Charter/Cox Challengers Counter Cable Companies' Claims
Charter Communications and Cox Communications are justifying their planned $34.5 billion combination on flawed premises, a Public Knowledge-led group said in an FCC posting Tuesday (docket 25-233). PK, Communications Workers of America, the Benton Institute for Broadband & Society and the Center for Accessible Technology have petitioned to block Charter/Cox (see 2511190049), and the filing was a reply to the Charter and Cox response (see 2512050028)
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
The groups said Charter and Cox mistakenly argue that theoretical competition from technologies that aren't real substitutes can moderate cable pricing; that no local geographic overlap means Charter/Cox poses no competitive harm; and that the FCC's public interest authority is limited to whether two specific companies directly compete. Charter and Cox point to fixed wireless access subscriber growth, but FWA appeals primarily to price-sensitive consumers, and FWA growth doesn't mean it can pick up customers who would switch away from cable in response to a price increase, the groups said.
They also said Charter and Cox are ignoring the 16,485 California addresses where they're the only providers of 1 Gbps service. The FCC set an aspirational goal of 1 Gbps/500 Mbps for broadband, and the companies shouldn't dismiss the loss of gigabit competition at those California locations by pointing to satellite service, considering that satellite operates at a fraction of those speeds, the groups added.