<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Frontier Targeted for Takeover? Deal &#8220;Likely Within Six Months,&#8221; Says Industry Analyst</title>
	<atom:link href="http://stopthecap.com/2008/08/21/frontier-targeted-for-takeover-deal-likely-within-six-months-says-industry-analyst/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://stopthecap.com/2008/08/21/frontier-targeted-for-takeover-deal-likely-within-six-months-says-industry-analyst/</link>
	<description>Promoting Better Broadband, Fighting Data Caps, Usage-Based Billing, &#38; Other Internet Overcharging Schemes</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 08:19:16 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Doug</title>
		<link>http://stopthecap.com/2008/08/21/frontier-targeted-for-takeover-deal-likely-within-six-months-says-industry-analyst/#comment-637</link>
		<dc:creator>Doug</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Sep 2008 02:42:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stopthecap.com/?p=354#comment-637</guid>
		<description>Phil, We (WIndstream employees) were told that as of Sept 8 the relationship with the call center in India will be terminated.   Very good news.

Also as to the size of Rochester, we already have Lexington, KY which is about double the size of Rochester so I don&#039;t think the size of the city would, in itself, be reason to sell it off.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Phil, We (WIndstream employees) were told that as of Sept 8 the relationship with the call center in India will be terminated.   Very good news.</p>
<p>Also as to the size of Rochester, we already have Lexington, KY which is about double the size of Rochester so I don&#8217;t think the size of the city would, in itself, be reason to sell it off.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Associated Press: Internet provider&#8217;s usage cap raises questions &#171; Michigan Telephone, VoIP and Broadband blog</title>
		<link>http://stopthecap.com/2008/08/21/frontier-targeted-for-takeover-deal-likely-within-six-months-says-industry-analyst/#comment-619</link>
		<dc:creator>Associated Press: Internet provider&#8217;s usage cap raises questions &#171; Michigan Telephone, VoIP and Broadband blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Aug 2008 19:06:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stopthecap.com/?p=354#comment-619</guid>
		<description>[...] of hope for Frontier Communications customers is that there&#8217;s a rumor going around today that the company might be sold to Little Rock, Arkansas-based Windstream Communications in the next six months or so. As the linked article states, Windstream has no plans to implement [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] of hope for Frontier Communications customers is that there&#8217;s a rumor going around today that the company might be sold to Little Rock, Arkansas-based Windstream Communications in the next six months or so. As the linked article states, Windstream has no plans to implement [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sheryl T</title>
		<link>http://stopthecap.com/2008/08/21/frontier-targeted-for-takeover-deal-likely-within-six-months-says-industry-analyst/#comment-618</link>
		<dc:creator>Sheryl T</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Aug 2008 18:52:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stopthecap.com/?p=354#comment-618</guid>
		<description>Always a good idea to have a good provider.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Always a good idea to have a good provider.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: phil</title>
		<link>http://stopthecap.com/2008/08/21/frontier-targeted-for-takeover-deal-likely-within-six-months-says-industry-analyst/#comment-571</link>
		<dc:creator>phil</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Aug 2008 20:47:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stopthecap.com/?p=354#comment-571</guid>
		<description>Some personal comments and observations:

1) If this comes to pass, Windstream management in Little Rock will almost certainly be guiding the future of Windstream.  Historically in their other mergers, this has always been the case.  Others get exit packages or absorption into the Windstream way of thinking.

2) The company has a reasonably good track record, and is aggressively trying to wire even their most rural territories with 6mbps DSL, which is an improvement over what is usually available in the most rural areas of the country.

3) Their pricing is reasonable but not exceptional.  The pricing in the article reflects the first year of service for new customers.  Rates increase after that.  At least they don&#039;t charge a modem rental fee - one is provided for free after rebate (and you eat the sales tax and $12.95 shipping fee) to customers.

4) Support might be an issue - they have outsourced some of it to India (ugh) which means accent barriers.  I am worried about the impact on jobs here in Rochester.  If Windstream maintains their track record, I would be concerned about still having one in a call center locally.  In their other mergers, most of these people end up getting let go.

5) The oddity would be the Rochester, NY (585 area code) service area.  The old Rochester Telephone system which is the largest operating company in Frontier territory is much, much larger than the traditional rural telcos these independents serve.  Would Windstream see more value in retaining a Rochester 585 area telco, or put it up for sale to recoup some expenses (potentially opening the door to Verizon?)

6) Company officials confirm they have no plans for a usage cap at this time, which is a big bonus for customers!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Some personal comments and observations:</p>
<p>1) If this comes to pass, Windstream management in Little Rock will almost certainly be guiding the future of Windstream.  Historically in their other mergers, this has always been the case.  Others get exit packages or absorption into the Windstream way of thinking.</p>
<p>2) The company has a reasonably good track record, and is aggressively trying to wire even their most rural territories with 6mbps DSL, which is an improvement over what is usually available in the most rural areas of the country.</p>
<p>3) Their pricing is reasonable but not exceptional.  The pricing in the article reflects the first year of service for new customers.  Rates increase after that.  At least they don&#8217;t charge a modem rental fee &#8211; one is provided for free after rebate (and you eat the sales tax and $12.95 shipping fee) to customers.</p>
<p>4) Support might be an issue &#8211; they have outsourced some of it to India (ugh) which means accent barriers.  I am worried about the impact on jobs here in Rochester.  If Windstream maintains their track record, I would be concerned about still having one in a call center locally.  In their other mergers, most of these people end up getting let go.</p>
<p>5) The oddity would be the Rochester, NY (585 area code) service area.  The old Rochester Telephone system which is the largest operating company in Frontier territory is much, much larger than the traditional rural telcos these independents serve.  Would Windstream see more value in retaining a Rochester 585 area telco, or put it up for sale to recoup some expenses (potentially opening the door to Verizon?)</p>
<p>6) Company officials confirm they have no plans for a usage cap at this time, which is a big bonus for customers!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

