AT&T customers in western Colorado are furious at AT&T for suggesting expensive phone upgrades were required to get back cell phone service that actually went out because of a cell tower failure.

Stop the Cap! first reported this story earlier this week, when Grand Valley customers discovered their cell phone service (and 2G data services) suddenly stopped working last weekend.  Customers lined up inside and outside the doors of AT&T stores in the Grand Junction area to get an explanation for the service disruption, only to be told their 2G data service had been discontinued and they’ll need to buy new phones to get their service restored.

An undisclosed number of customers signed new two year contracts and upgraded to smartphones — which carry a considerably upgraded price to cover the mandatory data plan that accompanies them.

But now AT&T says a cell tower failure was responsible for customers losing access to voice calling, and any disruption to 2G service will be temporary until the company completes shifting that data service to a different frequency band.

Now customers are complaining they were defrauded by AT&T store employees who emphatically told them no cell service outage existed in the area.

“Is that fraud,” AT&T customer Bill Somerville asked KJCT-TV. “Are they taking advantage of people by not giving them the information they should have gotten?”

“They categorically lied about the status of the service and [forced] people into a new contract and new equipment,” said AT&T customer Jay Anderson.

“If that is customer care, that’s not the customer care I’d like to have,” added Somerville.

[flv width=”360″ height=”290″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/KJCT Grand Junction ATT Customers Without Service And Definite Answers 9-21-11.mp4[/flv]

KJCT-TV talked to more angry customers who feel AT&T mislead them into signing expensive new two year contracts for new phones when a tower outage actually was responsible for the disrupted service.  (3 minutes)

In a blow to their image, Texas-based AT&T has lost a major wireless customer to one of their competitors with the announcement the city of Houston is dumping the wireless company in favor of Sprint.

That the city government has been a long-time AT&T customer is an understatement — they have been with AT&T since the 1980s, when the concept of a cell phone was a brick-sized behemoth that could fit in a briefcase, but never a pocket.

But now the city has had enough of AT&T’s high prices, dropped calls, and otherwise bad service and are taking $15 million worth of their business to Kansas City-based Sprint.

“Sprint delivered for Houston on price, support, products and solutions,” said Mayor Annise Parker in a statement. “Their sales and support organizations delivered a proposal that made sense and proved the most cost effective for our city. Over the life of the contract we expect Sprint to save the city’s taxpayers nearly $3 million due to the company’s efficiency.”

Sprint will be supplying Houston government workers with more than 6,000 different wireless devices, ranging from cell phones to tablets, for both civil servants and emergency communications.

Divided Loyalties? -- Mayor John Marks

A growing scandal involving AT&T and the mayor of the state capital of Florida has further exposed the link between AT&T’s pay-for-play public policy agenda and the politicians willing to act as puppets for the phone company’s interests.

Tallahassee Mayor John Marks strongly promoted an Atlanta nonprofit group to participate in a $1.6 million dollar federal broadband grant to expand Internet access to the urban poor and train disadvantaged citizens to navigate the online world, without disclosing he was a paid adviser to the group.

What the rest of the city never knew is that the Alliance for Digital Equality (ADE) is little more than an AT&T astroturf effort — a front group almost entirely funded by AT&T that actually did almost nothing to bring Internet access to anyone.

The Alliance for Digital Equality, a group supposedly focused on erasing the digital divide, spends an inordinate amount of time running radio ads under the alias of “Alliance for Equal Access” for competition in cable-TV… when that competition comes from AT&T U-verse. Listen to two radio commercials run in Georgia and Tennessee, both AT&T service areas, promoting legislation that was introduced at the behest of AT&T and promoted by ADE. (2 minutes)
You must remain on this page to hear the clip, or you can download the clip and listen later.

In fact, an investigation by a Tallahassee newspaper reviewing the group’s federal tax returns found four of every five dollars spent by ADE went to board members, consultants, lawyers, and media companies for the purpose of promoting AT&T’s agenda against Net Neutrality and for the company’s various business interests:

Marks also didn’t mention when he brought ADE to the City Commission in September 2010 that AT&T has been paying him since the early 1990s as a lawyer and consultant.

Tax returns for ADE show it got $7.36 million from AT&T from 2007 through 2009. Among its expenses, it spent $2.7 million on consulting and legal fees, $1.2 million on travel, $1.1 million on media and communications and $931,509 in pay to officers and board of advisers members.

ADE spent nothing on projects to provide Internet access to underserved areas from 2007-09. It wasn’t created to do so. The group’s mission, as reported to the IRS, was to advocate “technology inflows to underserved communities by interacting with elected officials, policymakers at all levels of government and private sectors.”

In those interactions, ADE presented the same message as AT&T in opposition to greater price regulation of the Internet.

View the 2007, 2008, and 2009 tax returns for the Alliance for Digital Equality yourself.

Some of ADE’s officers and board members are familiar to Stop the Cap! readers as loyal AT&T advocates.  Even worse, many of them routinely play the “race card” whenever AT&T’s agenda is threatened.  Take Shirley Franklin.  She is the former mayor of Atlanta, but these days her biggest constituent is AT&T.  Last August, Franklin helped lead an attack against Free Press, a consumer advocacy group, that she said “target[ed] women, African-Americans and other minorities” after the group complained about the ties between several civil and minority rights organizations and AT&T.

ADE unsurprisingly is also all-for the merger of AT&T and T-Mobile

Julius Hollis, chairman and founder of the Alliance for Digital Equality, was even more strident.

“I am extremely disappointed in the Free Press, not only in its policies and tactics that they are attempting deploy in their strategy paper, but equally disturbing are its attempts to portray the African-American and Latino consumers as expendable in their efforts to promote Net Neutrality,” Hollis said last year. “In my opinion, this is going back to the tactics that were used in the Jim Crow era by segregationists. It’s no better than what was used in the Willie Horton playbook by Lee Atwater who, upon his deathbed, asked for forgiveness for using such political behavior tactics.”

Stop the Cap! exposed ADE ourselves as a “dollar-a-holler” advocate in August 2010 when we learned the majority of the group’s funds came from AT&T.

Anne Landman, managing editor of the Center for Media and Democracy, told the Tallahassee Democrat the purpose of groups almost entirely sponsored by a single corporate interest is to obfuscate the messenger. “It’s a nontransparent way of operating,” she said. “People don’t know who’s behind these efforts. So it’s fake, and it’s phony, and it gives people wrong information. It’s designed to purposely fool people.”

The newspaper spent months trying to track down financial reports, tax filings, and other documentation about the group, and ran into repeated resistance.  At one point, written requests sent to the group’s headquarters in Atlanta were returned unopened and marked “refused.”

ADE’s corporate influence is bad enough, but when the group uses race, gender, and economic cards to attack real public interest groups, it raises eyebrows, particularly when the group doing the attacking is financed by a corporate entity.  The Black Agenda Report, a website that can hardly be accused of racism, called out Franklin and the organization she represents.

The newspaper’s investigation also found all of ADE’s employees were actually independent contractors.  Non-profit group experts claim the entire structure of ADE is unusual because it funnels all of its money through contractors.

Tallahassee Mayor John Marks is apparently one of them, having received $86,000 as a member of ADE’s board of advisers in addition to AT&T paying him directly as a lawyer and consultant.

With the recent revelations, Tallahassee’s broadband grant is now in ruins and will be returned, unspent.  Marks is reportedly under investigation by the FBI for potential corruption.  And another AT&T astroturf effort has been exposed and has blown up in the company’s face.

[flv]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/WCTV Tallahassee Mayor Under Fire Over ATT-ADE Ethics Scandal 3-29-11 – 9-15-11.flv[/flv]

Stop the Cap! has compiled almost a year of coverage of the burgeoning scandal in the Tallahassee mayor’s office, courtesy of WCTV-TV, which has doggedly pursued the scandal with assistance from its news partner Tallahassee Reports.  (10 minutes)

Verizon Communications was supposed to have a “neutral” position regarding the takeover bid by AT&T to absorb T-Mobile, but Lowell McAdam, CEO could sit on his hands no longer, and told the Wall Street Journal “the match had to occur” and cautioned if the government blocks the merger, it needs to cough up more spectrum for wireless companies like his, and fast.

McAdam made those comments earlier today at an investor conference on the afternoon of the first court hearing on the Department of Justice lawsuit to derail the $39 billion deal.

My Breakfast With Julius

McAdam has the luxury of getting his point across directly with Washington’s movers and shakers.  While consumers continue to clamor in overwhelming numbers against the idea of T-Mobile being absorbed into a super-sized AT&T, McAdam enjoyed breakfast with Federal Communications Commission chairman Julius Genachowski.

Consumers don't have the luxury of breakfast with the chairman of the FCC

“I have taken the position that the AT&T merger with T-Mobile was kind of like gravity,” Mr. McAdam said. “It had to occur, because you had a company with a T-Mobile that had the spectrum but didn’t have the capital to build it out. AT&T needed the spectrum, they didn’t have it in order to take care of their customers, and so that match had to occur.”

“So in my discussions with the FCC and folks on the Hill, if we want to stop or if the government wants to stop a merger like that, they need to then step up and say, this is how we are going to get spectrum in the hands of people,” he said.

Mr. McAdam said that can be done through secondary auctions, incentive options or freeing up additional spectrum. He said the wireless industry needs more spectrum, and the FCC will be “very focused on delivering that.”

McAdam didn’t say T-Mobile could have always sold its unwanted spectrum to AT&T instead of entering into a $39 billion dollar merger deal that will further reduce wireless consumers’ choice in carriers.

Unfortunately, consumers bringing delicious breakfast pastries and a point of view about wireless consolidation are unlikely to find themselves sharing a cup of joe with the head of the FCC.  They can’t even be trusted with the FCC Chairman’s direct phone number, which executives at AT&T and Verizon both have.

No Second Cup of Coffee for Jittery Investors

Investors may not want a cup of coffee themselves, considering the jittery reception some have had to news Verizon would forgo a recurring dividend and spend money at wireless spectrum auctions instead.

“When it makes sense, we’ll have a dividend,” he said. “When there’s a better first use for those dollars, we’ll do that with it, and the dividend will either be on a hiatus or less.”

If you are a current AT&T DSL customer, there is no reason you should be paying regular prices for their usage-capped broadband.  With the implementation of their 150GB usage cap on DSL (250GB on U-verse), now is a good time to call AT&T and tell them you are upset they reduced the value of your account with a usage limit.  But hint you may be persuaded to stay if you can sign up for the same deal some of your friends are getting.

At present, those deals include:

1. One year of AT&T DSL Elite service (typically 6Mbps) for $19.95-24.95 a month (this is the easiest deal to get and renew, even if you already took advantage of it — start by asking for the lowest price, but be willing to agree to the higher price if they won’t grant your first request — the price varies in different regions.)
2. One year of AT&T DSL Pro service (typically 3Mbps) for $14.95 a month;
3. One year of AT&T U-verse 12Mbps broadband for $25 a month.

These promotions should work for “naked DSL” (broadband service only) and for current customers who already subscribe to AT&T service.

You can get these offers by calling AT&T Retentions Department directly at:

• Midwest: 1-866-918-8377
• Southwest: 1-888-387-6270
• California: 1-877-377-0415
• Connecticut: 1-877-235-2293

If your promotion is about to expire, call and ask them to extend it.  They usually will.