Anyone else paying $65.95 for Comcast?

[TheGadfly]

As of January, my internet-only Comcast bill is $65.95 per month. That's up from an already high $44.99.

Admittedly, I subscribe to "performance internet" but it's not clear from Comcast's website whether it's even possible to downgrade to a cheaper internet service. I've looked into other providers but Comcast has a monopoly in my area.

I plan to move in August 2016, at which time I can probably get back on Comcast's promotional rate, so it's not the end of the world. But, geez, $65.95 for JUST internet?

[rulesofacquisition]

Good freakin' luck dealing with Comcast. I had a sale plan at about $69 for internet (we have a few cable channels because it was cheaper than just internet). It just  (today) went up by $10, and is scheduled to keep going up. The last time this happened they said they didn't have a cheaper plan because that was only for new customers. So 4 hangups and hours later I cancelled with them, and they sent me to collections for a modem I didn't have. I went to a local office, and they can't help you, so I had a basic hissy fit and told DH to deal with it if he wanted internet back. So he gets the pleasure of calling them today.

Sorry for the rant, Comcast really sucks, wish I had another internet option. Did I mention they suck?

[Allison]

I am on the Comcast Economy internet plan for $39.95.  I didn't think they could go lower but called and ask for help getting my bill lower.

[woopwoop]

Ugh, I wish we were that low. We're paying $89 now for some internet plan (not the bare bones, maybe one tier up). They just raised the rate by like $20.

[Jack]

Nope, I'm paying $19.99 (for 3Mbps down / 768k up -- which is bullshit; asymmetrical connections are unethical and there is zero technical excuse for it either). It's the slowest/cheapest plan they offered me other than "internet essentials," which you have to be on food stamps to qualify for.

I'd like to have a faster connection, but I'm not about to give those criminal fuckers a penny more than I absolutely have to. When I moved to my current location I tried literally every alternative (all two of them, DSL and wi-max) and neither of them would work at all, let alone fast. I'll happily be paying Google Fiber $70/month the nanosecond it becomes available.

Part of the reason the price offered to me is lower might be that I'm in a not-so-affluent zip code. The other part of it is that I'm really, really persistent in demanding the absolute cheapest deal. I think to get this one (which was advertised by a direct-mail flyer), I had to talk to a Comcast phone rep, then a Comcast website chat rep, then a phone rep again, then a website chat rep again. (They initially wanted to pretend my address didn't "qualify" for it, despite the fact that it was mailed directly to it! Then they the phone rep tried to tell me it was only available when signing up online, and then the web rep told me only a phone rep could cancel my previous plan. I don't remember all the other details anymore, but suffice it to say it was as much of a PITA as they could make it.)

I also have made, not one, but two Better Business Bureau complaints in the past in order to get Comcast to honor their own reps' promises, so maybe a note about that is on my file and they know not to try to fuck with me. (Or maybe that's just wishful thinking on my part.)

[simpleFIblog]

As of January, my internet-only Comcast bill is $65.95 per month. That's up from an already high $44.99.

Admittedly, I subscribe to "performance internet" but it's not clear from Comcast's website whether it's even possible to downgrade to a cheaper internet service. I've looked into other providers but Comcast has a monopoly in my area.

I plan to move in August 2016, at which time I can probably get back on Comcast's promotional rate, so it's not the end of the world. But, geez, $65.95 for JUST internet?

Dealing with Comcast is indeed a pain. It took me several phone calls and a couple trips to the store, but I was able to negotiate a reasonable rate for the same Performance service you have. (Full story here: http://simplified-finance.com/5-simple-steps-to-a-lower-internet-bill/)


The website often doesn't show all of the available rates and the customer service reps on the phone really don't offer much help beyond the information on the website. If there is a store in your area, I recommend going in and speaking with someone face to face. Having recently gone through the process myself, it was the only way to get anything done and the in-store employees offered a rate that wasn't on the website.


If you don't feel like waiting around until August when you move, sometimes you can get a promotional rate just by asking.

[ZiziPB]

Nope, I'm paying $19.99 (for 3Mbps down / 768k up -- which is bullshit; asymmetrical connections are unethical and there is zero technical excuse for it either). It's the slowest/cheapest plan they offered me other than "internet essentials," which you have to be on food stamps to qualify for.

I'd like to have a faster connection, but I'm not about to give those criminal fuckers a penny more than I absolutely have to. When I moved to my current location I tried literally every alternative (all two of them, DSL and wi-max) and neither of them would work at all, let alone fast. I'll happily be paying Google Fiber $70/month the nanosecond it becomes available.

Part of the reason the price offered to me is lower might be that I'm in a not-so-affluent zip code. The other part of it is that I'm really, really persistent in demanding the absolute cheapest deal. I think to get this one (which was advertised by a direct-mail flyer), I had to talk to a Comcast phone rep, then a Comcast website chat rep, then a phone rep again, then a website chat rep again. (They initially wanted to pretend my address didn't "qualify" for it, despite the fact that it was mailed directly to it! Then they the phone rep tried to tell me it was only available when signing up online, and then the web rep told me only a phone rep could cancel my previous plan. I don't remember all the other details anymore, but suffice it to say it was as much of a PITA as they could make it.)

I also have made, not one, but two Better Business Bureau complaints in the past in order to get Comcast to honor their own reps' promises, so maybe a note about that is on my file and they know not to try to fuck with me. (Or maybe that's just wishful thinking on my part.)

Haha, I have just cancelled my service with Frontier and called Comcast earlier today to arrange for my new internet service.  The lady on the phone gives me a price of $44.99 per month plus tax.  I tell her that I just got a mailer from Comcast the other day for the same level of service she's offering to me but it is for $29.99 plus tax.  She gives me a run around and talks about postal zones and the postal service misdirecting mail!  The mailer is addressed to my address!!!  I tell her that on their website they are showing $34.99 for the same level of service, so what's up it with her pricing?  She tells me she has to do research and get back to me??!!!  This is not a good start.  Reminded me of why I dropped Comcast almost 3 years ago.  But my current provider, Frontier, is even worse, so I guess I'll wait for her to call me back.  If I don't hear back by tomorrow, I'm calling them again and this time I will not be polite. 

Frontier, BTW, was notorious for breaking their reps promises.  They basically ignored any chat or conversation I had with them and charged me whatever they felt like.  I spent months calling them, complaining, being escalated, calling again, e-mailing, all to no avail...

[boarder42]

move to a google fiber city.  free 6 down 6 up ... just pay a 300 dollar install fee and you ahve it for 7 years. 

ok so its not free but its 3.5 a month for 7 years

[JLee]

Nope, I'm paying $19.99 (for 3Mbps down / 768k up -- which is bullshit; asymmetrical connections are unethical and there is zero technical excuse for it either). It's the slowest/cheapest plan they offered me other than "internet essentials," which you have to be on food stamps to qualify for.

I'd like to have a faster connection, but I'm not about to give those criminal fuckers a penny more than I absolutely have to. When I moved to my current location I tried literally every alternative (all two of them, DSL and wi-max) and neither of them would work at all, let alone fast. I'll happily be paying Google Fiber $70/month the nanosecond it becomes available.

Part of the reason the price offered to me is lower might be that I'm in a not-so-affluent zip code. The other part of it is that I'm really, really persistent in demanding the absolute cheapest deal. I think to get this one (which was advertised by a direct-mail flyer), I had to talk to a Comcast phone rep, then a Comcast website chat rep, then a phone rep again, then a website chat rep again. (They initially wanted to pretend my address didn't "qualify" for it, despite the fact that it was mailed directly to it! Then they the phone rep tried to tell me it was only available when signing up online, and then the web rep told me only a phone rep could cancel my previous plan. I don't remember all the other details anymore, but suffice it to say it was as much of a PITA as they could make it.)

I also have made, not one, but two Better Business Bureau complaints in the past in order to get Comcast to honor their own reps' promises, so maybe a note about that is on my file and they know not to try to fuck with me. (Or maybe that's just wishful thinking on my part.)

That will vary based on the type of connection (DOCSIS cable vs fiber, etc).  The nature of cable infrastructure unfortunately prevents symmetrical speeds (though I suppose you could cap download speeds to match upload, but that doesn't seem helpful).

Link

2.1 PHY Layer Protocol
Considering compatibility issues, DOCSIS uses the same spectrum as that in the earlier cable network. The fact that upstream frequency ranges from 5 to 42 MHz while the downstream frequency ranges from 88 to 860MHz results in the asymmetric bandwidth in cable net-work. Since upstream channel uses the lower part of the spectrum, it is more vulnerable to noise than downstream channel. In order to enhance the immunity to noise, a trade-off is made by using lower symbol rate modulation types such as QPSK and 16QAM. This is why the up-stream bandwidth is scarce.

I realize that you are capped at 768Kbps, which is so incredibly far below the technical ceiling for speed so this may not apply to your situation, but there is a definite technical reason why even the top tier cable packages do not provide symmetrical bandwidth. I had 100Mbps service in Phoenix and I could pull 126Mbps down on a speed test, but upload was about 22Mbps.

I look forward to the day when Google Fiber is all over the place.

[ooeei]

Nope, I'm paying $19.99 (for 3Mbps down / 768k up -- which is bullshit; asymmetrical connections are unethical and there is zero technical excuse for it either). It's the slowest/cheapest plan they offered me other than "internet essentials," which you have to be on food stamps to qualify for.

I'd like to have a faster connection, but I'm not about to give those criminal fuckers a penny more than I absolutely have to. When I moved to my current location I tried literally every alternative (all two of them, DSL and wi-max) and neither of them would work at all, let alone fast. I'll happily be paying Google Fiber $70/month the nanosecond it becomes available.

Part of the reason the price offered to me is lower might be that I'm in a not-so-affluent zip code. The other part of it is that I'm really, really persistent in demanding the absolute cheapest deal. I think to get this one (which was advertised by a direct-mail flyer), I had to talk to a Comcast phone rep, then a Comcast website chat rep, then a phone rep again, then a website chat rep again. (They initially wanted to pretend my address didn't "qualify" for it, despite the fact that it was mailed directly to it! Then they the phone rep tried to tell me it was only available when signing up online, and then the web rep told me only a phone rep could cancel my previous plan. I don't remember all the other details anymore, but suffice it to say it was as much of a PITA as they could make it.)

I also have made, not one, but two Better Business Bureau complaints in the past in order to get Comcast to honor their own reps' promises, so maybe a note about that is on my file and they know not to try to fuck with me. (Or maybe that's just wishful thinking on my part.)

I hate to break it to you, but the BBB doesn't actually have any power.  It's basically an old school Yelp that tells people how good companies are ranked with them.  I don't think Comcast is sweating over a complaint there, as they probably get a ton of them.

[AZDude]

I have used BBB twice before and gotten good results each time.

[Jack]

Frontier, BTW, was notorious for breaking their reps promises.  They basically ignored any chat or conversation I had with them and charged me whatever they felt like.  I spent months calling them, complaining, being escalated, calling again, e-mailing, all to no avail...

File a BBB claim, and write in the complaint that their own rep offered X and that their own recording of the conversation will show it. Once I did that to Comcast, I got a call from a VP of somthing-or-other saying that they'd reviewed the recording and would be honoring the agreement for one year. (Then they reneged after 6 months, which prompted BBB complaint #2 -- instantly, without even bothering to try to let them resolve it first because they'd already failed so comprehensively. That bought me the other 6 months.)

I hate to break it to you, but the BBB doesn't actually have any power.  It's basically an old school Yelp that tells people how good companies are ranked with them.  I don't think Comcast is sweating over a complaint there, as they probably get a ton of them.

That's true, but that doesn't change the fact that both complaints were resolved in my favor.

I realize that you are capped at 768Kbps, which is so incredibly far below the technical ceiling for speed so this may not apply to your situation, but there is a definite technical reason why even the top tier cable packages do not provide symmetrical bandwidth. I had 100Mbps service in Phoenix and I could pull 126Mbps down on a speed test, but upload was about 22Mbps.

If I had a top-tier connection, I might be even slightly sympathetic to that argument. But I don't, so I'm not.

More to the point, there is no reason whatsoever they couldn't have designed DOCSIS to be symmetrical in the first place, except that they absolutely hate the idea of people being content producers instead of passive consumers. They want nothing better than to turn what could be the most revolutionary technology for the democratization of ideas ever invented into Cable TV 2.0, and it shows in the very design of their networks itself!

[JLee]

Frontier, BTW, was notorious for breaking their reps promises.  They basically ignored any chat or conversation I had with them and charged me whatever they felt like.  I spent months calling them, complaining, being escalated, calling again, e-mailing, all to no avail...

File a BBB claim, and write in the complaint that their own rep offered X and that their own recording of the conversation will show it. Once I did that to Comcast, I got a call from a VP of somthing-or-other saying that they'd reviewed the recording and would be honoring the agreement for one year. (Then they reneged after 6 months, which prompted BBB complaint #2 -- instantly, without even bothering to try to let them resolve it first because they'd already failed so comprehensively. That bought me the other 6 months.)

I hate to break it to you, but the BBB doesn't actually have any power.  It's basically an old school Yelp that tells people how good companies are ranked with them.  I don't think Comcast is sweating over a complaint there, as they probably get a ton of them.

That's true, but that doesn't change the fact that both complaints were resolved in my favor.

I realize that you are capped at 768Kbps, which is so incredibly far below the technical ceiling for speed so this may not apply to your situation, but there is a definite technical reason why even the top tier cable packages do not provide symmetrical bandwidth. I had 100Mbps service in Phoenix and I could pull 126Mbps down on a speed test, but upload was about 22Mbps.

If I had a top-tier connection, I might be even slightly sympathetic to that argument. But I don't, so I'm not.

More to the point, there is no reason whatsoever they couldn't have designed DOCSIS to be symmetrical in the first place, except that they absolutely hate the idea of people being content producers instead of passive consumers. They want nothing better than to turn what could be the most revolutionary technology for the democratization of ideas ever invented into Cable TV 2.0, and it shows in the very design of their networks itself!

To be fair, the entire cable system was initially designed for cable television, not internet.  I find the adaptation of existing (and archaic) infrastructure to a system that can sustain 100Mbps+ data transfer speeds to be incredible.  The vast majority of traffic is, in fact, downloading (even more so given the state of internet and computer technology at the inception of DOCSIS) -- so the initial disproportionate allocation makes perfect sense.

All tiers of Verizon FIOS are symmetrical, as is Google's fast plan...though their slow/free plan is indeed asymmetrical.

[Jack]

To be fair, the entire cable system was initially designed for cable television, not internet.  I find the adaptation of existing (and archaic) infrastructure to a system that can sustain 100Mbps+ data transfer speeds to be incredible.  The vast majority of traffic is, in fact, downloading (even more so given the state of internet and computer technology at the inception of DOCSIS) -- so the initial disproportionate allocation makes perfect sense.

"Affirming the consequent" fallacy.

Who's to say that the Internet wouldn't have developed differently if fast symmetrical connections hadn't been withheld from the public? For all we know, instead of relying on centralized, censored, corporate-controlled services like Youtube we might have all been serving our videos from our own home servers by now (for example).

[JLee]

To be fair, the entire cable system was initially designed for cable television, not internet.  I find the adaptation of existing (and archaic) infrastructure to a system that can sustain 100Mbps+ data transfer speeds to be incredible.  The vast majority of traffic is, in fact, downloading (even more so given the state of internet and computer technology at the inception of DOCSIS) -- so the initial disproportionate allocation makes perfect sense.

"Affirming the consequent" fallacy.

Who's to say that the Internet wouldn't have developed differently if fast symmetrical connections hadn't been withheld from the public? For all we know, instead of relying on centralized, censored, corporate-controlled services like Youtube we might have all been serving our videos from our own home servers by now (for example).

I think your tinfoil hat got lost. You might want to find a new one.

[ketchup]

We're still on $29.99/mo for 25 down / 5 up (promo rate). 

Nope, I'm paying $19.99 (for 3Mbps down / 768k up -- which is bullshit; asymmetrical connections are unethical and there is zero technical excuse for it either).

That is frustrating.  My GF is a photographer often uploading client photos, and it would be nice to be able to get 20mbps up without having to pay $100/mo (promotional) for 150mbps down.

[Million2000]

I've got the exact same service, but am on a promotional rate that has it lowered to $39.99. This expires in April. I've had this happen before when I lived at my former place, I reduced the speed down to the lowest tier, "Economy" and lived for a few months before moving and getting another promotional rate.

I plan on calling them up before my last bill and threatening to leave, I've heard that if you demand to quit the service right then and there, they will negotiate and lower the bill as the rep gets penalized for losing a customer. I don't expect as low a bill but I won't pay the $69.99 (they recently raised the base rate a few bucks per month here) they think their service is worth.  When I lived in another city and had AT&T DSL (much lower rate) I had the same situation after my one year deal ended, I had them reduce the bill around 35% when I said I could get another internet service for cheaper, so it might help to have another offer in hand (or at least some promotional material). 

[spokey doke]

following

[minimalist]

My bill is $75/month for Verizon FiOS 75/75Mbps in DC, split among 6 people.

[asiljoy]

Good freakin' luck dealing with Comcast. I had a sale plan at about $69 for internet (we have a few cable channels because it was cheaper than just internet). It just  (today) went up by $10, and is scheduled to keep going up. The last time this happened they said they didn't have a cheaper plan because that was only for new customers. So 4 hangups and hours later I cancelled with them, and they sent me to collections for a modem I didn't have. I went to a local office, and they can't help you, so I had a basic hissy fit and told DH to deal with it if he wanted internet back. So he gets the pleasure of calling them today.

Sorry for the rant, Comcast really sucks, wish I had another internet option. Did I mention they suck?

Moved to a new home in November and called to ask if there were any deals. Rep basically said we were already on a deal and hung up. Quality. We pay 69 and change just for internet.

[Jack]

To be fair, the entire cable system was initially designed for cable television, not internet.  I find the adaptation of existing (and archaic) infrastructure to a system that can sustain 100Mbps+ data transfer speeds to be incredible.  The vast majority of traffic is, in fact, downloading (even more so given the state of internet and computer technology at the inception of DOCSIS) -- so the initial disproportionate allocation makes perfect sense.

"Affirming the consequent" fallacy.

Who's to say that the Internet wouldn't have developed differently if fast symmetrical connections hadn't been withheld from the public? For all we know, instead of relying on centralized, censored, corporate-controlled services like Youtube we might have all been serving our videos from our own home servers by now (for example).

I think your tinfoil hat got lost. You might want to find a new one.

Ad-hominem fallacy. Got any actual arguments?

[Inaya]

RCN, which is available in some major cities, I think? Pay ~$70 Internet only (but also the building has free basic cable, so maybe it counts?). 120 down, 22 up. Sometimes. During peak times it drops to about 30 down for the Ethernet, and the wireless is for some reason permanently capped at 30 despite all my efforts to get it up. So basically only my husband gets the full speed we pay for (he's the only wired connection) and even then only part of the time.

[JLee]

To be fair, the entire cable system was initially designed for cable television, not internet.  I find the adaptation of existing (and archaic) infrastructure to a system that can sustain 100Mbps+ data transfer speeds to be incredible.  The vast majority of traffic is, in fact, downloading (even more so given the state of internet and computer technology at the inception of DOCSIS) -- so the initial disproportionate allocation makes perfect sense.

"Affirming the consequent" fallacy.

Who's to say that the Internet wouldn't have developed differently if fast symmetrical connections hadn't been withheld from the public? For all we know, instead of relying on centralized, censored, corporate-controlled services like Youtube we might have all been serving our videos from our own home servers by now (for example).

I think your tinfoil hat got lost. You might want to find a new one.

Ad-hominem fallacy. Got any actual arguments?

I had specific data indicating the technical limitations of the current infrastructure and that just spawned a conspiracy theory, so apparently I don't. Meanwhile, your "argument" consists of outright speculation.

Meanwhile, I'll happily use my symmetrical 150Mbps service (which is hosting a media server, ironically) that is easily available from a mainstream fiber provider in my area.

Why fiber? Because cable can't do it, as I already explained.  If you would like to provide actual data indicating that cable providers intentionally limited upstream speeds out of malice and greed instead out of providing the most effective use of available bandwidth, then I will happily agree that there's "no reason".

[RFAAOATB]

What is the right price for internet?  How much is an acceptable profit margin for a company?

Is it simply what people will pay which is why prices are all over the place?

The problem with COMCAST is we're pretty sure we're getting screwed but most don't have the technical understanding to understand why.  The existence of wildly different prices for similar services suggest that it is not entirely a function of network capacity and technological limitations which suggests they are trying to gouge us.

Would 1985 you pay $100 a month for 2015 cable internet?  That would be unbelievable considering what computers and cell phones were like.

Internet is amazing, relatively new, and relatively affordable.  If we didn't feel like we were being screwed we would probably have no problem paying more.

[JLee]

What is the right price for internet?  How much is an acceptable profit margin for a company?

Is it simply what people will pay which is why prices are all over the place?

The problem with COMCAST is we're pretty sure we're getting screwed but most don't have the technical understanding to understand why.  The existence of wildly different prices for similar services suggest that it is not entirely a function of network capacity and technological limitations which suggests they are trying to gouge us.

Would 1985 you pay $100 a month for 2015 cable internet?  That would be unbelievable considering what computers and cell phones were like.

Internet is amazing, relatively new, and relatively affordable.  If we didn't feel like we were being screwed we would probably have no problem paying more.

When Google Fiber announced that they were looking at entering Phoenix, Cox doubled their internet speeds at no charge.

So...it's safe to say that their margin was higher than necessary. ;)

[ysette9]

Comcast is The. Worst.

It is appalling and embarrassing that they are our best option when I live in Silicon Valley, literally down the street from Facebook, two cities over from Google, next door to Tesla, etc. etc. Google fiber can't come fast enough.

A year or so ago I got all inspired by MMM to tackle my recurring bills. I contacted Comcast through online chat and phone to request something cheaper. After HOURS, multiple chats and phone calls, much angst over the reps not listening to me (I ask for something cheaper at the same speed or faster for the same speed; they try to offer something more expensive, not faster, with bundled TV which I explicitly said I didn't want), I gave up. I did end up learning that my modem was so ancient that I wasn't experiencing the speed I was paying for due to hardware limitations on my end.

Long story short: I ended up spending more money for a new modem and still pay the same $69/month. ~sigh~

[dodojojo]

I'm embarrassed to admit I was paying $54 with taxes for 3mb/dl from Verizon DSL for many, many years.  Finally, I call up Verizon to see if my bill could be lowered and/or increase my speed.  The best offer was to lower my bill to $45 before taxes.  As far as speed, I was already getting the top speed at 3mb!

So I switched to Comcast.  As wary as I am of their horrific reputation, their intro offer of $35 for 25mb/dl was just too good compared to Verizon's best offer.  Don't even get me started on the installation process.  Unbelievable doesn't even begin to describe it. Though the issue was quickly resolved.

I'm bracing myself for Comcast tomfoolery but I have say, so far, the 25mb speed is really super compared to Verizon's 3mb.  Nice to watch sports without the constant buffering and stutter.

[alsoknownasDean]

Nope, I'm paying $19.99 (for 3Mbps down / 768k up -- which is bullshit; asymmetrical connections are unethical and there is zero technical excuse for it either). It's the slowest/cheapest plan they offered me other than "internet essentials," which you have to be on food stamps to qualify for.

I'd like to have a faster connection, but I'm not about to give those criminal fuckers a penny more than I absolutely have to. When I moved to my current location I tried literally every alternative (all two of them, DSL and wi-max) and neither of them would work at all, let alone fast. I'll happily be paying Google Fiber $70/month the nanosecond it becomes available.

Part of the reason the price offered to me is lower might be that I'm in a not-so-affluent zip code. The other part of it is that I'm really, really persistent in demanding the absolute cheapest deal. I think to get this one (which was advertised by a direct-mail flyer), I had to talk to a Comcast phone rep, then a Comcast website chat rep, then a phone rep again, then a website chat rep again. (They initially wanted to pretend my address didn't "qualify" for it, despite the fact that it was mailed directly to it! Then they the phone rep tried to tell me it was only available when signing up online, and then the web rep told me only a phone rep could cancel my previous plan. I don't remember all the other details anymore, but suffice it to say it was as much of a PITA as they could make it.)

I also have made, not one, but two Better Business Bureau complaints in the past in order to get Comcast to honor their own reps' promises, so maybe a note about that is on my file and they know not to try to fuck with me. (Or maybe that's just wishful thinking on my part.)

That will vary based on the type of connection (DOCSIS cable vs fiber, etc).  The nature of cable infrastructure unfortunately prevents symmetrical speeds (though I suppose you could cap download speeds to match upload, but that doesn't seem helpful).

Link

2.1 PHY Layer Protocol
Considering compatibility issues, DOCSIS uses the same spectrum as that in the earlier cable network. The fact that upstream frequency ranges from 5 to 42 MHz while the downstream frequency ranges from 88 to 860MHz results in the asymmetric bandwidth in cable net-work. Since upstream channel uses the lower part of the spectrum, it is more vulnerable to noise than downstream channel. In order to enhance the immunity to noise, a trade-off is made by using lower symbol rate modulation types such as QPSK and 16QAM. This is why the up-stream bandwidth is scarce.

I realize that you are capped at 768Kbps, which is so incredibly far below the technical ceiling for speed so this may not apply to your situation, but there is a definite technical reason why even the top tier cable packages do not provide symmetrical bandwidth. I had 100Mbps service in Phoenix and I could pull 126Mbps down on a speed test, but upload was about 22Mbps.

I look forward to the day when Google Fiber is all over the place.

Haha, it could be worse. I was on cable at my last place, with 100Mbps down and 2Mbps up. I usually would struggle to get more than 1.5Mbps up on a speedtest (with downstream often in the 90s). No faster fixed line internet was available. Where I am now I can't even get cable. I'm on ADSL2+ for now, and some people can't even get that.

I'm actually considering ditching fixed line internet and tethering my cellphone once my ADSL contract ends. Funnily enough, it's likely to be faster (although a much lower quota), especially on 4G.

Currently I'm paying iiNet $59.95 a month for naked DSL with a 200GB quota. It works OK. I'm not going to get much cheaper really, maybe to $50 if I change carriers.

[Jack]

The problem with COMCAST is we're pretty sure we're getting screwed but most don't have the technical understanding to understand why.

The problem with Comcast is that they're evil: violating Net Neutrality, violating FCC rules on cable encryption (encrypting channels before they were allowed, without the proper notice, and lying about it), copyright infringement (e.g. substituting website ads for Comcast's own), breaking internet protocols (e.g. hijacking DNS to serve ads instead of a proper 404 error), killing off "digital cable ready" TVs in favor of rented set-top boxes and making it as difficult as possible for customers to exercise their right to use CableCard, etc.

That's on top of the predatory pricing and shitty customer service!

[slappy]

I pay $73 a month to Comcast for channels 1-15 and internet. I have no idea how fast the internet is, but we've never had any complaints, except that the bill creeps up every few months.

[Roots&Wings]

I also have Comcast Performance Plus for $19.99/mo. I own my modem which saves $10/mo on modem rental. One year promo rate though, then should be able to downgrade to the 'Economy Plus' service for around the same price, which should be fine for my usage per IP Daley's Tech Guide.

[I'm a red panda]

I don't have Comcast (we can't get cable in our area) but our internet is $70 a month.  It is the only available company if you just want internet.

I could get DISH, but the minimum is about $120 a month.

[ZiziPB]

I haven't heard back from the Comcast rep I spoke to yesterday so I called them again and this time was successful in getting them to agree to the mail flyer price.  25Mbps for $29.99 for 12 months, $44.99 for the next 12 months.  Seems like a good deal.  Let's hope they live up to what the rep said on the phone :-)

[Jacana]

We are at 83$ just for Internet with Comcast. We had FiOS until we moved in August and it was so much cheaper. It is absolutely a ripoff. FiOS stops at the bridge to our community, and Comcast has an absolute monopoly in high speed internet here. The next highest speed available is 6 Mbps which we did seriously consider for a while but ultimately decided we couldn't do it.  Comcast knowingly charges a fortune and doesn't offer promotional prices in our community unless you bundle because they know there are no alternatives. Bastards. As soon as there's a viable alternative, good riddance we are gone.