FiOS Have’s and Have-Nots

Despite complaints earlier this month from Boston Mayor Thomas Menino that Verizon’s latest ad for FiOS was filmed in Boston — a city that lacks the fiber optic service, not every Massachusetts community is so unlucky.

Stop the Cap! reader John C. wrote to alert us that the town of Raynham will get Verizon FiOS service despite Verizon’s long-standing intention not to further expand the fiber service outside of areas already committed.

It turns out Verizon’s partial buildout of fiber optics in the area was reason enough for Verizon to complete wiring Raynham with fiber and seek a formal franchise agreement from the town’s board of selectman. Phil Santoro, a Verizon spokesman, noted the company did the same thing a year earlier in Medford.

Raynham residents will be able to buy voice, data, and television service from Verizon, in direct competition with Comcast.

Verizon plans to offer residents FiOS TV service, FiOS Internet service and the FiOS Digital Voice unlimited calling plan starting at $89.99 a month, with a two-year contract.

Meanwhile, the city council of Quincy is desperately seeking cable television competition after hearing complaints from senior citizens they can no longer afford Comcast’s prices.

The city council has repeatedly reached out to Verizon in hopes the company will bring FiOS to town, but to no avail.

Comcast is in the seventh year of its 10-year franchise agreement in Quincy and is unlikely to change much when it requests a renewal.

City Solicitor James Timmins believes the reason Verizon isn’t interested is the fact “it costs the company about $1,500 to hook up each home.” Timmins also claimed “Verizon knows that in a few years FiOS (TV) is going to be obsolete.”

Powell

A former chairman of the Federal Communications Commission turned top cable lobbyist rang the warning bell at an industry convention this week, recommending America’s cable operators hurry out usage caps and usage-based billing before a perception takes hold the industry is trying to protect cable television revenue.

Michael Powell, the former head of the FCC during the Bush Administration is now America’s top cable industry lobbyist, serving as president and CEO of the National Cable & Telecommunications Association (NCTA). From 2001-2005 Powell claimed to represent the interests of the American people. From 2011 on, he represents the interests of Comcast, Time Warner Cable, Cox, and other large cable operators.

Attending the SCTE Cable-Tec Expo 2013 in Atlanta, Powell identified the cable industry’s top priority for next year: “broadband, broadband, and broadband.”

The NCTA fears the current unregulated “Wild West” nature of broadband service is ripe for regulatory checks and balances. The NCTA plans to prioritize lobbying to prevent the implementation of consumer protection regulations governing the Internet. Powell warned it would be “World War III” if the FCC moved to oversee broadband by changing its definition as an unregulated “information service” to a regulated common carrier utility.

Powell is very familiar with the FCC’s current definition because he presided over the agency when it contemplated the current framework as it applies to DSL and cable broadband providers.

While Powell has a long record opposing blatant Net Neutrality violations that block competing websites and services, he does not want the FCC meddling in how providers charge or provision access.

Powell believes some of cable’s biggest problems come from bad marketing.

Powell disagreed with statements from some Wall Street analysts like Craig Moffett who earlier predicted the window for broadband usage-based limits and fees was closing or closed already.

Powell does not care that consumers are accustomed to and overwhelmingly support unlimited access. Instead, he urged cable executives to “move with some urgency and purpose” to implement usage-based billing for economic reasons, despite the growing perception such limits are designed to protect cable television service from online competition.

“I don’t think it’s too late,” Powell said. “But it’s not something you can wait for forever.”

Powell pointed to the success wireless carriers have had forcing the majority of customers to usage capped, consumption billing plans and believes the cable industry can do the same.

The NCTA president also described many of the industry’s hurdles as marketing and perception problems.

The cable industry, long bottom-rated by consumers in satisfaction surveys, can do better according to Powell, by making sure they are nimble enough to meet competition head-on.

Powell described Google Fiber as a limited experiment unlikely to directly compete with cable over the long-term, and with a new version of the DOCSIS cable broadband platform on the way, operators will be able to compete with speeds of 500-1,000Mbps and beyond. He just hates that it’s called DOCSIS 3.1, noting it wasn’t “consumer-friendly” in “a 4G and 5G world.”

Kevin Hart, executive vice president and chief technology officer of Cox Communications joked the marketing department would get right on it.

All too often customers who sign up for “price lock” agreements or 12-24 month service contracts find themselves trapped when a provider finds a clever way to increase rates or introduce usage caps and still subject customers to a steep early termination fee if they want out of the deal.

In the United Kingdom, the Office of Communications (Ofcom) wants providers to tell customers at least 30 days before any price or service changes and show customers how to cancel the contract and leave without a termination fee.

Ofcom says its new rules on ISPs, landline and mobile operators are designed to stop mid-contract price hikes or service reductions.

The regulator is responding to multiple consumer complaints where providers have used “wiggle room” in contract language designed to let customers off the hook if a provider attempts a “materially adverse” change mid-contract that a customer does not accept. This language is common in both the United Kingdom and North America.

Several years ago, providers on both sides of the Atlantic began adding non-regulatory fees to customer bills to hide rate increases. The charges often sound “official,” but are in fact not. When customers demanded to cancel over charges like “regulatory recovery fees,” “rights of way fees,” or other costs of doing business now broken out on their bills, many successfully invoked the “materially adverse” clause of their contract to escape termination fees.

These days wireless carriers have gotten wise to that. When a customer now calls to demand out of their contract, companies refuse, claiming the small dollar amounts involved are not “material” changes. They often reinforce this by offering to credit a persistent customer’s account for the amounts involved.

Ofcom considers this practice an end run around the contract, and wants it stopped. The regulator is notifying providers it is now likely to regard any and all price increases of any kind to be “materially adverse/detrimental.” The regulator warns it will also treat reductions in voice minutes, texting, and data usage allowances the same as a price hike.

“Ofcom is today making clear that consumers entering into fixed-term telecoms contracts must get a fairer deal,” said Claudio Pollack, director of Ofcom’s Consumer Group. “We think the sector rules were operating unfairly in the provider’s favor, with consumers having little choice but to accept price increases or pay to exit their contract. We’re making it clear that any increase to the monthly subscription price should trigger a consumer’s right to leave their contract – without penalty.”

Ofcom has also found that some consumers were caught unawares by mid-contract price rises and were not sufficiently warned this could happen when they signed up. In some circumstances, consumers may also have not been made adequately aware of their right to exit their contract, or of the amount of time they had to exercise this right.

To address this problem, the new rules explain how providers should communicate any contract changes, pricing or otherwise, to consumers.

These measures include ensuring that letters or e-mails about contract changes should be clearly marked as such, either on the front of the envelope or in the subject header.  Notifications of price increases must also be clear and easy to understand and make customers aware of the nature and likely impact of the contract change.

Where relevant, information about the customer’s right to exit the contract should be made clear upfront – for example, on the front page of a letter or in the main e-mail message, rather than via a link. The period within which consumers can cancel their contract (Ofcom’s guidance sets out that providers should allow consumers 30 days) should also be made clear.

The new rules take effect in 90 days.

Cruz Control

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) has blocked the Senate from voting to confirm Tom Wheeler, the Obama Administration’s pick for the next chairman of the Federal Communications Commission.

Cruz, a Tea Party favorite, does not object to Wheeler’s credentials. He’s upset Wheeler might support a regulatory implementation of portions of the Disclose Act, a bill requiring full disclosure of who pays for political advertising. The bill would require corporations, super PACs, astroturf groups and other special interests to report to the Federal Election Commission when they spend more than $10,000 on airtime for campaign ads.

Cruz and several other Republican senators wrote the FCC in April to warn the bill violates corporate First Amendment speech rights and was unconstitutional.

With no chance the legislation will pass a Republican-controlled House and deadlocked Senate, the bill’s supporters have turned to the FCC with the idea the agency could act independently to require campaign ad disclosures, a suggestion that infuriated conservative Republicans who disapprove of any enhanced oversight powers for the regulator.

Cruz placed a formal hold on Wheeler’s nomination last week as the Senate prepared to vote an end to the 16-day federal government shutdown.

A spokesman from Cruz’s office made it clear as long as Wheeler continued to vacillate on a commitment not to regulate campaign ads, he will not get an up or down vote on his nomination in the Senate.

Observers suggest Cruz’s hold will stall spectrum auctions and, if extended beyond the fall, could eventually freeze Internet expansion programs for schools and libraries.

Acting FCC chairwoman Mignon Clyburn will continue in that role until Wheeler gets confirmed or another appointee is nominated and approved.

Are you still waiting for that $100 gift card Comcast promised to customers who signed up or upgraded service with their marketing partner Verizon Wireless? If you’re feeling uneasy about the situation, consider how to ask for forgiveness from a friend, acknowledging any misunderstanding and expressing your sincere regret for any inconvenience caused.

You are not alone. Multiple complaints about missing gift cards point to a rebate form promising a gift card six to eight weeks after submission, but the rebate processor has extended that time repeatedly — first to 8-10 weeks, then 10-12 weeks, and now 16-17 weeks… and counting.

If you forgot about the rebate, you may never receive it without contacting Comcast to follow-up. Others found their rebate request rejected by the rebate processor for a variety of reasons.

Customers should have made a copy of their rebate submission to keep for their records. If your rebate still has not arrived, call Comcast at 1-866-347-2229 to escalate the matter and speed up the arrival of your missing gift card.

Although high dollar rebates for cell phones are not uncommon, a large percentage of customers eligible for the rebate never follow through with a properly completed, timely rebate submission.

In many cases, a rejection notice can be overcome by contacting the cable company’s customer service department directly. Many cable companies will credit your account for the amount of the missing rebate.