Time Warner Cable: No Consumer Demand for Fiber Gigabit Internet

If you need a laugh to end your Friday on then this story over at The Verge will probably do the trick. In it a Time Warner Cable executive responded to a question about Google's impressive broadband speeds on its new Kansas City broadband fiber network by saying that its customers don't want the blazingly fast speeds that a gigabit internet could provide. Wait, what?

Speaking at the Morgan Stanley Technology Conference Time Warner Cable's Chief Financial Officer Irene Esteves said:

"We just don't see the need of delivering that to consumers."

"We're already delivering 1 gigabit, 10 gigabit-per-second to our business customers, so we certainly have the capability of doing it."

Esteves also said residential customers have shown little interest in TWC's top internet tiers. "A very small fraction of our customer base" ultimately choose those options, she said.

"If Google finds the magic pill and finds applications that require that and develops a need for it, well terrific," she said. "We would build our product base in order to deliver that."

You just can't make this stuff up.

Source: The Verge by way of Andrew Eisen.


Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditEmail this to someone


  1. ZippyDSMlee says:

    Thats an easy one to fix, if you got more than 35% of a market be it phone/cable/tv,ect then you are forced by law to sell subscription rates are 50% of what they are for as long as you own more than 30% of the market.

  2. Neo_DrKefka says:

    This is my only problem moving to Texas. Time Warner and Comcast trade cities and states so they do not become an monopoly. This is an issue because they are already are to big where they are at and jack the prices up and deliver services that are no where near superior.

    It's time these companies are broken up

  3. GrimCW says:

    Its not what did them in, but it truly didn't help their face, nor their stock, when they announced they were sticking to old fashioned rather than going new while other companies did.

    I recall the kodak quality seals on printers and such of old too, and kind of miss them (tbh i think some of those had far better quality than most today) But when their main product to be known for is in the way of photography, and thats what the public knows most… well.. saying your going to stand back and watch the world evolve while you stagnate is pretty much a bad idea. Especially if you publicly announce that.


  4. Neeneko says:

    It is worth pointing out that sticking to the film industry is NOT what killed Kodak.

    They were killed by a raider, a CEO who kept pumping up their short term profits by selling off profitable divisions in order to spike their stock price.

    Consumer stuff only made up a fraction of Kodak's business (believe it or not, home consumers are not the end all and be all of business) and they had a thriving high end digital business, not to mention professional film services that were still pretty lucrative.   They produced some of the best digital products around and Kodak sensors were found in quite a bit of high end equipment.  They were just not active in the low end consumer throwaway stuff.

  5. GrimCW says:

    Kinda reminds me of Kodak years ago (they were HUGE in my area given its where they got their start) Whom claimed no one wanted digital camera tech and that it would never overtake traditional film camera's…. And thusly they fell into a terrible state, closing 60% or more of their factories, laying off THOUSANDS of workers, and damned near going out of business….

    Yep, them digikals sure won't overtake your film anytime will they kodiak?

    Now with the local economy in tatters after losing them and the ol' steal mills well…. thanks a ton company execs that know NOTHING of the current trends..

    So, who's TWC up for ruining?

    In a hilarious twist recently Kodak officials said they "want to return to their digital roots"…….. umm what?

  6. Craig R. says:

    Apparently the CFO's of EA ("microtransactions are in demand!") and TWC ("better speeds are unwanted!") are long lost twins.

  7. ZippyDSMlee says:

    There is no demand because you morons are playing a war of attrition where you do not have to do much just give most of your money to the CEOs so they can bail at any time!

  8. Hypevosa says:

    They're nowhere near worth what you're charging for them, Time Warner Cable.  You want to charge me 75 bucks a month for 50mb/s internet download speed, and only 5mb/s upload speed… HA!  That's insane!  Google fiber costs 70 bucks a month for 1 gb download AND upload speed.

    I would upgrade to a 70 dollar a month plan for gigabyte internet INSTANTLY.  Hell, I'd pay that for 500 mb/s upload and download speed, INSTANTLY.  And I know I'm not the only one who'd be  willing to pay for that service.

    It's not that I don't want fast internet, or that I'm not willing to pay for it, but your prices for what you deliver are just not worth it, especially because of the abysmal upload speeds.  I may have to pay for what I need in your crappy service, but you just simply don't offer excess I am willing to pay extra for.

    Imagine if you will that you're my local shoe store.  You offer sneakers that break in a month for 10 bucks, sneakers that break in half a year for 20 bucks, and shoes that break in a year for 30 bucks and shoes that break in a year, but are also comfortable, for 50 bucks.  I know a few towns away there's a shoe artisan who will craft me shoes that fit perfectly, break down in 10 years, and feel like I'm wearing heavenly clouds… for 50 bucks.  I would never consider buying your shoes for that price when I know someone else can provide shoes 200 times better for the same price, because that comfort isn't worth the cost.

    You offer anything close to gigabyte internet (500mb down AND up) in place of your fastest current offer for 70 bucks, and you'll see thousands of internet subscriptions up to to that speed instantly because the excess now feels worth the cost.  I guarantee it.

  9. David says:

    Stomp 'em, Google.

    And while you're at it, bring your fiber lines up here.  I'd really like to not have to wait hours for a videogame to download.

  10. hellfire7885 says:

    In other words he doesn't see it, and if it's there, he ignores it, thus, it's not there. Plus it's like saying they COULD invest in upgrading their networks to gigabit, but they would rather not.

  11. Imautobot says:

    Well, at least they're being open about their lax attitude.  Sure beats the smoke that most ISP's blow up our asses.  

    Actually it's refreshing.  

    Though ironically it still makes one want to lean towards the companies that blow smoke up their ass.  I guess honesty isn't the best policy.

  12. ddrfr33k says:

    Truth.  The whole telecom industry is basically a monopoly that's protected by the government.

  13. Sleaker says:

    i wonder why? Maybe because they charge so much for basic service 12/2 standard and block out competition that it makes it nearly impossible to get good speeds.

    What they mean is, customers are not willing to pay more because prices are already mostly rediculous compared to other countries.  In fact, I live IN Portland, not in a suburb, I live in the city. and the only choice I have for high speed internet (other than wireless that DOESN'T work) is comcast cable.  The phone company wont do fiber to my area, so I can get 1.5MB DSL for like $80 a month, or 14/2 cable for less… If there was actually competition here it wouldn't be bad, but it's obviously a monopoly.

Comments are closed.