Phillip Dampier

Time Warner Cable has completed their DOCSIS 3 upgrade of the Rochester/Finger Lakes region and their new Road Runner Extreme and Wideband services should now be available throughout the region.  Stop the Cap! HQ will receive its upgrade to Road Runner Extreme late this afternoon, primarily for the 5Mbps upstream speed, which will make uploading content to our servers much easier and more efficient.

The cable company is insistent on their installation fee, which amounts to nearly $68 (unjustified in my personal opinion).  Some details for our local readers:

• Customers in the Rochester & Finger Lakes region almost never own their own cable modems — they are provided with Road Runner at no extra charge;
• Upgrading to Extreme or Wideband will mean either a modem swap or a second piece of equipment if you have Time Warner phone service.  The new equipment includes a built-in wireless router;
• You are not obligated to use the cable company’s equipment as your primary router if you favor using your own existing router;
• As part of the installation fee, you have a right to insist they spend the time to configure service the way you want it, especially if you want to continue using your own router;
• It is also a good time to ask them to check signal levels and clean up any wiring or service issues.  Western New York has endured a record-breaking deluge of rain this spring, and degraded outdoor wiring can create havoc for broadband and cable service.
• If you are currently receiving a promotion such as free or discounted Road Runner Turbo service, you will lose the value of that promotion when you upgrade service and will pay full price going forward.

Beyond the installation fee, Road Runner Extreme (30/5Mbps) costs $20 more than Road Runner Standard (10/1Mbps) service.  Road Runner Wideband (50/5Mbps) is priced at $99 a month, but is a much better value bundled with the cable company’s Signature Home ($199) package, which includes complete packages of digital cable, “digital phone,” and broadband service.  For most in the Rochester/Finger Lakes area, the only alternative is Frontier Communications’ DSL combined with an unlimited calling plan and satellite television or a similar package from Verizon or much smaller Windstream.  Verizon’s fiber to the home service FiOS is not available anywhere in this region.

A Time Warner Cable customer in Whitefield, Maine has filed a complaint with the state’s Attorney General charging the cable company is selling customers a product it cannot deliver in parts of the state, and bills customers for it anyway.

The broadband add-on, Road Runner Turbo, is supposed to provide customers with a faster broadband experience, but in communities up and down Maine, it apparently does not, and has not for nearly three years.

The cable company hotly disputes the accusation, made by Michael Panosian, that the company has been overbilling him $10 a month for three years.

Andrew Russell, a Time Warner Cable spokesman, told the Kennebec Journal that the company does not charge for services it cannot provide.

But the cable company’s argument lost a considerable amount of credibility when evidence emerged Time Warner has admitted the problem, and quietly agreed to reimburse Panosian $328.35 for Road Runner Turbo service all the way back to June 2008.

The admission has also become a point of interest inside the Attorney General’s Consumer Protection Division, which is engaged in discussions with Panosian and the cable company.

Despite Russell’s denials, Time Warner officials admitted there was a problem and told state officials it would be corrected sometime this month.

Panosian thinks the cable company is ripping off Maine residents pitching faster Internet it does not deliver.

Panosian said a Time Warner Cable technician told him Turbo is not available in his area and possibly others in Maine.

“From what the tech told me, it isn’t just Whitefield,” Panosian said. “I went down (to Time Warner’s Augusta office) and talked to them about it, and they’re aware of it.  I said, ‘If you’re aware, why are you taking everybody’s money?’  If they don’t charge for services they don’t provide, why are they reimbursing me?”

Stop the Cap! reader Frederick, who lives in nearby Windsor and shared the story with us, says it is a classic case of Time Warner Cable overselling its service.

“The truth here is actually in the middle; Time Warner actually does deliver a Turbo service in Maine, it’s just that their network is so overcongested, nobody benefits from it during peak usage times,” Frederick reports.  “They have too many customers trying to share the Internet, and Turbo cannot help resolve this problem, only upgrades can.”

Frederick reports he identified the source of the problem running a series of speed tests on his Time Warner Cable connection.  He subscribes to Road Runner Turbo himself.

“The truth is revealed when you examine the upload speed of your connection,” he says. “Even when the network is busy, I can still get nearly 1Mbps upload speeds, a sure sign Turbo is on my account.”

The download speeds are another matter.

“In Windsor during peak usage times, you will easily see even a Turbo connection drop to 5Mbps in download speeds, only returning to normal after people go to bed,” he says.  “That means Time Warner has oversold their network, putting too many people on the same ‘node,’ one inadequate in capacity.”

Frederick suspects the “fix” Time Warner refers to is an upgrade to DOCSIS 3 technology.

“Maine is treated like a backwater by Time Warner Cable,” Frederick charges.  “What other cities got a year ago we just start to receive, so instead of performing periodic upgrades, they are just waiting for DOCSIS 3 to solve all of their problems.”

Frederick thinks customers should be compensated for the poor service, and is considering demanding a refund himself.

“I pay more than $50 a month for my broadband service with Turbo and they deliver what their ads claim only when I’m asleep or at work.”

Gov. Purdue

If North Carolina Gov. Bev Purdue does not veto H.129, the cable industry-written bill to throw up roadblocks for community broadband, it will automatically become law at midnight tonight.

We need every North Carolinian on the phone this afternoon, even if you called her office before. Let the governor know that you expect her to veto this anti-consumer, anti-jobs, anti-development bill that will keep broadband out of rural areas and competition at bay.  Let them know you cannot be fooled: doing nothing is the same as signing it into law as far as you are concerned.

The Governor’s Phone Number: +1 919 733 2391

The open source community has joined the fight.  Community Broadband Networks shares the open letter sent to the governor, published on Rootstrikers.org, a community dedicated to fighting all the corruption in politics that allows massive companies like Time Warner Cable to buy legislation:

Dear Governor Perdue,

We are strong supporters of your leadership and your campaign, and we would like to be heard on the important issue of community broadband. I know you are not afraid to use your veto pen, and so I ask you to veto H129, a bill that will take the future away from North Carolina and put it into the pockets of cable company monopolists.

On Sunday May 15th you may have read about our latest investment in North Carolina, Manifold Recording. This was the feature story in the Arts & Living section, and the top right-hand text box on the front page. One of the most difficult and expensive line-items in this multi-million dollar project was securing a broadband link to the site in rural Chatham County. I spent more than two years begging Time Warner to sell me a service that costs 50x more than it should, and that’s after I agreed to pay 100% of the installation costs for more than a mile of fiber. As part of a revised Conditional Use Permit (approved last night), I presented to the Commissioners and the Planning Board of Chatham County data on the economic investment I made, and the fact that according to the statistics from the Rural Broadband Coalition, that such an investment was worth about $300,000 to the 100+ neighbors who live along the new fiber link that I paid for.

Such heroics should not be necessary, nor should they be so costly.

I spent 10 years in Silicon Valley, and I know how quick they are to adopt new technologies that help people start and grow businesses. Manifold Recording would have remained a pipe-dream without broadband. But not everybody can afford to pay $1000/month for the slowest class of fiber broadband. Community broadband initiatives reach more people faster, at lower costs, leading to better economic development. Take it from me: had I been able to spend the time and money on community broadband that I spent in my commercial negotiations, there would be more jobs in Chatham County today.

For more information, which I strongly encourage you to have someone on staff research, please review https://www.rootstrikers.org/#!/story/community-broadband/. There, you will see that “as goes North Carolina, so goes the nation.” We cannot afford to ruin either our own prospects for an economic recovery led by new technologies and new business nor the prospects for an America recovery.

Homes and businesses across Singapore are rapidly being wired with fiber to the home broadband service as part of the country’s Next Generation Nationwide Broadband Network.

Under the Intelligent National 2015 Master Plan, the Infocomm Development Authority of Singapore (IDA) has specified fiber broadband as the only technology capable of meeting the country’s requirement that all homes, offices, and schools have a minimum capacity of 1 Gigabit per second broadband no later than 2015.

Government officials have declared Gigabit broadband “a national priority” to keep Singapore a world leader in high tech business, medical care, and innovative education.  The country considers older broadband standards, including ADSL, cable broadband, and wireless service inadequate or outdated, and began installing fiber optic cables in 2009.

Singapore’s advanced fiber network is a public-private partnership between four partners – Axia NetMedia (Axia), Singapore Telecommunications (SingTel), Singapore Press Holdings (SPH) and SP Telecommunications (SPT).  Government policy has helped reduce red tape and the country’s largest telecommunications companies are working together to build a single fiber platform on which various services can deliver what they call “a richer broadband experience with more choices at more affordable prices.”

Residents and businesses are being encouraged to participate with incentives like free installation, which represents a savings of $300 or more over regular installation costs.  A third-party company, OpenNet, has been contracted to handle wiring, installation, and maintenance of the fiber network.

Once installed, customers can choose any provider they like to establish service.  One of the country’s largest — SingTel, is already selling access at speeds currently up to 150Mbps:

Once the country’s fiber network is firmly established across the entire country, speeds will be increased.  Singapore has solved the domestic broadband speed problem, but like other countries in and around the South Pacific, international capacity remains constrained, and so are broadband speeds for international destinations.  But several undersea fiber projects are expected to vastly expand capacity within five years, allowing providers to eventually lift speed caps.

While many of Singapore’s residents live in multi-dwelling units like apartments and condominiums, many others live in individual homes.  Singapore decided fiber access must be ubiquitous, so coverage will extend to all types of buildings.

[flv width=”640″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/OpenNet Overview Singapore 5-2011.flv[/flv]

This video contains an overview of Singapore’s fiber network, how it will be installed, what services it brings, and how it is being marketed across the country.  (14 minutes)

At least 41 percent of West Virginian economic development professionals responding in a new survey rate their area’s existing broadband service as “not very good,” a result that could have profound implications for high tech economic development in the state because of poor quality business broadband service.

Some of the results of the survey, conducted by Internet Service Provider Citynet:

• 77% said government involvement in steering broadband policy was “very important.”
• 78% believe modern, reasonably priced broadband Internet infrastructure is “extremely important” or “very important” in competing against other locations for jobs.
• On a 10-point scale, broadband Internet infrastructure (8.56) rates as slightly more important than road improvements (8.26) and water infrastructure (8.26).

“Seventy-eight percent of respondents say it has been their experience that businesses considering locating in their areas place high priority on access to affordable, high-speed Internet when evaluating site selections,” said Jim Martin, president and chief executive officer of Citynet. “And 66 percent say cost and capacity of broadband service are factors more than half of the time when discussing new business prospects.”

Some participants in the survey said they are losing business prospects in part due to the lack of broadband capacity, its speed or cost. Most of the professionals said they were “very familiar” or “somewhat familiar” with broadband expansion programs, such as middle-mile infrastructure, being implemented in adjoining states.

In West Virginia, most broadband expansion is being done by “last-mile” service provider Frontier Communications, which took over most of the state’s landlines from Verizon.  For most homes and businesses outside of areas where cable companies compete, Frontier provides DSL broadband service ranging from 1-3Mbps in smaller communities, perhaps 7Mbps or slightly better in larger cities.

West Virginia has proved to be one of the least impressive states for broadband owing to its terrain and large number of rural communities, providing few incentives for robust competition.  That has meant slow speed service at high prices.

Survey respondents were less than impressed:

• “I have a project pending [and] will probably lose it based on costs of broadband.”
• “The lack of high speed service in the rural areas totally extinguishes the possibility of new small business start-ups.”
• “Prospects don’t look here because of the lack of high speed, affordable, reliable broadband…. Current speeds of up to 3 mb while may be suitable for residential use are not suitable for business.”
• “Not only do too many areas still not have broadband, but too many places where people live do not have it and that affects the quality of life issue when attracting a prospect to live, work and play in WV.”
• “We were looking at a possible location of a data center and the lack of affordable, large capacity broadband was a deciding factor in them not locating in WV.”
• “We need the middle-mile and trunk-line services in West Virginia to remain competitive for many of today’s industries. What good is it if we get high-speed to every place in West Virginia, when we can only reach each other and do not have the facilities to get out of the state and into the major lines?”
• “[We] lost a company that looked at an existing building located in an area that doesn’t have high-speed access. They ended up locating in another area.”
• “You are not in the game without it.”
• “What are we waiting for?”

Citynet has a dog in this fight.  Martin has tangled with Frontier Communications in the past year over broadband stimulus funding and where taxpayer dollars are being spent in the state.  While Frontier has touted “fiber projects” in West Virginia, those are primarily directed at increasing capacity for Frontier’s middle-mile network between its telephone exchanges, in hopes of expanding DSL further out into rural areas.  The company is also trying to address congestion issues that have grown since buying out Verizon’s landline-based broadband business.

Martin has criticized state officials for supporting Frontier’s efforts because the company will end up owning and controlling the network built, in part, from taxpayer dollars.

Stop the Cap! hears regularly from ordinary consumers in the state who are dissatisfied with their broadband choices, especially when they come from just a single provider — Frontier.  Slow speeds, poor service, and repeated service outages have been documented here and by the state’s local media.  Some outages are attributable to Verizon’s poor quality infrastructure (now owned by Frontier), others to Frontier’s unwillingness to replace that infrastructure — instead choosing to repair it, even if further outages occur later.