Retirees enjoying employer-based discounts on wireless service are learning they are often ineligible to continue getting a break on their Verizon Wireless bill after the phone company began auditing its discount program.

Verizon Wireless, like many wireless providers, has agreements with many companies extending discounts to workers as an employee benefit. But with millions out of work, ongoing downsizing, and early retirement, Verizon Wireless decided to start periodic audits to re-verify its wireless customers receiving discounts of 15-25% or more they may no longer be qualified to receive.

The audit is likely to earn millions in extra revenue as unqualified customers are dropped from the program.

Among the hardest hit are retirees who find they no longer qualify.

Verizon Wireless blames companies for not including retirees in their employer discount program and several human resources departments blame Verizon Wireless for not giving them that option as part of the employer discount contract.

Among those losing discounts are law enforcement personnel, retirees from the U.S. Post Office, Lockheed Martin, and countless other corporations. Most federal and state government retirees also no longer qualify. A handful of large companies that have major accounts with Verizon Wireless have negotiated discounts for retirees, but they are reportedly few in number.

Most retirees discover they are about to lose their discount when Verizon Wireless auditors request they revalidate their employment in a text message or letter. Every customer getting a discount will now be periodically reverified.

“Verizon Wireless will periodically ask you to validate your current employment status to ensure we have accurate information for the company for which you work, and the discount for which you are eligible to receive,” indicates the company’s employment verification website. “It is our goal to ensure that you continue receiving a discount on eligible plans and features on your wireless service based on your employment with a company that has a business agreement with us. Verizon Wireless has agreements with a large number of companies. If you have changed employers since we last validated your employment status, you may still be eligible for a discount.”

Verizon Wireless’ Current Operational Profitability

“Verizon gives the discount because it wants to,” complained one customer. “Verizon could just as easy give that discount to every retiree if they wanted to, but Verizon chose not to.”

Critics contend Verizon can afford the discount. In one quarter last year, the company earned $20 billion in revenue from its wireless service, up 7.5 percent year over year.

Eliminating discounts, charging new service, activation, and upgrade fees, lengthening the device upgrade window, and launching new, higher-priced, bundled service plans that include services many customers don’t use have all helped the company continue to boost its earnings.

“Shame on you, Verizon,” wrote another recent retiree. “I will take my business elsewhere as soon as I can. Verizon has always been more expensive, but coverage was the best, so I stuck with them.  This is the thanks you get for being a loyal customer for many years.”

Time Warner Cable executives brushed away Charter Communications’ first public offer to acquire the second largest cable company in the country in a debt-financed deal that Time Warner considers a lowball offer.

“[Charter’s] proposal is grossly inadequate,” Time Warner Cable said in a statement. “We are confident in our standalone plan and we are not going to let Charter steal the company.”

Charter’s combined service areas, if they win control of Time Warner Cable.

On Tuesday, Charter violated a long-standing, informal Code of the Cable Cartel that keeps cable companies from attacking each other.

Charter Communications chief operating officer John Bickham launched an investor presentation that trashed Time Warner Cable and its leadership, and contended fixing the cable company will take more work than first envisioned.

Bickham claimed Time Warner has exhibited a decade of a “failed operating strategy revealed by fact that they are losing customers at an alarming rate,” while Charter has a proven track record of performance.

Bickham

Historians recollect Charter’s recent past differently. In 2009, mired in debt and lacking a disciplined business plan, Charter declared Chapter 11 bankruptcy, wiping out shareholders and stiffing creditors.

Bickham capitalized on Time Warner’s 2013 summer of discontent, when a dispute with CBS resulted in the loss of the network from Time Warner Cable lineups (along with Showtime) in some of the biggest cities in the country. Combined with rate increases, subscribers began switching to the competition, especially where Verizon FiOS and AT&T U-verse gives cable operators stiff competition from money-saving new customer promotions.

Bickham described TWC as a company in shambles:

On Time Warner Cable TV: “It appears that Time Warner didn’t want to spend the money to go all-digital,” adding that the quality of TWC’s TV signal is poor and the company still lacks enough HD channels that could have been on the lineup if the cable company dropped analog service long ago.

On Time Warner Cable Internet: Bickham complained Time Warner is offering deep discounts on slow Internet packages, particularly its campaign targeting DSL customers with 2Mbps service for $14.99 a month. Bickham complains the large variety of Internet speed tiers are unnecessary, resulting in “nickel-and-dime charges to customers.” He argues Time Warner needs to simplify its offering by adopting a digital lineup and boost Internet speeds, so customers get at least 30Mbps service. Bickham did not mention Charter Communications also has a usage cap on its broadband products. TWC does not on most offerings.

On Time Warner Cable employees: “TWC never had a vision on high standards” for how the company manages its 50,000 employees. Bickham feels the workmanship of TWC installers leaves a lot to be desired.

[flv]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Bloomberg Time Warner Cable Rejects Charter Offer 1-15-14.flv[/flv]

Time Warner Cable rejected an acquisition offer from Charter Communications valued at more than $61 billion including debt, spurning the biggest unsolicited takeover bid since 2008. Manus Cranny examines why the offer was rejected on Bloomberg Television’s “Countdown.” (2:06)

Charter’s proposed price comparison chart, produced for the benefit of Time Warner Cable shareholders, assumes worst-case pricing almost no Time Warner Cable customer actually has to pay.

Charter is America’s second worst rated cable company. (Consumer Reports, 2013)

On its face, Charter’s plan for Time Warner Cable doesn’t look all bad, but execution is critical and Charter has a long-standing and very poor record of customer satisfaction, typically ranked in consumer surveys as America’s second worst cable operator year after year.

Should Charter win control of Time Warner Cable, big changes will be in store for TWC customers under the Charter umbrella:

• Analog television would be phased out, along with “limited basic” packages. Charter wants to repurpose analog spectrum for faster Internet speeds, but that also means video customers will be required to get more set-top boxes;
• Eliminate “Switched Digital Video” technology now in place on TWC systems. SDV is a bandwidth saver – only delivering digital TV signals customers in a particular neighborhood are actively watching. But those using inexpensive digital-to-analog set-top boxes on analog-only televisions can’t watch SDV channels, inconveniencing customers;
• Increase the number of HD channels to 200+;
• All residential set-top boxes would now support HD signals at no added cost and customers will be able to get up to four DVR boxes for $20 a month;
• Time Warner Cable’s new minimum Internet speed would be 30Mbps with much faster added-cost tiers available, but usage caps will apply;
• Time Warner Cable’s phone product would be repriced at $30 a month in the first year, $20 in the second with all calling features and voicemail included;
• No term contracts will be offered and modem rental fees, regulatory surcharges, added taxes on Internet and Phone, and service visit fees will no longer be charged.

Charter customers can expect aggressive sales pitches for their “high value” triple-play bundle which may include services customers don’t want at a price that is largely non-negotiable. The more boxes and services you add, the greater the discount you will receive. In contrast, Time Warner Cable began de-emphasizing its triple play promotions in early 2012 and now aggressively promotes single and double play packages that typically omit phone service.

Unlike TWC, Charter has been more difficult when trying to negotiate customer retention discounts. Charter generally charges the same prices everywhere.

Their proposed offer for Time Warner customers will be a triple play offer starting at $110 a month for the first 12 months, then increase $20 in the second year to $130 a month and in year three the price will rise again to $150 a month. Charter’s typical “step-up” pricing is in $20 increments.

Charter is reluctant to allow customers to add or drop package components, so for most customers packages will be all-inclusive with no discounts for dropping channels or features. That means customers will likely end up with more television channels, more phone features, and faster Internet speeds, but at the cost of an eventually higher cable bill.

Any buyout could also mean some Time Warner Cable territories could be put up for sale to a third-party. Charter is especially interested in the New York and Los Angeles markets, but may have little interest in western New York and Ohio, New England, Kentucky and Wisconsin. Any orphaned TWC customers would likely be snapped up by companies like Comcast, which may join Charter’s takeover bid.

Any sale would need approval by the Federal Communications Commission and potentially the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division, especially in Comcast becomes involved.

[flv]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/CNBC Tom Rutledge Explains Charter Offer for TWC 1-15-14.mp4[/flv]

Time Warner Cable rejected a merger proposal from Charter Communications. Tom Rutledge, Charter Communications president and CEO, explains the offer as he describes as “rich and fair.” We feel like we’ve come a far way and have not received a serious response, Rutledge says. A CNBC exclusive. (4:35)

The Weather Channel has been removed from DirecTV’s lineup and replaced with WeatherNation, a much-smaller channel based in St. Paul, Minn., because the popular weather network reportedly sought a $0.01 monthly rate increase.

DirecTV subscribers told Stop the Cap! the channel change happened just after midnight, although WeatherNation was already a part of DirecTV’s lineup.

“This is unprecedented for the Weather Channel,” said David Kenny, CEO of the Weather Channel’s parent company. “In our 32 years, we have never had a significant disruption due to a failure to reach a carriage agreement.”

The Weather Channel has launched a campaign to restore the network that carries the impression DirecTV does not care about the safety of their customers. The Weather Channel executives have stated their severe weather coverage is unparalleled and would leave satellite dish customers in rural areas without important information about dangerous weather.

But Dan York, responsible for DirecTV content, said weather information is available from a variety of sources, especially smartphones, and The Weather Channel has drifted away from its core weather mission, devoting up to 40 percent of its programming to reality TV shows.

The two sides are far apart, even arguing over the amount of the increase The Weather Channel wants for its programming. Executives at The Weather Channel claim their requested increase amounts to $0.01 per month, per subscriber, on top of the $0.13 average cost distributors pay for the weather network. DirecTV says it is substantially more than that and it seeking a 20% rate cut due to declining ratings.

The Weather Channel lacks the clout major corporate conglomerates like NBC Universal, Time Warner Entertainment, or Viacom have when negotiating contract renewals. Instead, it is counting on its loyal audience to bring the fight to the satellite provider.

So far, viewers seem to be responding. An anti-DirecTV website run by The Weather Channel has received more than 700,000 page views and reportedly brought 150,000 complaint calls to DirecTV customer service.

[flv]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/WSJ The Weather Channel Off DirecTV 1-14-14.flv[/flv]

The Wall Street Journal reports the advent of smartphones has taken a significant toll on The Weather Channel’s viewership, leading DirecTV to ask for a 20% rate cut. (4:17)

A U.S. appeals court today ruled the FCC’s Net Neutrality policy requiring all Internet Service Providers to treat Internet traffic equally lacks legal authority.

The court found the FCC relied on an untenable foundation for its Net Neutrality policy that lacked legal standing, handing a victory to Verizon Communications that claimed its free speech rights were being violated.

The three judge panel were unanimous, finding the FCC could not regulate the Internet under the existing regulatory formula, in place since 2011 under the chairmanship of Julius Genachowski.

“Even though the commission has general authority to regulate in this arena, it may not impose requirements that contravene express statutory mandates,” Judge David Tatel said.

Many analysts predicted the FCC had a shaky case from the outset, relying on a controversial classification of broadband as an “information service” that was unlikely to survive a court challenge.

“Given that the commission has chosen to classify broadband providers in a manner that exempts them from treatment as common carriers, the Communications Act expressly prohibits the commission from nonetheless regulating them as such,” Tatel wrote.

Many consumer groups argued the FCC should have reclassified broadband as a “telecommunications service” before implementing Net Neutrality. Today’s court decision seems to agree.

Wheeler

“The FCC — under the leadership of former Chairman Julius Genachowski — made a grave mistake when it failed to ground its open Internet rules on solid legal footing,” said Craig Aaron, president of Free Press. “Internet users will pay dearly for the previous chairman’s lack of political will. That’s why we need to fix the problems the agency could have avoided in the first place.”

FCC chairman Tom Wheeler expressed disappointment in today’s ruling and suggested the court would not have the last word.

“I am committed to maintaining our networks as engines for economic growth, test beds for innovative services and products, and channels for all forms of speech protected by the First Amendment,” Wheeler said in a statement. “We will consider all available options, including those for appeal, to ensure that these networks on which the Internet depends continue to provide a free and open platform for innovation and expression, and operate in the interest of all Americans.”

“We’re disappointed that the court came to this conclusion,” said Aaron. “Its ruling means that Internet users will be pitted against the biggest phone and cable companies — and in the absence of any oversight, these companies can now block and discriminate against their customers’ communications at will.”

But the cable industry denies it will attempt to interfere with Internet traffic.

Former FCC chairman Michael Powell, who helped design the “information service” framework for Internet oversight during the Bush Administration, said the cable industry he now represents as president of the National Cable and Telecommunications Association will maintain a “hands-off” approach to Internet traffic.

“The cable industry has always embraced the principles of an open Internet and the Court decision will not change that,” Powell said. “Consumers have always been entitled to enjoy the legal web content of their choosing and they will continue to do so. An open Internet is good for our customers, and good for our business. The cable industry has always made it clear that it does not – and will not – block our customer’s ability to access lawful Internet content, applications or services.”

[flv]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/CNBC FCC Loses Net Neutrality Case 1-14-14.mp4[/flv]

CNBC reports today’s Net Neutrality decision could impact online services like Netflix with an Internet “toll road” for video content. (1:48)

As expected for months, Charter Communications, Inc. today formally offered Time Warner Cable shareholders $132.50 per share to assume ownership of the nation’s second largest cable operator in a deal worth more than $61 billion, including debt.

Bloomberg News this afternoon reported Charter Cable has offered $83 in cash for each outstanding share of TWC stock, as well as about $49.50 in Charter stock. That makes the attempted takeover the third largest merger deal worldwide since 2009.

Rutledge

Charter CEO Thomas Rutledge, a former executive at TWC and Cablevision would lead the combined enterprise under the Charter Cable name, likely pushing out TWC’s new CEO Robert Marcus. Rutledge argues that combining Charter and TWC would bring about considerable cost savings, particularly for spiraling programming costs. Analysts say the deal would also mean a reduction in Time Warner Cable’s workforce, especially in middle management, as operations are consolidated around Charter’s leadership.

Rutledge today said he privately approached Time Warner Cable executives with an offer in late December.

“We haven’t received a serious response,” Rutledge said today in a Bloomberg News telephone interview. “Our objective was to talk to management and try to get them engaged. They have not, so we’re going to make our case to shareholders about why this deal is good for them and hope they ask management and the board to watch out for the interests of shareholders.”

[flv]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/CNBC Marangi on TWC Deal 1-13-14.mp4[/flv]

Chris Marangi from Gamco tells CNBC Charter Communications’ proposal to buy Time Warner Cable for $61.3 billion is probably too low, but the cable industry is “ripe for consolidation” and further mergers are likely. (1:39)

Time Warner Cable’s chief financial officer Artie Minson reportedly requested Charter make a higher bid that included more cash, but Charter refused.

Malone

The man pulling the levers behind Charter’s curtain is Dr. John Malone, former CEO of Tele-Communications, Inc., which was America’s largest cable operator in the late 1980s and 1990s. Malone’s Liberty Media is Charter Communications’ largest single investor. Malone has long argued for consolidation and cooperation in the cable industry to boost profits and control programming costs that drive up cable television bills.

Malone specializes in structured mergers and acquisitions that result in tax-free buyouts. Charter’s offer relies heavily on debt financing and would allow Charter to shield its ongoing net operating losses from taxes.

Malone indicated he is willing to play hardball to force a merger.

Malone told investors he expected Time Warner Cable to resist a takeover by Charter — America’s fourth largest cable company — so he is prepared to nominate Charter-friendly directors for Time Warner Cable’s board before nominations close Feb. 15. Time Warner Cable shareholders could force the merger by voting for Malone’s handpicked directors, who would promptly approve Charter’s takeover offer. But Time Warner executives will likely argue Charter’s offer is disadvantageous for TWC shareholders.

“Since we made our first proposal, Time Warner Cable has lost another half million video customers,” Rutledge said. “Their customer service continues to decline in every measure. We can improve it. We have a demonstrated track record of improving customer service. It’s a question of credibility.”

Consumer Reports reports otherwise. Charter Communications has perennially been ranked America’s second worst Internet Service Provider cable operator in annual reader surveys. Only Mediacom is ranked lower among cable operators.

Now that Charter’s offer has gone public, investors suspect other cable operators may soon consider bidding for Time Warner Cable as well. Comcast is a likely bidder with an interest is taking control of Time Warner Cable’s systems in New York City and certain midwestern markets. Comcast would also like TWC’s regional sports channels serving southern California.

Customers will have no say in the matter, except through appeals to federal regulators which must approve any sale.

Unlike TWC, Charter Cable has usage limits on their broadband service.

[flv]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/CNBC CNBC David Faber on TWC Deal 1-13-14.mp4[/flv]

CNBC’s David Faber reports today’s offer from Charter Communications is not technically a “bid” for Time Warner Cable. Instead, it’s a public offer to hopefully force TWC executives to take Charter’s offer more seriously. (3:25)