Waiting for Comcast and Verizon to offer cutting edge broadband to 620,000 Baltimore city residents and businesses appears to be going nowhere, so the city is hiring an Internet consultant to consider whether to sell access to its existing fiber network.

Baltimore officials spent at least a year trying to convince Google to launch its fiber network in the city only to be bypassed in favor of Kansas City, Austin, and Provo, Utah. Local unions and community groups have also attempted to embarrass the local phone company by publicly protesting Verizon’s lack of interest in expanding its fiber optic network FiOS in Baltimore. Comcast has proved a disappointment for many, with the latest technology going to other cities well before Baltimore gets improved service.

Baltimore’s Board of Estimates voted to spend $157,000 to hire Magellan Advisors to produce a cost-benefit analysis of expanding the city’s current fiber infrastructure to deliver better Internet access.

“I’m paying more here for lesser service, so I think one of the things we want to try to do is look at that, look at what [current companies] offer and try to incentivize people to offer more,” Baltimore’s chief information officer Chris Tonjes told the Baltimore Business Journal. “In the short term, we’re going to do a study. In the medium run, we’re going to try to renegotiate the cable franchise agreement. In the longer run we want to make it more profitable for providers to come in here and offer the expanded service.”

Like many cities, Baltimore already owns and operates its own fiber ring, built with public funds to support the city’s public safety radio system. Like many municipal institutional fiber networks, Baltimore’s fiber ring is underutilized. Public safety and other institutional users often use just a fraction of available capacity. Despite the fact such networks are often oversized, they are rarely controversial because they do not typically compete with commercial providers and are usually off-limits to the public.

As Baltimore prepares to update their existing fiber infrastructure, Magellan will study the implications of leasing excess capacity to third-party providers that can sell broadband access to private businesses and individuals. Even Comcast and Verizon would be welcome to lease capacity.

Neither company has shown much interest, and the proposal received a strong rebuke from Maryland Sen. Catherine Pugh (D-Baltimore City):

Pugh

For the most part, municipally-built broadband networks have the economic chips stacked against them and, where tried, have saddled local taxpayers with a mountain of debt and half-built networks that are then sold at fire-sale prices to vulture investors. Taxpayers in Provo, Utah, for instance, spent $40 million to build a relatively small and modest network only to sell it for $1 a few years later because they underestimated the massive costs of operating, upgrading and maintaining it.

But Provo is just the latest exhibit in a long pantheon of such failed initiatives that include Groton, Conn., ($38 million taxpayer loss) and Marietta, Ga., ($35 million taxpayer loss). Cities as large as Philadelphia, New York and Chicago and as small as Lompoc, Calif., and Acworth, Ga., have also tried and failed to launch their own broadband networks — or simply gave up.

Pugh’s editorial, published in both the Wall Street Journal and The Baltimore Sun, failed to disclose Pugh has received political campaign contributions from both Comcast and Verizon. More importantly, Pugh did not bother to mention she is the president-elect of the National Black Caucus of State Legislators, a group with close ties to both Comcast and Verizon Communications.

Among the “member corporations” of the NBCSL — companies who “weigh in” on the policies promoted by the group: AT&T, Comcast, CTIA – The Wireless Association, the National Cable & Telecommunications Association, Time Warner Cable, and Verizon.

Among the NBCSL’s roundtable members: AT&T, Comcast, Time Warner Cable, and Verizon

For the fourth consecutive year, Verizon hosted its Black History Month open house at the Reginald F. Lewis Museum in downtown Baltimore. This year, among Verizon’s special guests: Maryland Senator and president-elect of the National Black Caucus of State Legislators Catherine Pugh. Comcast has also opened its checkbook to the NBCSL. Among the contributions — $50,000 to form the “NBCSL/Comcast Broadband Legislative Fellowship” to “increase efforts to conduct research and develop solutions regarding broadband adoption among African Americans.”

Opening up a competitive, lower-priced broadband alternative owned by the citizens of Baltimore is not one of Pugh’s favored solutions to be sure.

The NBCSL has been more than a little preoccupied with the business agendas of its corporate members. The group’s glowing endorsement of the Comcast-NBCUniversal merger was so positive, Comcast continues to present the group’s submission urging approval of the merger on its website. In 2011, the NBCSL signed on to the campaign to get government approval of the now-dead merger of AT&T and T-Mobile USA, claiming it was in the best interests of African-Americans. Just this month, Time Warner Cable quoted the group’s comments on the dispute between the cable company and CBS on its website.

Stop the Cap! has refuted claims that public broadband is a financial failure in the past. Read our fact check here.

Although Comcast has been the dominant cable provider in Baltimore for years, its monopoly status is “de facto” only, because federal law prohibits exclusive cable franchise agreements. That being said, no other well-known cable provider will agree to offer service in competition with another. Overbuilders — small private entities that have business plans that depend on competing with incumbent operators, are few and far between. For most Americans, the only cable competition comes from satellite providers or the phone company. Satellite television lacks a broadband option and Verizon’s local broadband infrastructure is limited to providing DSL service.

Tonjes

Tonjes hopes the possibility of a public broadband alternative might shake up the city’s broadband landscape, but not every neighborhood is now passed by the city’s fiber ring.

AT&T and Camden Property Trust have announced an agreement to offer broadband, television, and phone services over fiber to the premises technology beginning this fall, serving new high-end apartment homes owned by the developer in Atlanta, Austin, and Orlando.

AT&T’s suggestion it will build a competing fiber network that would rival Google appears to be, for now, limited to selected, luxury multi-dwelling units participating in a strategic marketing partnership that can guarantee enough customers to make the investment in fiber optics worthwhile.

AT&T’s Connected Communities Initiative is a special program offered to large single-family homebuilders, developers, real estate investment trusts, apartment owners, property management groups and large homeowners’ associations that can deliver AT&T a virtually captive customer base in return for better-than-average service and kickbacks in the form of lucrative commissions.

Camden’s Gaines Ranch in Austin, Tex.

With AT&T’s latest agreement, the new Camden-managed properties will receive the next generation of U-verse High Speed Internet, U-verse TV and U-verse Voice on an all-fiber network that will deliver a level of enhanced service unavailable to most U-verse customers. Most importantly, the fiber infrastructure will let AT&T to offer faster broadband to residents without limiting their television viewing.

Most AT&T U-verse customers receive service over a hybrid fiber-copper phone wire network using a more advanced form of DSL. Fiber from the nearest AT&T central office extends into each neighborhood, but existing copper phone wiring carries the service the last several blocks into individual customer homes. The presence of copper limits the available bandwidth, which has kept AT&T’s top U-verse speeds at around 24Mbps. The only way to increase speeds is to cut the amount of copper in the network. Eliminating it completely is even better.

AT&T has been reluctant to follow Verizon’s lead deploying an all-fiber network. The cost to wire each home with fiber was too prohibitive for AT&T, but providing fiber connectivity to large apartment buildings, condos, or other multi-dwelling units has met AT&T’s cost concerns, especially when the property owner signs over exclusive rights to the buildings’ existing telecommunications infrastructure.

AT&T’s program encourages the participation of property owners with a variety of paid commissions and other compensation, including:

Exclusive Marketing Agreements: Under an AT&T Exclusive Marketing Agreement, residents may still choose their communications and entertainment services provider, but the builder, developer or property owner agrees to exclusively promote AT&T services. In doing so, AT&T provides financial incentives in the form of commissions for property owners and multiple service options for residents. In most cases, renters may have the mistaken impression they can only get service from AT&T, and are informally discouraged from considering alternative providers.

Bulk Contracts: An AT&T Connected Communities bulk agreement offers greater earning potential. With a single, monthly recurring bulk bill for all contracted units, developers and HOAs get below-retail pricing, increased savings on equipment costs, and other rewarding financial incentives. In most cases, building owners include AT&T services either as part of the monthly rent or billed as a mandatory services surcharge. A resident can still sign up for satellite or cable television, but has zero incentive to do so because they would be effectively paying for service twice.

Exclusive Use of Wire:  Property owners grant AT&T exclusive use of the wiring, including coaxial cable, at the property. In addition, owners agree to promote AT&T products to residents. This deters would-be competitors from providing service at a property signed up with AT&T. A cable or satellite competitor would not have access to existing wiring and have to arrange an agreement with the property owner to provision a second cable inside the building. Neither the competing provider or the property owner would have any incentive to do this, regardless of the wishes of renters.

Large properties can also contract with AT&T to provision a site-wide Wi-Fi network for the benefit of residents both around the property and at amenities like clubhouses or poolside.

While such agreements can benefit residents with bulk pricing discounts beyond what they could have obtained from AT&T themselves, it also strongly deters other providers from delivering competitive services.

[flv width=”640″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/ATT Connected Communities 9-2012.flv[/flv]

Last fall, AT&T promoted its Connected Communities program with property developers, offering them commissions and other special deals if they sign exclusive marketing agreements with the phone company. In 2013, broadband speeds for certain U-verse Internet customers will be increasing, depending on the infrastructure available. (2 minutes)

[flv width=”640″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Camden Online Communities 8-13.flv[/flv]

Camden Properties emphasizes the online services available to residents, particularly those that promote social interaction. In some cases, those services will now be powered by AT&T U-verse. (1 minute)

Verizon Wireless sees enormous new revenue opportunities in the “machine to machine” applications business, using its LTE 4G wireless network to exchange data between you and the companies you do business with.

Fran Shammo, Verizon’s chief financial officer, noted that State Farm Insurance is just one example where your wireless carrier and insurance company will quietly collect data about your driving habits based on the car seat law in california and share the information for marketing purposes and to micromanage your driving insurance rates based on your real driving habits.

State Farm Insurance recently signed an agreement with Verizon subsidiary Hughes Telematics, which today embeds microchips into vehicles that can communicate over Verizon’s nationwide wireless network. In the near future, State Farm Insurance customers’ driving habits will be automatically tracked by Verizon Wireless with certain data shared with the insurance company to personalize your auto insurance rates.

Shammo

“If you know the car insurance industry today, they do everything based on actuarial studies and make you pay based on your driving habits, charging a premium specific to your driving,” Shammo told investors at the Oppenheimer 16th Annual Technology, Internet & Communications Conference. “We will accumulate that data, analyze that, and send that off to State Farm.” Keep your car protected with extended warranty protection. Drive confidently with Nova Warranty’s Jeep Extended Warranty.

Visit Car’s Cash For Junk Clunkers at 314 S Union Ave #230, Springfield, MO 65802 (417) 263-6523 to avail their cash for cars.

With the contracts signed, State Farm hopes to expand its Drive Safe & Save program nationwide later this year. It will be voluntary, for now, for customers driving OnStar-equipped vehicles from General Motors and Ford’s Sync system. Others can take part with Hughes’ In-Drive tracking device, installed by the customer. Customers choosing In-Drive will have to pay a monthly fee for the device ranging from $5-15 a month.

Verizon Wireless will benefit from tracking information about where customers are, have been, and are likely to go in the future. State Farm will not benefit from that level of precision, however. Verizon will purposely “fuzz” up those details, depicting vehicles only within a 40-mile radius. But State Farm will still know a great deal about your personal driving habits, which can directly affect your insurance premium.

State Farm says its program is primarily intended to deliver discounts to safe drivers (sometimes up to 50 percent off the highest risk category drivers, such as teens), not penalize unsafe ones. But the insurance company does disclose it will increase rates of policyholders caught driving over their selected mileage category or if they are ever tracked driving 80mph or over for any reason, regardless of the posted speed limit.

The amount of the discount is dependent on a number of factors, mostly based on mileage driven, the time of day the vehicle is on the road, and the rate which one accelerates and brakes while driving. But State Farm agents admit other factors can also penalize you. Making a lot of left turns will cut your discount — more accidents occur during those. When that unfortunately happens, you can go to this web-site. How hard of a turn you make also matters – squealing tires and a fast turn will earn a spanking for aggressive driving. Do you often pass other vehicles? That can hurt your discount as well.

Progressive pitches its “Snapshot” drive tracking system.

If you don’t drive the car at all, State Farm will, not surprisingly, praise your driving habits and boost your discount. A car driven under 500 miles a year may get a 30% discount. Drive it close to the annual average of 11,000 miles and your discount plummets to 11%. Long commutes hurt the most. A policyholder driving 16,000 miles a year will only receive 1% off.

Wherever you go, Verizon Wireless and State Farm, among other insurers, will be watching and that bothers some privacy experts.

“It’s a slippery slope,” Paul Stephens, an official with the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, told the Wall Street Journal. While insurers say they don’t track routes driven, Mr. Stephens fears that as programs expand and get more commonplace, insurers may wind up with “a very detailed log of your whereabouts throughout the day.”

A St. Louis Post-Dispatch reporter joined over 1.4 million other Progressive insurance customers driving with Snapshot — a competing drive tracking system. He concluded it felt like driving with a nanny.

It beeped at me when I braked too hard or floored it up the ramp to Highway 40. Each beep, I knew, was a demerit that could mean a higher insurance quote.

Like some other programs, Progressive lets you keep track of your performance on its website, measuring your braking, acceleration and mileage. It grades you as excellent, good or “opportunity,” which is a nice way of saying “no discount for you, bub.” It also awards little online merit badges. I got one for “alien abduction,” since I left town and didn’t drive for a week. When I finished the tryout, the system offered me an initial 12 percent discount from Progressive’s normal rate. I’m considering this device.

Privacy experts also caution that those refusing to install the currently voluntary drive tracking systems may eventually be lumped into high risk driving pools because insurers may conclude those drivers have something to hide.

[flv width=”640″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Progressive Snapshot 8-13.flv[/flv]

Progressive’s omnipresent spokesperson “Flo” introduces drivers to Snapshot, the insurance company’s driver tracking system. (1 minute)

“You can see who is defensive and who is aggressive,” said Richard Hutchinson, Progressive’s general manager for usage-based insurance. “It gives us very powerful data from an insurance standpoint.”

“If people choose to (sign up for the program), that’s up to them,” said Wisconsin state Sen. Jon Erpenbach (D-Middleton), a longtime privacy advocate. “But I would just caution people to know exactly what they’re getting into.  I have huge privacy concerns (about the program). They are offering a 5 percent discount and I would assume somebody’s rates are going up somewhere else to pay for that.”

Wisconsin-based American Family Insurance takes driver tracking to an even more personal level with its Teen Safe Driver system, which uses DriveCam technology to maintain a comprehensive video and data record of driving habits. If the system detects unsafe driving, a professional driving coach will automatically receive a video file showing the incident, leading to a personal follow-up to discuss the dangerous driving.

[flv width=”640″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/TeenSafe Drivecam 8-13.flv[/flv]

American Family Insurance’s TeenSafe Driver Program uses an in-car camera to watch teen drivers and automatically sends video of incidents to a professional driving coach if an infraction or unsafe driving is detected. Could insurance companies adopt similar technology for adult drivers for on-the-spot rate adjustments in the future? (3 minutes)

Erpenbach

“Armed with this kind of data, an insurance company could eventually theoretically adjust a driver’s insurance rates on the spot, or even notify the policyholder they intend to cancel their insurance,” says Sam Underwood, who feels the insurance industry will soon police more driving infractions than local traffic cops. “While a safe driver may feel they have nothing to hide, their driving details could be subject to disclosure under a criminal or civil subpoena as part of any legal action, driving related or not.”

Ten years ago, privacy experts worried about automated toll collection devices like E-Z Pass being used to track driving habits. Underwood says insurance companies will take that to a whole different level.

“They have a vested interest in reducing insurance claims and payouts and there is probably nothing wrong with that because who wants to be in an accident,” Underwood says. “But under current laws, they are the judge, jury and executioner and can subjectively use this data to set rates as they please. It starts with a tantalizing discount but ends with a compulsory system that will make cell companies like Verizon Wireless a lot of money and let them keep a copy of collected data for who knows what purpose.”

The Wall Street Journal calls the programs “usage based insurance,” priced according to how customers actually drive. But there have been some familiar arguments and “family discussions” that have followed the regular report cards and insurance renewal premiums that arrive after enrolling into the tracking programs:

One day recently, Mr. Scharlau logged onto his State Farm account to learn he so far had earned “A+” grades for left-hand turns and for not topping 80 miles per hour, but only “B+” for braking, acceleration and time of day his Expedition was on the road. Mr. Scharlau said he and his wife now find themselves chatting “about our own driving and what we see around us: ‘Oops, did we just lose points?'”

Shammo says Verizon Wireless is just beginning to profit from this type of machine to machine application. It has well-positioned itself with the acquisition of Hughes Telematics, which develops chipsets that makes it simple to move data over Verizon’s wireless network. Shammo admits it costs just pennies on the dollar to transport information from applications like drive tracking devices. But Verizon isn’t satisfied just charging for data traffic. The real earnings come from processing the data Verizon collects, analyzes and transmits back to clients like State Farm.

“If you then take the next step, though, the value is really in the data in the cloud and how you can utilize data to do the analytics behind that,” Shammo said. “If you look at Hughes Telematics and what they are doing […], it’s not the transport through Verizon Wireless that really creates the average revenue per user increment on that machine to machine [traffic]. It’s all the other analytics behind that. The ARPU on that is $20 to $30 higher than what it would be on a machine-to-machine type application for just transport.”

Verizon Wireless considers machine to machine traffic still in its infancy and primed for more profits. That worries people like Sen. Erpenbach who wonders where it will all end.

“If I’m State Farm, sure, I want to know about any driving habit of my policyholders,” he said. “I would also love to know, if I’m State Farm, what everybody does in their houses (for home insurance purposes). And I’m sure health companies would love to see people’s grocery lists.”

Phillip “Every other 2008 spectrum bidder except U.S. Cellular has since sold its winnings to AT&T or Verizon Wireless or has never provided competitive service” Dampier

AT&T is unhappy with a proposal from a wireless competitor it originally tried to buy in 2011 that would offer smaller competitors a more realistic chance of winning favored 600MHz spectrum vacated by UHF television stations at a forthcoming FCC auction.

T-Mobile’s “Dynamic Market Rule” proposal would establish a cap on the amount of spectrum market leaders AT&T and Verizon Wireless, flush with financial resources for the auction, could win.

“Imposing modest constraints on excessive low-band spectrum aggregation will promote competition, increase consumer choice, encourage innovation, and accelerate broadband deployment,” T-Mobile offered in its proposal to the FCC.

Without some limits, wireless competitors Sprint and T-Mobile, among other smaller carriers, could find themselves outbid for the prime spectrum, well-suited for penetrating buildings and requiring a smaller network of cell towers to deliver blanket coverage.

In a public policy blog post today, AT&T argues T-Mobile is behind the times and its proposal is unfair and unworkable:

First, the purported advantage of low band spectrum – that it allows more coverage and better building penetration with fewer cell sites – has been overtaken by marketplace realities under which capacity not coverage drives network deployment.  Carriers deploying low band and high band spectrum alike must squeeze as many cell sites as they can into their networks to meet exploding demand for data services.  Second, to the extent this is less the case in rural areas, those areas are not spectrum-constrained and the lower cost of building out low band spectrum in such areas is offset by the higher cost of the spectrum itself.

[…] But this is not the only point that should concern policymakers.  Such caps will also suppress auction revenues, potentially to the point of auction failure, ultimately reducing the amount of spectrum freed up for mobile broadband use and undermining the auction’s ability to meet critical statutory goals.

[…] Even if T-Mobile’s proposal did not result in complete auction failure, its proposed caps would suppress auction revenues, reducing the amount of spectrum freed up for mobile broadband use as well as funds generated for FirstNet and to pay down the national debt.  That is because strict limits on participation by otherwise qualified bidders will make the auction less competitive and will yield less revenue.  Indeed, if T-Mobile’s proposed spectrum cap was strictly enforced, Verizon estimates it would be barred from bidding in 7 of the top 10 markets.  AT&T would face similar bidding limitations, as noted in our filing.

AT&T suggests the last major auction in 2008 attracted 214 qualified bidders and 101 bidders won licenses, including carriers of all sizes and new entrants.

But an analysis by Stop the Cap! shows the breakaway winners of the 2008 auction were none other than AT&T and Verizon Wireless, which paid a combined $16.3 billion of the total $19.592 billion raised. For that money, they acquired:

• Block A – Verizon Wireless and U.S. Cellular both bought 25 licenses each. In this block, Verizon targeted urban areas, while U.S. Cellular bought licenses primarily in the northern part of the U.S., where it provides regional cellular service. Cavalier Telephone and CenturyTel also bought 23 and 21 licenses, respectively. Cavalier Telephone is now wholly owned by Windstream, which does not provide cell service and was selling its 700MHz spectrum to none other than AT&T. So is CenturyLink (formerly CenturyTel).

• Block B – AT&T Mobility was the biggest buyer in the B block, with 227 licenses totaling $6.6 billion. U.S. Cellular and Verizon bought 127 and 77 licenses, respectively. AT&T Mobility and Verizon Wireless bought licenses around the country, while U.S. Cellular continued with its strategy to buy licenses in its home network northern regions.

• Block C – Of the 10 licenses in the C Block, Verizon Wireless bought the 7 that cover the contiguous 48 states (and Hawaii). Those seven licenses cost Verizon roughly $4.7 billion. Of the other three, Triad Communications — a wireless spectrum speculator — bought the two covering Alaska, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands through its Triad 700, LLC investor partnership, while Small Ventures USA, L.P. bought the one covering the Gulf of Mexico. Triad 700, LLC sold its spectrum last fall to AT&T while Small Ventures USA sold theirs to Verizon Wireless.

• Block E – EchoStar spent $711 million to buy 168 of the 176 available Block E licenses. This block, made up of unpaired spectrum, will likely be used to stream television shows. Qualcomm also bought 5 licenses. Neither company has used its spectrum to offer any services five years after the auction ended.

So much for improving the competitive landscape of wireless. Other than U.S. Cellular, which is rumored to be on AT&T and Verizon Wireless’ acquisitions wish list, every auction winner has either sold its spectrum to the wireless giants or has done nothing with it.

If “highest bidder wins”-rules apply at the forthcoming auction, expect more of the same.

AT&T and Verizon Wireless have significant financial resources to outbid Sprint, T-Mobile and smaller carriers and will likely win the bulk of the available spectrum whether they actually need it or not. Smaller victories may be won by smaller competitors, but only in rural areas and sections of the country disfavored by the largest two.

Richard Miller from the Capitol Fax blog spent the weekend at the Illinois State Fair and might as well have left his AT&T cell phone at home, because the wireless giant’s network collapsed with an overload of traffic.

“Both days, after 5 o’clock in the afternoon, AT&T’s mobile phone service wouldn’t work,” Miller writes. “Calls in or out were sporadic at best, and texts took numerous attempts to work, if ever. Internet? Fugetaboutit. And when the nightly concert started, everything completely shut down. No calls, no texts, no nothing.”

How to improve AT&T service? Remove the rules that require them to provide it.

Miller reported friends attending the fair with him had no difficulties using Verizon Wireless, Sprint, or T-Mobile, so Miller concludes the problems were AT&T’s to own.

“There’s no excuse for the giant corporation’s lousy service,” said Miller.

Attendees with missing children or needing to make emergency calls were plain out of luck. Pay phones are long gone. The only alternative was finding someone with a phone not served by AT&T.

“[People] pay good money for the service and they have a right to expect that they can use their expensive communications devices at large annual events, where people get separated all the time,” said Miller.

Ironically, the Illinois Farm Bureau (IFB) received at least $20,000 from AT&T in 2012 and is for wholesale deregulation of AT&T. The Illinois Partnership for the New Economy & Jobs, a front group for AT&T Illinois, noted that the farm bureau is all for “updating” Illinois state laws that take the hook off AT&T’s responsibility to serve every resident in the state. A preview of what that looks like was experienced by Miller and others at the state fairgrounds.