[eli]

I'm definitely with you that Comcast is too expensive.

I don't agree that the price needs to have any relation to the wholesale cost, though. It's just price discrimination. Expensive shampoo doesn't cost more than cheap shampoo because of the ingredients.

[al_bundling]

Price discrimination is only ok if it increases consumer surplus and you have a choice of providers. Comcast fails on the former and more often than not on the latter.

[eli]

I just don't see the difference. Not having a choice in providers is clearly a problem regardless of how that provider structures their fees. Allowing them to charge certain people more and less is not inherently worse.

[al_bundling]

Allow me to enlighten you:

Price discrimination is ok, if it in addition to providing a premium product also makes the good or product more affordable and available to another class of customers, thus creating a consumer surplus. Classic example: air travel.

Comcast's offering is a sham. It makes broadband more expensive for everyone. This is inherently worse.