Cricket wants to convince you that paying AT&T or Verizon $90-120 a month for a cell plan with unlimited calling, texting and a 1-3GB data plan is too much, because it can sell you an “all-unlimited plan” for $45.

Cricket this week launched its “Half Is More” marketing campaign online, as well as in print and television advertisements.

“When we go out and talk to a lot of consumers, we hear a lot of angst from post-paid subscribers,” Cricket senior vice president Tyler Wallis told CNET. “They’re not happy with the service they’re getting and they’re feeling like they’re getting gouged.”

They also might not like finding out their “unlimited use” data plan actually comes with a barely disclosed speed throttle that kicks in after only 1GB of usage, reducing speeds to near dial-up for the rest of the billing cycle.

Cricket defends the claim they offer “unlimited” data service by stating they do not completely sever a customer’s data connection when they reach the limit, or charge them overlimit fees. They just slow the service down… a lot. Cricket customers tell Stop the Cap! Cricket’s wireless Internet becomes almost unusable once they are placed in the usage penalty box.

Cricket also depends heavily on Sprint for roaming coverage outside of the small number of home markets where Cricket owns and operates its own network. For many customers, that means frequent roaming on Sprint’s 3G network, which is not rated well for its speed and performance.

Once throttled, customers are stuck in the slow lane until their next billing cycle begins.

Customers with light data needs might find Cricket’s plan an option, assuming they have good coverage either from Cricket itself or roaming on Sprint’s network.

Cricket’s campaign noticeably avoids comparing their plan against T-Mobile, which offers a $70 monthly truly unlimited plan or for ten dollars less, a 2GB plan with unlimited calling and texting.

How easy can you read the white fine print disclaimer on the white background in Cricket’s ad? Cricket advertises unlimited data but keeps its speed throttle mostly to itself. (1 minute)

Other stories of interest:

1. Cricket Raising Wireless Broadband Prices Again; Announces Data Roaming On Sprint’s 3G Network
2. Cricket Launches Nationwide Voice Service Through Roaming Agreement With Sprint, Others – $30/Month Unlimited
3. AT&T’s Old ‘Unlimited’ Plan Has 2GB Throttle Threshold; For the Same $30, Get 3GB ‘Limited’ Plan
4. Largely Pointless ‘Radio Shack Mobile’ Simply Resells Cricket Service, Where Available
5. Welcome to Virgin Mobile’s Higher Calling: The 2.5GB/256kbps Usage Throttle Starts Friday

One of the chairs of the North Carolina House Finance Committee abruptly resigned his chairmanship on the House floor Wednesday, submitting a letter read aloud in the chamber that accused fellow Republican House Speaker Thom Tillis (R-Mecklenburg) of having an unexplained business relationship with Time Warner Cable.

Rep. Robert Brawley (R-Iredell) wrote Tillis burst into his office demanding to know about a bill Brawley introduced that would have weakened the 2011 law Tillis strongly supported that severely restricted publicly owned broadband networks in the state.

“You slamming my office door shut, standing in front of me and stating that you have a business relationship with Time Warner and wanting to know what the bill was about,” Brawley wrote in his resignation letter. “You and I both know the bill stifles the competition with MI Connections in Mooresville. MI Connections is being operated just as any other free enterprise system and should be allowed to do so without the restrictions placed on them by the proponents of Time Warner.”

Tillis’ office described the resignation of Brawley’s chairmanship as “a mutual decision.”

Tillis was honored in 2011 as ALEC’s “Legislator of the Year” and received an undisclosed cash reward. Time Warner Cable is a corporate member of ALEC.

House Bill 557, introduced by Brawley, would have permitted an exception under state law for the community-owned MI Connection cable system to expand its area of service to include economic development sites, public safety facilities, governmental facilities, and schools and colleges located in and near the city of Statesville. It would also allow the provider to extend service based on the approval of the Board of County Commissioners and, with respect to schools, the Iredell County School Board.

The bill died in the Committee on Government earlier this month.

MI Connection is the publicly owned and operated cable and Internet system serving the towns of Mooresville, Davidson and Cornelius in the counties of Mecklenburg and Iredell. It was originally a former Adelphia-owned cable system that fell into disrepair before it was sold in a bankruptcy proceeding. MI Connection has proved financially challenging to the local communities it serves because the antiquated cable system required significant and costly upgrades, faces fierce competition from AT&T and Time Warner Cable, and lacks the technological advantage fiber to the home offers other public networks like Greenlight in Wilson and Fibrant in Salisbury. Despite the challenges, MI Connection has successfully upgraded its broadband infrastructure with the fastest speeds available in the area — up to 60/10Mbps.

Tillis helped shepherd into law the 2011 bill that Time Warner Cable helped write and sponsor designed to stop public networks like MI Connection from expanding and new public networks ever seeing the light of day. The legislation places strict limits on public broadband network deployment and financing. The bill Brawley introduced would have chipped away at the law’s limits on network expansion. Brawley’s letter suggests Tillis had direct involvement stopping his bill from getting further consideration.

Brawley

Both Brawley and Tillis represent portions of the MI Connection service area.

Time Warner Cable has a long history pushing for community broadband bans in North Carolina, but the bills never became law when the legislature was still in the hands of Democrats. But in late 2010, Republicans took control of the state house for the first time in more than a century. Time Warner Cable’s fortunes brightened considerably under Republicans like Rep. Marilyn Avila (R-Wake). Avila willingly met with Time Warner Cable’s top lobbyist to coordinate movement on the community broadband ban legislation she introduced and after it became law was honored by the state cable lobby at a retreat in Asheville.

Tillis, who became speaker of the house in 2011 under the new GOP majority, received $37,000 in telecom contributions in 2010–2011 (despite running unopposed in 2010), which is more than any other state lawmaker and significantly more than the $4,250 he received 2006–2008 combined. AT&T, Time Warner Cable, and Verizon each gave Tillis $1,000 in early-mid January, just before he was sworn in as speaker on January 26. Tillis was in a key position to make sure the anti-competitive bill moved along the legislative pipeline.

Last summer, Time Warner Cable returned the favor inviting Tillis to serve a prominent role at a media event inaugurating its Wi-Fi network in time for last year’s Democratic National Convention, held at the Time Warner Cable Arena.

Despite all that, newspapers in the state are having trouble determining exactly what ties Tillis has to Time Warner Cable. The Raleigh News & Observer noted, “It’s unclear what relationship Tillis might have to Time Warner. His financial disclosure lists no connection.”

The Greensboro News & Record published a non-denial denial from Tillis spokesman Jordan Shaw: “Shaw said he doesn’t know of any business relationship between Tillis and Time Warner.” The paper added, “a regional Time-Warner spokesman said Tillis has no ties to the company.”

“Not knowing” is not a total denial and a legislator need not have direct ties to a company to be influenced by their agenda through lobbyists like the North Carolina Cable Telecommunications Association, the statewide cable trade association that includes Time Warner Cable as its largest member. Then there are third-party groups.

A May 7 editorial in the News & Observer pointed out Tillis does have close ties to the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), a group financed in part by Time Warner Cable and cited by CEO Glenn Britt as a useful asset to the cable operator because it was ”particularly focused on telecom matters.” The commentary, “ALEC’s Guy is Thom Tillis,” reminded readers Tillis wasn’t just a casual member of the corporate-funded group, he’s a national board member. In fact, Stop the Cap! has learned he was ALEC’s 2011 Legislator of the Year. On hand at the 2011 New Orleans ALEC event to applaud Tillis were more than two dozen fellow North Carolina Republican legislators, including Reps. Marilyn Avila and Julia Howard.

Among the model, corporate ghost-written bills ALEC maintains in its extensive database is one that restricts or bans publicly owned broadband networks, similar to what passed in North Carolina in 2011.

The fortunes of ALEC (and the corporations that underwrite its operations) have continued to improve in North Carolina this year. The News & Observer notes:

ALEC, as it’s known, has provided language for bills that [have been] used this session in North Carolina, ranging from creating an independent board to take charter school governance away from the State Board of Education to protecting a Philadelphia-based company from lawsuits involving asbestos exposure to installing an anti-union amendment in the state constitution. Closer to home, the Civitas Institute, a conservative group, used ALEC literature in an indoctrination…er, training…session for freshman lawmakers.

“I wish you’d turn the camera off now because I am going to get up and leave if you don’t,” said Rep. Julia Howard

Uncovering the corporate influence and pay to play politics pervasive in North Carolina’s legislature on broadband matters has proved historically scandalous for members and ex-members alike, as Stop the Cap! has reported for more than four years:

• In 2009, Rep. Ty Harrell (D-Wake) ran away from his own bill to ban community broadband after he admitted he ran into a hornet’s nest of controversy over the legislation, which was introduced because Time Warner approached him and asked for it. Later that same year he ran into another hornet’s nest over allegations of misused campaign funds and resigned his office;
• In 2010, Sen. David Hoyle admitted he introduced a community broadband ban in the North Carolina Senate that the cable industry wrote with his help. When asked about criticism that he was “carrying water” for the cable companies, Hoyle replied, “I’ve carried more water than Gunga Din for the business community – the people who pay the taxes.” He decided not to run for re-election;
• In 2011, life became uncomfortable for Rep. Julia Howard (R-Davie, Iredell), who became so upset over scrutiny she received from Raleigh’s NBC affiliate over the bill to ban community broadband, she threatened to flee the interview if the cameras were not shut off.

Tillis is following in others’ footsteps and is suspected of having even bigger political ambitions for 2014 — challenging the U.S. Senate seat now held by Democrat Kay Hagan.

The News & Observer thinks Tillis is forgetting about the people who elected him to office:

For North Carolinians of any political philosophy, however, the larger concern here is that laws are being written by those outside the state with only an ideological interest. ALEC, except for advancing its agenda, likely could care less about issues specific to North Carolina, things of intense, day-to-day concern to North Carolinians.

And not only are bills being influenced by ALEC, the speaker of the House is on the group’s board.

Thom Tillis and his Republican mates on Jones Street weren’t elected to march to orders issued by some national organization. Perhaps if they kept their eyes and ears open for constituents, their legislative agenda might be more about them and less about doing ALEC’s bidding.

Brawley himself is not free from controversy. In addition to attending the aforementioned ALEC event in New Orleans with Tillis, Avila, and Howard, earlier this year Brawley introduced House Bill 640, legislation that would roll back ethics reforms and allow lobbyists to once again give gifts to state lawmakers without any public disclosure.

Brawley told WRAL-TV that required ethics classes on gifts and disclosure requirements ”are useless for anyone without internal ethics anyway. They only tell you the law. They do not guarantee integrity. What makes you think a person without ethics is going to obey a law anyway?”

The laws were enacted after a major 2006 scandal involving then-House Speaker Jim Black.

Corrections: In the original article, we mistakenly identified the News & Observer as a Charlotte newspaper. It is actually published in Raleigh. We also wrote that House Bill 557 died without being assigned to any committee for consideration. We received word the bill was actually referred to the Committee on Government on Apr. 4, 2013 where no further action was apparently taken. We regret the errors.

Other stories of interest:

1. Anti-Community Broadband N.C. State Rep. Marilyn Avila’s Fun Weekend in Asheville: Did You Pay?
2. Payoff: Big Telecom Cuts Big Checks to Legislators Who Outlawed N.C. Community Broadband
3. Time Warner Cable Introduces Wi-Fi Service in Charlotte, N.C.
4. ALEC Front Group Responds to Truth-telling About N.C. Broadband With Talking Points
5. North Carolina Call to Action: Call Your Legislators Now!

Despite efforts to improve their reputation, cable companies are hated so much the industry now scores lower than any other according to the American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI).

The only reason the industry’s average score or 68 out of 100 ticked higher are some new competitors, especially Verizon’s FiOS fiber optic network, which scores higher than any other provider.

The cable companies you grew up with still stink, ACSI reports, with Comcast (63) and Time Warner Cable (60) near the bottom of the barrel.

At fault for the dreadful ratings are constant rate increases and poor customer service. As a whole, consumers reported highest satisfaction with fiber optic providers, closely followed by satellite television services. Cable television scored the worst. Despite the poor ratings, every cable operator measured except Time Warner Cable managed to gain a slight increase in more satisfied customers. Time Warner Cable’s score for television service dropped five percent.

Customers are even less happy with broadband service. Verizon FiOS again scored the highest with a 71% approval rating. Time Warner Cable (63) and Comcast (62) scored the lowest. Customers complained about overpriced service plans, speed and reliability issues. Customers were unhappy with their plan options as well, including the fact many providers now place arbitrary usage limits on their access.

The best word to describe customer feelings about their broadband options: frustration, according to ACSI chair Claes Fornell. “In a market even less competitive than subscription TV, there is little incentive for companies to improve.”

Other stories of interest:

1. Consumer Reports Rates Your Broadband Provider: Fiber Great, Cable/DSL Meh, Satellite Sucks
2. Verizon’s Anti-Aggression Treaty With Big Cable May Be the End of FiOS
3. A Look at Broadband Numbers in the United States: DSL Hurting Phone Companies
4. HissyFitWatch: Frontier and Comcast Battle Over Billboards in Ft. Wayne, Ind.
5. Competition Breather: Verizon FiOS Rate Hikes Ease Pressure on Cablevision, TWC

AT&T wants everyone in Oklahoma City to stay off the phone and rely on text messaging for communications with family, friends, and loved ones “given high call volumes.”

Although AT&T has announced it is waiving voice, data, and text overage charges through June 30 for customers in the affected areas, it won’t automatically waive your bill for services you cannot use or per message charges incurred if you do not have a texting plan.

“AT&T customer service told me the waived fees only cover overlimit fees, not plan fees,” says Susan Ramos, who received a text message on her AT&T phone advising her of the special tornado victim compensation plan. “When I called them to learn the exact terms, they told me if you don’t have a text plan, for instance, you will still be charged a per message fee.”

Ramos, who is in Moore, Okla., tells Stop the Cap! AT&T is pleading Oklahoma City customers to stay off their cell phones and rely on text messaging. But without a text plan AT&T will charge 20 cents per text message, 30 cents for each picture or video message.

“Looking at AT&T’s website, their generous offer doesn’t seem so generous when you notice they are only selling a $20 texting plan that already provides unlimited messages,” Ramos notes. “How about just waiving all text message fees for everyone until June 30?”

AT&T’s remaining unlimited data customers in the area also wonder whether the company’s notorious speed throttle will still kick in after using a few gigabytes.

Ramos doesn’t think AT&T’s offer to waive voice overages means all that much either.

“Does anyone ever exceed their voice allowance anymore?” she asks. “Besides, they don’t want you using your phone for voice calling anyway.”

Other stories of interest:

1. Gouge Train: AT&T Wireless Eliminates Budget Texting Plans: Welcome to $20+ Texting
2. AT&T’s Old ‘Unlimited’ Plan Has 2GB Throttle Threshold; For the Same $30, Get 3GB ‘Limited’ Plan
3. Verizon Confusion: Is Verizon Redefining Texting Plans to Mean Only Plain Text Messages?
4. Cell Phone Industry Considers Imposing Expensive ‘Unlimited Voice Calling’ Plans
5. Comcast Brings Back Its Usage Cap… Now With Overlimit Fees for Your Inconvenience

AT&T says government regulations have hampered the company’s plans to roll out faster broadband networks to areas where consumers and businesses want faster speeds.

Now that Google has gotten permission to roll out its gigabit fiber network only to neighborhoods that show an interest in the service, AT&T says it should be allowed to operate the same way.

CEO Randall Stephenson told investors at a J.P. Morgan investor conference in Boston that AT&T would like to build fiber networks, but government requirements that it offer the service universally across the communities it serves has made such networks financially unprofitable. Eliminating those rules would create a new incentive for fiber upgrades in areas that want them.

“I think you are going to see that begin to manifest itself around the United States, and in not just AT&T and Google,” Stephenson said. “You will see others doing this because the demand for really high-speed broadband via gigabit-type fiber-based solutions on a targeted basis is going to be very, very high.”

AT&T says Google has already changed how future broadband networks are deployed — only to areas where there is enough demand for the service. Google’s entry into Kansas City came with a pre-registration procedure that allowed the company to gauge demand for its fiber network. The neighborhoods expressing the most interest were given priority during the network buildout. Google also won the right to entirely bypass neighborhoods where an insufficient number of residents expressed interest in the service.

Stephenson

Traditionally, cable and phone companies constructing networks like FiOS, U-verse, and similar fiber deployments are required to offer service throughout each community. The only general exception relates to sparsely populated or very high cost areas that have an insufficient number of potential customers, making return on investment difficult. Google can bypass even the most densely populated sections of downtown Kansas City if there is insufficient demand for its service. Cable and phone providers who attempted this in the past would have been accused of “redlining” — singling out only the most lucrative, affluent service areas while bypassing low-income neighborhoods.

Now AT&T hopes Google has established a precedent it can use to cherry-pick network upgrades of its own.

“The key is being able to do it in places where you know there is going to be high demand and people willing to pay the premium for those type services,” Stephenson said, predicting in some parts of Austin, AT&T could achieve a 35 percent market share for its promised fiber network.

Stephenson also suggested an unlikely new source of money to finance fiber upgrades — content producers and applications developers who need faster networks to support sales of their online products and services. That would shift the economics of faster broadband to an entire new model — broadband providers may decide their current networks are fast enough and might avoid upgrading them without some financial compensation from the websites and content producers customers visit.

Wireless Industry: We’re running out of spectrum!
Wireless Industry: We’ve got plenty to room for unlimited ESPN!

America is on the verge of a wireless traffic data jam so bad, it could bring America to its knees.

Or not.

Stop the Cap! notices with some interest that while wireless carriers continue to sound the alarm about a spectrum crisis so serious it necessitates further compressing the UHF television dial and forces other spectrum users to become closer neighbors, the same giant phone companies warning of impending doom are negotiating with online video producers to offer customers “toll-free,” all-you-cat-eat streaming video of major sports events that won’t count against your usage allowance.

ESPN is in talks with at least one major carrier (AT&T or Verizon Wireless) to subsidize some of the costs of its streamed video content so that customers can watch as much as they want without running into a provider’s usage limit. Both Verizon and AT&T have signaled their interest in allowing content producers to pay for subscribers’ data usage. In fact, they don’t seem to care who pays for the enormous bandwidth consumed by streaming video, so long as someone does.

At a recent investment bank conference Verizon Wireless chief executive Dan Mead explained the next chapter in monetizing data usage will allow the company to rake in more revenue from third parties instead of customers already struggling with high wireless bills.

“We are actively exploring those opportunities and looking at every way to bring value to our customers,” said Mead.

Content producers are increasingly frustrated with the stingy caps on offer at AT&T and Verizon Wireless because customers stop accessing that content once they near their monthly usage limit. One large provider admitted to ESPN that “significant numbers” of customers are already reaching their cap before the end of their billing cycle, after which their online usage plummets to limit the sting of overlimit charges.

Offering “toll-free” data could dramatically increase the use of high bandwidth applications and increase profits at wireless providers based on new fees they could collect from content producers. Customers would still be subject to usage limits for all non-preferred content, a clear violation of Net Neutrality principles.

The buffet is open.

But in case you forgot, wireless carriers won exemption from Net Neutrality, arguing their networks lack the capacity to sustain a Net Neutral Internet experience. These same companies claim without more frequencies to handle the massive, potentially unsustainable amount of wireless traffic, the wireless data apocalypse could be at hand in just a few years. It was also the most-cited reason AT&T and Verizon discontinued their unlimited use data plans.

But unlimiting ESPN video? No problem.

In January 2010, Verizon Wireless was singing a very different tune to the FCC about the need to control and manage high bandwidth applications like the “toll-free” streaming video service ESPN proposes (underlining ours):

Wireless broadband services face technological and operational constraints arising from the need to manage spectrum sharing by a dynamically varying number of mobile users at any time. Thus, unlike, for example, cable broadband networks, where a known and relatively fixed number of subscribers share capacity in a given area, the capacity demand at any given cell site is much more variable as the number and mix of subscribers constantly change in sometimes highly unpredictable ways.

Are wireless carriers now part of the problem?

For example, as a subscriber using a high-bandwidth application such as streaming video moves from range of one cell site to another, the network must immediately provide the needed capacity for that subscriber, while not disrupting other subscribers using that same cell site. Of course, the problem is magnified many times over as multiple subscribers can be moving in and out of range of a cell site at any given moment. Moreover, the available bandwidth can fluctuate due to variations in radio frequency signal strength and quality, which can be affected by changing factors such as weather, traffic, speed, and the nearby presence of interfering devices (e.g., wireless microphones).

These problems compound those resulting from limited spectrum. As the Commission has repeatedly recognized in proclaiming an upcoming spectrum crisis, “as wireless is increasingly used as a platform for broadband communications services, the demand for spectrum bandwidth will likely continue to increase significantly, and spectrum availability may become critical to ensuring further innovation.”

A wireless carrier cannot readily increase capacity once it has exhausted its spectrum capacity. Thus, wireless broadband providers are left to acquire additional spectrum (to the extent available) or take measures that use their existing spectrum as efficiently as possible, which they do through a combination of investing in additional cell sites and network management practices that optimize network usage and address congestion so as to provide consumers with the quality of service they expect.

Regulators need to ask why wireless companies are telling the FCC there is a bandwidth crisis of epic proportions that requires the Commission to exempt them from important Net Neutrality principles while telling investment banks, shareholders and content producers the more traffic the merrier, as long as someone pays. Customers also might ask why their unlimited use data plans were discontinued while carriers seek deals to allow unlimited viewing with their preferred content partners.

What is the real motivation? The Wall Street Journal suggests one:

“Creating a second revenue stream for mobile broadband is the holy grail for wireless operators but collecting fees from content companies would probably make the FCC take a close look into the policy implications,” said Paul Gallant, managing director at Guggenheim Securities. An FCC spokesman declined to comment.

The Wall Street Journal takes a closer look at a plan to manage an end run around Net Neutrality by allowing preferred content partners to offer streaming video services exempt from your usage cap. (4 minutes)

Other stories of interest:

1. What Spectrum Crisis: Verizon Wireless Tries to Monetize Video Usage With New App
2. Bulldozing Wireless Net Neutrality: Carriers Want “Toll-Free” Data for Their Partners
3. Proof Verizon’s Banishment of ‘Unlimited Data’ is a Money Grab, Not a Capacity Concern
4. AT&T’s Internet Overcharging Merry-go-Round — Billing App Makers for Your ‘Overusage’
5. AT&T’s ‘Data Tsunami’: Upselling Customers for Higher Profits During Spectrum ‘Crisis’

Cisco 170HD DTA

Time Warner Cable customers in greater New York will soon need set-top boxes or CableCARD technology to keep watching cable television.

The cable operator will be dropping analog television service, starting in Mount Vernon, Staten Island, and Bergen County, N.J. with much of the rest of the downstate region switched over the summer.

Cable television customers who already use Time Warner Cable set-top boxes, including DVRs, will not notice any change. Customers that plug a cable directly into the back of a television will need to take steps to keep their video service working after the digital conversion.

Time Warner’s digital switch will also disable viewing on televisions equipped with a QAM tuner. Cable operators now have the power to encrypt their entire television lineup.

The company is mailing letters to affected television subscribers advising them to get a Time Warner Cable DVR, traditional set-top box, CableCARD or Digital Adapter (DTA). For secondary televisions, Time Warner’s new DTA for downstate New York is the Cisco DTA 170HD, which supports both High Definition and Standard Definition channels and digital-only QAM tuning up to 1GHz. This model is also capable of providing HD premium channels, which are currently not available to customers with earlier generation DTAs. It is unknown if Time Warner will support that functionality.

Time Warner is making DTA units available to customers at no charge through the end of next year. Effective Jan. 1, 2015 each DTA box will cost $0.99 a month.

The company says the digital conversion will open extra bandwidth on the cable system to support more video on demand, HD channels, and faster broadband. Each 6MHz analog channel will make room for 10-12 digital channels, three digital HD channels, or an extra 40Mbps of download speed, according to Time Warner’s blog.

Residential customers can get DTA boxes as follows:

1. through the website at www.TWC.com/digitaladapter
2. via the telephone at 1-855-286-1736
3. in-person at a local TWC store
4. have a tech visit and install it

 Time Warner Cable produced this video to explain the digital conversion, who needs to get ready, and how.  (2 minutes)

Other stories of interest:

1. Time Warner Cable Starts the Transition to All-Digital Cable, Beginning in Maine
2. Time Warner Cable Begins Digital Cable Conversion in Upstate New York
3. Time Warner Cable Will Abandon Analog Cable Within 5 Years – Converting to All-Digital Systems
4. North Carolina Time Warner Cable Customers Frustrated About Digital Adapter Shortage
5. Maine Grows More Upset With Time Warner Cable’s All-Digital Conversion

Phillip “I Shop Online” Dampier

Last week, JCPenney launched their nationwide redemption tour, apologizing to millions of ex-customers that fled the former retail giant, begging them to come back.

It took over a year for JCPenney to get the message that “disciplining” and “re-educating” customers to accept the wisdom of everyday higher prices with few sales and almost no coupons was hardly the door-busting success “miracle worker” CEO Ron Johnson originally had in mind. The ex-Apple executive was rewarded a $52.7 million signing bonus to take over JCPenney’s tired leadership and in return he dragged sales down 28.4% from the year before, with same store sales down 32%. Johnson’s new vision also steamrolled one-third of JCPenney’s online business.

The day those results became known, he confidently showed Wall Street he did not dwell in the reality-based community: “I’m completely convinced that our transformation is on track!” (For Kohl’s benefit anyway.)

Johnson also believed in a “less is more” philosophy in human resources, overseeing layoffs of 13 percent of the company’s workforce last April, with another 350 let go in July.

Despite the fact his all-new, rebooted vision of JCPenney was about as popular as bird flu, he stayed, even as customers and employees didn’t.

It wasn’t that the company didn’t know customers had a problem with all this. Many complained about the radical, unwanted changes at JCPenney, particularly middle-aged professional women representing one of the stores’ most important business segments. Company executives simply didn’t listen.

A year later, some of the same analysts that cheered JCPenney’s crackdown on discounting now wonder if the company will survive 2013. Many fretted about the real possibility the last customer to brave the “new era” of JCP might forget to turn the lights out when they left for good. Others were mostly furious the board let Johnson go.

Despite the tragic consequences, the conventional wisdom on Wall Street remains: Alienating customers with a revamp nobody asked for and “everyday pricing” designed to boost profits every day was not the problem, how Johnson implemented the strategy was. He just didn’t educate customers enough.

We see the same warped thinking in the broadband marketplace, particularly with usage caps, consumption billing, junk fees and the general ever-increasing price of broadband itself.

On providers’ quarterly results conference calls, the regular questions challenging leaders of the industry are not about providers charging too much for too little. The real concern is that your ISP is leaving too much ripe fruit on the tree:

• Where is the revenue-boosting usage caps and consumption billing, Time Warner Cable?
• Comcast: can’t you raise prices further on those recent speed increases to maximize additional revenue?
• Verizon: why are you spending so much on fiber broadband upgrades customers love when that money could have gone back to shareholders?
• AT&T: Is there anything else you can do to exploit your market share and make even more money from costly data plans?

The best ways a consumer can reward a good broadband provider include remaining a loyal customer, paying your bill on time and upgrading to faster speeds as needed. For Wall Street, the growing demand for broadband is a sign there is plenty of wiggle room for at-will rate increases, new fees and surcharges, contract tricks and traps, customer service cuts, and monetizing usage wherever possible. After all, you probably won’t cancel because the other guy in town is doing the same thing.

This is what sets the broadband marketplace of today apart from most retailers: consumers don’t have 10-20 other choices to take their business to if they are fed up.

Comcast or AT&T? Both charge a lot and have usage limits on their broadband service for no good reason. Your other alternatives? A wireless provider charging even more with an even lower usage cap. Or you can always go without.

While providers may tell you there is a healthy, competitive broadband marketplace, Wall Street knows better. When Time Warner Cable recently announced it would dramatically curtail new customer promotions and concentrate on delivering fewer services for more money, nobody bothered asking whether this would result in a stampede to the competition. What competition?

Although Google is delivering much-needed, game-changing competition in a tiny handful of cities, most Americans will not benefit because the best upgrades and lowest prices are only available where Google threatens the status quo. A larger number of municipalities are done putting their broadband (and economic) future in the hands of the phone and cable company and are building their own digital infrastructure for the good of their communities.

For everyone else, we can dream that one day, someday, the cable and phone company most Americans do business with will be forced to run their own JCPenney-like apology tour for years of abusive pricing and mediocre “good enough for you” broadband with unwarranted usage limits. Time Warner Cable went half way, but until competition or oversight forces some dramatic changes, we should not count on providers to actually listen to what customers want. They don’t believe they need to listen to earn or keep your business.

Other stories of interest:

1. Time Warner Cable’s Broadband Pricing Game: Special Wall-Street-At-Home Edition
2. Craig “Data Cap” Moffett Leaves Sanford Bernstein Wall Street Firm to Start His Own
3. Wall Street Journal’s Distorted Views on Broadband Only See the Industry’s Point of View
4. Time Warner Cable Loses 15% of Their Analog Cable Customers; News on Broadband Caps, Pricing
5. Time Warner Cable Pulling Back Hard on Promotions: New Customers Will Pay More for Less

Cable One has announced it will invest $60 million in network upgrades across 42 cable systems in its mostly rural footprint to enhance reliability and deliver faster Internet service.

The cable operator, owned by the Washington Post, has been criticized for outdated infrastructure and poor service, particularly in Mississippi.

”We’re committed to delivering the best possible experience to our customers,” said Cable One CEO Tom Might. “We’re confident that this investment will ensure that our customers will receive superior service in the speed, reliability, and the overall performance of our services.”

The two-year upgrade project aims to replace amplifiers, split broadband customers who share a backbone connection into smaller groups, replace aging coaxial cable and improve the cable company’s fiber optic backbone.

The upgrade might allow the company to consider relaxing its draconian usage cap and speed throttle policies, which force customers to choose between an uncapped 5Mbps connection (with a speed throttle for those using more than 3GB per day) or a 50/2Mbps connection with caps as low as 50GB per month (overlimit fees: $0.50-1.00/each extra gigabyte.)

Cable One now offers two levels of Internet service: an uncapped 5Mbps plan for $50 a month and a 50/2Mbps plan for $50 a month with a 50-100GB monthly usage cap, depending on the package bundle. Usage is measured between 8am-12 midnight. Users on the uncapped 5Mbps plan are subject to speed throttling if they exceed 3GB of usage per day.

Other stories of interest:

1. Time Warner Cable Introduces DOCSIS 3 Speed Upgrades for Rural Upstate New Yorkers
2. Updated: Time Warner Cable Boosts Turbo Upload Speeds to 2Mbps in Rochester, N.Y.
3. Charter Cable Increasing Broadband Speeds, But You’ll Hit Their Caps Faster
4. New England Time Warner Cable Subs Get Free Broadband Speed Upgrade
5. 10 Turkish Cities Getting 1Gbps Broadband; Turkcell Upgrades Budget Plan to 20Mbps Service

Sprint will focus its postpaid wireless business on profitability in 2013, with reductions in customer discounts and a tighter upgrade policy that will raise prices for some and slow down others seeking new subsidized smartphones.

CEO Dan Hesse today told Wall Street investors Sprint will be leveraging its upgraded LTE network to help hold the line on discounts and early upgrades, reminding customers Sprint’s Network Vision plan is delivering better service with faster speeds and fewer dropped or blocked calls.

Sprint released its 1st quarter 2013 earnings this morning, showing the company reduced its quarterly losses from $863 million in the same quarter last year to $643 million. The company spent $1.4 billion during the first quarter on network upgrades, primarily on forthcoming 4G LTE network roll-outs.

Steve Elfman, Sprint’s president of network operations reported the company activated more than 12,000 LTE-upgraded cell towers by the end of the quarter, slowed only by inclement weather. This year will see a massive increase in those numbers.

“We now have zoning complete on over 32,000 sites and leasing complete on over 31,000 sites. More than 25,000 sites already or have already begun construction,” Elfman reported. “Our weekly construction starts are now at a level to achieve our goals for the year. There are over 600 cities under construction and we have now launched 4G LTE in 88 cities with over 170 expected to launch in the months to come.”

Hesse

While Elfman oversees LTE upgrades, Sprint is also busy working towards decommissioning its Nextel network on June 30. Despite repeated warnings Nextel’s demise was close at hand, at least 1.4 million Nextel customers, nearly all business accounts, are still active on that network. Sprint is focusing most of its promotional budget again this quarter on convincing those customers to convert to Sprint service. But only 46 percent of Nextel customers took Sprint up on their repeated offers during the first quarter. Many others left for Verizon Wireless, switching off not only their Nextel commercial phones, but also those on Sprint’s network as well.

Sprint expects to hold on to a declining number of its Nextel customers as the second quarter progresses, until the network is switched off for good at the end of June.

That hurts, because Sprint has also been losing customers due to “pardon our dust” construction-related service interruptions as part of LTE 4G upgrades. Those disruptions are expected to accelerate  as more cities are prepared for LTE service.

Sprint’s Lifeline cell phone service for the poor, Assurance, also took major hits during the quarter after the FCC tightened eligibility requirements for the free/low-cost cell phone service. The company switched off 224,000 accounts in the last three months that either failed to re-certify eligibility or were never qualified in the first place. Sprint’s wholesale customers, which resell access on the Sprint network, are also busy deactivating unqualified Lifeline wireless lines, so Sprint expects a similar number of disconnects during the second quarter as those accounts are dropped from the network.

As Sprint turns its attention to profitability, revenue numbers at Sprint improved slightly. Sprint’s prepaid division added 568,000 net prepaid customers, and Virgin Mobile raised its minimum top up amount for 90 days of service to $20 (up from $15 with a credit card). As customers upgrade their Sprint postpaid phones, more customers are also encountering Sprint’s $10 “premium data” surcharge.

Customers will also discover a tightening of Sprint’s discounts and upgrade promotions. Among the efforts underway:

• curtailing or eliminating certain customer credits and discounts;
• tightening device upgrade policies to end early upgrades, although Sprint still retains its 20 month upgrade policy for now;
• holding the line on phone subsidies for increasingly expensive smartphones.

Sprint’s prepaid mobile division

Slowing phone upgrades is particularly important for Sprint’s bottom line.

“I think the policy shifting is important in the industry because subsidies just keep going up and I think from the economic model perspective of the carriers we just can’t afford to upgrade as often,” said Sprint CEO Dan Hesse. “We’re not seeing any evidence yet that customers are interested in upgrading less often if they see less difference or improvement year-over-year in terms of what’s going on with these devices. In fact the opposite might be true which means these policies are really quite important for the industry.”

Hesse admitted that the drive to increase profits could cost Sprint some of its postpaid business, and probably already has over the last three years. But Hesse noted many of those contract customers have migrated to the company’s prepaid service, which keeps revenue in-house. Hesse expects as long as popular phones are available on prepaid plans, price-sensitive customers will continue to migrate towards prepaid service.

“I think what you are seeing is maturing of the U.S. markets beginning,” Hesse noted. “The U.S. has always been or traditionally been almost exclusively postpaid and it’s beginning to look like other markets that have a higher prepaid mix in terms of the number or percentage of customers.”

Other stories of interest:

1. Sprint’s Dan Hesse Complains About Wall Street’s “Disconnect” Over Investment
2. Wall Street Attacks: Sprint CEO in Big Trouble for Plans to Upgrade Sprint’s Network to LTE
3. Sprint Moves To Launch Its Own LTE 4G Network; WiMax? Not So Much Anymore
4. Verizon Wireless Eliminating “New Every Two” Program; Other Upgrade Discounts Being Phased Out
5. Sprint CEO Says Provider “Could” Discontinue Unlimited Pricing, But Not Now