Stop the Cap! » HissyFitWatch

HissyFitWatch: AT&T CEO Mad At Himself for Ever Allowing “Unlimited” Use Plans

Phillip Dampier — Mon, 07 May 2012 17:32:08 +0000

AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson is kicking himself over his decision to allow “unlimited use” plans on AT&T’s wireless network.

Speaking at the Milken Institute’s Global Conference last Wednesday, Stephenson took the audience on a journey through AT&T’s transformation from a landline provider into a company that today sees wireless as the source of the majority of its revenue and future growth. But the company left a lot of revenue on the table when it offered “unlimited data” for smartphone customers, particularly those using Apple’s iPhone. It’s a mistake Stephenson wishes he never made.

“My only regret was how we introduced pricing in the beginning… thirty dollars and you get all you can eat and it’s a variable cost model,” Stephenson complained. “Every additional megabyte you use in this network, I have to invest capital. So get the pricing right. Our average revenue [per customer] has been increasing every single quarter since we started down this path.”

Stephenson admitted AT&T’s problems were created by the company itself when it embraced its transformation into a wireless power player.

Years earlier, the current CEO green-lit a new “smartphone” after a visit from Apple proposing a new device that used a touch screen to make calls, launch applications, and surf the wireless web. It was called the iPhone.

AT&T’s first iPhone, Stephenson said, was not a major problem for AT&T and did not even launch on the company’s growing 3G network. In 2007, the Apple iPhone came pre-loaded with a selection of apps and used AT&T 2G network to move data. Stephenson said Apple’s launch of a new iPhone in 2008 that worked on AT&T’s 3G network, along with a new App Store that allowed customers to do more with their phones, changed everything. By 2009, AT&T’s network was overloaded with data traffic in many areas.

“[There] were volumes [of traffic] that nobody had ever anticipated and we had anticipated big volumes of growth,” Stephenson said.

In Stephenson’s view, AT&T’s solution to the traffic problem early on should have been a change to the pricing model, eliminating flat rate service at the first sign of network congestion.

“I wish we had moved quicker to change the pricing model to make sure that people that were consuming the bandwidth were paying for the bandwidth and [instead] we had a model where the high end users were being subsidized by the low end users,” he said.

Stephenson acknowledged the company has service issues in large American cities like New York, San Francisco, and Los Angeles, and blames them on a combination of voracious wireless data usage and spectrum shortages. However, industry observers also note that many of AT&T’s service woes may have come from an unwillingness to invest in sufficient network upgrades as aggressively as other carriers, which have not experienced the same level of network congestion and the resulting steep declines in customer satisfaction AT&T has endured for the last three years.

But the ongoing congestion problems have not hurt AT&T’s revenue and profits. Stephenson admitted that in 2006, AT&T earned almost nothing from wireless data and made between 30-32% margin selling voice and texting service.

“Today, we’re a $20 billion data revenue company and we’re operating at 41-42% margins,” Stephenson said.

Despite that improved revenue, AT&T says if they don’t get spectrum relief soon, they are going to keep raising prices on consumers. Stephenson said the company has been increasing prices across the board on data plans, new smartphone ownership, those upgrading phones, as well as reducing certain benefits for long-term customers. Stephenson said these actions were taken because spectrum has become a precious resource and bandwidth scarcity requires the company to tamp down on demand. But that’s not a message he delivers to Wall Street, telling investors AT&T’s key earnings and increased revenue come from price adjustments and metering data usage.

Stephenson also fretted there is too much competition in America’s wireless marketplace. That competition is eating up all of the available wireless spectrum, threatening to create a spectrum crisis if the federal government does not rethink spectrum allocation policies, he argued. Stephenson believes additional industry consolidation is inevitable because of the capital costs associated with network construction and upgrades. He said he was uncertain whether AT&T will be able to participate in that consolidation after failing to win approval of its buyout of T-Mobile USA.

Stephenson believes the days of heavy investment in wired networks are over. Stephenson has systematically sought to transition AT&T away from prioritizing wired services in favor of wireless, a position he has maintained since his earliest days as AT&T’s CEO. The company’s decision to end expansion of U-verse — AT&T’s fiber-to-the-neighborhood service, and concentrate investment on wireless is part of Stephenson’s grand vision of a wireless America. Stephenson noted the real fiber revolution isn’t provisioning fiber to the home, it’s wiring fiber to cell towers to support higher data traffic.

But that traffic doesn’t come to users free. Instead, Stephenson believes leaving the meter on guarantees lower rates of congestion because it makes customers think about what they are doing with their phones. It also brings higher profits for AT&T by charging customers for network traffic. Stephenson believes that assures the returns Wall Street investors demand, attracting capital to front network investments.

With that in mind, Stephenson still believes AT&T can help solve the data digital divide, where poor families cannot afford to participate in the online revolution. Stephenson said it can be managed by handing the disadvantaged sub-$100 smartphones and $20 data plans, assuming they can afford those prices.

What keeps Stephenson up nights? Worrying about business model busters that manage end-runs around AT&T’s profitable wireless services.

“Apple iMessage is a classic example,” Stephenson noted. “If you’re using iMessage, you’re not using one of our messaging services, right? That’s disruptive to our messaging revenue stream.”

Stephenson remains fearful its network upgrades will improve wireless data service enough to allow customers to switch to Skype for voice and video calling, depriving AT&T of voice revenue.

But the CEO seems less concerned than some of his predecessors that content producers are enjoying “free rides” on AT&T’s network.

“We in this industry have spent more time bemoaning the thought that Google or Facebook may use our network for free, and it just hasn’t played out that way,” Stephenson said. “I mean they do use it for free, they’re getting a bargain, and that is fine.”

“I believe what will play itself out over time, is that the demand model will change this behavior,” he said. “We’re already at a place where some companies that deliver content are coming to us and saying ‘we would like to do a deal with you where you would give us a class of service to deliver our content to your customers.’”

“The content guys that have been so loud about these issues [Net Neutrality] are now the ones coming to us saying we want these models,” Stephenson argued. “I’ve always believed that is what would play out.”

Click here to view the embedded video.

Stop the Cap! edited down Randall Stephenson’s appearance at last Wednesday’s conference. Stephenson faces few challenges as he presents his world-view about AT&T pricing, spectrum allocation policies, network investments vs. data traffic growth, his vision for AT&T’s future, and how much customers will be forced to pay for today’s “spectrum crisis.” (28 minutes)

Other coverage you may enjoy:

HissyFitWatch: Frustration XFINITY – Comcast’s Nationwide Sporadic E-Mail Outage

Phillip Dampier — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 18:17:35 +0000

Some Comcast customers might have thought they were losing their minds when e-mail user names and passwords kept failing with errors like “username and password do not match” even though customers were certain they did. Our reader David dropped us a note late last night to say Comcast’s ongoing e-mail problems created quite a stir on the company’s customer support forum.

Customers have reported the issue sporadically for weeks, and many are unhappy about the perception Comcast has a policy of ’blame the customer first and don’t assume responsibility unless absolutely necessary.’

"I could have sworn the password was right!"

One customer:

They assume the customer is wrong and stick to that script no matter what, even when Signature Support states the customer’s PC is fine and the issue is on the provider’s network.

I spent hours (and $50 w/Signature) trying to get anyone to listen to me. I escalated and escalated until I was told there was no one higher, which we all know is incorrect, there are plenty of people higher than the Tech Support Supervisors. The way Comcast ignores proof is just unacceptable.

A Comcast support representative identified only as “Jordan” reports the problem was, indeed, Comcast’s responsibility:

It looks like we found a database replication issue that was not keeping passwords in sync across our multiple platforms. At this point, the issue is resolved and all systems are working properly.

So for those that have been resetting their passwords in an effort to fix the issue, it should be set to the last one used. If for some reason that does not work, please reset your password one more time to ensure what you think is your “new” password is your current password. Obviously, you’ll then need to update any email programs, mobile devices, etc. with the new password.

Other coverage you may enjoy:

AT&T “Wins” Consumerist’s Third-Worst Company in America Award

Phillip Dampier — Thu, 05 Apr 2012 17:10:47 +0000

The Consumerist awards AT&T the "Bronze Poo" Award for Third Worst Company in America. (Image: The Consumerist)

A video game company reviled by game fans and the perennially-shoddy Bank of America managed to beat out America’s lowest rated phone company in The Consumerist’s “Worst Company in America” annual award contest, but not by much.

As Electronic-Arts tries to explain away its top-worst rating, AT&T easily took third place after a consolation round decidedly eliminated Walmart.

Congratulations to the folks aboard the Death Star! As soon as we get some proper bronze-colored paint, we’ll be packing up your Bronze Poo and sending it off in the mail. It will, of course, include a 620-page end-user agreement that preempts any class-action lawsuits by AT&T employees.

Some Consumerist readers wondered why game fans rushed to beat EA over the head over its anti-consumer tendencies when Ma Bell was still ripe for some kicking:

This should be easy call. I’m pulling for AT&T to go all the way. The list of AT&T transgressions is long and wide-ranging. Much more so than EA.

AT&T is like the T-1000 Terminator, reassembling itself after Ma Bell was broken up in the 80′s;

AT&T caps broadband Internet connections;

AT&T is one of Washington’s biggest lobbyists;

AT&T blocks important updates from customer’s phones;

AT&T tried to buy up a competitor to reduce competition and further monopolize the spectrum which is collectively owned by We The People;

AT&T shameless displays its arrogance on its own AT&T Public Policy blog;

AT&T opposes Net Neutrality.

I could go on and on…

The Consumerist notes their award epitomizes the last 12 months for AT&T.

“First it attempted to leap-frog to the head of the wireless pack by swallowing T-Mobile whole, only to fail miserably after many months and at a cost of several billion dollars,” the piece reads. “Then it came tantalizingly close to vying for the coveted Worst Company In America Golden Poo trophy, only to be given the smack-down by a video game company. At least it won’t be leaving the tournament empty-handed.”

Other coverage you may enjoy:

Angry Frontier Customers Launch Facebook Group: Fix Frontier DSL Now

Phillip Dampier — Mon, 26 Mar 2012 19:28:38 +0000

West Virginia continues to be broadband challenged, with or without the help of Frontier Communications’ DSL service, which continues to be criticized for being woefully “oversold.”

Now some of Frontier’s most frustrated customers have found Facebook, and hope to encourage the company to deliver better speeds through their Fix Frontier DSL Now page.

Customers are especially peeved in areas where they are sold “up to 12Mbps” service, but cannot break 1Mbps during peak usage times when inadequate infrastructure cannot support customer usage demands. Some are taking their complaints to the West Virginia Public Service Commission:

I am a long-time subscriber to Frontier Communications’ “High-speed Internet Max” DSL service. I live in the Frankford, West Virginia, telephone exchange (304-497-XXXX), which is an area that has always been served by Frontier. We never had Verizon service at my home.

When Frontier installed DSL service in our area, we immediately cancelled our satellite Internet service and signed up. Initially, we had business-class DSL which was very satisfactory. Later, we discontinued our business operation and downgraded to the residential “High-Speed Internet Max” DSL service. That remained quite satisfactory until about a year and a half ago, when service quality deteriorated to the point of being unusable.

During the evening hours, we generally log download speeds of anywhere from 150kbps (0.15MBPS) to 450kbps (0.45MBPS) , with around 300kbps (0.3MBPS) being the norm. This is barely adequate for accessing a static web page, and is totally inadequate for common tasks such as watching a video on YouTube or even streaming music. Speeds do improve, sometimes into the range of 1500kbps (1.5MBPS), in the middle of the night and the afternoons, when we are generally asleep or at work, but are consistently unusable during the evening hours when we are home.

Customers pay around $40 a month for this level of broadband service, and customers calling for assistance are being told to wait:

I have called Frontier’s tech support and opened numerous trouble tickets. Each time, a technician will come out to our house, test the line, pronounce it “perfect” from the house to the switching station, then explain that the problem is lack of bandwidth. Sometimes they say the bottleneck is in Bluefield. Sometimes they say it is between Marlinton and Ashburn, Virginia. In other words, Frontier does not have enough bandwidth available to meet customer needs.

The last time we put in a trouble ticket, the technician didn’t even come to our home. He just called and said he would put the ticket on the stack with all of the other ones, and perhaps the problem would be solved in a couple of years. A couple of years? Yet, I am constantly bombarded with ads asking me to buy Frontier’s high-speed DSL service at rates as low as half of what I pay.

As Stop the Cap! has reported previously, Frontier has acknowledged the problems in West Virginia and promised backbone upgrades to handle the influx of new customers, particularly those adopted from Verizon Communications in 2010 when the company purchased their landline network in the state. But a schedule of promised upgrades disappeared off Frontier’s website, and according to our readers, continues to be overdue.

The loudest complainers are offered $5 monthly service credits for their troubles, but customers don’t want the money, they want something that actually qualifies as “broadband service.”

Here is how you can tell where your problem might be:

Technical Line Fault Symptoms (these can be corrected by a local technician’s service call to your home)

Consistently low speeds that do not vary much with time of day or on weekends;
Weather-related service interruptions or slowdowns – poor quality cables, fittings, and other problems are often most visible during the wet spring months;
Loud hum or static on your voice line when making or receiving calls;
Hearing conversations from other customers on your phone line;

Oversold Broadband (these problems require Frontier to regionally address problems that affect a much larger group of customers)

Dramatically reduced speeds during evenings and weekends that consistently speed up later at night or during the workday;
Similar speed-related issues affecting friends and neighbors in the same neighborhood or community;
Pages that do not load completely, time out, or require refreshing to load properly;
“Tracert” reports that indicate certain upstream connections Frontier uses to connect to its national network are timing out or require multiple attempts to get through.

Other coverage you may enjoy:

HissyFitWatch: Shepard Smith Calls Time Warner Cable an Anti-American Monopoly

Phillip Dampier — Thu, 22 Mar 2012 17:18:18 +0000

Click here to view the embedded video.

Shepard Smith has a bone to pick with Time Warner Cable. (1 minute)

Fox News’ Shepard Smith has the same problem lots of Americans have with telecommunications providers: he hates them.

Smith is angry again

Just a few weeks after slamming AT&T for its creative reinterpretation of the word “unlimited,” Smith is now on the warpath against Time Warner Cable for delivering lousy service to his home in Manhattan.

It all started with Smith’s alienation over reports that Apple iPad users are being advised to switch to Wi-Fi to avoid burning through their 4G mobile broadband data allowances.

“Well I would use that Wi-Fi connection if that Time Warner Cable would get over there and fix it,” Smith responded. “It’s been six weeks, I talked to ten people. They won’t fix it, and [...] I’ve about had it.”

“I could scream at Time Warner until the cows come home and make new cows,” Smith added. “And nothing would still happen. Know why? Because it’s Time Warner Cable, that’s why.”

Smith is certain Time Warner Cable has a monopoly on service to his New York neighborhood, primarily because he can’t sign up for Verizon FiOS, which is only slowly becoming available in the New York metropolitan area.

“Look if they let me go and [I can get] FiOS, I’d take the FiOS with a smile and say sayonara; I don’t have that option,” Smith said. “It is a monopoly and it’s un-American and I’m done with them but I can’t get rid of them.”

Other coverage you may enjoy:

#Rogers1Number Social Media Outreach Backfires: “What a National Disgrace of a Company”

Phillip Dampier — Tue, 20 Mar 2012 15:31:29 +0000

Rogers’ paid social media outreach campaign on Twitter was supposed to promote the company’s new 1Number service, more or less a ripoff of Google Voice (with fewer features) that lets Rogers’ cell phone customers make and receive calls from a computer or wireless phone, engage in video chats, and send text messages from the 1Number portal. But the paid tweets, which reached the top of Canada’s “trending topics,” quickly went rogue after antagonized customers who loathe Canada’s largest cable operator hijacked the campaign.

“Rogers deserves every tweet coming their way,” wrote one Ontario customer. “What a national disgrace of a company. I’ll bet my last dollar this is the first time top [management] has had any clear indication what their customers think of them. Until now, they’ve just been busy finding new ways to part customers from their money.”

“Bryck123″ took Rogers’ debacle more in stride: “Watching this epic fail is almost worth all that I’ve overpaid you guys over the years.”

Ironically, Rogers is paying Twitter for most of the venting and customer wrath. Twitter sells a “promoted tweets” service to companies who pay whenever someone retweets, replies, clicks, or gives a “thumbs-up” to the promotion. A lot of Canadians are obliging, telling Rogers their customer service, billing and pricing is a disaster.

Hijacking a paid social media outreach campaign isn’t new on Twitter. McDonalds learned this themselves in January when its own paid hashtag turned into a bashtag.

“Rogers learned nothing from McDonalds’ disastrous Twitter campaign, which it smartly ended after a few hours,” said Twitter user Jacques Roglet. “Rogers has been carrying on for days, and so have their customers.”

Roglet says Rogers’ mistake was trying to use Twitter as a way to reach younger customers with a one-way advertising campaign. Twitter was designed for two way (or more) communication, and Rogers showed no interest in establishing a dialogue with their customers.

They are now.

In an effort to turn consumer lemons into lemonade, a small army of Rogers’ social media representatives are reaching out to complaining customers to address sometimes long-standing problems and concerns. Customers threatening to leave Rogers behind are winning special customer retention deals that slash rates or deliver larger broadband usage allowances for the same money. But it may be too late for some.

“I think if there is some true Canadian identity, something shared by Canadians from all walks of life, it might be the common experience of having your money and time stolen by Roger’s criminal syndicate,” shared Michael To.

But things may not be that great elsewhere.

“I went through Bell, Rogers and Telus over the course of 12 years,” shared one reader of the Globe and Mail. “‘Bad service’ doesn’t describe it adequately – ‘absolute contempt for my humanity’ better describes it – every one of the them viewed me as a muppet to be abused, exploited and soaked as much as possible.”

[Thanks to Stop the Cap! reader Damian who alerted us.]

Click here to view the embedded video.

Rogers produced this video introducing customers to its 1Number service. (2 minutes)

Other coverage you may enjoy:

CenturyLink Criticized for Installing Phone Lines Atop Roadways, Inside Pavement Cracks

Phillip Dampier — Wed, 14 Mar 2012 14:32:59 +0000

Phoenix-area officials are discovering CenturyLink, the area’s largest phone company, has gotten a little too creative with landline repairs, installing replacement lines across public streets, on fences, and in one case even wedged between a pavement crack.

CenturyLink calls them “temporary telephone lines,” run as quick fixes to get service up and running again. Local officials call them a nuisance, and question what CenturyLink’s definition of “temporary” means.

The Arizona Republic found CenturyLink phone lines strung across the asphalt on Knox Road in Gilbert, where they remained in place for about a year, with vehicle traffic driving right over the cables. When the newspaper sent photos to the phone company asking why, they were gone within 24 hours.

CenturyLink’s Alex Juarez explains:

“CenturyLink is not required to bury or hang wires in any specific amount of time, but we make every effort to remove temporary lines as quickly as possible. … Repairing a damaged or malfunctioning underground or suspended cable takes time. CenturyLink uses temporary wires to restore service while we work to repair the permanent cable. Restoration of service is a priority. We place lines where they will be safely out of the way.”

A "temporary" phone cable installed along the top of a wire fence.

Gilbert local officials dispute that, having previously notified CenturyLink the phone company was in violation of town regulations. Gilbert prohibits any utility wiring on its streets, and had received public complaints about temporary phone lines a year ago. Town spokeswoman Beth Lucas told the newspaper she was surprised the company was back at it again.

“We do not allow those kind of lines, and they can interfere with a variety of work,” including street sweepers, she said. “For a utility to be in a right of way, whether on a permanent or temporary basis, the company would need a permit, which means approval during the planning review process with staff.”

The problem with temporary wiring is that CenturyLink is not obligated to report where the lines have been installed, which can create a public nuisance, possible danger to public safety, and frustration for construction crews that often cut the cables without realizing they were there.

Chandler’s streets Superintendent Rex Hartmann noted city paving contractors cut off phone service for an undetermined number of customers when they discovered CenturyLink had force-wedged a communications cable into a pavement crack, covered up with sealant. When the roads were repaved, the cable was severed.

Hartmann also doesn’t buy CenturyLink’s claim the lines were “temporary.” He’s found several that were left so long, the “temporary” cable itself was cracked and brittle.

Phoenix city officials think prohibiting temporary lines from being scattered across the ground or pavement makes common sense.

Spokeswoman Sina Matthes says those kind of installations represent tripping hazards for pedestrians and residents, and the city requires temporary repairs to be replaced by permanent ones within two weeks.

Other coverage you may enjoy:

Comcast Wraps Up ‘Town Hall’ Meetings in Savannah Over Hundreds of Customer Complaints

Phillip Dampier — Tue, 14 Feb 2012 20:32:03 +0000

Click here to view the embedded video.

Comcast has concluded the last of four public meetings to address consumer complaints with the quality of the cable company’s products and customer service in Savannah, Ga.

Dozens of customers filled Armstrong Center to complain about billing, hold times, and service issues. Comcast technicians were on hand and literally followed some customers home to address long-standing problems on the spot.

The public meetings came at the urging of Savannah city officials who have received hundreds of complaints about Comcast’s poor performance in the Georgia city.

“We are committed to continuously improving the services that we offer and the way we deliver the service, said Andrew Macke, vice president of government and community affairs. “There’s ongoing efforts to improve that, but certainly as we value our relationship with the city, we’ll continue to work with them to highlight some of the things that we’re doing but also address some of the common themes.” (2 minutes)

Other coverage you may enjoy:

Comcast’s “Stranglehold on Savannah” — City in Open Revolt Over Shoddy “Don’t Care” Service

Phillip Dampier — Wed, 08 Feb 2012 20:53:33 +0000

Diana Thibodoux documents Comcast's shoddy work in her rented home.

The city of Savannah, Georgia is at the mercy of Comcast Cable, and city officials and local residents are fed up with high bills, the “don’t care” attitude from customer service, and cable and broadband that fails repeatedly, sometimes extending for weeks.

The fervor came to a head in December when city council had accumulated more than 150 complaints from local residents, deciding public hearings were warranted to deal with the city’s dominant cable company, Comcast.

“Comcast Destroyed My House”

Diana Thibodoux called Comcast to deal with a cable issue in her Ardsley Park home and never expected the service call would turn into an expensive nightmare.

Thibodoux says the Comcast technician who showed up decided on his own to rewire the house for cable and began drilling through brick and expensive plaster, stringing easily visible black coaxial cable along outside walls, inside baseboards and up over doors, all in plain sight.

“My house looks like a frat house,” Thibodoux complained to Comcast officials who were on hand to listen to customer complaints at the first of four public “town hall” meetings.

“I’ve never dealt with a company so incompetent,” another local resident said.

Click here to view the embedded video.

WTOC in Savannah shares the horror story of Diana Thibodoux, who says Comcast destroyed her house thanks to an overzealous, incompetent repairman. (3 minutes)

At least everyone knows she has cable.

Residents used the public sessions to vent about long hold times which can extend to as much as two hours, poor quality service, and what city officials call the predictable outcome of a company that has “a stranglehold” over Savannah’s cable TV market.

“Comcast has treated Savannah like a third world country for years, delivering the best service to the wealthiest neighborhoods while leaving cable lines dangling on the ground in the areas they don’t care about,” said Stop the Cap! reader Jenny Child, who has kept a folder of papers documenting more than a dozen service calls regarding poor Internet service at her small business.

“If it rains in Savannah, and it does so a lot, our Internet goes out,” Child complains. “We have called and called but the technician shows up when it is bright and sunny and shrugs his shoulders and says there is no problem.”

Child and her two employees now handle their online business activities based on local weather forecasts.

“If the man says we’re getting rain today, we handle our Internet things real quick, because as sure as I’ll be in church on Sunday, we won’t have service after the first drops fall from the sky,” she says.

Child keeps calling Comcast when her Internet service drops out, but long hold times to reach the company’s outsourced-to-India customer service department have cut into her business.

“I can’t be sitting here on hold with Comcast for 45 minutes waiting for some representative’s nails to dry so she can pick up the phone and deal with customers,” Child complains. “It’s the biggest cable company ever, and don’t they own NBC? How many people do they have working there that they can’t answer the phone. Maybe everyone else is calling to complain too.”

Comcast’s Business Broadband Blockade Prompts Whining When Potential Competition Shows Up

Hargray is wiring downtown Savannah with fiber broadband to serve long-neglected area businesses

While fielding complaints from more than 50 local residents at a second meeting held to address complaints, Comcast executives questioned whether the city of Savannah was giving favorable treatment to Hargray, a new entrant pushing to bring 21st century broadband into the city of Savannah for businesses Comcast has refused to serve for years.

Comcast complained they didn’t mind competition, but wanted “a level playing field,” a statement that prompted an immediate and angry response from some members of the city council, who blasted the cable company for its attitude.

Aldermen Tony Thomas, John Hall, and Tom Bordeaux all noted Comcast has steadfastly refused to wire many downtown business buildings for cable broadband service, despite years of requests. Comcast claimed the relatively low number of customers did not justify the cost to expand the service.

Alderman Tony Thomas has championed the ongoing dispute with Comcast Cable on behalf of local residents.

All three could not understand why Comcast had a sudden urgency to complain about unfair treatment when a competitor sought to provide the service they never did.

“If [Comcast] did not want to offer that service previously and someone else is coming in to provide the service, where is the sticking point?” Thomas said.

Bordeaux was more blunt in his remarks intended for Comcast.

“Tell them to sue us,” he said.

In contrast to service from AT&T and Comcast, which often markets 3-6Mbps broadband in Savannah, Hargray’s fiber broadband project will deliver speeds up to 1Gbps, first to business customers. But the company promises it is considering selling to residential customers as well.

Great Deals, But Only for “Selected Neighborhoods”

As Comcast’s bad press has become fodder for the nightly newscasts on several of the city’s television outlets, Comcast literally took to the streets to try and mitigate their public relations nightmare. In the process, they created a new one.

Councilman Tony Thomas is happy Comcast is approaching upset customers and offering them substantial discounts on their cable bill. But he’s not happy Comcast is only extending those deals to certain customers, not all.

Thomas wants the deals offered to everyone, something that he says is not happening today.

(Courtesy: Ted Goff/newslettercartoons.com)

Andy Macke, Comcast’s Vice President of Communications counters, “All they have to do is call 1-800-COMCAST and they will hear the same deals that the same people are getting from those reps going from door to door.”

“Comcast’s attitude in Savannah is see no evil, hear no evil,” says Jeff White, a Comcast customer who has watched the scuffle. “They don’t even admit there is a problem until it runs on the evening news and city council waves 150 complaints they are getting at the camera — the ones Comcast ignored.”

Macke himself told WJCL-TV, which has covered the dispute with Comcast repeatedly, he was “unaware of the extent of the concerns that our Savannah customers had with us.”

Despite promises to make things right, Alderman Thomas says many complaints are still unresolved.

“We were told that all of those folks had been contacted and that their problems were being worked on. I have since found a few of these people [who] have had no contact whatsoever with Comcast,” Thomas told the TV station.

“Under no circumstances should City Council let the situation with Comcast get pushed under the rug,” one person wrote in the Vox Populi column in the Savannah Morning News. “We the people need help!”

No Help On the Way

Unfortunately for that reader, and other Savannah residents, an attempt by Savannah city officials to attract competing cable service has met with no success and no interest. Cable operators almost never compete head to head, each respecting the service areas of fellow providers. Hargray’s interest in Savannah is primarily serving business customers, and the option for municipal service may not be possible much longer if a bill supported by Comcast, SB 313, ever becomes law.

Click here to view the embedded video.

A compilation of news reports from WJCL, WSAV, and WTOC exploring Comcast’s performance problems in the city of Savannah, Georgia. (15 minutes)

Other coverage you may enjoy:

HissyFitWatch: AT&T’s Failed-Merger Tab Will Be Covered by Customers

Phillip Dampier — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 18:01:41 +0000

HissyFitWatch: Damn you FCC!

For the first time in a long time, AT&T did not get what it wanted from Washington regulators and legislators. The repercussions of the company’s failure to secure its controversial merger with Deutsche Telekom’s T-Mobile USA has been one HissyFit after another, including the resignation-retirement of Forrest Miller, a 30-year veteran who was the company’s head of corporate strategy and mergers and acquisitions. After heads rolled, there was the small matter of the multi-billion dollar “breakup fee” payable to T-Mobile. Now someone has to pay: You.

At Stop the Cap!, we scrutinize quarterly conference calls at major telecommunications companies so you don’t have to. We’ve sat through renditions of “we’re sorry” when Charter Communications’ executive management allowed the company to be flushed into bankruptcy, we’ve heard the Excuse-o-Matic from Frontier Communications about why their broadband service is woefully overloaded with promises of better days ahead, and a whole lot of creative spin to emphasize cord-cutting-bad-news at the nation’s largest cable companies isn’t really a problem all — it’s the housing market, it’s the ‘seasonal residences’ or ‘college students going home’ problem… or sunspots. Who really knows? It’s definitely not that they’re charging too much.

Whether it has been Time Warner Cable’s Glenn Britt, or Verizon’s Ivan Seidenberg, chief executives always project a cool, calm, steady authority that leaves shareholders and financial analysts with an impression the adults are in charge, even if they tell little white lies to keep the stock price up.

And then there is AT&T’s chief executive — ~~Chairman~~ Emperor Randolph Stephenson, who used the occasion of AT&T’s 4th Quarter earning results conference call to become a spectacle that brought the house down.

As we look ahead, the issue that gives me the most concern, quite frankly, isn’t our ability to execute. The #1 issue for us as we move forward, and for the industry, I believe, it continues to be spectrum. This industry continues to see just explosive mobile broadband growth and is providing one of the few bright spots in the U.S. economy, but I think we all understand this growth cannot continue without more spectrum being cleared and brought to market. And despite all the speeches from the FCC, we’re all still waiting.

He didn’t stop there. In an impromptu rant, Stephenson lectured Washington from afar, excoriating all-concerned for failing to agree with their multi-million dollar propaganda campaign that merging America’s second and fourth largest wireless carriers in a market with just four national providers was good for consumers and would bring wireless nirvana to the heartland and lower prices for all. Evidently America was not ready to accept the word of AT&T-compensated telecommunications experts at the NAACP, the Special Dream Farm, the Shreveport-Bossier Rescue Mission and cattle ranchers a combination of T-Mobile’s spectrum and AT&T’s would ease the capacity crunch, bring 4G to Beaver, Oklahoma, and stop driving AT&T customers nuts with dropped calls and reception black holes.

How it usually works in Washington.

AT&T would have gotten away with their merger if it weren’t for those darned kids (consumers), the FCC and Justice Department ruining everything.

“The last significant spectrum auction was nearly 5 years ago now. And this FCC has made it abundantly clear that they’ll not allow significant [mergers and acquisitions] to help bridge their delays in freeing up new spectrum,” Stephenson complained. “So in the absence of auctions, our company and others in the industry have taken the logical step of entering into smaller transactions to acquire the spectrum we need to meet this demand. But even here, we need the FCC’s action and leadership, and unfortunately, even the smallest and most routine spectrum deals are receiving intense scrutiny from this FCC, oftentimes taking up to a year and sometimes longer before these are approved.”

Stephenson ignores the fact the FCC has rubber-stamped a number of wireless mergers over the past several years, which is why consumers no longer buy competitive service from Cingular, Alltel, Dobson Communications, Centennial Wireless, West Virginia Wireless, Unicel, Ramcell, or SureWest Wireless. All of these former competitors are now a part of the nation’s two largest carriers AT&T and Verizon Wireless. Even more impressively for the man in full denial, the FCC just quickly and quietly approved AT&T’s spectrum transfer purchase from Qualcomm.

“Now I hope I’m wrong, but it appears the FCC is intent on picking winners and losers rather than letting these markets work,” the chief executive said.

In other words, AT&T’s definition of letting markets “work” means letting them write their own laws governing the pesky concepts of antitrust, monopoly/duopoly market power, anti-competitive activity, etc. AT&T has no problem picking winners and losers in the community-owned broadband front, lobbying its way through state legislatures trying to block new networks from being built, even while slapping usage limits on their own customers’ DSL and U-verse accounts because of “capacity” concerns.

In the wireless marketplace, Charlie Sheen would declare AT&T “winning,” considering it has achieved 1/3rd of the U.S. wireless market. It wants more of course, even though Trefis, a market research firm, noted that had the FCC granted Stephenson’s wishes for three national carriers, AT&T, Verizon Wireless and Sprint “will control more than 90% of the U.S. wireless market, resulting in lower competition and higher prices for consumers.”

No problem there.

Stephenson also noted a lot of the company’s close friends were on their side (and handsomely compensated along the way we might add):

A lot of recent comments and speeches about certain members of this FCC suggest that they and not Congress should decide how spectrum auctions are conducted, including who can participate and what the conditions should be for participating. Meanwhile, we pile more and more regulatory uncertainty on top of an industry that is a foundation for a lot of today’s innovation*, making it difficult for all of us to allocate and commit capital. And in this industry, we all know capital investment equals jobs*. So the end result of this is we have a industry that is just really stuck in terms of creating real capacity*.

(*- except when community-based, publicly-owned networks are involved. They must be stopped at all costs.)

No matter that AT&T continues to sit on earlier spectrum acquisitions it continues not to use. It only grudgingly agreed to roaming agreements with the company it preferred to dismantle altogether: T-Mobile. In earlier, accidental disclosures, it was clear even before the merger and the newly-reticent FCC, AT&T preferred to raise prices, restrict service, and hang onto its profits instead of sufficiently investing them back into its network. Verizon Wireless has a 4G network, no dropped-call-syndrome, fewer signal black holes, and no apparent spectrum panic attacks.

Part of Sprint's fact sheet opposing the merger deal.

AT&T bit off more than they could chew through, and now faces the humiliating prospect of paying off its gambling debts. Only now, AT&T has effectively declared they are not going to pay for their costly mistake. Customers are.

Stephenson: Payback time.

The company introduced new, higher prices for its smartphone data plans this month, and intends to continue to increase prices and crack down on data use with speed throttles in 2012 and blame it on the “spectrum crunch”:

“In a capacity-constrained environment, usage-based data plans, increased pricing, managing the speeds of the highest volume users, these are all logical and necessary steps to manage utilization,” Stephenson said.

But AT&T’s chief executive also told shareholders repeatedly those increased prices were key to boosting company revenue and profits:

“We’ll expand wireless and consolidated margins. We’ll achieve mid-single-digit EPS growth or better. Cash generation continues to look very strong again next year. And given the operational momentum we have in the business, all of this appears very achievable and probably at the conservative end of our expectations.”

AT&T’s chief financial officer John J. Stephens put a spotlight on it:

In 2011, 76% of our revenues came from wireless and wireline data and managed services. That’s up from 68% or more than $10 billion from just 2 years ago. And revenues from these areas grew about $7 billion last year or more than 7% for 2011. We’re confident this mix shift will continue. In fact, in 2012 we expect consolidated revenues to continue to grow, thanks to strength in these growth drivers with little expected lift from the economy.

[...] We also continue to bring more subscribers onto our network with tiered data plans, more than 22 million at the end of the quarter, with most choosing the higher-priced plan. As more of our base moves to tiered plans and as data use increases, we expect our compelling [average revenue per subscriber] growth story to continue.

Other coverage you may enjoy: