Oh do they mean customers who own stock in the company?!
...... such a great smiley for "gettin it in/deviousness"
Comcast will acquire Time Warner Cable in a deal worth $45.2 billion
- Thread starter 88m3
- Start date
...... such a great smiley for "gettin it in/deviousness"
So nothing wrong has happened, its the potential that has you guys upset...
How are you .... *cough* ...... poster of the year? ... and don't get that Comcast having an enormous amount of the cable TV market cornered already and attempting to purchase another major cable provider would give them overwhelming market share .... a little thing called monopoly .......
That supposedly the Sherman Anti-Trust Law was supposed to regulate/prevent, because the potential for price gouging is major ......
... you not understanding breh? 
I dont' think this is a liberal or conservative thing....not on the outset
You did it too, you assume some inherent evil in possessing enormous market share.How are you .... *cough* ...... poster of the year? ... and don't get that Comcast having an enormous amount of the cable TV market cornered already and attempting to purchase another major cable provider would give them overwhelming market share .... a little thing called monopoly .......
That supposedly the Sherman Anti-Trust Law was supposed to regulate/prevent, because the potential for price gouging is major ......
guilty til proven innocent is the norm now.
You did it too, you assume some inherent evil in possessing enormous market share.
guilty til proven innocent is the norm now.
.... not evil .... but unfairness that could turn evil if you paying an exorbitant amount for a telecommunications bill, whose going to stop them..... this is why they broke up AT&T back in the day into different regional "Bells" ... this ain't me talking, this is history talking .... 
Depreciating Asset
Please pawg responsibly
Basic microeconomics illustrates that monopolies are incentivized to produce a smaller level of output and charge higher prices than that which would exist in a perfectly competitive environment. If companies follow through on basic economic principles (there are possible reasons why they wouldn't like perhaps they want to avoid government regulation or promote the idea that they are a company that cares) then this does hurts consumers.
But on the other hand I would argue that cable is a nonessential good. It's not like anyone has to purchase cable to preserve their livelihood. If you don't like the cost of the good, don't buy it.
But on the other hand I would argue that cable is a nonessential good. It's not like anyone has to purchase cable to preserve their livelihood. If you don't like the cost of the good, don't buy it.
but if comcast own 80%- 95% of the market share where will we go? theorhetically speaking, what about people that doesnt have much of a choice?
Govt. as history also shows...
Depreciating Asset
Please pawg responsibly
You have a choice not to buy cable if you think it's too expensive or think they are delivering a shytty product. You can always cut the cord.
I think that is what is going to happen. switch to fios, get netflix, turn off the cable and get xmbc, call it a day, someone else mentioned a roku box. whats a roku box again?
ExodusNirvana
Change is inevitable...
True but when the alternatives are slower speeds and less offerings compared to what's actually possible (peep the speeds available in other countries) it begs the question: why are the ISPs claiming they don't have the bandwith to offer us these speeds?
The same reason why the cell companies are withholding...customer service does not increase profits....increases in subscriber base does.
Especially when the subscriber base doesn't have a choice.
Verizon is not gonna roll FIOS out anymore. It costs too much. They're gonna focus on their more profitable wireless business.
And it will be years before Google Fiber hits places like the tri-state area the way it is in Kansas.
Depreciating Asset
Please pawg responsibly
I actually am ignoring the internet in my responses and I shouldn't. That's a whole different story. I think that if the only internet option available is a monopoly, then the public welfare is in jeopardy. The internet HAS become an essential good in our country and thus it needs to be regulated or at the very least watched to prevent fraud and abuse. I don't feel this way about cable television but I do about the internet.
Depreciating Asset
Please pawg responsibly
Solid point. The lines are quite blurred with these telecom conglomerates. There are some products that they offer where they should have the freedom to charge whatever price they want and others where the government needs to enact punishment if there is price gouging or intentional supply limitations (which you mentioned). The Federal Trade Commission will need to keep a close watch on the details of this merger if they are going to protect the public interest. But at the same time we can't assume that it's all bad. Some and possibly all aspects of the merger may be perfectly legitimate.
It's simple. Cable companies already have monopolies over territories. Now Comcast will have an even larger monopoly. Stifled competition = bad for the economy. Unless you have an explanation as to how this is a good thing? This is not "free market" at all.fukkin liberals I swear. At least put forth an argument as to why this is bad/evil. There is only a thread title...
...not even an link or real comment in the op. Just a mention of the acquisition, followed by outrage
... and then the free market is pointlessly thrown in the mix just for shyts and giggles, cause f*ck that too.
I remember when I moved and Comcast told me 200 for install in 3 rooms.