Home » Issues » Recent Articles:

Nebraska City Commissions Gigabit Fiber Broadband for Every Resident, Business

Phillip Dampier October 15, 2013 Broadband Speed, Competition, Public Policy & Gov't 1 Comment

spiralNebraska City, Neb. understands how super fast broadband can transform local businesses, education, health care, and consumer entertainment. The only problem for the community of 7,277 residents is getting a provider to supply it.

Although incumbent providers Time Warner Cable and Windstream Communications were willing to offer expanded service, only Spiral Communications of Bellevue, Neb., promised to deliver 1,000/1,000Mbps fiber optic broadband to every local resident and business that wants it.

nebraska city“To be competitive with other communities in retaining and attracting industry, businesses, families and individuals and to continue to provide a high quality of life for our citizens, we must have greater bandwidth,” Nebraska City Mayor Jack Hobbie said.

Spiral has begun engineering studies in the Otoe County seat to contemplate the total cost of the network — an expense the company will bear itself. Spiral said it would invest $3 million in the equipment and pay a 3 percent franchise fee to the city.

Prices for the service have not yet been set, but Spiral promises customers can buy less costly Internet speeds of 10-50Mbps.

Currently, Spiral Communications provides wireless Internet service in western Iowa and has a fiber to the home project in Traynor and fiber optic ring around Tabor, both in Iowa.

Editoral Decries Time Warner Cable’s Attempt to Deregulate Phone Service in New York

Phillip Dampier October 14, 2013 Competition, Consumer News, Public Policy & Gov't Comments Off on Editoral Decries Time Warner Cable’s Attempt to Deregulate Phone Service in New York

timewarner twcEfforts by New York’s largest cable operator to deregulate telephone service in New York, potentially cutting off delinquent ratepayers’ phone service at inconvenient times, has run into opposition from an Albany newspaper.

The Times Union published an editorial last week opposing the measure, fearing it could leave some of the millions of Time Warner Cable phone customers without service on nights and weekends without any way to make a payment to prevent the disconnection.

Unlike other services that companies like Time Warner offer — such as TV, Internet, security and remote lighting and heating control — the home telephone holds special status. It has long been regarded as an essential utility, much like residential gas, water and electricity. The PSC regulates how and when a utility can cut a customer off such a critical service for failure to pay a bill on time.

For years, Time Warner maintained it was not a phone company and should not be bound by these rules. That changed earlier this year when it accepted the responsibilities and regulations that come with being a residential phone provider.

Now, though, Time Warner is petitioning the PSC to change the rules governing home phone bills.

Some of the requests appear reasonable, such as updating language about local and long-distance calling charges. But that’s not the case with Time Warner’s request to expand the hours and days when it can disconnect services for customers who have fallen behind in their bills, including their phone service.

Specifically, Time Warner wants to deal with delinquent customers on nights and weekends.

Most other utility providers can cut service for non-payment only during weekdays, when the PSC’s staff is working and available to help broker solutions and protect consumers. The PSC has the authority to make decisions on disputed bills, revise payment plan arrangements and remedy situations where continued service is medically necessary.

Late and unpaid bills are admittedly a chronic problem for cable companies. In the past year, Time Warner sent more than 1.7 million past-due notices to residential customers in the state and shut off or suspended service to nearly 600,000 households for failing to pay bills.

Time Warner calls its proposed change a convenience to its customers. It’s really a convenience for Time Warner, which wants to handle phone bills the same as other services. But this would bypass the special safeguards for phone consumers.

The Public Service Commission is still reviewing the proposal from Time Warner Cable, which is the dominant cable provider in upstate New York and parts of New York City.

WOW! Cable Expands in Ohio, Michigan; Local Officials Appealed for More Competition

Phillip Dampier October 14, 2013 Competition, Consumer News, Public Policy & Gov't, WOW! 1 Comment

Better

Efforts by local officials to attract more cable competition are paying off in suburban Cleveland, Ohio and Detroit, Mich. where customers will soon be able to choose between two cable companies or AT&T for cable service.

WOW!, a Denver-based cable overbuilder, has announced it will expand service to Lathrup Village, Mich. and Sheffield Lake, Brunswick, and North Ridgeville, Ohio between now and the middle of next year.

North Ridgeville City Council president Kevin Corcoran last week announced WOW! would begin head-to-head competition with Time Warner Cable starting in 2014. Corcoran told The Chronicle Telegram the city began looking for a competing cable provider after hearing complaints from residents about Time Warner Cable’s poor customer service and reliability. He approached WOW!, which has provided competitive service in parts of the greater Cleveland area, about expanding in North Ridgeville.

north ridgeville“My only pitch was that people are dying for some competition,” Corcoran told the newspaper.

Corcoran met informally with WOW! officials to discuss the prospects of expanding into North Ridgeville before more formal meetings were held with city officials including the mayor and the safety-service director.

Making life easier for WOW!’s entry is the presence of existing utility easements, which means WOW! can run cable on existing utility poles without formal approval by the city council. But WOW! will still need certain permits from the Building Department to move forward with wiring. The company will use Ohio’s statewide video franchising law, originally pushed by AT&T for U-verse, to obtain video service permits and a franchise agreement with the Ohio Department of Commerce.

WOW!’s regular prices are much lower than Time Warner Cable’s promotional prices for new customers:

  • Standard triple play (15/1Mbps Internet, Cable TV, phone) costs $105.98/month from Time Warner ($118.97 with DVR), $85/month from WOW! ($92 with DVR);
  • Standard double play (15/1Mbps Internet, Cable TV) still costs $105.98/month from Time Warner ($118.98 with DCR), $75/month from WOW! ($82 with DVR);
  • Internet-only service (15/1Mbps) costs $40.98/month from Time Warner Cable, $30/month from WOW! (promotional pricing expires after 12 months).

Time Warner Cable said it welcomes the competition.

NORTH RIDGEVILLE – Residents who have long griped about poor cable television service can look forward to some competition next year.

City Council President Kevin Corcoran on Friday that

WOW! Cable TV is planning to begin giving Time Warner Cable, the city’s current cable TV provider, some competition starting in 2014.Talks between the city and WOW! Cable began in late summer and continued into September where the company announced it would go ahead with plans to begin offering digital and HDTV cable service to residents next year.

WOW! Cable’s Matthew Harper, who serves as the company’s systems manager for the Cleveland market, confirmed the Denver-based firm’s plans to begin serving a portion of the city by the end of 2014.

“We’re in the process of doing a walk-out, which involves gathering information about the number of (utility) poles and distances between them, and the number of homes we are able to get built out for next year,” Harper said. “Our goal is to build out the entire city over the next few years.”

Because the company will use existing utility easements to run wiring over utility poles, its plans do not require formal approval by City Council, according to both Corcoran and Harper.

Permits for construction of equipment and attaching wiring to power poles will need to be obtained from the city Building Department.

WOW! Cable will obtain required video service and state franchise agreements through the Ohio Department of Commerce, Harper said.

Under the firm’s universal pricing structure, North Ridgeville customers can expect to pay $60 a month for any two services such as cable TV and phone service, or $70 a month for three services including cable TV, phone, and high-speed Internet service, according to Harper.

More specific details and pricing for the company’s numerous packages of services can be found at www.wowway.com, Harper said.

Wow! Cable currently serves about 4,300 customers in AvonLake, and just completed work on a system to serve SheffieldLake, Harper said.

Cost figures for the North Ridgeville project were not disclosed.

Corcoran said he began to investigate prospects for bringing another cable TV provider to town after he and others heard periodic complaints from residents about the cable TV service they had from Time Warner.

“We’d heard that Time Warner doesn’t always have the greatest reputation for customer service and reliability, and that people were going off to Dish and DirecTV,” Corcoran said. “My only pitch was that people are dying for some competition.”

Realizing that “a lot of people like to stick with cable for various reasons,” Corcoran met informally with WOW! officials before more formal meetings were held with city officials including Mayor David Gillock and Safety-Service Director Jeffry Armbruster.

Time Warner spokesman Mike Pedelty said the company has been aware of WOW! Cable’s plans to enter North Ridgeville.

“We are well aware of them coming in and compete with them in other locations,” Pedelty said.

When asked about Corcoran’s comments concerning Time Warner’s poor service, Pedelty said “it’s hard to respond to that comment.”

“We respect all competitors, but are really driven by making sure we provide the type of services our customers expect at a good value,” he said.

– See more at: http://www.chroniclet.com/2013/10/11/new-cable-company-offering-service-in-north-ridgeville-in-2014/#sthash.L6ciWB1H.dpuf

Time Warner Cable: AT&T, Verizon Cannot Meet Broadband Demand With 4G Wireless Technology

Phillip Dampier October 10, 2013 AT&T, Broadband "Shortage", Broadband Speed, Comcast/Xfinity, Consumer News, Data Caps, Public Policy & Gov't, Verizon, Video, Wireless Broadband Comments Off on Time Warner Cable: AT&T, Verizon Cannot Meet Broadband Demand With 4G Wireless Technology

freewifiA new research report issued by Time Warner Cable concludes cell phone companies like AT&T and Verizon Wireless cannot meet the future data demands of customers over their 4G LTE wireless networks without punitive usage caps and high fees to deter usage, even with new spectrum becoming available for the wireless industry’s use.

The report, authored by Michael Calabrese of the New America Foundation, finds an answer to this problem in Wi-Fi, which can offload wireless traffic and deliver wireless service customers already prefer:

There is simply not enough exclusively licensed spectrum to meet the rapidly rising demand for wireless data, to sustain a competitive market, and to keep prices at an affordable level.

Major mobile carriers are increasingly coming to grips with this reality. The Wireless Broadband Alliance, a global industry group, reports that Wi-Fi offloading has become an industry standard as “18 of the world’s top 20 largest telcos by revenue have now publicly committed to investing in deploying their own Wi-Fi Hotspot networks.” The industry is shifting steadily toward what it calls heterogeneous networks (HetNets)—i.e., a combination of licensed and unlicensed infrastructure—in order to meet their customers’ insatiable demand for data while keeping costs down.

Alcatel-Lucent forecasts an increase of “87 times [the current] daily traffic on wireless networks” over the next five years, with 50 percent of that traffic on cellular networks “while the remaining 50 percent will be offloaded to Wi-Fi.”

Cisco’s own studies back Calabrese’s findings on consumer preference towards Wi-Fi.

twc“Given a choice, more than 80 percent of tablet, laptop, and eReader owners would either prefer Wi-Fi to mobile access, or have no preference,” Cisco concluded. “And, just over half of smartphone owners would prefer to use Wi-Fi, or are ambivalent about the two access networks.”

The Cisco surveys found users are choosing Wi-Fi over mobile connectivity for reasons of cost, “because it doesn’t impose data-usage caps or reduce their mobile data plan quotas.” But the primary reason for choosing Wi-Fi “is that respondents find it much faster than mobile networks.” And since Wi-Fi traffic travels over increasingly upgraded wireline networks, that speed differential may only increase as more and more homes, businesses and retail outlets upgrade to fiber optic or other high-speed connections of 100Mbps or more.

America’s largest wireless carriers have fallen far behind offering Wi-Fi services to customers compared to their overseas colleagues:

  • AT&T: More than 32,000 Wi-Fi hotspots are available at partnered retail businesses, restaurants, and high-traffic areas like stadiums and major tourist destinations;
  • Verizon Wireless: Verizon has an insignificant Wi-Fi presence, with a small number of unadvertised hotspots in selected venues like airports and convention centers;
  • Japan’s NTT DOCOMO: Up to 150,000 hotspots, up from only 8,400 in 2o12.
  • China Mobile: More than 2 million hotspots are up and running carrying 70 percent of the company’s data traffic.
  • France’s Free Mobile: More than 4 million residential hotspots are available through Free’s parent – Iliad.
Comcast could soon be the nation's largest Wi-Fi hotspot provider.

Comcast could soon be the nation’s largest Wi-Fi hotspot provider.

Calabrese argues it is important for the United States to set aside significant spectrum for unlicensed wireless networks like Wi-Fi to meet future wireless demands. Currently, some Republican members of Congress are opposed to significant spectrum set asides they feel could best be monetized for private use through the spectrum auction process.

It is no coincidence that Calabrese’s findings would be released by Time Warner Cable which itself is growing a Wi-Fi presence in certain cities where it provides cable service.

The wireless carriers’ collective lack of interest in an aggressive nationwide Wi-Fi deployment may have provided a strategic opening for cable operators to fill that gap with Wi-Fi networks of their own. Cable operators consider them a useful tool to retain customer loyalty — access is typically free and unlimited for current customers.

This summer, Comcast announced a “neighborhood hotspot initiative” that will turn millions of customer cable Internet connections into shared Wi-Fi hotspots using a dual-use wireless home gateway. The equipment will offer two separate Wi-Fi signals — one intended for the customer and the other open for use by any Comcast customers in the neighborhood. The cable company will provision extra bandwidth for the open Wi-Fi network to ease concerns that guest users could theoretically slow down a customer’s own Wi-Fi channel. In a relatively short period, Comcast could become the nation’s biggest Wi-Fi network offering more than 20 million hotspots hosted by the company’s own broadband customers.

Calabrese points to the future of seamless transitions between wired, wireless 4G and Wi-Fi network access without dropping calls or data connections. Many customers won’t even know the difference.

The author recommends the FCC think about reserving space for new unlicensed “citizens band” frequencies dedicated for public and private Wi-Fi networks:

  • The FCC should reorganize the UHF TV band to ensure the availability of at least 30 to 40MHz of unlicensed spectrum in every media market, perhaps including Channel 37 (now reserved for radio astronomy) and eliminating two dedicated channels reserved for wireless microphones;
  • Open the grossly underutilized 3.5–3.7GHz federal band for unlicensed small cell antennas delivering a ‘Citizens Broadband Service.’ This band is now mostly used for offshore naval radar, allowing both services to co-exist without mutual interference;
  • Expand unlicensed access to the 5GHz band by allocating the 5.35–5.47 and 5.85–5.925GHz bands providing contiguous, very wide channels useful for the 802.11ac Wi-Fi standard that can support very high-speed wireless services.

[flv width=”640″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/XFINITY Wireless Gateway Powers Connected Home Summer 2013.flv[/flv]

Comcast talks about their new X3 Wireless Gateway which is capable of providing two separate Wi-Fi networks, one for the customer and another for the neighborhood. (2 minutes)

Stolen/Lost Wireless Device? Verizon Wireless Charges California Customer Fees to Suspend/Transfer Service

Phillip Dampier October 10, 2013 Consumer News, Public Policy & Gov't, Verizon, Video, Wireless Broadband Comments Off on Stolen/Lost Wireless Device? Verizon Wireless Charges California Customer Fees to Suspend/Transfer Service

They are coming.

If your smartphone goes missing or gets stolen, should you still have to pay Verizon Wireless for service you no longer have?

Verizon Wireless apparently thinks you do, even if you are beyond your two-year contract and pay month-to-month.

KGO-TV’s consumer reporter discovered Verizon Wireless dings customers coming and going.

Bonnie Mich, a Verizon Wireless customer in Healdsburg, was stunned when Verizon insisted she had to keep paying service charges on a cell phone she no longer owned.

“I said, ‘I don’t have a phone. I’m not under contract. I have no service from you. That is ridiculous,'” Mich told 7 On Your Side reporter Michael Finney. “I was angry. I didn’t think it made sense.”

Although Verizon did agree to suspend the calling plan portion of her bill for the missing phone, it wouldn’t agree to do it for free:

surchargeA charge of $15.35 was applied six days after her phone was stolen. The explanation? Verizon charges a fee when a customer service representative temporarily suspends service on a lost or stolen phone.

The following month, Mich decided to take her business to another wireless company, but Verizon Wireless was ready for that possibility. Verizon Wireless placed a block on number transfers, meaning Fich wasn’t going anywhere until Verizon was paid an extra $17.51 in service charges to remove the phone number transfer block.

Mark Toney, executive director of the Utility Reform Network told KGO Verizon had no justification for charging those fees and called the situation “a total rip off.” Toney advised customers to complain directly to state regulators and demand Verizon Wireless credit the charges and/or refund the customer.

When KGO called Verizon, an apology came quickly:

“We did not meet our own standards and reiterate our apology to our customer,” Verizon said in an e-mail message to the television station, promising a refund.

Mich reports she is still waiting.

[flv width=”640″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/KGO San Francisco Do you have to pay the bill if your cellphone gets stolen 10-3-13.mp4[/flv]

KGO in San Francisco reports a stolen or lost Verizon Wireless cell phone can be cost you more than you think. (3 minutes)

Search This Site:

Contributions:

Recent Comments:

Your Account:

Stop the Cap!