AT&T has finally gotten around to following Verizon Wireless’ footsteps to fewer customer returns as it joins Big Red cutting “no hassle” returns to just two weeks.

Starting this month, if you return a phone to AT&T within 14 days, the company will charge you a $35 restocking fee or 10% of the purchase price for accessories over $199. Return it after 14 days and you may not be hassled, but you will be out as much as $325.

Consumers (including Individual Responsibility Users) – Device/Accessory Returns

Cosmetic blemish items are considered closeout items and are not eligible for return or exchange. 

Sprint’s deal with Softbank is bad news for margin-obsessed Wall Street. More competition=lower profits.

Wall Street is turning a cold shoulder to today’s official announcement that Japan’s Softbank will acquire nearly 70% of Sprint-Nextel, giving effective control of the company to Japanese business magnet Masayoshi Son.

The $20.1 billion acquisition is the largest-ever foreign buyout by a Japanese company, made possible by the combination of a historically low U.S. dollar against the increasingly strong yen, giving Softbank even more value for money.

But outside of a handful of investment banks that stand to earn $200 million in fees for helping to advice the two companies about the deal, Wall Street is not happy.

“It’s a competitive headache,” said Christopher King, an analyst at Stifel Nicolaus & Co. The transaction is expected to infuse billions in new capital into perennially third-place Sprint, which is far behind its larger rivals AT&T and Verizon Wireless.

King and other Wall Street analysts fear a bolstered Sprint will spark new competition into the decreasingly competitive wireless marketplace. Softbank is well known in Japan for cut-throat pricing competition, something that could directly impact Verizon and AT&T’s increasingly expensive pricing for wireless service. Many on Wall Street fear an emboldened Sprint could overtake T-Mobile offering aggressively priced service plans.

[flv width=”360″ height=”290″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Bloomberg King Says Sprint Deal Creates Competitive Headaches 10-15-12.mp4[/flv]

Stifel Nicolaus & Co., analyst Christopher King calls today’s announcement by Softbank and Sprint “a competitive headache” for the wireless industry, which may face more competition and lower prices.  (2 minutes)

Christopher King, an analyst for Stifel Nicolaus & Co., called the Sprint-Softbank deal a competitive headache.

Sprint is also expected to put Softbank’s investment to good use — acquiring additional spectrum and quickly upgrading its 4G LTE network, now under construction. The surprise investment could mean a more robust network for Sprint, an important objective for a company criticized for offering less coverage than its larger rivals.

Craig Moffett, an analyst with Sanford Bernstein, said Sprint’s aggressive upgrades are bad news because it means the company is going to spend a lot to improve service and presumably cut prices, which will hurt profit margins at Sprint and its competitors who may be forced to lower prices in turn to compete.

Consumers, especially existing Sprint customers, will likely celebrate a stronger Sprint, especially if it triggers a wireless price war.

The investment banks offering advice to both parties have little to complain about either. Citigroup and Raine Group LLC may earn as much as $200 million in direct fees from the deal. Softbank’s own advisers — Deutsche Bank and Mizuho Securities will earn $70-100 million. Sprint’s advisers — Citigroup, UBS, and Rothschild will likely earn an equal amount, according to Bloomberg News.

Investment bankers are hopeful the deal will help trigger another wave of wireless consolidation, which will bolster their fee earnings. In addition to Leap Wireless’ Cricket, there are at least a dozen independent regional carriers including C-Spire and US Cellular now ripe for acquisition by AT&T, Verizon Wireless, Sprint, or T-Mobile.

Softbank has been acquiring some of its own competitors back home in Japan, including eAccess, largely to gain additional spectrum to bolster its LTE 4G network build.

For now, the deal announced today does not include beleaguered Clearwire, but most Wall Street investors believe the Sprint-controlled company will eventually also be acquired.

[flv]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/CNBC Sprinting Forward with Softbank 10-15-12.flv[/flv]

CNBC talks with Sanford Bernstein’s Craig Moffett, who is not thrilled with a deal that will leave Sprint on a spending spree to upgrade its network and potentially trigger a price war.  (4 minutes)

The Federal Communications Commission has granted cable operators permission to completely encrypt their television lineups, potentially requiring every subscriber to rent set top boxes or CableCARD technology to continue watching cable-TV.

The FCC voted last week 5-0 to allow total encryption, a reversal of an older rule that prohibited encryption of the basic tier, allowing cable customers to watch local stations and other community programming without the expense of extra equipment.

The cable industry said the decision is a victory against cable theft, claiming that nearly five percent of all cable television hookups are illegally stealing service, at a cost estimated at $5 billion in lost revenue annually.

But some third party companies offering alternatives to costly set top boxes with endless monthly rental fees claim the industry move towards encryption is more about protecting the cable monopoly than controlling signal theft.

Current licensing agreements do not allow third party set top manufacturers to support scrambled channels without an added-cost, cable company-supplied set top box or card. That means a would-be customer would have to invest in a third party set top box and a cable company-supplied set top box to manage scrambled channels. That may leave customers wondering why they need the third party box at all.

This presented a problem for Boxee, which manufactures third party set top boxes, some with DVR capability. If cable systems completely encrypt their lineups, Boxee customers will need to rent a cable box and work through a complicated procedure to get both to work together.

Boxee officials suggest both an interim and long term solution to the dilemma — both requiring the goodwill of the cable industry to work out the details.

For now, Boxee and Comcast have agreed to work together on an HD digital transport adapter (DTA) with built-in Ethernet (E-DTA). A Boxee user would then access basic tier channels directly through an Ethernet connection and change channels remotely using their enhanced set top via a DLNA protocol.

A longer term solution would be to create a licensing path for an integrated DTA solution included inside third party set top boxes. This would eliminate the need for an added cost E-DTA box.

Cable operators planning to encrypt their entire television lineup will soon begin notifying customers of their plans. Under an agreement with the FCC, those with broadcast basic service will get up to two boxes for two years without charge (five years if the customer is on public assistance). Those who already have a cable box or DVR will get one box for two years at no charge. The cable company can impose monthly rental fees on additional boxes and begin charging for every box after two years.

Former FCC chairman Michael Powell, who now presides over the nation’s largest cable lobbying group, called the FCC decision “pro-consumer” despite the added expense and inconvenient many customers will experience.

“By permitting cable operators to join their competitors in encrypting the basic service tier, the commission has adopted a sensible, pro-consumer approach that will reduce overall in- home service calls,” said Powell, president of the National Cable and Telecommunications Association. “Encryption of the basic tier also enhances security of the network which reduces service theft that harms honest customers.”

Comcast is a leading proponent of total encryption, because it would allow them to start and stop service remotely, without having to schedule a service call to disconnect service. Cablevision already encrypts its entire lineup in certain areas under a previously-obtained waiver from the FCC. The company said it saved money reducing labor costs associated with service calls to physically connect and disconnect service.

Frontier Communications has found a new way to make a little extra from customers who disconnect their Internet service.

According to a document obtained exclusively by Stop the Cap!, Frontier will charge a $9.99 “Broadband Processing Fee” for new customers shutting off their Internet service starting Nov. 1. Customers that order Internet service from Frontier after Oct. 1 are supposed to be notified about the new fee during a review of their order. Existing customers are not affected.

This fee is above and beyond any early termination fees contract customers may face for ending service before the end of a service contract.

According to Frontier, broadband services subject to the new fee include:

• DSL
• “Simply Broadband” (broadband-only service)
• FiOS Data
• Frontier Satellite Broadband
• Frontier Tandem (VoIP)
• Wi-Fi (Commercial accounts only — basic, sponsored hot spots, etc.)

Seattle residents are on edge thanks to incredibly aggressive Comcast contract workers who refuse to take no for an answer, pounding on doors demanding to be let in, and in some cases making repeated visits, even after police were called.

Valerie Bauman told KING News two men turned up at her apartment Friday flashing cards which they said gave them the right to go where they please.

“They said they were contractors for Comcast and had the authority to be there and showed me this card and I mean, I’ve got a deck of cards, I can pull out the queen but I’m not royalty,” Bauman told the station.

Sam Levine, another Seattle resident said Comcast salespeople pounded on his door demanding to be let in and simply will not take no for an answer.

“It’s not acceptable, it’s not cool, it’s not a way to treat your customers,” Levine said.

Bauman called police because she felt unsafe with the two men, especially after they came back.

Won’t take no for an answer.

“One of them smiled at me and said, ‘Are the police on their way ma’am?’” said Bauman.

Comcast told both customers they were powerless to help because the salesmen were contract workers not directly hired by Comcast and it would be hard to pinpoint who they were.

“You don’t have any right to put somebody in a position where you feel unsafe and threatened in your own home,” said Bauman.

After the media got involved, Steve Kipp, Comcast Washington Region vice president of communications issued this statement:

On behalf of Comcast, I want to offer my apologies to our customers. We are taking these complaints very seriously. As a policy, we do not tolerate overly aggressive, inappropriate behavior from the door to door sales people employed directly by Comcast or by our contractor companies and will take steps to ensure that incidents like this do not happen again. If anyone witnesses unacceptable behavior from any door to door sales person representing Comcast, we encourage you to call 1-800-COMCAST to lodge a complaint.

[flv width=”432″ height=”260″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/KING Seattle Pushy Comcast workers worry Capitol Hill residents 10-8-12.mp4[/flv]

KING in Seattle talks with local residents about Comcast’s highly aggressive sales force that pounds on doors and demands entry to sell cable service.  (2 minutes)