
Cable Company Fees Add $450 to Typical Annual Bill - howard941
https://www.consumerreports.org/fees-billing/cable-company-fees-add-to-tv-bill/
======
kevin_b_er
And remember, you have little to no recourse for these hidden fees. Due to
mandatory binding arbitration, you are forbidden from courts of law to dispute
their fees. You cannot and will not have your "day in court". The companies
put a small line item in your contract. You were not required to have a common
understanding or meeting of the minds to have been banned from disputing these
fees in a court of law.

Instead you must hope your local attorney general defends the public interest.

~~~
jjeaff
I get that a court of law is preferable in many cases.

But the common refrain is that losing binding arbitration cases is a foregone
conclusion.

That is simply not the case. Many times, you can win arbitration cases and it
will cost you much less than a traditional court case would.

------
KingMachiavelli
I can't think of a situation where I would ever want the base price and fees
to be disclosed seperately. The advertised price should include everything but
sales taxes that vary by region. If I ever care to know why the advertised
price is different in state A vs state B, then I would simply look up
breakdown of the total price.

> The total amounts to nearly $450 per year in unexpected fees just on TV
> service alone.

As someone who hasn't every signed up for anything but flat rate internet
service (still from Comcast); the only 'fee' I had was a $15 BS charge for a
'self-installation kit' but it was still discolsed before signing up for
service. Are the fee amounts unknown until the first bill? Or are they just
baried in the 100 page contract?

~~~
09bjb
Welcome to retail. Companies recognize that the best way to get a lead is to
advertise the lowest base price out there, and the best way to make money is
to have the most leads and then use every tactic in the book to extract
revenue from them (close the deal, and then fees, upgrades, upcharges, rate
increases, etc.)

~~~
mathewsanders
A few years ago I was in a T-mobile store (making the switch from AT&T) and
the sales guy kept trying to get me to include add-ons to my base contract
(e.g. unlimited international calls).

He kept trying to convince me, and I kept saying “no I don’t want that”. At
the (final?) step when reviewing the contract I saw he’d still included some
of the add ons.

I asked him to remove them, and he started the spiel about why I should
include them again.

This is the rudest I’ve ever been to a salesperson, but I didn’t even say
goodbye: I just walked out, went home and ordered a sim online.

I’ve often wondered if he was just new/poorly trained or actually
intentionally trying to trick me.

~~~
pkulak
Commissions, baby.

------
Phillips126
In rural New York, US, I had the "pleasure" of dealing with Time Warner Cable
(now Spectrum) as pretty much our only provider. We wanted basic TV and
internet access, each were priced relatively high on their own but cheap as a
"triple play" package when phone was included. I think our overall bill was
$70/mo for the first year. After the 12 months, our bill went to just shy of
$250/mo (promotion ended). We ended up only really using the internet with
streaming services so I called them up to cut back exclusively to their
internet dropping phone and TV.

This was the most PAINFUL phone call I've had in a long time that literally
resulted in me begging them to remove these services after they made at least
a dozen or two "what if we do this..." offers. Since that day we've never
thought twice to getting TV again (or phone) and have strictly stuck to
internet. I'd say weekly I get a new offer mailed to me but it goes straight
into the trash.

It's all to apparent they make their promotional packages sweet enough that
most people will sign up for them. Once the promotion ends you're stuck with
all the "bells and whistles" at an incredibly high price. I believe they
intentionally make their downgrade processes as painful as possible so most
people just deal with the payment. For example you can easily increase your
channel lineup/internet speeds online but you have to call to downgrade
anything...

------
chrisseaton
In the US do people really pay hundreds of dollars a month for cable? I could
never in a million years justify spending that much for entertainment like
that when you can get internet for £30 and Netflix for £6, and we're famously
overcharged in the UK I thought!

~~~
defen
My parents pay Comcast $219/month for cable TV (with HBO/Showtime/Netflix) +
internet + landline. I've told them multiple times that this seems
outrageously high but they're remarkably blasé about it.

~~~
chrisseaton
> $219/month

This is effectively a small second mortgage. That is absolutely bonkers.

~~~
hnburnsy
Just a thought what does attending a play, movie, or sporting event cost. On a
per hour basis, cable TV is cheap.

I really hope that the cord cutting alternates start to drive prices down from
the legacy satellite and cable providers. It seems they haven't yet.

------
briffle
A bit off-topic, but this used to be discussed often on the consumerist.com
web site, which Consumer Reports bought, and then archived. I miss that blog.

~~~
RandomBacon
I miss that site a lot too, but there's more to the story than that:

\- Consumer Reports bought the site, all is well.

\- Site was hacked via the comments system.

\- Site returned without the comments.

\- Since comments were why most people went to that site, the site site
suffered greatly.

\- They reintroduced comments, but made you jump through hoops to get an
account. Only a few (literaly less than ten that I can remember) people
commented.

\- Those few people stopped commenting because there was no one else to
interact with.

\- The site shut down.

(I had a story that I submitted and was posted to The Consumerist. I also had
one of those few accounts after the hack.)

------
dehrmann
I get how fees that appear to be regulatory but are actually from the provider
are BS, but we really can't decide if we want flat-fee for everything, a la
carte, or packages. The article calls out HD fees and the sports upsell, but
Netflix charges extra for 4k, and it's its own sort of package, kinda like HBO
or sports, so it's not a solution, it's the same old problem.

------
formichunter
I cut my monthly bill from $191 down to $79.99 Gigabit/Fios plus $40 for
DirectvNow/AT&TTVNOWVIPASAPPLZ. Plus, I converted my mom, Comcast in this
case...can't understand why anybody would settle for cable prices...hurts so
bad. Well, I'm also the IT helpdesk of the family and get called A LOT more
now that I'm expected to fix issues asap.

------
Jonnax
You rent your modem and set top box in America?

That's crazy.

~~~
MrFoof
You don't have to, but most people do.

I supplied my own modem. I see no fee. I haven't had TV service since 2007.

I have Comcast and my bill is $60/mo (total) for 250Mbps down, 10Mbps up (and
get that reliably). When it's about to go back to $90-100/mo in May
(promotional price expires), I will give them a 15-minute call to get back
down to that $60/mo for another year.

My parents on the other hand have a TV package, internet, and phone through
them, while renting a set top box and their modem. They pay somewhere around
$200/mo. I've informed them of their options (and offered to set it up for
them), but they elect to not care.

~~~
tenebrisalietum
I had TV then switched to a similar Internet only plan with Comcast.

I adopted a strategy of telling them I have no TV anymore (and I disconnected
my TV boxes before calling) and need the Internet for work only. I had to
politely repeat myself a few times and decline a couple offers of bundled
packages, but they switched me over.

The experience wasn't too bad. I expected the caller to try to upsell me but I
just said "No thanks, I don't have a TV anyway and really just need the
Internet for my job."

But, people who leave themselves open by telling the rep something like "I
don't like what's on TV" or "TV is too expensive" will probably have trouble.
They really want you to have any type of TV subscription.

------
mnm1
It's too bad we can't have laws regulating fraudulent behavior like this. This
is just one of many ways that companies continually fuck over American
consumers and consumers can't do anything about it other than not using
services which isn't always an option. Getting ripped off on an ongoing basis
is the norm. How do we expect people to plan financially when they are
constantly lied to and screwed out of their money with no recourse? Even if
there was a class action suit, it would do nothing for consumers. Voting is
completely useless as both parties support this predatory anti regulatory
capitalism. It's no wonder so many people turn to violence. One had to think
that many of those who do so were probably motivated by getting fucked over by
companies, especially since the vast majorities of shooters have no mental
health problems. What a fucked up society to live in, where one is helpless
and often hopeless.

------
cik
TIL there are people who still have cable. I assume it's just generational? I
don't know anyone (including my parents) who have cable anymore - and that's
very much limited to tech folks.

------
ptah
similar shenanigans with satellite tv. cheaper to just subscribe to all
streaming options

------
neogodless
This is (edited to - regulatory capture. I had mentioned capitalism; I only
mean we want consumers to figure out what choices they have and exercise them.
But as mentioned below, when there's power, like in a monopoly, that power
needs to restricted or removed i.e. by government or if at all possible,
meaningful competition.)

Here is your recourse:

Try to become and remain among the educated. If you are in a position to do
so, educate others.

Vote with your wallet. This, by itself, is not enough. The masses need to be
educated and make this vote meaningful.

When the ones in power play dirty, try to remove that power or restrict their
ability to play dirty. Our biggest, most profitable companies seem to
increasingly have the ability to influence consumers with underhanded,
manipulative means. In that scenario, there isn't enough educated consumer
power to effect change.

This morning, I was thinking about Google, and how I personally feel like they
have some of the absolute worst customer support in the world for many
products. Because they will not fail to profit because a few hundred thousand
people are unhappy with one of their services. Likewise, the cable companies
can anger customers, but continue to profit, as long as they have some kind of
power to reap those profits, such as being the only option in an area, or the
only (or most direct) way to see certain content, such as live sports or
broadcasts. There's definitely a difference in the analogy above - Google
makes most of their money not from consumers, but from businesses wishing to
advertise.

Anyway, I think cable companies will get worse as long as they are mixing
pipelines and content subscriptions, and certainly as long as they hold the
keys to the single wire bringing all of your entertainment into your home.

~~~
megaman821
Why would a regional monopoly represent capitalism? Google Fiber had to halt
their fiber roll-out because of all the red-tape and lawsuits they faced. The
more accurate statement would be, this is regulatory capture.

~~~
neogodless
You're right - I mean, they don't have a monopoly in delivery of "any"
entertainment being delivered to you, which is why I use cable/fiber for
internet and nothing more. I know many people feel the need to have live
broadcast and choose to continue paying their cable/fiber provider for
content. So far they have not added additional fees to my internet bill - only
when I subscribe to TV content.

So it's somewhat in the hands of consumers to stop paying cable/fiber for TV,
within the limits of monopolies on content people feel they need.

I'm not blaming capitalism or saying it's a bad thing. I'm saying - we want
better options for consumers to win here.

