AT&T 3G MicroCell

AT&T has lost another customer.

PC World‘s Tony Bradley noticed reception on AT&T’s network in suburban Houston has been losing bars in more places than it has maintained over the last few years.

“[…] for reasons unknown to me the AT&T network in my area has been getting steadily worse. There have been a couple of weak spots in the same location for years. Rather than improving and eliminating those weak spots, the weak spots became dead zones…and then proliferated.

I don’t live in the boonies. I live in suburban Houston in a community that is very near a major highway, and yet there are four or five areas with literally no service. I could almost understand if the signal decreased, or if it switched from 3G to the older Edge network in places, but in 2012 in an affluent suburb near a highway there is no excuse for a company like AT&T to have any area where my phone literally displays “No Service”.

Even with the growing dead zone epidemic, I was still reluctant to switch. I maintained that the grass is always greener, and that I was better off to stick with the devil I know. That is, until I moved.

I only moved four miles, and I am still in the same community I was in before. However, in my new house the AT&T signal is too flaky and unreliable. I have to walk to special places in my house to get a workable signal, and even then I am told constantly that I am “breaking up” by the person on the other end of the line. I often miss calls because there is no signal and my phone doesn’t even ring. I don’t realize I even had a call until I receive the voicemail.”

AT&T’s response to these kinds of reception problems is to suggest customers purchase one of their 3G MicroCell units, which delivers a wireless signal inside your home or business connected through your broadband account.  But Bradley took exception that AT&T would charge him $200 (negotiated down to $100) and a monthly service fee just to mitigate the company’s own reception problems.  AT&T has since lost Bradley as a long-lasting customer — he took his business to Verizon Wireless, which offers better reception in his neighborhood.

The columnist cannot understand why AT&T would treat a long-term customer so poorly.

“AT&T could have kept me happy, but chose to let me leave instead,” Bradley writes.  “So, let me get this straight. AT&T isn’t capable of delivering the service I am already paying for, and the proposed solution is that I spend $200 (or $100 after a lengthy and heated debate), plus additional money every month for the privilege of routing my calls over the broadband Internet service I am also paying for? That was really the last straw for me with AT&T.”

A coalition of high tech companies including Google and Alcatel-Lucent are warning South Carolina legislators they are playing with future high tech jobs and will stifle the state’s digital economy if they grant the request of large phone and cable companies to make it difficult, if not impossible for community-owned broadband to compete.  Alcatel-Lucent, American Public Power Association, Atlantic Engineering, Fiber to the Home Council, Google, OnTrac, Southeast Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors, Telecommunications Industry Association, and the Utilities Telecom Council all co-signed the letter addressed to the state’s Senate Judiciary Committee:

Dear Senator McConnell and Members of the Senate Judiciary Committee:

We, the private-sector companies and trade associations listed below, urge you to oppose H.3508 because these bills, on top of South Carolina’s existing barrier to public communications initiatives, codified in SC Code §§ 58-9-2600 et seq., will harm both the public and private sectors, stifle economic growth, prevent the creation or retention of thousands of jobs, hamper work force development and diminish the quality of life in South Carolina. In particular, these bills will hurt the private sector in several ways: by curtailing public-private partnerships, stifling private companies that sell equipment and services to public broadband providers, and impairing educational and occupational opportunities that contribute to a skilled workforce from which businesses across the state will benefit.

Clearwire's coverage map shows no service in South Carolina.

The United States continues to suffer through difficult economic times.  The private sector alone cannot lift the United States out of this crisis.  As a result, federal and state efforts are taking place across the Nation to deploy both private and public broadband infrastructure to stimulate and support economic development and jobs, especially in economically distressed areas.  For example, in South Carolina, Orangeburg and Oconee Counties have received broadband stimulus awards to bring much-needed broadband services and capabilities to communities that the private sector has chosen not to serve adequately.  H.3508, together with SC Code §§ 58-9-2600 et seq., would impose burdensome financial and regulatory requirements that will prevent public broadband providers from building the sorely needed advanced broadband infrastructure that will stimulate local businesses development, foster work force retraining, and boost employment in these economically depressed areas.

Consistent with these expressions of national unity, public entities across America, including South Carolina, are ready, willing, and able to do their share to bring affordable high-capacity broadband connectivity to all Americans. Enactment or retention of direct or effective barriers to community broadband, such as H.3508 and SC Code §§ 58-9-2600 et seq., would be counterproductive to the achievement of these goals.  These measures are also inconsistent with our country’s National Broadband Plan, which recommends that no new barriers be enacted and that existing barriers be removed.

We support strong, fair and open competition to ensure that users can enjoy the widest range of choices and opportunities.  H.3508 is a step in the wrong direction.  South Carolina should be removing barriers to public broadband initiatives rather than establishing new ones, so that high technology companies can spread and prosper into all the communities in this beautiful state.  Please oppose H.3508, repeal SC Code § 58‑9‑2600 et seq., and reject any future measures that could significantly impair municipal broadband deployments or public-private partnerships in South Carolina.

Stop the Cap! earlier noted this legislation is heavily sponsored by AT&T and other telecommunications companies already operating in South Carolina.  Several months ago, we reported on South Carolina’s woeful broadband: A Corridor of Shame, with large sections of the state without anything close to “broadband” service, even as state legislators in 2009 leased away the state’s publicly owned Educational Broadband Service-spectrum to private companies like Clearwire that don’t appear to be delivering any service in South Carolina.

HissyFitWatch: Damn you FCC!

For the first time in a long time, AT&T did not get what it wanted from Washington regulators and legislators. The repercussions of the company’s failure to secure its controversial merger with Deutsche Telekom’s T-Mobile USA has been one HissyFit after another, including the resignation-retirement of Forrest Miller, a 30-year veteran who was the company’s head of corporate strategy and mergers and acquisitions. After heads rolled, there was the small matter of the multi-billion dollar “breakup fee” payable to T-Mobile. Now someone has to pay:  You.

At Stop the Cap!, we scrutinize quarterly conference calls at major telecommunications companies so you don’t have to. We’ve sat through renditions of “we’re sorry” when Charter Communications’ executive management allowed the company to be flushed into bankruptcy, we’ve heard the Excuse-o-Matic from Frontier Communications about why their broadband service is woefully overloaded with promises of better days ahead, and a whole lot of creative spin to emphasize cord-cutting-bad-news at the nation’s largest cable companies isn’t really a problem all — it’s the housing market, it’s the ‘seasonal residences’ or ‘college students going home’ problem… or sunspots.  Who really knows?  It’s definitely not that they’re charging too much.

Whether it has been Time Warner Cable’s Glenn Britt, or Verizon’s Ivan Seidenberg, chief executives always project a cool, calm, steady authority that leaves shareholders and financial analysts with an impression the adults are in charge, even if they tell little white lies to keep the stock price up.

And then there is AT&T’s chief executive — Chairman Emperor Randolph Stephenson, who used the occasion of AT&T’s 4th Quarter earning results conference call to become a spectacle that brought the house down.

As we look ahead, the issue that gives me the most concern, quite frankly, isn’t our ability to execute. The #1 issue for us as we move forward, and for the industry, I believe, it continues to be spectrum. This industry continues to see just explosive mobile broadband growth and is providing one of the few bright spots in the U.S. economy, but I think we all understand this growth cannot continue without more spectrum being cleared and brought to market. And despite all the speeches from the FCC, we’re all still waiting.

He didn’t stop there.  In an impromptu rant, Stephenson lectured Washington from afar, excoriating all-concerned for failing to agree with their multi-million dollar propaganda campaign that merging America’s second and fourth largest wireless carriers in a market with just four national providers was good for consumers and would bring wireless nirvana to the heartland and lower prices for all.  Evidently America was not ready to accept the word of AT&T-compensated telecommunications experts at the NAACP, the Special Dream Farm, the Shreveport-Bossier Rescue Mission and cattle ranchers a combination of T-Mobile’s spectrum and AT&T’s would ease the capacity crunch, bring 4G to Beaver, Oklahoma, and stop driving AT&T customers nuts with dropped calls and reception black holes.

How it usually works in Washington.

AT&T would have gotten away with their merger if it weren’t for those darned kids (consumers), the FCC and Justice Department ruining everything.

“The last significant spectrum auction was nearly 5 years ago now. And this FCC has made it abundantly clear that they’ll not allow significant [mergers and acquisitions] to help bridge their delays in freeing up new spectrum,” Stephenson complained. “So in the absence of auctions, our company and others in the industry have taken the logical step of entering into smaller transactions to acquire the spectrum we need to meet this demand. But even here, we need the FCC’s action and leadership, and unfortunately, even the smallest and most routine spectrum deals are receiving intense scrutiny from this FCC, oftentimes taking up to a year and sometimes longer before these are approved.”

Stephenson ignores the fact the FCC has rubber-stamped a number of wireless mergers over the past several years, which is why consumers no longer buy competitive service from Cingular, Alltel, Dobson Communications, Centennial Wireless, West Virginia Wireless, Unicel, Ramcell, or SureWest Wireless.  All of these former competitors are now a part of the nation’s two largest carriers AT&T and Verizon Wireless.  Even more impressively for the man in full denial, the FCC just quickly and quietly approved AT&T’s spectrum transfer purchase from Qualcomm.

“Now I hope I’m wrong, but it appears the FCC is intent on picking winners and losers rather than letting these markets work,” the chief executive said.

In other words, AT&T’s definition of letting markets “work” means letting them write their own laws governing the pesky concepts of antitrust, monopoly/duopoly market power, anti-competitive activity, etc.  AT&T has no problem picking winners and losers in the community-owned broadband front, lobbying its way through state legislatures trying to block new networks from being built, even while slapping usage limits on their own customers’ DSL and U-verse accounts because of “capacity” concerns.

In the wireless marketplace, Charlie Sheen would declare AT&T “winning,” considering it has achieved 1/3rd of the U.S. wireless market.  It wants more of course, even though Trefis, a market research firm, noted that had the FCC granted Stephenson’s wishes for three national carriers, AT&T, Verizon Wireless and Sprint “will control more than 90% of the U.S. wireless market, resulting in lower competition and higher prices for consumers.”

No problem there.

Stephenson also noted a lot of the company’s close friends were on their side (and handsomely compensated along the way we might add):

A lot of recent comments and speeches about certain members of this FCC suggest that they and not Congress should decide how spectrum auctions are conducted, including who can participate and what the conditions should be for participating. Meanwhile, we pile more and more regulatory uncertainty on top of an industry that is a foundation for a lot of today’s innovation*, making it difficult for all of us to allocate and commit capital. And in this industry, we all know capital investment equals jobs*. So the end result of this is we have a industry that is just really stuck in terms of creating real capacity*.

(*- except when community-based, publicly-owned networks are involved. They must be stopped at all costs.)

No matter that AT&T continues to sit on earlier spectrum acquisitions it continues not to use.  It only grudgingly agreed to roaming agreements with the company it preferred to dismantle altogether: T-Mobile.  In earlier, accidental disclosures, it was clear even before the merger and the newly-reticent FCC, AT&T preferred to raise prices, restrict service, and hang onto its profits instead of sufficiently investing them back into its network.  Verizon Wireless has a 4G network, no dropped-call-syndrome, fewer signal black holes, and no apparent spectrum panic attacks.

Part of Sprint's fact sheet opposing the merger deal.

AT&T bit off more than they could chew through, and now faces the humiliating prospect of paying off its gambling debts.  Only now, AT&T has effectively declared they are not going to pay for their costly mistake. Customers are.

Stephenson: Payback time.

The company introduced new, higher prices for its smartphone data plans this month, and intends to continue to increase prices and crack down on data use with speed throttles in 2012 and blame it on the “spectrum crunch”:

“In a capacity-constrained environment, usage-based data plans, increased pricing, managing the speeds of the highest volume users, these are all logical and necessary steps to manage utilization,” Stephenson said.

But AT&T’s chief executive also told shareholders repeatedly those increased prices were key to boosting company revenue and profits:

“We’ll expand wireless and consolidated margins. We’ll achieve mid-single-digit EPS growth or better. Cash generation continues to look very strong again next year. And given the operational momentum we have in the business, all of this appears very achievable and probably at the conservative end of our expectations.”

AT&T’s chief financial officer John J. Stephens put a spotlight on it:

In 2011, 76% of our revenues came from wireless and wireline data and managed services. That’s up from 68% or more than $10 billion from just 2 years ago. And revenues from these areas grew about $7 billion last year or more than 7% for 2011. We’re confident this mix shift will continue. In fact, in 2012 we expect consolidated revenues to continue to grow, thanks to strength in these growth drivers with little expected lift from the economy.

[…] We also continue to bring more subscribers onto our network with tiered data plans, more than 22 million at the end of the quarter, with most choosing the higher-priced plan. As more of our base moves to tiered plans and as data use increases, we expect our compelling [average revenue per subscriber] growth story to continue.

Phillip "Rural Georgia Isn't On AT&T's Mind" Dampier

Columbia County, Georgia has been talking about fiber optic broadband for two years — two years that the state’s largest phone and cable companies have not stepped up to provide suitable broadband to local schools, residents, and libraries.  In 2010, enough was enough and the county applied for, and won, a $13.5 million Broadband Technology Opportunity Program grant to increase broadband and wireless access to the Internet throughout the area.  Local taxpayers chipped in about $4.5 million in 1-percent sales tax dollars, and in-kind voluntary donations worth $2.3 million fulfilled the grant requirement that local matching funds be provided.

To residents long-suffering with satellite-delivered Internet, usage-capped mobile broadband, spotty DSL service, and frequent outages and slow speeds, a modern fiber network would help 120,000 county residents obtain the kind of broadband service people elsewhere take for granted.  Columbia County’s rural character is evident when you consider it contains only two small incorporated cities and 91 percent of the population lives in unincorporated areas, making the eastern Georgia county an afterthought for big phone and cable companies who see better profits in bigger cities.

Now these companies, with the help of a campaign contribution-gorging state legislator, are intent on stopping projects even in areas they could care less about.

The News-Times captured this image from the groundbreaking ceremony for Columbia County's new fiber network in 2010. Big phone and cable companies would like them to run this picture again at the project's burial.

Columbia County’s local newspaper, the News-Times, is alarmed at the prospect of public tax dollars already spent on the project burned for the benefit of Big Telecom companies:

Republican State Sen. Chip Rogers, fueled by generous contributions from telecommunications companies, has filed a bill in the Georgia Legislature that, he claims, would protect private service providers from unfair competition by government-subsidized broadband systems.

Nonsensically, some in Columbia County welcomed the news as a slap at the county’s government. While we’re on record opposing the concept of the $13.5 million federal grant that allows the county’s entry into broadband, the fact remains that the project already is underway.

That federal program is designed to expand broadband Internet service to rural areas that, because of the up-front infrastructure costs, aren’t deemed profitable by private companies. Our county has plenty of those areas, served at best only by spotty, expensive cellular-based services.

Columbia County’s program wouldn’t compete with private companies. Instead, it uses the federal grant and local sale-tax funding to build that high-speed infrastructure, which private companies can then lease to provide Internet service to underserved areas.

Rather than undercutting local communities and sacrificing rural customers on behalf of the private companies, Rogers ought to look for ways to improve such public-private partnerships. Columbia County taxpayers had better hope so, too, unless they want all the money they’ve spent wiring the county with fiber optic cables to have been wasted.

SB. 313 is just another contract taken out on community-owned broadband networks that could deliver competition (and worse — far better service) to areas of Georgia where even conservative-minded voters wary of spending public money on anything are simply fed up with the status quo.

Columbia County, Georgia

So much for the Columbia County Broadband Network, a 220-mile, county-wide fiber middle mile network that will connect nearly 150 community anchor institutions and enhance health care, public safety, and government services throughout the county. Anchor institutions hoping to be connected at broadband speeds of 100 Mbps to 10 Gbps include K-12 schools, fire and emergency facilities, public libraries, Augusta Technical College, and the Columbia County Health Department. The project also planned to facilitate the creation of a high-capacity data center at the Medical College of Georgia, support a sophisticated county-wide traffic and water control system, and construct five wireless towers to enhance public safety communications as well as improve wireless communications capabilities throughout the region.

If Rogers’ bill passes, the county may have to go back to begging for access from the companies that have repeatedly said it wasn’t worth the investment or their time.

County officials have been more generous, offering all along to share access to the fiber network with the very providers who are seeking to destroy it.  So far, that hasn’t changed any minds.

“If we don’t own it, that means we don’t want you to have it” is standard operating procedure for the state’s phone and cable operators, even in the service areas they routinely ignore, even if it means flushing millions of dollars already spent on new networks down the drain.

That’s money-fueled politics.  State legislators with Big Telecom dollars in their eyes can’t see the 120,000 Columbia County residents waiting years for better broadband.  Perhaps the best way to reach legislators in Atlanta is to condemn them to the same kind of broadband service local residents in Evans, Martinez, and Appling are forced to endure, if they have it at all.

While a downturn economy continues to afflict middle and lower income America, it doesn’t seem to be doing much harm to Time Warner Cable’s profits.

America’s second largest cable operator saw profits jump more than $150 million higher to $564 million last quarter, compared to $392 million at the same time the year before.  Time Warner’s revenue grew by 4% to $5 billion in the fourth quarter alone.  In fact, the company is performing so well, executives announced they would return $3.3 billion in earnings to shareholders through share buybacks and dividend payouts, in addition to the forthcoming $4 billion share repurchase program.  Wall Street liked what they saw, boosting shares 7% after the company posted its quarterly and annual results on its website.

Time Warner’s biggest success story remains its broadband service, which consistently delivers the company new subscribers and has helped offset the loss of video subscribers, numbered at an additional 129,000 who “cut the cord” in the fourth quarter of 2011.

Time Warner Cable earned $1.148 billion in revenue from broadband in the last quarter, an increase of 8.6% over last year.  For 2011, the cable operator earned $4.476 billion selling residential Internet access, also representing an 8.6% growth rate over earnings across 2010.

The company attributed this to “growth in high-speed data subscribers and increases in average revenues per subscriber (due to both price increases and a greater percentage of subscribers purchasing higher-priced tiers of service).”

The increased costs incurred by Time Warner Cable to upgrade and expand their network and cable systems were well offset by the aforementioned price increases and subscriber upgrades.  The company increased capital expenditures to $942 million in the last quarter.  Results over the full year show just a 0.2% overall increase in capital investment, now at $2.937 billion.  System upgrades, Time Warner’s plans to move their systems to all-digital cable television, the ongoing rollout of DOCSIS 3.0, new home security and automation services, and investment in online video and data centers are included in these costs. But a more significant reason for the increase comes from the company’s ongoing expansion into business services, which requires wiring more office buildings for cable.

Britt

Time Warner Cable CEO Glenn Britt led off the conference call with investors with an explanation for the increased expenses.

“We plan to continue our aggressive growth in business services by expanding product offerings, growing our sales force, improving productivity and increasing our serviceable footprint. This means continued investment, both in people and in capital,” Britt said. “Projects include expansion of our content delivery network, which powers our IP video capability, our 2 international headends, completion of DOCSIS 3.0 deployment, and conversion to all-digital in more cities. We expect to be able to accomplish this while maintaining the capital spending of the last 2 years — that is, between $2.9 billion and $3 billion, which represents a continued decline in capital intensity.”

Nothing in Time Warner Cable’s financial disclosures provides any evidence to justify significant changes in their pricing model for broadband, which currently delivers flat rate, unlimited service to customers at different speed rates and price points.  In fact, the company’s investments in DOCSIS 3.0 upgrades, which can support faster broadband speeds and a more even customer experience, have already paid off with subscriber upgrades.

Robert D. Marcus, president and chief operating officer, noted subscribers are increasingly considering faster (and more profitable) broadband tiers.

“Once again, high-speed data net adds over-indexed to our higher-speed tiers,” Marcus noted. “Roughly 3/4 of residential broadband net adds were Turbo or higher. And DOCSIS 3.0 net adds accelerated for the eighth consecutive quarter to an all-time high of 54,000.”

Time Warner’s biggest challenges continue to be the current state of the economy, which has made subscribers much more sensitive to pricing and rate increases, and cord cutting traditional cable television service.

“One group is extremely price-conscious, perhaps due in part to the ongoing economic malaise,” Britt said. “The other group is willing and able to pay for more features and service. We’re going to focus more attention on products and services that best meet each group’s needs rather than pursuing traditional one-size-fits-all solutions.”

That is clearly evident in the company’s bundled service options, including increasingly aggressive discounted pricing for new customers and for those threatening to leave and Time Warner’s super-premium Signature Home service, which delivers super-profits.  Average revenue from Signature Home customers averages $230 a month.  Traditional “triple play” customers who buy phone, Internet, and cable service only bring the cable company an average of $150 a month.

The company’s plans for 2012 do not include a specific statement about implementing an Internet Overcharging scheme like usage billing or usage caps.  But it is unlikely such an announcement would be made explicitly at an earnings announcement.  In the last quarter, Stop the Cap! reported comments from chief financial officer Irene Esteves that the company was still very interested in the concept of selling broadband with usage pricing as a “wonderful hedge” against cord-cutting.

Esteves told a UBS conference she believes usage-based pricing for Time Warner Cable broadband will become a reality sooner or later.  Charging “heavy users” more would already be familiar to consumers used to paying higher prices for heavy use of other services, and she claimed light users would have the option of paying less.

But despite favorable reception to the idea of usage pricing by Wall Street, Esteves acknowledged the company’s past experiments in usage pricing didn’t go as planned, and she suggested the company will introduce usage pricing “the right way rather than quickly.”

Other developments and highlights

• 

  Time Warner faces Verizon's $500 rebate offers in NY City

  Time Warner Beats Up DSL: Time Warner Cable’s most lucrative source for new broadband customers comes at the expense of phone companies still relying on DSL to deliver broadband service.  As DSL speeds have failed to stay competitive with cable broadband, the cable operator has successfully lured price-sensitive DSL customers with attractive ongoing price promotions delivering a year of standard 10/1Mbps cable Internet access for $29.99 a month, often less expensive than the total price of DSL service that frequently delivers slower speeds.

• Stalled Verizon FiOS deployment has limited the amount of competition Time Warner faces from fiber optics to just 12% of the company’s service area.  Where competition does exist, especially in New York State, Time Warner has had to stay aggressive to retain customers with deeply-discounted retention deals to keep up with Verizon’s high value rebate gift cards and new customer offers.  AT&T now provides U-verse competition in about 25% of Time Warner’s service area, but like satellite, AT&T U-verse pricing is less heavily discounted.
• Retention pricing and new customer deals deliver lower prices than ever.  In November, Time Warner started selling a triple play offer for $89.99 a month that includes DVR service and now also includes deep discounts or free 90 day trials of premium movie channels. That is $10 less than the same time last year.
• Premium movie channels continue to take a major hit as subscribers try to reduce their bills, especially after Time Warner began increasing rates on those networks.  HBO now sells for as much as $15 a month in many areas.  Time Warner Cable hopes to ‘revitalize’ premium movie channels with online video services like HBO and Max Go and promotional discounts.
• Long-standing customers of Time Warner’s “triple play” package received a “thank-you gift” — free voice-mail in 2011, something that will continue in 2012.
• Customers signing up for Time Warner’s premium-priced Wideband (50/5Mbps) service ($99/month) are being offered free phone service to sweeten the deal.

What to Expect in 2012

• Time Warner is moving forward to create its own Regional Sports Network for southern California;
• Los Angeles will continue to see large-scale expansion of Time Warner’s growing Wi-Fi network, available for free to premium broadband customers, with thousands of new access points on the way;
• The cable company will introduce Wi-Fi service in other, yet-to-be-announced cities in 2012, with up to 10,000 access points planned.
• Time Warner will be making its “digital phone” product more attractive with lower prices and more features, especially in product bundles, as consumers increasingly discard landlines;
• Expect to see the end of analog cable television in a growing number of Time Warner Cable areas, requiring customers to use new equipment (initially provided free) to continue watching on older televisions and those without existing set top boxes.
• Time Warner will continue to expand its “TV Everywhere” project to include live streaming TV on smartphones, video game consoles, computers, and more.  On-demand programming will be available as well sometime this year across all platforms.
• A nationwide channel re-alignment will move subscribers to consistent channel numbers across the country, in part based on grouping them together into “genres.”  Many areas already have digital cable channels arranged this way, but now they will be consistent from coast-to-coast.
• Time Warner will complete DOCSIS 3 deployment in all areas this year.
• The company is moving to introduce 2-hour service call windows almost everywhere, and 1-hour windows and weekend appointments in some markets.  Several cities now allow customers to select specific times for service appointments.
• Self-install kits will become increasingly available for different products, allowing customers to install equipment themselves;
• Time Warner’s IntelligentHome home security, monitoring, and automation product will expand beyond its launch markets (Syracuse and Rochester, N.Y., Charlotte, N.C. and Los Angeles/Southern Calif.).  The product currently has customers in the thousands, considered relatively small.  But Time Warner has learned subscribers are using the service in surprising ways, which will let them adapt their marketing.  Among the most popular features: remotely watching your pets at home.

Most Memorable Quote: “I think, more than anything else, our pricing strategy is dictated by what the marketplace will bear as opposed to what our underlying cost structure is.” — Robert Marcus, president and chief operating officer, Time Warner Cable