Home » AT&T » Recent Articles:

Chattanoogans Speak Out About Why EPB Fiber Optics is 1st Class Broadband

[flv width=”640″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/EPB Fiber Optics Testimonials 9-11.flv[/flv]

Consumers and businesses across Chattanooga, Tenn. are saying goodbye to Internet Overcharging from AT&T and Comcast, making the switch to EPB Fiber Optics.  While Big Telecom companies claim community-owned broadband is a business failure, see why so many businesses and consumers in southeast Tennessee reject that claim and have made the switch.  Speed that blows Comcast away, prices that deliver a much better value than AT&T, service and support that is fast and reliable, and a community-owned provider that keeps its earnings right at home working for the people of greater Chattanooga.  EPB is one of Stop the Cap!’s most highly-recommended broadband providers.  If you are lucky enough to live or work in their service area, we can’t say enough about EPB, and that’s an unsolicited testimonial from us!  You can call them at (423) 648-1372.

Watch these testimonials from actual customers, sign up, and spread the word.  (10 minutes)

Verizon Wireless Introduces $50 Unlimited Plan… Good on Only Lower End “Feature Phones”

Phillip Dampier September 14, 2011 Consumer News, Verizon, Wireless Broadband 3 Comments

Verizon Wireless has announced a new $50 unlimited talk, text, and web prepaid plan for price sensitive new customers who don’t mind being stuck with a lower-end feature phone.

The new Verizon Unleashed unlimited plan has been test-marketed since April to prepaid customers in southern California and Florida, but will now be available nationwide from Verizon stores, Best Buy, Wal-Mart and Target.

Although existing Verizon Wireless prepaid customers may be able to sign up for the plan on their existing phones, new customers in test markets were limited to a selection of just a handful of “feature phones” that make web use and texting cumbersome:

  • LG Cosmos™ 2 — Now into its second generation, this basic feature phone slightly improved its slide-out keyboard.  The phone was rated “adequate” for an entry-level feature phone, but CNET’s detailed review notes it lacks 3G EV-DO service.  That means you will be web browsing on Verizon’s painfully slow 1xRTT data network.  Verizon has no worries customers using this phone will chew up a lot of wireless data.  Customers rated the build quality as adequate, but found the keys on the first generation of this phone did tend to wear out with a lot of use.  It’s a true “throwaway” phone once the warranty expires.  Repairs always cost more than buying a new phone.  Verizon’s website prices the phone at a stiff $189.99 for month-to-month customers, but it will probably remain priced at around $99.99 for prepaid customers choosing the Unleashed plan.
  • LG Accolade™ — A real workhorse basic phone for Verizon Wireless, the Accolade is much better for making and receiving calls than doing anything with texting or web use.  The phone has no QWERTY keyboard to type on, and no 3G service either, so its usefulness for data and texting is extremely limited.  But it is cheap, routinely selling for under $40.  CNET has a video review.  We suspect this phone will not be major part of the nationwide rollout of Unleashed, as Verizon appears to have discontinued it recently.
  • Pantech Caper — A front facing tiny keyboard features prominently on this phone, which would have been considered cutting edge five years ago.  Now, it’s considered a ho-hum “feature phone” for the non-smartphone crowd.  It received a fair rating from most reviewers, with the biggest complaints coming from unintentional pocket dialing and button pressing, and a lousy built-in camera.  No 3G service.  The Caper also won’t win any awards for its ergonomics.  Verizon Wireless had been selling this phone in test markets for $80 earlier this year.  CNET’s video review is here.

There is a good chance a few different, more current feature phones will be introduced for the Unleashed plan later this week.  But they will all likely dispense with support for 3G service and lack features many customers increasingly seek on smartphones.

Verizon Wireless has traditionally done poorly in the prepaid market, because its plans are considerably more expensive that those offered by competitors, especially T-Mobile and Sprint.  Verizon Wireless had been charging $95 a month for unlimited talk/text prepaid service plus $0.99 per day for web use.  At those prices, Verizon has been losing prepaid customers, now down to 4.4 million.  Many of those customers fled to providers like Sprint’s Virgin Mobile, which saw a 23 percent increase in its customers, which now number 13.8 million.

Verizon’s $50 unlimited plan matches AT&T’s $50 prepaid unlimited GoPhone plan.  Analysts suggest both companies have set prices (and limitations on the phones that work with the plans) at a level that allows them to compete with lower-priced rivals, but does not encourage their contract customers to switch to a cheaper prepaid plan.

For data-hungry smartphone users, there is little here to persuade anyone to downgrade to a $50 prepaid plan.

Frontier’s Internet Service Nightmare on Florida’s Panhandle: 6 Major Outages in 3 Months

Phillip Dampier September 13, 2011 Broadband Speed, Competition, Consumer News, Data Caps, Frontier, Rural Broadband Comments Off on Frontier’s Internet Service Nightmare on Florida’s Panhandle: 6 Major Outages in 3 Months

Frontier Communications customers in North Escambia have spent a very frustrating summer trying to use Frontier’s Internet service.  The phone company has left their Internet customers in Walnut Hill, Bratt, Molino and Atmore (Ala.) offline from at least six major outages since June, often lasting as long as 12 hours at a time.

“This is happening way too often, with no reimbursement for not having the service,” says Frontier customer Susan. “It is crazy to pay as much as we do for dinosaur equipment. I was being charged for High Speed Max for over three years and was actually only getting 756kbps. When we found this out, they only gave me credit for half of what they were overcharging me.”

Frontier Communications blamed AT&T for the latest outage, which lasted nearly eight hours.

Escambia County, Fla.

Karen Miller, spokesperson for Frontier, said the outage occurred when an AT&T fiber line was cut near Bay Minette, interrupting the connection between Atmore and Atlanta.

Miller admitted Frontier has just a single strand of fiber optic cable for their Panhandle customers.  When something happens to that fiber, there is no backup and service goes offline… for everyone.

Without redundancy, Internet customers are at the mercy of AT&T, and any contracting work done between Atlanta and Atmore.  That’s a major problem for some Frontier customers.

“If Atmore and Northwest Florida is managed with only a single cable and the [connection] point of this service is at Bay Minette, Atmore is in bigger trouble than they know,” writes JimD.

Bay Minette is vulnerable to serious Gulf hurricanes.

Customers were also not happy to learn Frontier was largely blaming AT&T, particularly as some customers pay Frontier upwards of $50 a month for less than 1Mbps service that has failed them at least a half-dozen times in the past 90 days.

“Frontier routinely gives high cost deficient service and holds a monopoly on the local market,” writes one local customer. “It is nearly impossible for businesses to find another option. It’s a case of mind over matter: they don’t mind so we don’t matter.”

Miller says Frontier is currently conducting an engineering study to get a backup fiber route from Atmore to Atlanta, but for some customers it is too late.

“We switched to Bright House Networks for both Internet and landline service,” says another customer. “It’s better quality, less expensive and it works. No more Frontier-anything for us.”

Turner Introduces New TV Everywhere App for Everyone But Time Warner Cable Customers

Cable, satellite and telco-TV subscribers around the country can now watch most of the hit shows on Turner’s TBS and TNT Networks for free, assuming two things are true:

  1. You pay for a package of television channels from Comcast, DirecTV, Dish Network, Cox Communications, Cablevision Systems, Suddenlink Communications, Verizon FiOS, or AT&T U-verse.
  2. You are not a Time Warner Cable subscriber.

The new TV Everywhere app, available for phones and tablets, comes free of charge.  Once authenticated as a legitimate pay television subscriber, users can watch hit series and some older shows from both networks.

Once again, Time Warner customers are on the outside, looking in.  The nation’s second biggest cable operator has not been a TV Everywhere team player, preferring to launch its own live streaming iPad application and steering clear, so far, from on-demand, online viewing from most of its partner networks, including HBO.  Time Warner Cable executives have, in the past, alluded to licensing fees and user authentication complications for not launching TV Everywhere on-demand viewing for its customers, but the company has not explained why it has not signed on for Turner’s app.

TV Everywhere, a concept on the drawing board for almost two years, is an attempt by the pay television industry to lock down online video programming for paying customers, in an effort to slow down “cord cutting” by consumers trying to save money on their cable TV bill.  The concept delivers unlimited access to popular cable programming, but only to those who already pay to subscribe.

Many TV Everywhere projects have been soft-launched without much publicity, but that is not true for Turner’s app.  The network has commissioned several clever advertisements featuring various network stars promoting the app, and now Turner wants to educate consumers about how to use it to watch shows online.

The most complicated part of the process is getting “authenticated” by the application for authorized viewing.  Some cable companies like Time Warner want customers to launch access to TV Everywhere programming from the cable company’s website, where customers have already been authenticated when they sign up for an online account.  Other companies are using customer account numbers, PIN codes, or passwords printed on monthly bills to let customers register directly for access.  When the application matches a customer account number or PIN code, the content becomes accessible.  It is typically a one-time-only hassle, but there have been cases where customers have had to grab a recent bill more than once to re-authenticate themselves.

Not every show will be made available for online viewing.  Many rerun off-network shows shown on TNT and TBS don’t currently include streaming rights.  So while users can watch past episodes of Conan O’Brien, they’re out of luck if they want to watch Friends.

[flv width=”640″ height=”500″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Turner App.flv[/flv]

Watch a selection of spots from the new advertising campaign for Turner’s ‘TV Everywhere’ app.  (4 minutes)

Regarding the Chicago Tribune’s Clueless Editorial Advocating the AT&T/T-Mobile Merger…

The Chicago Tribune‘s advocacy for the merger of AT&T and T-Mobile leaves the facts far behind, and raises questions about just how much the newspaper understands about telecommunications company mergers.

In this morning’s edition, the newspaper claims efforts by the Justice Department to block the merger will “slow [wireless] progress to a crawl.” That’s a half-baked conclusion, considering AT&T’s own accidentally-public internal documents reveal a willingness to spend $39 billion on a merger while balking at spending one-tenth of that amount to upgrade its own 4G network.  The injury to rural America the Tribune fears most was self-inflicted by AT&T even before the merger was announced.

Access to advanced wireless Internet is the key. A merger of AT&T and T-Mobile would bring an under-served swath of America into the 21st century of high-speed mobile data communication. Much like the rural electrification movement of the 1930s, this deal offers a chance for many Americans to leap ahead technologically.

If Justice gets its way, progress will slow to a crawl. We think the FCC should approve the merger after obtaining appropriate concessions — and Justice should settle its case sooner, not later. Dragging out this proceeding stands to hurt a nation that can ill afford more damage from a government too often hostile to business interests.

Evidently the editorial writers at the Tribune have been drinking AT&T’s Kool-Aid.  There is more to see here than AT&T’s advocacy kit, if one is willing to look beyond lucrative, saturation advertising campaigns and lobbying.

The government got the bright idea of helping wire rural America for electricity when commercial providers refused.

AT&T’s own merger announcement spoke glowingly of the “increased efficiencies” a more concentrated wireless marketplace will deliver, but said very little to investors about T-Mobile’s cellular network being the key to unlock rural wireless.  The reason is simple: T-Mobile doesn’t have a rural wireless network.  In fact, T-Mobile’s long-standing focus on urban markets means considerable duplication of resources in medium and large cities — resources that might help reduce the number of dropped calls in cities like New York, Chicago or San Francisco, but hardly a boon for residents of Ottumwa, Iowa, who barely get a signal today from AT&T, much less T-Mobile.

We agree with the Tribune editors when they say improved advanced wireless Internet is important to rural America. But nothing within AT&T’s massive document dump guarantees rural 4G service, especially after four national companies judged it didn’t make much business sense.  Three national carriers hardly strengthens the case.  In fact, investors will expect AT&T to use precisely the same Return on Investment-formulas that have always ruled rural 4G wireless out of bounds.

The Tribune forgets rural electrification came in spite of private power companies, who viciously opposed government electrification projects (unless they benefited from them).  The reason rural Americans went without electrical service until the late 1930s was the same reason rural Iowa doesn’t have lightning-fast 4G service — it doesn’t make much business sense to provide it.

When President Franklin D. Roosevelt declared electricity an essential utility service every American should be able to access at a fair price, government resources picked up where Wall Street left off — financing electric generation projects and encouraging the development of power cooperatives and municipal utilities. It often took more than 20 years to pay off the costs of the infrastructure — at a price (and wait) unwilling to be covered by giant power companies like Chicago’s Commonwealth Edison at the time.

It’s much the same story for AT&T today.  The enormous telecommunications company was provided an estimate of $4 billion to upgrade its network to 4G service nationwide.  Company executives refused, suggesting the time required to recoup that investment was too far out for their tastes.  But a $39 billion dollar merger with T-Mobile, despite the much higher price tag, delivers immediate benefits they can take to the bank: decreased competition and pricing innovation.  T-Mobile delivers both on its own, and even in fourth place influenced the service plans and pricing at other wireless carriers.  By eliminating that competition, the pressure to reduce prices or enhance service is diminished.  The ability to raise prices, or reduce the number of services, is enhanced.

Astonishingly, the Tribune writers completely ignore the biggest reason why AT&T cannot afford to slow progress to a crawl.  Its name is Verizon Wireless, and AT&T ignores its own network at its peril.  That’s why competition, even from America’s #4 carrier, remains critically important.

While the Chicago Tribune seems comfortable rallying for the cause of one of their advertisers — a multi-billion dollar corporation it sees as a victim of government “anti-business” hostility, we’re more concerned about protecting American wireless consumers from the results of AT&T’s efforts to cut competition (and consumer-friendly services) to a bare minimum.  AT&T’s carrot is the illusory promise of enhanced wireless service in rural communities the company routinely ignores.  The Justice Department, thankfully, prefers the stick — recognizing an anti-competitive, anti-trust feeding frenzy when it sees one, and is correct when it gives it a good whack.

Search This Site:

Contributions:

Recent Comments:

Your Account:

Stop the Cap!