🚀 go-pugleaf

David W. Tamkin <nobody@[127.0.0.1]> wrote:
> A few years ago I found a map of the cable franchise divisions within the
> city of Chicago on the net, possibly within www.cityofchicago.org somewhere,
> but I shortsightedly failed to save the image nor even bookmark the page. 
> Now I can't find it to save my life.

> Can anyone lead me back to it, please?

> I asked on a TV technical forum, and someone found a map that showed area 2
> reaching to the lakeshore, which is obviously wrong.

I don't think it matters anymore, is probably the reason there is no current
map.

Comcast operates in all 5 zones, there are only two others (I think), RCN
and WOW. Those two only have a limited market area, both more or less
catering to multi-unit dwellings, in the city anyway.

So there are some areas with a choice, but that doesn't mean the alternate
wants to deal with you. If you hate Comcast, want the RCN and they don't
service your block, too bad. There was some ruling from the CCC about if one
or the other was available to service a dwelling, their job was done.

It might of been the same ruling where they dropped the exclusive bit, prior
to that it was one company, one zone. When they gave Comcast the ability to
operate in all the zones, they dropped the exclusive reign and now permit
two or more to operate in the same zone.

Being that is the case, there really isn't any reason to use a zone map
anymore, any company can operate in any area once they apply and get
approved for it.

If you are concerned about a particular building, just punch the address in
the two websites for rcn and wow, it'll tell you right away if it's
available.

But like I said, as long as one of the three can provide service, the CCC
considers it a job well done on their part.

-bruce
bje@ripco.com
 

Bruce Esquibel <bje@ripco.com> wrote:
>David W. Tamkin <nobody@[127.0.0.1]> wrote:

>>A few years ago I found a map of the cable franchise divisions within the
>>city of Chicago on the net, possibly within www.cityofchicago.org somewhere,
>>but I shortsightedly failed to save the image nor even bookmark the page. 
>>Now I can't find it to save my life.

>>Can anyone lead me back to it, please?

>>I asked on a TV technical forum, and someone found a map that showed area 2
>>reaching to the lakeshore, which is obviously wrong.

>I don't think it matters anymore, is probably the reason there is no current
>map.

There's no current map because the city's re-arranged Web site has a lot
less information on it than it once did. I even looked on the GIS applications
on the city maps page (linked on the city's home page), but no map there
either.

>Comcast operates in all 5 zones, there are only two others (I think), RCN
>and WOW. Those two only have a limited market area, both more or less
>catering to multi-unit dwellings, in the city anyway.

WOW has area 5, probably because they are in suburbs adjacent to this part
of the city. RCN has a franchise to wire anywhere in the city, but forgot
to do it. With Comcast, it's pretty hit or miss if they have a particular
building wired in area 1.

>So there are some areas with a choice, but that doesn't mean the alternate
>wants to deal with you. If you hate Comcast, want the RCN and they don't
>service your block, too bad. There was some ruling from the CCC about if one
>or the other was available to service a dwelling, their job was done.

I'd like to find somebody, somewhere, in a building that's passed by
multiple cable providers.

Bruce Esquibel <bje@ripco.com> wrote in <jk747m$lru$1@remote5bge0.ripco.com>:

| I don't think it matters anymore, is probably the reason there is no current
| map.

Comcast has different channel lineups and I think possibly some differences
in pricing for the former Chicago Cable zones (1, 4, and 5) from the former
Group W (and later Prime Cable) zones (2 and 3).  That's why I'm interested.

Meanwhile, I did find these maps, which look correct for the outlines, but
the roads and rivers are superimposed inaccurately, so they don't give the
boundaries with much precision:

Area 1:
http://www.comcastspotlight.com/markets/chicago/zone/local-zone-chicago-city-north

Area 2:
http://www.comcastspotlight.com/markets/chicago/zone/local-zone-chicago-northwest

Area 3:
http://www.comcastspotlight.com/markets/chicago/zone/local-zone-chicago-southwest

Area 4:
http://www.comcastspotlight.com/markets/chicago/zone/chicago-central

Area 5:
http://www.comcastspotlight.com/markets/chicago/zone/local-zone-chicago-south

Calling area 3 "southwest" and area 4 "central" is rather odd, but that's
what they did.

| If you are concerned about a particular building, just punch the address in
| the two websites for rcn and wow, it'll tell you right away if it's
| available.

That wasn't my reason, but I always did find it odd that RCN rented billboard
space at Pulaski and Granville, where they don't serve.

"Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote in <jk7e81$r0a$2@news.albasani.net>:

| There's no current map because the city's re-arranged Web site has a lot
| less information on it than it once did.

I wonder if it's archived anywhere.

Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>>So there are some areas with a choice, but that doesn't mean the alternate
>>wants to deal with you. If you hate Comcast, want the RCN and they don't
>>service your block, too bad. There was some ruling from the CCC about if one
>>or the other was available to service a dwelling, their job was done.
>
> I'd like to find somebody, somewhere, in a building that's passed by
> multiple cable providers.

hi!

Geoff Gass <glg@tanzenmb.com> wrote:
>Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

>>>So there are some areas with a choice, but that doesn't mean the alternate
>>>wants to deal with you. If you hate Comcast, want the RCN and they don't
>>>service your block, too bad. There was some ruling from the CCC about if one
>>>or the other was available to service a dwelling, their job was done.

>>I'd like to find somebody, somewhere, in a building that's passed by
>>multiple cable providers.

>hi!

Cool. You're the one subscriber Comcast has to be nice to. Yes, I know
you subscribe to RCN.

David W. Tamkin <dattier@ripco.com> wrote:

>That wasn't my reason, but I always did find it odd that RCN rented billboard
>space at Pulaski and Granville, where they don't serve.

Yeah. The Chicago Cable Commission really didn't do anything to force RCN
to wire up the rest of the city.

David W. Tamkin <nobody@[127.0.0.1]> wrote:

> Comcast has different channel lineups and I think possibly some differences
> in pricing for the former Chicago Cable zones (1, 4, and 5) from the former
> Group W (and later Prime Cable) zones (2 and 3).  That's why I'm interested.

I wonder if there really is a difference in the channel lineups.

Seems to me with Comcast, if they went digital in most areas now, there
wouldn't be one. When everything was analog, or mostly analog, made sense
because there was a major difference from the old Prime Cable and Chicago
Cable areas.

I think at one time, Prime even had dual cable (two lines coming into the
house) in some areas, with a 550Mhz bandwith. Most of the Chicago Cable
areas had a single 450Mhz feed.

Didn't AT&T take over Prime Cable in 2001/2002 for a while before Comcast
entered the picture?

I don't know about rates with Comcast, I'm a subscriber and barely can
figure out what I'm paying for everything. It's pretty misleading with the
way it's presented and can't really compare anything.

I think they hide the prices now, most of them anyway. When I was still with
Direct TV, they don't have the package prices clearly listed either. Just
saying you have to dig down a bit and end up with a cost that isn't based in
reality. There is too much of the "you get this for six months", just have
to sign a contract for two years.

With the channel lineup, Comcast does offer a list of them, but there are
like 10 different service levels. You need to punch in a service address but
isn't too hard to figure one out. Too tedious to figure out of there is a
difference, something like 8 or 9 pages of them. 

Just saying what you get and for how much is up in the air, seems like they
want you to negotiate the costs. 

-bruce
bje@ripco.com

Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
> Geoff Gass <glg@tanzenmb.com> wrote:
>>Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>
>>>>So there are some areas with a choice, but that doesn't mean the alternate
>>>>wants to deal with you. If you hate Comcast, want the RCN and they don't
>>>>service your block, too bad. There was some ruling from the CCC about if one
>>>>or the other was available to service a dwelling, their job was done.
>
>>>I'd like to find somebody, somewhere, in a building that's passed by
>>>multiple cable providers.
>
>>hi!
>
> Cool. You're the one subscriber Comcast has to be nice to. Yes, I know
> you subscribe to RCN.

yeah, course they were shitty to me at a previous location is a big part of
why I went RCN

Bruce Esquibel <bje@ripco.com> wrote in <jk9pmb$nle$1@remote5bge0.ripco.com>:

| Didn't AT&T take over Prime Cable in 2001/2002 for a while before Comcast
| entered the picture?

Yes, and as I remember AT&T had taken over from Chicago Cable in areas 1, 4,
and 5 around the time they took over from Prime Cable in areas 2 and 3, and
thus the whole city was AT&T cable territory for a while.

David W. Tamkin <nobody@[127.0.0.1]> wrote:
> Bruce Esquibel <bje@ripco.com> wrote in <jk9pmb$nle$1@remote5bge0.ripco.com>:
>
>| Didn't AT&T take over Prime Cable in 2001/2002 for a while before Comcast
>| entered the picture?
>
> Yes, and as I remember AT&T had taken over from Chicago Cable in areas 1, 4,
> and 5 around the time they took over from Prime Cable in areas 2 and 3, and
> thus the whole city was AT&T cable territory for a while.

TCI was in the middle there, think they bought Chicago Cable, then were
bought by AT&T

Geoff Gass <glg@tanzenmb.com> wrote:
>David W. Tamkin <nobody@[127.0.0.1]> wrote:
>>Bruce Esquibel <bje@ripco.com> wrote:

>>>Didn't AT&T take over Prime Cable in 2001/2002 for a while before Comcast
>>>entered the picture?

>>Yes, and as I remember AT&T had taken over from Chicago Cable in areas 1, 4,
>>and 5 around the time they took over from Prime Cable in areas 2 and 3, and
>>thus the whole city was AT&T cable territory for a while.

>TCI was in the middle there, think they bought Chicago Cable, then were
>bought by AT&T

AT&T bought TCI 1998-1999. AT&T bought MediaOne in 1999-2000. Did they
have one of the Chicago areas, too? Comcast bought Prime Cable 2000-2001,
but traded some areas to AT&T, so AT&T got Chicago's northwest side.
Then Comcast bought AT&T Broadband 2001-2002.

If you were a mergers and acquisitions counsel, you made big bucks
during this period of trading cable franchises like baseball cards.

Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
> Geoff Gass <glg@tanzenmb.com> wrote:
>>David W. Tamkin <nobody@[127.0.0.1]> wrote:
>>>Bruce Esquibel <bje@ripco.com> wrote:
>
>>>>Didn't AT&T take over Prime Cable in 2001/2002 for a while before Comcast
>>>>entered the picture?
>
>>>Yes, and as I remember AT&T had taken over from Chicago Cable in areas 1, 4,
>>>and 5 around the time they took over from Prime Cable in areas 2 and 3, and
>>>thus the whole city was AT&T cable territory for a while.
>
>>TCI was in the middle there, think they bought Chicago Cable, then were
>>bought by AT&T
>
> AT&T bought TCI 1998-1999. AT&T bought MediaOne in 1999-2000. Did they
> have one of the Chicago areas, too?

oh yeah, MediaOne was in there too.  I even have a vague memory of some kind
of swapping going on between TCI and MediaOne in there as well prior to AT&T
buying both

glg@tanzenmb.com wrote in <slrnjn77rg.gck.glg@ftupet.ftupet.com>:

| TCI was in the middle there, think they bought Chicago Cable, then were
| bought by AT&T

Ah yes; TCI had some suburban areas as well for a few years.

On Monday, March 19, 2012 10:30:04 AM UTC-5, David W. Tamkin wrote:
> Bruce Esquibel <bje@ripco.com> wrote in <jk747m$lru$1@remote5bge0.ripco.com>:
> 
> | I don't think it matters anymore, is probably the reason there is no current
> | map.
> 
> Comcast has different channel lineups and I think possibly some differences
> in pricing for the former Chicago Cable zones (1, 4, and 5) from the former
> Group W (and later Prime Cable) zones (2 and 3).  That's why I'm interested.

The Crumcast executive braintrust ran radio ads this morning touting they have WGN and DirecTV didn't. Hey Crummy, WGN and SatTV settled. 

Anyways, dump Cable and save $10000 in 10 years and compound that to $30K in 20 years !