate for some reason) on the Apple TV Watch ABC app after authenticating with my DirecTV Now credentials.
Netgear Nighthawk changed my life a few years back. No more dead spots and inconsistent speed. Great devices.
I don't know who you see out, but with work schedules we are lucky to go out 2x a month.. Just cause restaurants are packed don't mean it's the same people eating all the time. When we go out, we work between several local establishments.
If you switch to Vue, the only two good options right now to run it are the Amazon Fire TV box and the Playstation 4. The PS3 can run it, but the guide is jumpy. The Fire stick can run it as well, but the guide is nearly unusable in the old sticks and just barely acceptable in the new ones. A new Fire Stick might be a good choice for a secondary TV that gets limited use.
Roku now has it, and the stick does well with it. Can't speak for the Roku boxes.
I left Roku out because it didn't have the guide the last time I checked. Is that still the case?
It's my understanding that it does not--but is being worked on. I no longer have it because of the DirecTV situation described above.
That said, worked fine otherwise.
You can activate it on Apple TV now. This is why I pulled the trigger on the DirecTV Now AppleTV promotion. I was originally planning on buying a Fire TV box.
http://blog.us.playstation.com/2016/11/17/playstation-vue-launches-on-apple-tv-today/
Right now I'm using Chromecast for a secondary TV with DirecTV Now and it's working great. I understand PS Vue has more limited mobile/casting options and not all channels are available. My question is...how limited is it? What do you lose and how is the quality?
Hmmm, I'm all for home cooking, but are you arguing that if you dine out 10 times a month, you don't get to care about your cable bill?
And while we're talking about food, imagine if restaurants worked the way the cable industry works. You just want a burger, but you can't order a burger. You have three choices. You can get the "basic" menu for $20 -- is oatmeal, egg and toast, but no burger. The "extended" menu includes a burger but also fried octopus, prime rib, burritos and lasagne and costs $140. Or you can get the "premium" which will be 20 courses -- every dish on the restaurant's menu for $220.
I understand the arguments for cable bundling. Some people will benefit and some people will not when bundling goes away. But it is clearly going away. Consumers will win in the end. And that is very scary for ESPN because their whole business model is predicated on bundling.
Oh for me it's the budgetable costs. I want very much to be able to budget my money based on the actual value of what I'm receiving. When you're paying for 400 channels and only watching 1% of them you don't perceive a very high value there, and that's part of why cable companies score so low in customer satisfaction surveys. In an a la carte system, you'd be paying a lot more per channel -- maybe $10 or even $20. But you can at least decide whether you're getting enough value from the channel. We do that now for Netflix, Amazon and HBO -- decide whether it's worth the monthly cost. I think that kind of accountability will be good for ESPN. ESPN will have to produce programming that people actually buy instead of just impose it on people who are required to pay ESPN's fees because of bundling. It might make for better football broadcasts.
Agree on all points except that the consumer will win.
What we save in cable bundle/package costs we will end up paying back in droves to ISPs due to "bandwidth usage". Personally, I foresee a future similar to how internet was in the early-mid 90s: "Get online for 400 hours/month!"
Comcast will find a way to make money, you can count on that, but don't think bandwidth usage will be a huge factor in cost. Bandwidth is cheap.
Right now most Comcast customers are allowed to use 1 TB a month before they violate the terms of their usage agreement.
A HD video stream is approx 3 GB/hr. So 1 TB a month would give you 333 hours of HD programming - 10 hours a day.
So if everything you watch is streamed, the only way you'll have additional bandwidth charges is if you turn on the TV every morning and just leave it on in the background for 16 hours till you go to bed.
Which some people do. Some people like TV just for background noise. Some people find it comforting.
But aside from that -- if you're needing to actually WATCH more than 10 hours a day of TV, you're probably going to wear out your eyes long before you hit your Comcast bandwidth limit.
I think Comcast is well aware that people are going to get away from the cable package and buy streaming video a la carte. They will sell you the internet connection to do that, and they are trying hard to get you to buy streams through their Xfinity box. I.e. they want you to watch Netflix through their equipment. Who knows how it will shake out when the dam breaks and TV goes a la carte, but I think Comcast will be fine. They will still be the middleman between content generators and consumer, they'll get their cut as they do now The difference will be, when ESPN wants to raise their price for the umpteenth time, Comcast won't take the blame. ESPN will have to go direct to their audience and justify the price increase. I think Comcast may like the new paradigm just fine.
Right now most Comcast customers are allowed to use 1 TB a month before they violate the terms of their usage agreement.
A HD video stream is approx 3 GB/hr. So 1 TB a month would give you 333 hours of HD programming - 10 hours a day.
So if everything you watch is streamed, the only way you'll have additional bandwidth charges is if you turn on the TV every morning and just leave it on in the background for 16 hours till you go to bed.
Which some people do. Some people like TV just for background noise. Some people find it comforting.
But aside from that -- if you're needing to actually WATCH more than 10 hours a day of TV, you're probably going to wear out your eyes long before you hit your Comcast bandwidth limit.
I think Comcast is well aware that people are going to get away from the cable package and buy streaming video a la carte. They will sell you the internet connection to do that, and they are trying hard to get you to buy streams through their Xfinity box. I.e. they want you to watch Netflix through their equipment. Who knows how it will shake out when the dam breaks and TV goes a la carte, but I think Comcast will be fine. They will still be the middleman between content generators and consumer, they'll get their cut as they do now The difference will be, when ESPN wants to raise their price for the umpteenth time, Comcast won't take the blame. ESPN will have to go direct to their audience and justify the price increase. I think Comcast may like the new paradigm just fine.
Last edited:
What was your tripleplay bil, voice, video, data in 1990? $20 voice (long distance extra), $30 cable for 50 channels(maybe), $25 data for 56kbps = $75.
What you have now is better & more service in all 3 categories.
Adjusting for inflation you will see that prices have NOT increased in a real sense, while service has multiplied.
Quit complaining.
What you have now is better & more service in all 3 categories.
Adjusting for inflation you will see that prices have NOT increased in a real sense, while service has multiplied.
Quit complaining.
This makes no sense!! The price has increased and package qualities have decreased. To get the few channels I watch I got to pay 140.00 for a TV package that has channels in spanish, 14 shopping channels, 3 DTV advertisement stations, and countless other worthless programs. If I get rid of those, I drop down to the next package that eliminates BTN.
Not sure how much you were paying. I was tired of DirectTV at $109.00 month. Switched to Dish +120 package. Has BTN and lots of ESPN. Lots of sports channels. A promo for $49.00 month. It's now $59.00 month. I've adapted and like it fine.
https://www.dish.com/packages/
https://www.dish.com/packages/
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
FB Recruiting Running Recruit Visitors List (2025 Spring Edition)- Latest: NittanyNation51
