AT&T: 'If you don't do what we say, we're taking U-verse away!'

AT&T is threatening to pick up its toys and go home if the Federal Communications Commission tries to bring back its oversight powers over broadband.

CEO Randall Stephenson threw a major hissyfit in the pages of the Wall Street Journal, annoyed the company doesn’t have free rein to do whatever it wants.

“I’m a 3-2 vote away from the next guy coming in and [trying to regulate us], [and] I take it away,” Stephenson said, referring to it’s U-verse IPTV service.

AT&T has threatened to cut spending on U-verse deployment if AT&T faces regulations like Net Neutrality in its broadband business.

“If this Title 2 regulation looks imminent, we have to re-evaluate whether we put shovels in the ground,” Stephenson said, claiming the company planned to spend a “couple billion” dollars a year on the service… until now.

But AT&T has already cut spending on U-verse, slashing $2 billion in U-verse investments in 2009 alone — news trumpeted to shareholders.  Additionally, AT&T has laid off thousands of employees.  In short, the threats the company made this week have already come to pass… more than a year ago.

Many analysts claim AT&T is bluffing.  Like most landline providers, AT&T is losing traditional phone customers who are disconnecting their wired phone lines.  Its wireless division has been pummeled for inadequate 3G coverage, poor customer service, and lousy reception in many areas.  AT&T can’t afford -not- to upgrade their services if they wish to retain customers.

The cable television industry certainly hopes AT&T isn’t bluffing.  They are enjoying AT&T’s disconnect business as customers dump inadequate DSL service and overpriced phone lines for cable-provided alternatives.

TV Everywhere isn’t just for the United States.  Canadian cable operators are also threatened by cable cord-cutters, although their pervasive Internet Overcharging schemes have kept TV addicts from watching too much video online.

Both Shaw Cable (serving western Canada) and Vidéotron (best known in Quebec) have this week introduced their own online video portals providing “authenticated” cable subscribers with access to on-demand movies and television programming as an extension of their cable package.  But neither company is willing to exempt its customers from Internet Overcharging schemes which apply data caps and overlimit fees to broadband accounts.

Of the two services, Shaw Cable’s is bare bones, offering a relative handful of TV shows and a movie library.  No live video is provided, and many titles carry per-viewing fees, even for cable subscribers.  Non-subscribers face even higher fees to view programming.  Vidéotron takes a different approach, offering a video portal called Illico Web that offers on-demand and live streaming feeds of a wide range of cable networks, mostly in French for its Quebec subscriber base.

Shaw positioned its video-on-demand service as an extension of its cable service.  It hopes its announced acquisition of Canwest Global, which runs the Global television network in Canada and 18 cable networks will vastly expand its offerings in the future.

Vidéotron warns its subscribers watching its service eats into monthly broadband usage allowances.

“Technology continues to evolve with the ability to watch content on multi-platforms,” said Peter Bissonnette, President, Shaw Communications. “That’s why Shaw is investing in bringing exceptional content delivered in various ways. Our new broadband VOD Player provides our customers the convenience of watching their favorite movies and television shows when and where they want to.”

Pierre Karl Péladeau, the president and chief executive officer of Vidéotron’s parent Quebecor was more abrupt when he said on Wednesday that its TV Everywhere service would offer “an alternative to piracy.”

But in Canada, there is a catch.  Neither cable provider offers subscribers unlimited broadband service.  Both employ Internet Overcharging schemes ranging from usage caps to consumption billing schemes with overlimit penalties.  Vidéotron reminds its subscribers to “keep an eye on your Internet usage.”  That’s because they don’t exempt their online viewing service from their usage limits.  Vidéotron’s video portal does eat its way through subscriber allowances.  The company provides these estimates to help guess by how much:

[flv width=”432″ height=”263″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Welcome to illico web 6-10.flv[/flv]

Illico Web produced this video introduction to its TV Everywhere service. (French with English subtitles — 3 minutes)

Tired of paying that high Verizon Wireless bill?  Verizon’s handsome profits can translate into some great benefits, if you’re an employee.

For western New Yorkers, here’s your chance.

Verizon Wireless is hiring 200 call center employees in Rochester this year to bolster its existing 1,200 employee customer service department.

“As our customer base grows and the devices and services they use become more sophisticated, providing an outstanding customer experience becomes even more important,” said Russ Preite, president of Verizon Wireless’ Upstate New York Region. “We’ve been fortunate to continue to find top-quality, highly skilled talent in the Rochester area. Today’s announcement further endorses our commitment to Rochester and to maintaining superior customer service for our customers.”

Verizon can afford to pay employees some nice benefits:

• competitive salaries
• health, dental and vision coverage that begin on the first day of employment
• a 401(k) program with a 6 percent company match of the employee’s contribution
• annual bonus program
• profit sharing
• merit increases
• tuition assistance
• adoption assistance
• an on-site health and wellness facility, and more.

You can apply online.  If you land a job there, why not take a portion of your paycheck and send Stop the Cap! a contribution.  We’ll put their money to good use.

A Huntsville AT&T sub-contractor trying to install new telephone cable is safe after a resident started shooting in his direction, forcing Marcus Kyle to make a mad dash down a nearby highway to safety.

Questioned by police, the homeowner claimed he thought he was firing his shotgun at a possum.  WHNT-TV spoke with police officials and witnesses who are not convinced by the man’s story, suggesting the homeowner may have felt the AT&T worker was trespassing on his property.  Several witnesses claim the man took direct aim at the AT&T lineman before beginning to fire.

As shots rang out, the worker hightailed it out of range, thankfully unharmed. Those who want to learn more about gun laws in New York may consider consulting a firearms attorney.

The Lauderdale County Sheriff’s Office offered to charge the homeowner with misdemeanor reckless endangerment, but Kyle refused to press charges.

Kyle and his fellow workers added they were working within a recognized utility easement and did not stray onto anyone’s property, and weren’t sure why the resident started shooting.

Utility company employees usually have the right of reasonable access to their respective easements to perform work on the company’s infrastructure.  Many workers may inform residents of their presence as a courtesy, but it is not required.  It is never responsible to confront such workers with weapons.  If a homeowner has concerns about the legitimacy of the work being done, they should contact local police and let them handle it.

[flv width=”512″ height=”308″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/WHNT Huntsville Man Shot at While Installing Phone Lines 6-16-10.flv[/flv]

WHNT-TV in Huntsville ran this story about a local homeowner who let his shotgun do the talking, firing at a telephone company subcontractor he claims he mistook for a possum.  (2 minutes)

Unitel is one of five Maine telephone companies facing competition from Time Warner Cable's "digital phone" service

The Maine Public Utilities Commission has denied a request by Time Warner Cable to launch “digital phone” competition in rural Maine unless and until the cable operator agrees to completely wire every home that wants service in the affected communities.  The decision may carry national implications because it signals utility commissions have the power to stop unfair competition from companies that don’t agree to provide their service on a universal basis.

Five rural phone companies faced the prospect of trying to compete with Time Warner Cable’s “digital phone” service under requirements they provide universal service to every customer in their service area while the cable operator could cherry-pick where to provide service.

Unitel, Lincolnville Networks, Tidewater Telecom, Oxford Telephone Company and Oxford West Telephone Company told the PUC Time Warner Cable’s competitive threat was not fair because the cable company only provided service in choice neighborhoods, typically those with multiple residences adjacent to one another.  Only wiring significant population areas reduces costs for the cable operator while the rural landline providers are required to extend service to every resident in their communities, regardless of where they live.

A review by the PUC found Time Warner Cable’s request would create an undue economic burden on the rural telephone companies, reducing their value and increasing the risk of their long term survival, which would discourage investment and increase risk to creditors.

Reishus

PUC Chair Sharon Reishus: “Our decision…is taking place in a changing landscape for telephone regulation at the federal level with pending congressional and FCC actions, in the marketplace and in wireless technology. Our decision came down to an analysis of the current financial ability of the rural companies to withstand market competition if the exemption were lifted.”

“Customers in these rural areas must be assured a telephone service provider of last resort and access to lifeline services. Although the commission has a long history of recognizing the value of competition in the telecommunications market, in this instance, where Time Warner is not proposing to expand the availability of its service throughout the entire service territory of the rural companies, selective competition would undercut the ability of the rural companies to fulfill their ‘provider of last resort’ obligations.”

For years large telephone companies like AT&T and Verizon have argued that cable’s entry into the telephone business was unfair because cable companies never were required to serve every potential customer.  But instead of maintaining demands that cable match their universal service obligations, large phone companies have instead tried to free themselves from having to provide service to every possible customer.  AT&T, for example, has heavily lobbied for repeal of universal service requirements that mandate they provide telephone service to residents who live in the most rural service areas.

The Maine PUC has adopted a different standard — demanding that would-be cable competitors get busy wiring their entire communities for cable if they want permission to compete with area phone companies.  If they are not willing to do so, they cannot provide phone service to anyone in those communities.

Time Warner Cable had been seeking permission to provide phone service in rural Maine since 2008.

[flv width=”560″ height=”340″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Oxford Networks.mp4[/flv]

A promotional video from Oxford Networks (d/b/a Oxford/Oxford West Telephone Company) explaining the company’s history and their investment in fiber optics.  (3 minutes)