has anyone heard this rumor, that suddenlink communications has bought out Cox, but apparently we wont see it here in OKC untill march or late april? I do know suddenlink bought cox in some areas in east texas but according to a rumor(lady at work) cox will be gone by end of summer.

Suddenlink/Cebridge bought selected markets from Cox Communications in 2006, the OKC market was not included in that. I have not found any other news newer than that. The only thing more current than that is about a Cox Sports Television on Suddenlink.
Cox Mediaroom: Cox Communications and Cebridge Connections Announce Definitive Agreement for Purchase of Certain Cox Cable Television Systems (http://cox.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=181)

I'm sorry for anyone that has to put up with Suddenlink, my father-in-law has Suddenlink out in West Texas, they still do not carry HD channels in his market and have no HD offerings. I have known others in some of the Austin suburban markets that Suddenlink covers who have moved to Directv/Dish, AT&T U-Verse and Verizon FIOS because Suddenlink was so bad.

thanks blue, i was kinda excited when i heard the news just because sometimes change isnt so bad, and their are a lot of folks around here who really really hate cox. Cox is okay i guess, seems like a lot of fols are jumping on the att uverse bandwagon, may try it.

Suddenlink recently completed a 3 year program, costing $350,000,000 to go digital. It caused inconvenience for people with older sets without digital tuners. Such sets wouldn't get any thing above channel 30, so adapter boxes had to be installed, but were given out free. Other people found that their cheap cable splitters and R58 cable routed to other devices was of inadequate capability for digital signals and had to be replaced. And to little surprise, Suddenlink recently raised rates. Cable TV companies are liable to price themselves out of business, if they don't watch it.

I lived in Stillwater during the switch to Suddenlink. What a horrible company. There were internet outages all of the time. Their HD selection has to be the weakest of any cable provider on the planet. If this turns out to be true, I will switch to U-Verse or DirectTV immediately. Please let this be a false rumor... please.

Suddenlink is about as crappy as Comcast, which even beats AT&T on the crap front. If you're pissed at Cox for some reason, you probably won't change your mind, but they are by far the best option around.

Suddenlink/Cebridge bought selected markets from Cox Communications in 2006, the OKC market was not included in that. I have not found any other news newer than that. The only thing more current than that is about a Cox Sports Television on Suddenlink.
Cox Mediaroom: Cox Communications and Cebridge Connections Announce Definitive Agreement for Purchase of Certain Cox Cable Television Systems (http://cox.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=181)

I'm sorry for anyone that has to put up with Suddenlink, my father-in-law has Suddenlink out in West Texas, they still do not carry HD channels in his market and have no HD offerings. I have known others in some of the Austin suburban markets that Suddenlink covers who have moved to Directv/Dish, AT&T U-Verse and Verizon FIOS because Suddenlink was so bad.

SuddenLink is fine in Lubbock. No need to freak out- I'm sure our selection will be every bit as good as Lubbock.

Suddenlink is about as crappy as Comcast, which even beats AT&T on the crap front. If you're pissed at Cox for some reason, you probably won't change your mind, but they are by far the best option around.

Why? Does Suddenlink frequently go dead with you or on some channels?

So we still have no confirmation of the original rumor either way..?? Trying to get good info before my typical knee-jerk reaction :)

Suddenlink is not a large market cable system, it makes no sense for the company to buy Cox of Oklahoma and Cox of Tulsa (they are very linked and would likely only sell together)

Could Cox sell some/one of their smaller Oklahoma systems to Suddenlink? Certainly, it would even make sense, Cox isn't really much into the small market business and Suddenlink very much is. I could see Cox selling Enid or Bartlesville or something like that.

Would Suddenlink buy large systems like Oklahoma City and Tulsa? Unlikely. Would Cox sell Oklahoma City and Tulsa? Very unlikely, they would probably only let the systems loose in a trade with another provider where there were geographic reasons to do so. And Oklahoma City and Tulsa fit very well into Cox's footprint of systems anyway.

Could Suddenlink buy all of Cox, um Hell No.

Suddenlink is not a large market cable system, it makes no sense for the company to buy Cox of Oklahoma and Cox of Tulsa (they are very linked and would likely only sell together)

Could Cox sell some/one of their smaller Oklahoma systems to Suddenlink? Certainly, it would even make sense, Cox isn't really much into the small market business and Suddenlink very much is. I could see Cox selling Enid or Bartlesville or something like that.

Would Suddenlink buy large systems like Oklahoma City and Tulsa? Unlikely. Would Cox sell Oklahoma City and Tulsa? Very unlikely, they would probably only let the systems loose in a trade with another provider where there were geographic reasons to do so. And Oklahoma City and Tulsa fit very well into Cox's footprint of systems anyway.

Could Suddenlink buy all of Cox, um Hell No.

After doing a little reading about Suddenlink and the kinds of systems they target, I think you're spot-on. They're into the smaller markets, generally, and if Cox more or less treats OKC and Tulsa as a single entity (at least from a business perspective), that'd be generally out of their radar.

One more bit of info....found out that Cox is getting ready this quarter to push out its "Whole Home DVR" to the Oklahoma City area. It just finished deployment to the Tulsa area....given all that, I rather doubt that Cox is on the verge of dumping the OKC market to another outfit.

(p.s. Re Whole Home DVR: Looks like mandatory Cox install of Whole Home DVR will be $80 - no self install option available, which really gripes my cookies - and $5/mo additional to your bill)

Suddenlink is not buying out Cox, I don't even believe they have the capital to buy out Cox. As an employee of Cox this is not happening, also Cox has invested billions to launch serveral new products this year. When we sold are smaller markets it made financial sense to do so. The cost of maintence and upgrades was too high given the volume of customers needed to be profitable, this is probably the reason Suddenlink has such bad service.

I have never heard of Suddenlink and this first time reading here already showing me how bad they are. I hate Cox simply because they do not know how to lower their prices and be competitive with other companies. I hate Cox for blocking other cable companies from entering the markets to allow people to choose. If Suddenlink do buy out Cox's OKC and Tulsa markets, then all the equipments, technologies, and resources is already available to use. It will be up to Suddenlink to keep progressing from there (not backward) and to not raise the rates and do a bunch of crazy changes.

Again, it seems the rumor was misunderstood. Suddenlink buying out smaller markets and OKC/Tulsa got thrown into that misunderstanding rumor. Cox is fine, but they just need to get their acts together.

I have never heard of Suddenlink and this first time reading here already showing me how bad they are. I hate Cox simply because they do not know how to lower their prices and be competitive with other companies. I hate Cox for blocking other cable companies from entering the markets to allow people to choose. If Suddenlink do buy out Cox's OKC and Tulsa markets, then all the equipments, technologies, and resources is already available to use. It will be up to Suddenlink to keep progressing from there (not backward) and to not raise the rates and do a bunch of crazy changes.

Again, it seems the rumor was misunderstood. Suddenlink buying out smaller markets and OKC/Tulsa got thrown into that misunderstanding rumor. Cox is fine, but they just need to get their acts together.

I hate sticking up for Cox, but they are not the ones who block competition... I'm pretty sure it's all FCC mandated... So if you hate Cox, you need to pick a different reason.

I hate sticking up for Cox, but they are not the ones who block competition... I'm pretty sure it's all FCC mandated... So if you hate Cox, you need to pick a different reason.

No, unless I'm mistaken, Cox has an arrangement with the City of OKC as the cable provider via a franchise agreement that I believe was originally voted in.

This notion of "being competitive with other companies" makes it sound like there's no other TV provider in town, which runs afoul of the constant ATT, Dish, and DirectTV advertisements that come in my mail virtually every day. Beyond that, it wouldn't even make sense to have multiple cable providers, with each vendor laying their own networks, particularly into the residential areas...

I hate sticking up for Cox, but they are not the ones who block competition... I'm pretty sure it's all FCC mandated... So if you hate Cox, you need to pick a different reason.

Uhhh... Incorrect. They are blocking other cable competitions. I am not sure how, when, and who started it, since Cox was not the first to be here (previously was Multimedia), they do not allow other cable companies to enter their markets. This is monopolizing the market (if that is the correct term), I believe. Without competition, Cox is free to jack up their prices. There is satellite companies to compete, but that is a whole different category than cable.

Multiple cable companies would mean stringing too much cable everywhere, anyway. What an eyesore that would be and a big challenge to keep all that cable on poles during ice storms and other severe weather. And burying cables could mean confusion as to which is which.

Bunty: would imagine it would be like the multiple telephone companies. Each one doesn't have its own lines, they use the existing ones (many put in place when all we had was Ma Bell). The owner of the lines leases usage out the way I understand it. If wrong, someone please correct...

Think as a utility, they can have and do have an exclusive agreement with the munincipalities (sp) they contract with and pay a franchise fee to the City for that exclusive right. Of course those franchise fees show up on your bill...

I'm curious just what the limit is there in these lines we see strapped to the poles mid-air. It has always amazes me how so much data with cable and voices when people uses phone land lines passing through these lines so smoothly, so quickly, and without getting all jumbled up. Years before there was cell phones, I was always fascinated with how conversations can travel through these lines from one side of the country to another real time.

OK first off Thunder, you're wrong again. Cox isn't doing anything to block the market...read the above posts. And besides that, if you live outside of OKC, remember you used to have Multimedia Cablevision before Cox existed in OKC...eventually Cox bought them out...fair and square and it wasn't even that long ago, late 90's. There's still AT&T and Dish, so they have no monopoly of any kind. And for internet, you have those plus the wifi carriers like @Link.

As for infrastructure - let's examine. Pre-deregulation AT&T uses money from tax-payers to lay the infrastructure because there wasn't any yet. They laid copper lines - standard technology for the time. Deregulation happens, and they split into the regional companies. They no long have the money/interest to keep up with technology. Cox comes in and lays an entirely new all Fiber Optic infrastructure after they buy out Multimedia in OKC. Last I knew, it was a 3 point ring that encompasses the city...so the city can lose 2 main hub connections to the internet before their users get cut off (Comcast doesn't do it that way and places like Jacksonville lose internet in the whole city regularly). They also laid fiber to the junctions so you only have coax (with copper) from a junction to your house. When AT&T basically all merged back together through SBC (Southwestern Bell), THEN they started making changes with real ferver. Only then did things like Uverse and a fiber network come to pass. But why didn't they do it 10 years before that? They had laid the lines for free, had a monopoly market, and yet still couldn't be profitable or reliable? Cox comes in and pays out of their own pocket and does it better....without a huge rate hike, which is what AT&T wanted to be able to do upgrades.

So in all the years I've had Cox for residential everything, it's gone down twice. Once when someone ran into a junction box and the neighborhood all went out (and they had it fixed in 2 hours from the time it went down...not just from when someone showed up to fix it), and another time, I don't know what happened and it took all of 1 hour to get it back up....didn't even have to call support. When I have called support about my box or modem, it's always been a pleasant and FAST call. Never more than 15 minutes total.

Part of my job in networking means I help our remote users when they have problems with their internet. I've spoken to ever large vendor's support known to man, and lots of small ones. I'll tell you for sure, Cox is the best. I don't care what personal issue someone has, after years and years of dealing with support people around the country, you have no idea how good you have it with Cox. I don't even have to call Cox for a user but once a year or something because it's that reliable EVERYWHERE in the country. That's definitely NOT to be said for the AT&T/Comcast/Verizon(not cell)/Sprint(not cell)...oh and by the way those two often lease the line from AT&T/ etc.

OK first off Thunder, you're wrong again. Cox isn't doing anything to block the market...read the above posts. And besides that, if you live outside of OKC, remember you used to have Multimedia Cablevision before Cox existed in OKC...eventually Cox bought them out...fair and square and it wasn't even that long ago, late 90's. There's still AT&T and Dish, so they have no monopoly of any kind. And for internet, you have those plus the wifi carriers like @Link.

As for infrastructure - let's examine. Pre-deregulation AT&T uses money from tax-payers to lay the infrastructure because there wasn't any yet. They laid copper lines - standard technology for the time. Deregulation happens, and they split into the regional companies. They no long have the money/interest to keep up with technology. Cox comes in and lays an entirely new all Fiber Optic infrastructure after they buy out Multimedia in OKC. Last I knew, it was a 3 point ring that encompasses the city...so the city can lose 2 main hub connections to the internet before their users get cut off (Comcast doesn't do it that way and places like Jacksonville lose internet in the whole city regularly). They also laid fiber to the junctions so you only have coax (with copper) from a junction to your house. When AT&T basically all merged back together through SBC (Southwestern Bell), THEN they started making changes with real ferver. Only then did things like Uverse and a fiber network come to pass. But why didn't they do it 10 years before that? They had laid the lines for free, had a monopoly market, and yet still couldn't be profitable or reliable? Cox comes in and pays out of their own pocket and does it better....without a huge rate hike, which is what AT&T wanted to be able to do upgrades.

So in all the years I've had Cox for residential everything, it's gone down twice. Once when someone ran into a junction box and the neighborhood all went out (and they had it fixed in 2 hours from the time it went down...not just from when someone showed up to fix it), and another time, I don't know what happened and it took all of 1 hour to get it back up....didn't even have to call support. When I have called support about my box or modem, it's always been a pleasant and FAST call. Never more than 15 minutes total.

Part of my job in networking means I help our remote users when they have problems with their internet. I've spoken to ever large vendor's support known to man, and lots of small ones. I'll tell you for sure, Cox is the best. I don't care what personal issue someone has, after years and years of dealing with support people around the country, you have no idea how good you have it with Cox. I don't even have to call Cox for a user but once a year or something because it's that reliable EVERYWHERE in the country. That's definitely NOT to be said for the AT&T/Comcast/Verizon(not cell)/Sprint(not cell)...oh and by the way those two often lease the line from AT&T/ etc.

Cox may or may not have a franchise agreement with the city of Oklahoma City. But even if there is not a franchise agreement putting in a second cable company, called an Overbuilder, is VERY expensive especially in low density cities.

Only the very largest cities have overbuilders except in some rare circumstances like in Iowa where a company that already owned the utility poles started its own overbuilder cable system. City utility companies will sometimes start overbuilders too using city right of way to operate. RNC is probably about the largest overbuilder in the US but are not in any cities like Oklahoma City.

Most cities have other competitive companies that get into the multichannel business, most often the local LEC (local exchange carrier i.e. the phone company) which is what U-verse from AT&T here is or FIOS from Verizon is in other parts of the country. Sometimes local electric companies will use power transmissions to send cable signals.

We do have plenty of competition here in Oklahoma, there’s DirecTV, DISH, Cox and U-verse, and now there’s Hulu, Netflix on demand and others via broadband. Adding an overbuilder cable system is probably not going to happen.

Multimedia Cablevision in The Village is why I moved to Directv, the service was fine in Edmond but was horrible in The Village, the cable would go out when it was windy because of the overhead lines. The service was fine in Edmond due to the underground lines in the area where I lived. I have had Directv for 12 years and never plan on going back to cable for TV. I do have Time Warner cable for internet, I had Sprint Broadband Direct fixed wireless in OKC, it was not available in Austin so I went with cable internet. I really liked the Sprint service, it was fast.

Verizon FIOS is installed much like cable except it does fiber optic to the home instead of copper for the "last mile". They are in limited markets though, I know some of the suburban communities around Austin have it but the City of Austin does not.

OK first off Thunder, you're wrong again. Cox isn't doing anything to block the market...read the above posts. And besides that, if you live outside of OKC, remember you used to have Multimedia Cablevision before Cox existed in OKC...eventually Cox bought them out...fair and square and it wasn't even that long ago, late 90's. There's still AT&T and Dish, so they have no monopoly of any kind. And for internet, you have those plus the wifi carriers like @Link.

As for infrastructure - let's examine. Pre-deregulation AT&T uses money from tax-payers to lay the infrastructure because there wasn't any yet. They laid copper lines - standard technology for the time. Deregulation happens, and they split into the regional companies. They no long have the money/interest to keep up with technology. Cox comes in and lays an entirely new all Fiber Optic infrastructure after they buy out Multimedia in OKC. Last I knew, it was a 3 point ring that encompasses the city...so the city can lose 2 main hub connections to the internet before their users get cut off (Comcast doesn't do it that way and places like Jacksonville lose internet in the whole city regularly). They also laid fiber to the junctions so you only have coax (with copper) from a junction to your house. When AT&T basically all merged back together through SBC (Southwestern Bell), THEN they started making changes with real ferver. Only then did things like Uverse and a fiber network come to pass. But why didn't they do it 10 years before that? They had laid the lines for free, had a monopoly market, and yet still couldn't be profitable or reliable? Cox comes in and pays out of their own pocket and does it better....without a huge rate hike, which is what AT&T wanted to be able to do upgrades.

So in all the years I've had Cox for residential everything, it's gone down twice. Once when someone ran into a junction box and the neighborhood all went out (and they had it fixed in 2 hours from the time it went down...not just from when someone showed up to fix it), and another time, I don't know what happened and it took all of 1 hour to get it back up....didn't even have to call support. When I have called support about my box or modem, it's always been a pleasant and FAST call. Never more than 15 minutes total.

Part of my job in networking means I help our remote users when they have problems with their internet. I've spoken to ever large vendor's support known to man, and lots of small ones. I'll tell you for sure, Cox is the best. I don't care what personal issue someone has, after years and years of dealing with support people around the country, you have no idea how good you have it with Cox. I don't even have to call Cox for a user but once a year or something because it's that reliable EVERYWHERE in the country. That's definitely NOT to be said for the AT&T/Comcast/Verizon(not cell)/Sprint(not cell)...oh and by the way those two often lease the line from AT&T/ etc.

Impressive, very accurate, yes Cox does incorporate a 3 ring structure. Honestly the only thing that is holding Cox back technology wise is the equipment being used, although Cox will be releasing soon their Cisco based set-top boxes. Thank you very much for putting Thunder in his place concerning the accuracy of his comments. I happen to work for Cox and even though there are things that concern me, we are not trying to monopolize, it just happens to be the way governmental affairs work. As for the pricing, to be quite honest it is oranges and apples when comparing dish, att or cox. For the most part the reason pricing has increased lately is due to broadcasting fees, for instance look at what is happening between Dish and CBS currently.