On the heels of today’s announcement from Google that it intends to make Austin, Tex. the next home for Google Fiber, AT&T issued a press release claiming it was suddenly interested in building a gigabit fiber network in Austin too.

Today, AT&T announced that in conjunction with its previously announced Project VIP expansion of broadband access, it is prepared to build an advanced fiber optic infrastructure in Austin, Texas, capable of delivering speeds up to 1 gigabit per second.  AT&T’s expanded fiber plans in Austin anticipate it will be granted the same terms and conditions as Google on issues such as geographic scope of offerings, rights of way, permitting, state licenses and any investment incentives. This expanded investment is not expected to materially alter AT&T’s anticipated 2013 capital expenditures.

Currently, AT&T’s U-verse system in Austin — a fiber to the neighborhood system — cannot exceed 25Mbps as it is now configured. GigaOm’s Stacy Higginbotham reports AT&T told her it would build its own fiber to the premises system in Austin to support faster speeds.

But AT&T’s announcement does not come without plenty of wiggle room which could make today’s announcement little more than a publicity stunt:

1. AT&T claims it will build “infrastructure” capable of delivering “up to” 1Gbps. This could mean a network that supports a maximum of 1Gbps of shared Internet traffic, not 1Gbps to each home or business;
2. AT&T does not say it intends this network for residential customers, nor did it suggest a monthly price for gigabit service. Its Project VIP expansion describes planned broadband speed upgrades for residential U-verse customers of up to 75Mbps and for U-verse IPDSLAM to speeds of up to 45Mbps, not 1Gbps;
3. AT&T’s Project VIP already specifies fiber network build outs, but they are destined for cell towers, large business complexes, and multi-dwelling units that will share a fiber connection;
4. AT&T wants the same terms and conditions Google has received, including investment incentives. But AT&T could have applied for those incentives, and potentially could have already received them, if it specified plans for a gigabit network of its own. Instead, AT&T executives have always believed residential customers do not want or need gigabit broadband speeds. In fact, AT&T still doesn’t believe fiber to the home service makes economic sense, which is why it invested in a cheaper fiber to the neighborhood system that still relies on old copper wiring. AT&T also warns that, “Our potential capital investment will depend on the extent we can reach satisfactory agreements” with local officials on those incentives;
5. Wiring a city of Austin will cost tens of millions to reach every resident with service. Such an expense might be considered materially relevant to shareholders, requiring disclosure. Building a much lesser network, like a gigabit middle mile network or only offering fiber service to institutional or commercial customers would cost far less and could escape reporting requirements.

AT&T also did not miss an opportunity to promote its deregulatory agenda, which has so far not proved to be of much help to broadband speed enthusiasts stuck with DSL or U-verse.

“Most encouraging is the recognition by government officials that policies which eliminate unnecessary regulation, lower costs and speed infrastructure deployment, can be a meaningful catalyst to additional investment in advanced networks which drives employment and economic growth,” said Randall Stephenson, AT&T chairman and CEO.

AT&T’s agenda might result in a meaningful catalyst of a different kind — the end of rural landline telephone and broadband service.

Other stories of interest:

1. Austin Media Gushing for Google Fiber
2. Back to Kansas City: Google Fiber Now Going in the Ground; TV Service Also Announced
3. Bailiwick of Jersey Residents Getting 1Gbps Broadband; Private Providers Want Less
4. Multiple Sources Confirm Austin As Next Google Fiber City; Here Are Some Clues Why
5. Publicly Owned LUS Fiber Launching Gigabit Broadband for Lafayette, Louisiana

AT&T Mobility will acquire 21,000 Corr Wireless subscribers and spectrum owned by the Alabama-based wireless carrier in a private transaction between Corr’s parent company C Spire Wireless and AT&T.

Corr was acquired by Mississippi-based C Spire (formerly Cellular South) in February 2010 as the carrier sought expansion into northeastern Alabama and western Georgia. But Corr’s network has never been upgraded beyond 2G service, and the Corr has traditionally positioned itself as a value priced feature phone provider. As its competitors have moved beyond 3G into 4G service and now pitch mostly smartphones, Corr has fallen behind.

Corr’s coverage area has not been a priority for larger carriers like Verizon Wireless and AT&T. The acquisition, which includes multiple PCS and 700MHz “C-Block” licenses, will bolster AT&T’s weak coverage in the region, which includes Huntsville, Oneonta, Decatur, Cullman, Hartselle, and Arab, Ala.

AT&T is expected to decommission much of Corr’s older equipment and replace it with 4G LTE service.

Customers may not have to immediately upgrade their phones. Corr Wireless, like AT&T, operates a GSM network.

Other stories of interest:

1. AT&T & Verizon’s Artificial Wireless Fiefdoms: Interoperability is the Enemy
2. Cellular South Becomes C Spire Wireless: Offers Unlimited Data Plans, Sort Of…
3. Verizon Wireless Settles 4G Tethering Complaint, Pays $1.25 Million Settlement
4. The AT&T/Verizon Wireless Duopoly: “Humpty Dumpty Has Been Put Back Together Again”
5. T-Mobile: Allowing Verizon to Acquire Airwaves from Cable Industry Against the Public Interest

AT&T continues its quest to make landline service a really bad deal with the introduction of a new bill-padding fee that wireless customers will not have to pay.

AT&T’s $1.99 “Tennessee Regulatory Inspection Fee” appeared on customer bills in March, much to the surprise of customers.

“My regular service is only 22 bucks,” Charles “Buck” Meyer told the Chattanooga Times Free Press. “If they add $2 to it, that’s almost a 10 percent increase. I’ve been on the fence about switching off my landline for some months, and this could be the thing that pushes me over the edge.”

AT&T says it is entitled to recoup the money it pays to the Tennessee Regulatory Authority. The $1.99 fee appearing on March bills is a “one-time” fee until AT&T figures out how much it plans to charge customers on an ongoing basis. Most companies subject to TRA fees build them into the monthly cost of the service. AT&T is the only phone company in the state to break the fee out on the bill and collect the money separately.

In 2009, when the company lobbied for widespread deregulation of phone bills in Tennessee, it claimed deregulation would not bring about increased rates.

Meyer does not see it that way. He considers AT&T’s new fee a stealth rate hike.

“Slip a little line item on there that’s just a couple bucks and is a one-time deal,” he told the newspaper. “Then pretty soon it’s on there every month.”

The new fee is permitted because of a 2009 change in Tennessee’s statutes that now allow companies to pass along regulatory fees on customer bills.

Companies like AT&T heavily lobbied for statewide deregulation of telephone bills that year, and spent $180,000 in campaign contributions to lawmakers, their political action committees or party organizations. AT&T hired at least 20 lobbyists to help push deregulation through the Tennessee legislature. Critics of the bill warned its passage would lead to rate increases, something AT&T denied at the time.

AT&T Tennessee president Geoff Morton told the Times Free Press back in 2009, “the company needs to compete with rivals and is not interested in raising rates.”

AT&T refused to say how much it will collect from the new fee, but Morton said the company is now lobbying for another law that would gut the fees AT&T pays to the TRA to oversee the quality of phone service in the state.

“In the previous administration, telecommunications inspection fees increased despite a dramatic decrease in telecommunications services regulated by the commission,” AT&T spokesman Bob Corney told the newspaper. “We are hopeful that legislation will pass this session to reduce the regulatory burden on landline telephone customers in Tennessee.”

WMC’s “Ask Andy” segment has some non-answers from AT&T about their new $1.99 “regulatory authority inspection fee.” When the Memphis consumer reporter called AT&T, the company said, “no comment.”(1 minute)

Other stories of interest:

1. AT&T Giving Nashville Customers Bill Shock – Hundreds of Dollars of Overcharging… Month After Month
2. AT&T Wins Total Rate Deregulation in Tennessee: Let the Rate Hikes Commence
3. Deregulation Savings? CenturyLink Wins Right to Raise Phone Rates in Arizona
4. AT&T, Colorado Lawmakers Target Landline Subsidy; Collateral Damage: CenturyLink, Public Broadband
5. Kansas’ Law Allowing AT&T to Deregulate Itself Means Higher Phone Bills Are Imminent

Residents of some cities north of Dallas are in the unique position of being able to choose between two phone companies and at least one cable operator for television, phone, and broadband service.

AT&T U-verse competes head to head with Verizon’s advanced FiOS fiber to the home service in communities like Allen, Plano, and Frisco, Tex.,  because of franchising agreements that opened to door for both companies to compete in overlapping territories.

The aggressor was Verizon, which took advantage of Texas’ statewide video franchise law to “overbuild” its FiOS fiber operation into AT&T’s landline territory, particularly in affluent Frisco and Allen.

Verizon got interested in the area in 2008 because of the population boom and housing growth in North Texas. It was easy to lay fiber in the large housing developments under construction. When the economy crashed along with the housing market during the Great Recession, Verizon’s investment and interest in expanding FiOS declined. Today, some areas have access to both Verizon FiOS and U-verse from AT&T, as well as at least one cable operator. Other areas, especially in unfinished planned neighborhoods, only have access to only one provider, AT&T.

Verizon’s decision to overbuild and face AT&T was a decision to target investment into some of the richest areas in the Dallas-Ft. Worth Metroplex. Lower income areas often have neither service, as Verizon has focused efforts north of the city and AT&T U-verse is still not available in certain areas of downtown Dallas.

Other stories of interest:

1. Verizon Does the Right Thing and Will Not Cap Its DSL or FiOS Customers
2. AT&T and Verizon Cutting Off DSL Customers Without Warning for Phantom U-verse/FiOS Upgrades
3. Verizon FiOS: No Expansion in 2011; Existing Franchise Areas Will Be Completed, But That’s It
4. Verizon Reaffirms No Usage Caps; Speed Matters: Almost 50% Opt for 50-75Mbps FiOS Service
5. 50/5 Mbps ‘Wideband’ Service Arrives in Dallas for Time Warner Cable Customers Later This Month

A Financial Times blog post has started a buying frenzy for Vodafone Group Plc on news AT&T and Verizon Communications are about to bid for the British mobile phone giant, despite denials from Verizon it is involved in any deal to acquire the British mobile phone company.

The Times Alphaville blog quotes unnamed sources deemed “usually reliable people” who claim Verizon and AT&T are working together on a blockbuster $245 billion takeover deal for one of the world’s largest wireless carriers. After the story appeared, Vodafone shares were up 6.1 percent.

Verizon is interested in buying out Vodafone’s part ownership in its Verizon Wireless venture and AT&T is looking to overseas markets for future wireless revenue opportunities that are harder to find in the United States.

The sources told the Times they expect the deal will initially merge Vodafone and Verizon into a single entity, but only briefly. Verizon would promptly sell Vodafone’s extensive international assets to AT&T at a premium. Verizon would end up the sole owner of Verizon Wireless, and AT&T would acquire Vodafone’s enormous wireless operations in Europe, Asia, Africa and the Middle East.

Barclays Plc is working on putting together the potential transaction, Alphaville said today.

Informal talks have reportedly been underway between AT&T, Verizon and Vodafone since December according to Bloomberg News. The biggest impediments seem to be among the company’s top executives arguing over who ends up in the leadership and where the combined companies will be located — in the UK or the USA.

Vodafone has been a tolerated partner in Verizon Wireless since 1999 when Bell Atlantic and Vodafone merged their respective mobile ventures into Verizon Wireless. Vodafone has held tightly to their part-ownership of Verizon’s wireless network, which has proven an enormous earner in an American wireless marketplace considered less competitive than in Europe. The talks indicate Verizon is willing to pay a premium price to disconnect the British wireless company from its American operations. Allowing AT&T to help finance the largest wireless takeover in years makes it more likely a deal can be done, assuming regulators on both sides of the Atlantic agree.

Other stories of interest:

1. Bank of America Analyst Suggests AT&T and Verizon Wireless Buyout Vodafone
2. Verizon Sells ‘Excess Spectrum’ to T-Mobile USA, With Conditions
3. Moody’s Declares AT&T and Verizon the Winners — Sprint and T-Mobile Can “Never Catch Up”
4. Mobile Phone Companies Seek to Curtail Free Text/Calling Alternatives
5. Cash Out: Verizon Wireless Pays $8.5 Billion Dividend to Owners

Cable operators and publicly owned utilities in Tennessee are battling for control over the prices companies pay to use utility poles, with facts among the early casualties.

The subject of “pole attachment fees” has been of interest to cable companies for decades. In return for permission to hang cable wires on existing electric or telephone poles owned by utility companies, cable operators are asked to contribute towards their upkeep and eventual replacement. Cable operators want the fees to be as low as possible, while utility companies have sought leeway to defray rising utility pole costs and deal with ongoing wear and tear.

Little progress has been made in efforts to compromise, so this year two competing bills have been introduced by Republicans in the state legislature to define “fairness.” One is promoted by a group of municipal utilities and the other by the cable industry and several corporate-backed, conservative front groups claiming to represent the interests of state taxpayers and consumers.

Some background: Tennessee is unique in the pole attachment fee fight, because privately owned power companies bypassed a lot of the state (and much of the rest of the Tennessee Valley and Appalachian region) during the electrification movement of the early 20th century. Much of Tennessee is served by publicly owned power companies, which also own and maintain a large percentage of utility poles in the state.

Some of Tennessee’s largest telecom companies believe they can guarantee themselves low rates by pitching a case of private companies vs. big government utilities, with local municipalities accused of profiteering from artificially high pole attachment rates. Hoping to capitalize on anti-government sentiment, “small government” conservatives and telecom companies want to tie the hands of the pole owners indefinitely by taking away their right to set pole attachment rates.

The battle includes fact-warped editorials that distort the issues, misleading video ads, and an effort to conflate a utility fee with a tax. With millions at stake from pole attachment fees on tens of thousands of power poles throughout the state, the companies involved have launched a full-scale astroturf assault.

Grover Norquist’s Incendiary “Pole Tax”

Conservative Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform wrote that the pole attachment fee legislation promoted by public utilities would represent a $20 million dollar “tax increase” from higher cable and phone bills. Even worse, Norquist says, the new tax will delay telecom companies from rushing new investments on rural broadband.

Norquist

In reality, Americans for Tax Reform should be rebranded Special Interests for Tax Reform, because the group is funded by a variety of large tobacco corporations, former clients of disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff, and several wealthy conservative activists with their own foundations.

Norquist’s pole “tax increase” does not exist.

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) provides guidelines and a formula for determining pole attachment rates for privately owned utilities, but permits states to adopt their own regulations. Municipal utilities are exempted for an important reason — their rates and operations are often already well-regulated.

Stop the Cap! found that pole attachment revenue ends up in the hands of the utility companies that own and keep up the poles, not the government. Municipal utilities stand on their own — revenue earned by a utility stays with the utility. Should a municipal utility attempt to gouge other companies that hang wires on those poles, mechanisms kick in that guarantee it cannot profit from doing so.

A 2007 study by the state government in Tennessee effectively undercut the cable industry’s argument that publicly owned utilities are overcharging cable and phone companies that share space on their poles. The report found that “pole attachment revenues do not increase pole owners’ revenue in the long run.”¹

The Tennessee Valley Authority, which supplies electricity across Tennessee, regularly audits the revenues and costs of its municipal utility distributors and sets end-user rates accordingly. The goal is to guarantee that municipal distributors “break even.” Any new revenue sources, like pole attachment fees, are considered when setting wholesale electric rates. If a municipal utility overcharged for access to its poles, it will ultimately gain nothing because the TVA will set prices that take that revenue into account.

Freedom to Distort: The Cable Lobby’s Astroturf Efforts

Freedom to distort

Another “citizens group” jumping into the battle is called “Freedom to Connect,” actually run by the Tennessee Cable Telecommunications Association (TCTA). Most consumers won’t recognize TCTA as the state cable lobby. Almost all will have forgotten TCTA was the same group that filed a lawsuit to shut down EPB’s Fiber division, which today delivers 1,000Mbps broadband service across the city and competes against cable operators like Comcast and Charter Cable.

One TCTA advertisement claims that some utilities are planning “to double the fees broadband providers pay to the state’s government utilities.”

In reality, cable companies have gone incognito, hiding their identity by rebranding themselves as “broadband providers.” No utility has announced it plans to “double” pole attachment fees either.

TCTA members came under fire at a recent hearing attended by state lawmakers when Rep. Charles Curtiss (D-Sparta) spoke up about irritating robocalls directed at his constituents making similar claims.

“What was said was false,” Curtiss told the cable representatives at the hearing. “You’ve lost your integrity with me. Whoever made up your mind to do that, you’re in the wrong line of work.”

TCTA — Tennessee’s cable industry lobbying group, released this distorted advertisement opposing pole attachment fee increases.  (1 minute)

The Chattanooga Free-Press’ Drew Johnson: Independent Opinion Page Editor or Well-connected Activist with a Conflict of Interest?

Johnson (Times Free Press)

In its ad campaign, the TCTA gave prominent mention to an article in Chattanooga’s Times-Free Press from Feb. 27: “Bill Harms Consumers, Kills Competition.”

What the advertisement did not say is it originated in an editorial published by Drew Johnson, who serves as the paper’s conservative opinion editor. Johnson has had a bone to pick with Chattanooga’s public utility EPB since it got into the cable television and broadband business.

That may not be surprising, since Johnson is still listed as a “senior fellow” at the “Taxpayers Protection Alliance,” yet another corporate and conservative-backed astroturf group founded by former Texas congressman Dick Armey of FreedomWorks fame.

Johnson’s journalism credentials? He wrote a weekly column for the conservative online screed NewsMax, founded and funded by super-wealthy Richard Mellon Scaife and Christopher Ruddy, both frequent donors to conservative, pro-business causes.

TPA has plenty to hide — particularly the sources of their funding. When asked if private industry backs TPA’s efforts, president David Williams refused to come clean.

“It comes from private sources, and I don’t reveal who my donors are,” he told Environmental Building News in January.

Ironically, Johnson is best known for aggressively using Tennessee’s open records “Sunshine” law to get state employee e-mails and other records looking for conflicts of interest or scandal.

Newspaper readers may want to ask whether Johnson represents the newspaper, an industry-funded sock puppet group, or both.  They also deserve full disclosure if the TPA receives any funding from companies that directly compete with EPB.

The Institute from ALEC: The Institute for Policy Innovation’s Innovative Way to Funnel AT&T and Comcast Money Into the Fight

Provider-backed ALEC advocates for the corporate interests that fund its operations.

Another group fighting on the side of the cable and phone companies against municipal utilities is the Institute for Policy Innovation. Policy counsel Bartlett D. Cleland claimed the government is out to get private companies that want space on utility poles.

“The proposed new system in HB1111 and SB1222 is fervently supported by the electric cooperatives and the government-owned utilities for good reason – they are merely seeking a way to use the force of government against their private sector competitors,” Cleland said. “The proposal would allow them to radically raise their rates for pole attachments to multiples of the national average.”

The facts don’t match Cleland’s rhetoric.

In reality, the state of Tennessee found in their report on the matter in 2007 that Tennessee’s pole attachment fees are “not necessarily out of line with those in other states.”²

In fact, some of the state’s telecom companies seemed to agree:

• EMBARQ (now CenturyLink) provided data on fees received from other service providers in Tennessee, Virginia, South and North Carolina. In these data, Tennessee’s rates ($36.02 – $47.41) are similar to those in North Carolina ($23.12-$52.85) and Virginia ($28.94 – $35.77). Rates were lower in South Carolina.
• Cable operators, who have less infrastructure on poles than telephone and electric utilities, paid even less. Time Warner Cable provided mean rates per state showing Tennessee ($7.70) in the middle of the pack compared to Florida ($9.83) and North Carolina ($4.86 – $13.64).

In addition to his role as policy counsel, Cleland also happens to be co-chair of the Telecommunications and Information Technology Task Force of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). Members of that committee include Comcast and AT&T — Tennessee’s largest telecom companies, both competing with municipal telecommunications providers like EPB.

¹ Analysis of Pole Attachment Rate Issues in Tennessee, State of Tennessee. 2007. p.23

² Analysis of Pole Attachment Rate Issues in Tennessee, State of Tennessee. 2007. p.12

Other stories of interest:

1. Time Warner Cable Blames Pole Fee Increases They Won’t Pay for Future Rate Hikes
2. EPB Faces Blizzard of Bull from Comcast, Tennessee “Watchdog” Group
3. Americans for Prosperity Pro-Corporate Front Group Behind Calls Harassing NC Residents
4. Let the Fuhr Fly: Big Telecom Front Group Says Cut Community Broadband to Help Mitigate ‘Fiscal Cliff’
5. AT&T and Time Warner Cable’s Unnecessary Temper Tantrum in Kansas City

AT&T is accelerating the demise of its own landline business with a new wireless home phone product that is cheap for voice calls but could spell the end of your DSL service in certain cases.

AT&T Wireless Home Phone service provides contract-free unlimited nationwide voice calling for $20 a month ($10 if you are already an AT&T wireless phone customer sharing your Mobile Share minutes).

The service includes a base station ($99.99 prepaid or free with two-year contract) that receives AT&T’s wireless signal and integrates with your existing home telephones. The landline replacement includes caller ID, call waiting, three-way calling and voice mail. There is a $36 activation fee, a “Regulatory Cost Recovery Charge” of $1.25 per month and all the local taxes and surcharges that go with your current landline. Unless choosing the prepaid option, an early termination fee up to $150 applies. The restocking fee for customer returns is up to $35.

In certain cases, forfeiting your landline could mean the end of your DSL service if you do not remind the phone company you want to keep your broadband service intact. If you don’t AT&T and other phone companies might disconnect all of your services.

There are other caveats:

• Call quality is only as good as AT&T’s network and reception in your home;
• Caller ID only includes the calling party’s number. No name information is provided;
• Emergency 911 calls lack exact geographic information, which could make locating a caller more difficult;
• The service is unregulated and has no local or state government oversight to guarantee call quality and reliability;
• If power fails, an internal backup battery can keep the system running for up to 36 hours or 3.5 hours of talk time;
• The service cannot be used with home security systems, fax machines, medical alert systems, credit card terminals, dial-up Internet, or other data services.

Verizon Wireless offers their own version of this service: Wireless Home Phone Connect, for about the same price. It gets mixed reviews from owners because of complaints about call quality.

AT&T’s product promotion of its wireless home phone service. The pricing information in this video was intended primarily for existing AT&T wireless customers and is slightly outdated. (1 minute) 

Other stories of interest:

1. Should You Drop Your Landline? The Pros, Cons, and Alternatives
2. Verizon Targets Frontier, AT&T and Cable ‘Digital Phone’ Landline Customers in Rochester, N.Y. and Conn.
3. Rural Americans Losing Reliable Phone Service; FCC Investigates Growing Landline Failures
4. Cell Phone Industry Considers Imposing Expensive ‘Unlimited Voice Calling’ Plans
5. Wall Street Encourages Verizon to Get Completely Out Of Landline/FiOS Business

AT&T has new wireless data plans you can’t afford.

Saving money takes a back seat to AT&T’s newest supersized Mobile Share data packages reported by The Verge. AT&T’s goal of monetizing data usage for their most ravenous wireless data users means a 900 percent price hike from the days of the company’s $30 unlimited data plan. Here are the newest plans:

• 30GB data usage = $300 a month
• 40GB data usage = $400 a month
• 50GB data usage = $500 a month

Unlimited texting and talking are included in these prices, but the individual device fees for each smartphone, tablet, or wireless modem are not.

AT&T’s pricing is relevant to rural customers who face an imminent threat of losing landline phone and broadband service should the phone company win the right to abandon its copper wire network in favor of wireless-only service. A family watching Netflix consuming 45GB of usage on AT&T’s DSL service pay as little as $15 a month for broadband. With AT&T’s wireless Internet service, that same family will spend a prohibitive $500 a month.

Other stories of interest:

1. T-Mobile Introduces Family Plan Savings AT&T Merger Would Crush
2. Verizon Sneaks Customer Off Unlimited Data Plan, Despite Promises It Wouldn’t
3. Verizon Wireless Earns More from Wireless Data Traffic That Costs Them Less
4. Verizon Wireless Customers: 48 Hours Left to Secure Unlimited Data/Unlimited 4G Tethering Plans
5. AT&T Hints Wireless Will Be AT&T’s Rural Broadband Solution; ‘Customers Will Pay More’

AT&T is giving new U-verse customers their choice of a Kindle Fire HD, Nexus 7 Tablet, SONOS PLAY:3 or Xbox 360 game console when signing up for a double-play package of Internet and either phone or television service.

The company is targeting customers planning to switch more than one service away from an existing provider. Most will likely choose U-verse broadband and television service, but any combination of telephone or TV service will qualify a customer for the gift promotion, valued at up to $350.

But customers could wait more than a year before the gift shows up.

The fine print states that customers must wait up to 34 weeks (more than half a year) after signing up before a “reward notification” arrives. At that point, customers must complete an online redemption submission and wait an extra 23 weeks for the tablet or game console to arrive, assuming the customer kept service for at least 30 days.

Customers must sign up before  July 27, 2013 to qualify.

[Updated 3/19: One of our readers in the comment section quotes from an AT&T representative that their press release contained two major "typos": It should have said 3-4 weeks and 2-3 weeks, but someone forgot to proofread.]

Other stories of interest:

1. Time Warner Cable Offers Triple Play Customers Free Xbox 360 & $150-500 Best Buy Gift Card
2. AT&T U-verse Introduced in Central Illinois & Corpus Christi, Texas
3. AT&T Forces Texas Customers With DSL to Take “Free U-verse” Upgrade That Costs $337
4. AT&T and Verizon Cutting Off DSL Customers Without Warning for Phantom U-verse/FiOS Upgrades
5. AT&T U-verse Celebrates 2 Million Customers With New 24Mbps Speed Tier in Austin, San Antonio, and St. Louis

Verizon Wireless and AT&T could cooperate to allow both companies to build market power in the United States and abroad with a buyout of Vodafone, now a part-owner of Verizon Wireless.

The world’s second largest wireless service provider (behind China Mobile), Vodafone could be subject to an American takeover if the two largest phone companies in the United States structure the deal together.

Bank of America-Merrill analyst David Barden suggested AT&T could buy Vodafone’s international assets at an estimate price of $70 billion, allowing Verizon to buyout Vodafone’s 45 percent stake in Verizon Wireless.

Barden warned the deal would be time-consuming, and likely attract strict scrutiny from regulators both at home and abroad, but a deal would give Verizon its desired full control of its domestic wireless operation and allow AT&T to become a major global player in the wireless marketplace in Europe, Asia, Oceania, and the Middle East.

An analyst from RBC made news last week suggesting AT&T could be amenable to selling its non-core assets to raise cash, including the sale of its wireless broadcast and cell towers — money that could be used to help pay for such a deal.

AT&T spokesman Brad Burns declined to comment specifically on the speculation by RBC, but admitted, “if we wanted additional flexibility, that could be an option for us.”

“In all cases, our decisions are driven by what’s right for the company and for our shareowners, so in that sense, nothing’s off the table,” Burns said. “But any comments by analysts about potential sales are simply speculation.”

AT&T achieved record cash flows in 2012 and will likely end 2013 with $14 billion in free cash, which could be used in an acquisition strategy or returned to shareholders.

Fran Shammo, chief financial officer of Verizon, noted the company has been interested in taking full control over its wireless division for some time.

The estimated cost of buying out Vodafone’s U.S. share is around $115 billion.

Other stories of interest:

1. Cash Out: Verizon Wireless Pays $8.5 Billion Dividend to Owners
2. AT&T’s and Verizon’s Tax Windfall Could be Ending; AT&T Paid No Federal Tax Last Year
3. Verizon Sells ‘Excess Spectrum’ to T-Mobile USA, With Conditions
4. Breaking News: AT&T Withdraws FCC Application to Buy T-Mobile: “The Deal is Over the Cliff”
5. Pot to Kettle: AT&T Sounds Alarm That Sprint-Softbank Deal Threatens Competitive Wireless