Share and share alike is a concept unfamiliar to Rogers Communications, at least in the eyes of the independent Internet Service Providers who have wholesale bandwidth agreements with eastern Canada’s largest cable operator that are supposed to guarantee speed parity.

The Canadian Network Operators Consortium (CNOC) last week announced it filed a complaint with the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) accusing Rogers of withholding speed increases from independent ISPs.

In 2006, the CRTC made it clear that cable companies must treat its wholesale customers fairly:

The Commission determines that should a cable carrier introduce a speed upgrade to one of its retail internet service offerings with no corresponding price change, it is to issue at the same time, revised [third-party ISP access] tariff pages that match these retail service speed changes with no corresponding price change.

According to CNOC, Rogers wants independent ISPs to pay higher prices for the faster speeds it is providing its own customers for no additional charge.

That leaves providers like TekSavvy at a competitive disadvantage, according to the provider.

Peter Nowak explains Rogers is attempting to hurry independent ISPs to move to “aggregated points of interconnection,” part of the foundation of the CRTC’s earlier decision on usage-based billing. Independent ISPs were given two years to complete the transition and Rogers wants that change to move at faster pace:

Rogers wants indie ISPs to move onto the aggregated method, something it says the CRTC essentially ordered at the conclusion of the big usage-based billing fiasco a year ago. Here’s what a spokesperson told me:

We are not denying TPIAs access to our new speeds provided they have moved to a single point of connection, called an aggregated point of interconnection (POI). As part of the usage based billing rulings in November of last year, TPIAs were given two years to move from a disaggregated POI to an aggregated POI. The sooner this happens, the sooner we can provide those speeds to these third party ISPs.  Rogers will continue to provide access at existing speeds on the old network architecture until November 15, 2013.

The dispute, as usual, boils down to whether or not Rogers’ move can be considered anti-competitive. The small ISPs argue that it is, since Rogers’ own retail customers are getting the benefit of higher speeds without higher prices, yet the indie companies – and their own subscribers by extension – are being expected to pay more.

If it’s uneconomical for the indies to sell the faster speeds, they won’t, in which case the big network owners like Rogers will hold a distinct advantage since internet access is sold largely on speeds. Since they’ll simply perish if they can’t keep pace, the indie ISPs will ultimately have no choice but to accept the higher prices being pushed on them – and that effectively neutralizes the entire point of their existence, which is to provide a competitive check to the big guys.

CNOC has asked the CRTC to make an expedited ruling on the controversy as soon as possible to mitigate competitive damage.

Time Warner Cable has expanded the list of modems approved for customer purchase. Buying your own cable modem will exempt you from the company’s $3.95/month modem rental fee, applicable to all but customers on special promotions or the elite Signature Home tier.

The Motorola SB6121 ($79) is back on the approved list, although customers intending to aggressively upgrade speeds as Time Warner introduces faster tiers may be happier with the Motorola SB6141 ($99), which supports more bonded channels than its lesser counterpart. The models from Netgear and Zoom were undistinguished in customer reviews — the Zoom for a noticeable number of reports complaining about the product’s short longevity and the Netgear for compatibility issues, poor quality control, and irritating customer/technical support.

Stop the Cap! continues to recommend the Motorola SB6141, which delivers top-rated performance and is future-proof with support for up to eight bonded data channels — 300Mbps service. Although still expensive on Amazon.com, increased competition has dramatically cut pricing on eBay at “Buy It Now” prices ranging between $86-100 at time of writing. This means no bidding hassles, no upfront sales tax, and free shipping for most buyers. The Motorola 6141 is what we use here at Stop the Cap!, acquired from an eBay vendor for $99. Now you can do even better.

AT&T’s Supreme Court: senior executives sitting together in judgment of landlines at Wednesday’s analyst conference.

Yesterday, at least a half-dozen AT&T senior executives sat lined up in a perfect row to present Wall Street with the company’s vision for the future.

There were no consumers in attendance, just a group of Wall Street investors and analysts that braved the latest nor’easter to attend.

At issue: what to do about AT&T’s landline network, particularly in rural areas. Earlier this year, AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson, still smarting from a regulatory slap-down of his plan to acquire T-Mobile USA, ranted his disapproval of federal regulators for nixing the deal and then reflected on AT&T’s rural customers who still cannot buy broadband service from AT&T.

One of Stephenson’s strongest arguments in favor of merging with T-Mobile was it would facilitate a rural broadband solution. With that off the table, Stephenson seemed at a loss:

“We have been apprehensive on moving, doing anything on rural access lines because the issue here is, do you have a broadband product for rural America?,” Stephenson said. “And we’ve all been trying to find a broadband solution that was economically viable to get out to rural America and we’re not finding one to be quite candid. That having been set aside, now we’re looking at rural America and asking, what’s the broadband solution? We don’t have one right now.”

Now AT&T claims they do, and miracle of miracles, it turns out they never needed the buyout deal with T-Mobile after all.

AT&T’s solution is good news for urban, suburban, and exurban customers who will benefit from billions in additional investments to beef up the company’s U-verse platform. Those with access to U-verse TV, broadband, and phone service will soon find maximum speeds available up to 75Mbps — important at a time when cable companies are moving to 50-100Mbps premium service tiers. Those without access to U-verse, bypassed by its recently completed initial buildout, now will have a chance to see the service in their communities.

For more exurban and near-rural areas, AT&T has a positive plan to rid customers of the scourge of painfully slow ADSL service, better known simply as “DSL,” which AT&T pitches at speeds typically 10Mbps or less. In more rural areas, it is often much less.

By using additional fiber and using D-SLAM technology to reduce the amount of copper wiring between the phone company and you, AT&T’s IPDSLAM service will dramatically improve speeds for customers languishing with 3Mbps service to upwards of 45Mbps. But for now, AT&T won’t roll this out as a full-scale U-verse service. Because maximum speeds are lower and network variability is expected to be greater, AT&T will instead pitch this as a broadband and landline phone service package. Customers will be marketed satellite dishes if they want television service bundled in.

Although not as robust of a platform as U-verse will soon be, it still represents a major improvement over DSL, which is now barely tolerable for today’s online multimedia experience.

But AT&T’s “good news” may not be so great for its most rural customers, who either have the slowest DSL service or more likely no broadband at all. Those customers have waited years for AT&T to invest in upgrades to finally connect them to the Internet, but AT&T’s plans have gone in a very different direction.

AT&T’s rural solution is to take down the existing landline network and move everyone to its wireless cell phone service. To implement this proposed solution, AT&T will aggressively invest in rural cell sites within the 22 states where it supplies landline service. The company claims 99% of its customers will be able to access a 4G LTE signal within a few years.

Phillip “Are you following this shell game” Dampier

But here is where things begin to get dicey.  AT&T told investors it has no current plans to differentiate rural wireless customers from their urban counterparts. In larger cities, a smartphone and data plan is not necessarily a necessity — customers can still access a landline to place urgent calls or find a home broadband plan that does not carry the kinds of restrictive data caps wireless plans deliver.

Rural landline customers often pay low rates for their home phones, primarily because their local calling areas are generally far more restricted than in larger communities. The base rate for rural phone customers can be around $10 (before taxes and fees) in some areas. The base rate for AT&T’s wireless service starts at around $40 for 450 talk minutes or $19.99 for anchored, wireless unlimited calling home phone service (with a $36 activation fee and a two-year contract) that works with your existing home phones. Both represent rate increases.

Wireless data plans are notoriously expensive and limited. Verizon’s plan for home broadband users is priced at $60 a month with a 10GB limit. Less expensive plans with limits 25 times greater (or unlimited) are available from wired broadband providers. If the customer wants a smartphone for their data and home voice calling, bundled plans start at $85 a month with a 1GB usage limit.

With these prices, it is no surprise AT&T is promoting this as great news for the company. But we’re not so sure the average rural American is going to be pleased treated like a second class citizen with high priced, usage-capped Internet access.

As victims of Hurricane Sandy also found out last week, the venerable landline also enjoys a reputation of working after disasters strike. Unlike a fallen tree knocking down a phone line in the backyard, should AT&T’s wireless network fail in a storm, it would potentially leave hundreds, if not thousands of customers without service. Repair crews could take days to reach damaged facilities. That actually happened to Frontier Communications in some parts of West Virginia where heavy snows and tree damage made travel nearly impossible.

But there are important clues to what AT&T is really up to in regulatory filings that accompanied the showy presentation AT&T put on in New York Wednesday.

AT&T Has a Plan — Move Customers Away from Low Profit, Low Growth Landlines to High Profit Wireless/Deregulated Broadband

After the two hour presentation ended, AT&T posted a copy of its proposal sent to the Federal Communications Commission.

Reviewing the 24-page document is a classic case of  déjà vu. Once again, after the rhetoric is set aside, AT&T is back, peddling the same case to retire landline service and the regulatory obligations that accompany it. Only now, it has a carrot to dangle in front of regulators — significant investments in broadband expansion.

Although the private sector has invested well over $1 trillion in broadband networks, much remains to be done. As of 2010, roughly 14 million Americans, residing in rural and other high cost areas where the broadband business case is tenuous at best, still lacked access….

[…] Carriers such as AT&T are stepping up to do their part. In fact, just today, AT&T announced a $6 billion investment plan to expand and upgrade its wireline network to bring robust IP broadband services to millions of additional locations in its legacy footprint.

[…] AT&T makes this announcement with full confidence that the Commission will continue to implement the National Broadband Plan’s vision of removing regulatory impediments to efficient, all-IP networks, including obligations that could require carriers to maintain legacy facilities and services even after they have deployed new, IP-based alternatives.

I guess they didn’t need T-Mobile after all.

Translation: We used to bypass 14 million Americans, leaving them behind because it was unprofitable to serve them. But now we’re going to invest some additional money. But before you get that investment, we need you to agree the landline is a relic and (largely unregulated) IP-based networks are the future. We are not going to run both, so if you want all of this investment, you have to let us abandon our regulatory responsibilities and commitments to rural customers.

AT&T even tried to calm investor fears about capital spending increases, arguing the potential payoff of discarding landline service opens up a new era of earnings, both from shifting customers to AT&T’s highly profitable wireless service at a cost of double, triple, or more what customers used to pay the phone company, and a platform to sell them even more services later.

A number of Wall Street analysts disagreed, panning AT&T’s wireline investments as unproven.

The Broadband Coalition, a group of competing telecom providers, called the entire affair a smokescreen:

AT&T’s announcement today that it needs regulatory intervention from the FCC in order to invest in IP technology is a re-run of a tired ploy to leverage the company’s dominance. AT&T only invests in order to respond to competition, and competition is made possible by the very pro-competitive policies that AT&T seeks to eliminate.  The Broadband Coalition members have invested billions of dollars to bring the benefits of IP to American consumers from coast to coast.  But if AT&T gets its way, competition will largely disappear, investments will dry up and consumers will suffer.

Former Congressman Chip Pickering, coalition spokesman, stated,  “AT&T is simply trying to use its belated roll out of IP technology as an excuse to rewrite the telecom rules to its advantage.  We already know that AT&T’s claim that IP will somehow alter the laws of economics and lessen its dominance is patently false.  Clearly, AT&T’s proposed changes are not necessary to achieve widespread IP deployment, but the retention of competition policy is.”

Consumer groups accused AT&T of lying to federal regulators when the company argued the T-Mobile acquisition was essential to accomplish their plan to expand wireless service to 96% of the U.S. population. A year later, the company now claims it can deliver 4G wireless service to 300 million Americans and 99% of its landline service area without breaking much of a sweat.

CNN:

AT&T insists that it wasn’t being disingenuous with the regulators. Things changed, the company says, pointing to the 40 new spectrum deals it signed over the past year. The FCC recently made available some spectrum that wasn’t on the table when AT&T was negotiating its T-Mobile takeover.

“We chartered a new path,” AT&T spokeswoman Roberta Thomson told CNNMoney on Wednesday.

That’s precisely what the FCC — and industry analysts — believed would happen.

Now What

For now, rural customers need not worry AT&T will put their entire rural landline operation up for sale, potentially selling off a large number of  customers to companies like CenturyLink, Frontier, Windstream or FairPoint.

Rural America’s new home phone?

But AT&T’s lobbying machine will soon descend on state legislatures to win regulatory approval of their “abandon landlines” agenda. AT&T has a carrot for those legislators as well — a promise that states that hurry to rubber stamp AT&T’s wish list will be first in line for “investments.”

“We are going to have to see 21st-century regulation for 21st-century investments like this,” said AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson. “I think what you’re going to see is that these investments will go first to those states where you have good line of sight to good regulatory authority to do some of the things we’re talking about here.”

The implications for rural customers are profound if AT&T wins permission to scrap the landline network. Despite assurances from AT&T this is a technology argument, in fact it is more of a campaign to rid themselves of regulatory and consumer protection rules that have been around for decades. The type of technology used makes all the difference. Landline providers are usually compelled to provide reasonable, affordable, universal service for all Americans. Broadband, IP-based, and wireless networks now exist largely in a deregulation free-for-all where AT&T can do as it pleases, serve who it likes, and charge whatever it wants.

Considering AT&T’s current business plans, that sets the stage to worsen the newest digital divide — one pitting urban areas with faster, advanced, and more competitively priced networks against rural America, consigned to expensive, usage capped wireless service that may or may not work when a natural disaster strikes.

The only way this plan works for consumers is if common-sense service obligations, consumer protection, open access for competitors, and mandated equivalence of service is part of the package. Without it, AT&T will get exactly what it wants: a regulation free lifestyle, an expensive wireless network that rural residents will be forced to use for basic telecommunications, and cost savings and revenue opportunities AT&T will use to bolster its own profits, while cementing its monopoly position in the rural communities of 22 states where it operates.

A community-owned cable system that critics called “a municipal broadband failure” is proving to be anything but as it aggressively launches a broadband speed war and is narrowing its losses on the road to profitability.

MI-Connection is the community-owned cable system serving Mooresville, Davidson, and Cornelius, N.C.

Originally acquired in 2007 from bankrupt Adelphia Cable, MI-Connection has been a favorite target for municipal broadband critics who have painted the operation as an experiment gone wrong and a financial failure. But the system’s latest financial results and its forthcoming free broadband speed upgrades tell a different story.

Residents will see major boosts in their broadband speeds for no additional charge in December thanks to a broadband service upgrade. Meanwhile, competitor Time Warner Cable has announced new fees for cable modem rentals that will raise many customer bills by $4 a month. (MI-Connection does not charge customers a rental fee when they have just one cable modem on their account.)

The speed increases will provide the fastest download-upload speed combination in the area, thanks to faster upstream speeds. These upgrades launch Dec. 10:

• 8/4Mbps service upgrades to 10/5Mbps
• 12/4Mbps service upgrades to 15/5Mbps
• 16/4Mbps service upgrades to 20/5Mbps
• 20/4Mbps service upgrades to 30/10Mbps

Also on that date, MI-Connection will launch its fastest Internet tier yet, tentatively dubbed Warp Speed, offering 60/10Mbps service with a free wireless router for bundled customers, selling faster service at up to $20 less per month than what Time Warner charges:

• $99.95/month broadband service only
• $89.95/month when bundled with one other service
• $79.95/month when bundled with phone and television service

Warp Speed will be the fastest residential broadband available in Mecklenburg and Iredell counties.

MI-Connection hopes accelerating improvements in broadband will also accelerate additional earnings. MI-Connection continues to earn the bulk of its revenue from television, with broadband and phone lagging behind. But the biggest growth in revenue year over year comes from broadband service.

Last summer, MI-Connection reached another milestone — it delivered its first cash payments back to the communities that took a chance on owning and running their own telecommunications provider. Although the total amount of $277,000 was modest, and the company still has to pay down debt incurred from purchasing and upgrading the cable system, it was a symbolic victory against anti-government, anti-municipal broadband naysayers.

More elusive is tracking the amount of money saved by residents finding Time Warner Cable and area phone companies ready and willing to offer stunning rate cuts in customer retention efforts.

Stop the Cap! has tracked some of those offers over the past several years, based on reader input.

Time Warner Cable’s retention department has offered North Carolina customers with active competition in their area prices as low as $100 a month (after taxes and fees) for triple play packages that include a free year of Showtime and 30/5Mbps broadband. Customers who only want broadband and television have been able to negotiate rates averaging $70 a month, especially after pointing out MI-Connection provides a year of its own phone, broadband, and TV service for $89.99 a month, including three free months of HBO.

“Year after year, renewing these prices just takes a phone call mentioning you received a flyer from MI-Connection offering more for less,” says Stop the Cap! reader Sam, who we contacted this morning for an update on our earlier story in April. “Whether you stay with Time Warner or switch to MI-Connection, you can easily save dozens of dollars a month just mentioning one provider to the other.”

Courtesy: Davidson News

Sam remains a Time Warner Cable customer based on what he calls “a simple matter of economics and what my wife wants to spend.” But he still supports the fact MI-Connection is there, even though it has created some early headaches for Mooresville, Davidson, and Cornelius.

“The conservatives have demagogued MI-Connection to death to win seats in local government but recently have stopped attacking it as an outright failure and are now claiming they want to make it successful so they can sell it off in a few years, probably to their pals at Time Warner,” Sam reflects.

“At the rate MI-Connection is cutting their losses, it might actually be profitable then,” Sam argues. “Selling it would be stupid. But a lot of the current crowd is hellbent on selling it no matter what, mostly for ideological reasons, and after Time Warner buys it for cheap, we’ll all pay even more when they put the rates back up.”

Critics of MI-Connection have help from various astroturf groups, backed largely by telecommunications companies who oppose government involvement in broadband. Particularly notorious is the “Coalition for the New Economy,” which issues negative reports about municipal broadband while burying the fact the group is funded in part by AT&T, Time Warner Cable, and other Big Telecom lobbyists.

The “Coalition” issues various reports mostly summarizing news accounts about community broadband that highlight struggles and ignore successes, while concluding that community broadband is interfering with private providers trying to hurry upgrades into neglected areas.

“A report from some group that lies never brought better broadband access to anyone in North Carolina,” Sam said. “MI-Connection has become a thorn that must be pulled from Time Warner’s backside because MI actually does provide better service.”