Phillip DampierJanuary 14, 2010Mediacom, VideoComments Off on E-Malfunction – Mediacom E-Mail Woes Never Seem to End
More than a month after Mediacom promised customers their e-mail glitches were solved, problems continue to plague Mediacom customers in Iowa who continue to discover missing e-mail, inaccessible accounts, and delayed messages. The problem has worsened to the point it merited coverage on the evening news in Des Moines.
Mediacom’s efforts to switch to an “in-house” e-mail system to improve service have caused repeated problems for Mediacom customers who simply can’t get to their e-mail. The company blamed the problems on “software upgrades” which bring the system down while updates are installed. Mediacom claims to try and limit downtime to the early hours of the morning when most customers won’t notice.
But they do.
Consumer Reports just released rankings of cable operators in its February 2010 issue and Mediacom rated near the very bottom — 15th of 16 companies providing TV service, dead last among 23 cable “digital phone” providers, and 24th out of 27 Internet providers, and that was only because the very worst-rated Internet providers deserve a special place in hell for their fraudband satellite service.
Mediacom’s worst ratings? Their lousy reliability and customer service.
“We recognize that we have to continue to do a better job in customer service, and in the past year we committed significant resources to service improvements,” Phyllis Peters, a Mediacom spokeswoman, told the Des Moines Register.
While those service improvements work their way through the system, Mediacom customers don’t have to wait. They can obtain a Gmail address in seconds and bypass Mediacom’s e-mail nightmare for good.
[flv width=”512″ height=”308″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/WHO Des Moines More Email Problems For Mediacom Customers 1-13-10.flv[/flv]
WHO-TV in Des Moines, Iowa tells the story of an ALS sufferer who depends on e-mail service contending with Mediacom’s inability to provide it. (3 minutes)
For nearly 100 years, D&E Communications has served the people of eastern and central Pennsylvania from its headquarters in Lancaster. But the company founded in 1911 by William F. Brossman, an area farmer and fertilizer distributor, never saw its centennial after being snapped up by Windstream Communications in a $333 million dollar deal.
What Brossman planted so long ago brings a bountiful crop of benefits for the top five former executives of D&E and the plowing under of 70 percent of D&E’s other employees, who are being shown the door between today and April 9th.
The Winners
Four high-ranking executives had provisions in their contracts with D&E that required the company to pay six-figure payments should the company be sold. Thomas E. Morell, Albert H. Kramer, Stuart L. Kirkwood and Leonard J. Beurer are offered the stacks of cash as an incentive to get them to stay with the company, even as hundreds of others don’t get that choice.
Former D&E CEO James W. Morozzi gets a consolation prize of $942,000, not including benefits.
The Losers
D&E employees will be let go with considerably less (perhaps a cardboard box to hold their possessions as they are escorted from D&E buildings.)
Windstream filed papers months ago with the state Department of Labor and Industry detailing the slashing of D&E’s workforce, declaring most redundant and no longer needed, providing some of the “cost savings” that fuel these telecommunications deals.
For Lancaster County, as many as 270 of D&E’s 340 workers will be abandoned. For eastern and central Pennsylvania as a whole, 500 jobs will be reduced to 200 or less in Ephrata and Birdsboro. What made D&E “local” to Lancaster County and this part of Pennsylvania will be no more. Local customer service and support call centers are also being eliminated — transferred to existing Windstream centers in Cornelia, Georgia and Charlotte, North Carolina. Customers who have paid their D&E bills in person at the company’s Birdsboro office will have to make other arrangements — they are weeding out that service as well.
Central Floridians are angry and annoyed with a broadband provider that is more adept at randomly assigning blame than actually resolving serious service problems. Bright House Networks customers in the Orlando area first noticed their Road Runner service began slowing down around December 23rd. Web pages took minutes to render, if they finished at all. Important e-mail was inaccessible at times for many accustomed to a much faster online experience than the bad old days of dial-up.
Problems worsened by Christmas Day, and despite complaints from across the entire region, Bright House technicians spent their time assigning blame elsewhere. In a classic case of buck passing (Deluxe Goldman-Sachs Home Edition), the cable operator initially began blaming customers for the problems, claiming everything from virus infections to bad routers.
“The technician said he was certain it was either my router or my Windows XP had become hopelessly corrupted with viruses, and I might have to reformat my hard drive and start all over,” writes Stop the Cap! reader Kris. “Two days before Christmas was the worst possible time for something like this to happen, and it was clear Bright House’s biggest priority was to get me off the phone as fast as they could.”
As customers abandoned all hope of using their broadband accounts on Christmas Day, calls continued to pour into Bright House customer support. Even the media got involved, noting the cable company adopted a “mum’s the word” strategy on their website, saying nothing about the increasingly maddening service problems.
By then, company officials must have figured out blaming the customers wasn’t working too well, and they blamed Christmas instead.
“I was told heavy Christmas web traffic was responsible,” said Jed, a Stop the Cap! reader. “They told me with everyone getting new computers and laptops and other electronics, it might be awhile before things got back to normal, perhaps even as late as next week when people returned to work. Considering I was getting less than 56kbps service at this point, I wasn’t buying it.”
[flv width=”640″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/WFTV Orlando Internet Outages Frustrate Bright House Customers 12-27-09.flv[/flv]
WFTV-TV in Orlando is credited for being among the first in the media to shine a spotlight on Bright House Networks’ failure to address their ongoing Internet service problems (2 minutes)
As the weekend wore on, enterprising customers learned it was probable a DNS server or other connection point further up the Internet was probably causing all of the trouble. Yet that theory was repeatedly denied by Bright House, who was forced to begin issuing statements to the local press, still blaming others for broadband woes.
“Some Bright House Networks Road Runner Internet customers are experiencing intermittent problems accessing various websites,” Bright House spokesman Brian Craven wrote. “The issue is a result of off-network congestion. BHN engineers are working to resolve the issue.”
Customers were also on the receiving end of that old chestnut ‘the exaflood,’ the theory that the Internet is being crushes by a global traffic flood worthy of Noah’s Ark. As comments piled up on Orlando media’s online message boards, customers traded the excuses coming from Bright House, wondering why the company couldn’t spend as much effort actually fixing the problems with Road Runner on Xanax.
Finally, several days later, company officials admitted the problems were coming from a lot closer to home — theirs, not yours. Brian “It’s Congestion” Craven was back with a revised statement:
“A hardware problem experienced by a Bright House Networks vendor caused some Bright House Networks customers to experience intermittent problems accessing some Internet websites. The issue was resolved at 11 p.m. Sunday. Bright House Networks Internet service was never down. The situation only affected some customers’ ability to access certain Internet sites.”
Some websites like Google, for instance.
So it wasn’t your fault after all. It was one of their “vendors.” Customers pondered when they would be able to receive service credit for several days of useless broadband.
The answer? Never… tough luck:
“Customer credits will not be given because at no time was Internet service down. It was a latency issue in which some customers experienced intermittent problems accessing certain websites. The issue was caused by a hardware problem experienced by a Bright House Networks vendor,” Craven added.
Customers began lighting the torches.
[flv width=”640″ height=”500″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/WOFL Orlando Bright House Outage 12-29-09.flv[/flv]
WOFL-TV in Orlando reports on growing customer rage over the lousy customer service being provided by Bright House Networks. (1 minute)
News accounts noted some customers disappointed by the company’s callous response were returning the favor by unceremoniously dumping their cable modems on the counter at the nearest Bright House cable store, canceling service. For those brave enough to stay, lessons were learned. As one Web Worker Daily contributor lamented, the most effective way to get Bright House off their collective butts was to embarrass them in the media:
The biggest help [came] when the media started reporting the problem. A local TV station and the Orlando Sentinel both picked up the story. Within only a couple hours, the problem that supposedly didn’t even exist was magically solved, after having dragged on for at least a week.
The lesson I came away with was that fighting as a group is more powerful than going it alone — and even better is having a reporter or two in that group.
The Internet… interrupted: Bright House Networks’ holiday gift to you. A week of buck passing, liberal use of the “excuse-o-matic” that blames others for their own problems, and a complete unwillingness to do the right thing by customers. When a service doesn’t work properly, customers don’t want to hear a finger-pointing blame game. They want the service fixed… fast, and receive credit for the inconvenience they experienced while trying to use your service. Anyone aware of good customer relations already recognizes these are not unreasonable requests.
Too bad Bright House spent most of its time creatively not fixing its problems until the media got interested. They should stay on the company’s case until it provides the credit customers deserve.
[flv width=”640″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/WFTV Orlando Bright House Not Taking Blame For Outage 12-28-09.flv[/flv]
WFTV-TV in Orlando reports on the inevitable customer blowback that happens when a service provider treats their customers with disregard. [Apologies for the audio sync problem.] (2 minutes)
This newspaper ad is running across West Virginia opposing the sale of the state's phone business to Frontier Communications
Opposition to the sale of Verizon’s landline business to Frontier Communications in 13 states continues to increase, particularly in Ohio and West Virginia, where several employee unions have argued the deal represents a win for Wall Street and company executives, but a raw deal for millions of consumers.
The Communications Workers of America and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, who also warned state regulators in New England about the consequences of approving the sale of Verizon’s operations in Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont to FairPoint Communications, continue to warn consumers and state officials that a similar deal between Verizon and Frontier Communications could spell major problems for telephone customers. They call on state officials to reject the deal and force Verizon to invest some of their substantial profits earned in these communities into providing better service instead of dumping customers overboard.
The CWA says the sale would put $3.3 billion dollars into Verizon’s coffers — tax free — and leave Frontier buried in debt, which could impact both new and existing Frontier Communications customers, including hundreds of thousands of those in Rochester, New York, Frontier’s biggest service area.
“Verizon Communications has been divesting assets to smaller, less stable corporations in order to reap large, tax-free, profits,” CWA International Representative Elaine Harris said. “Verizon proposes to repeat that formula, and its disastrous effects, with the sale of all of its wireline operations here in West Virginia to Frontier.”
The CWA considers the transaction based primarily on corporate greed, not the best interests of phone customers.
“The only winner in all of these deals has been Verizon Communications and especially Verizon’s corporate executives,” Harris said. Verizon CEO Ivan Seidenberg is the highest paid executive in the telecom industry, with $24.31 million dollars in annual compensation from Verizon.
“His salary could have funded the entire network of senior services in West Virginia last year and he still would have had $8 million in his pocket,” Harris said.
The deal will leave Frontier Corporation with a total of $8 billion dollars in debt. “The West Virginia consumers will experience the effects of converting more than 617,000 aging access lines to a smaller, debt-ridden company,” Harris said. “The public will be forced to pick up the pieces if Frontier follows Verizon’s other buyers and files for bankruptcy.”
“We’ve closely watched the failures of the companies that purchased Verizon’s assets and we don’t need a crystal ball to figure out what will happen if Verizon tries the same scheme in West Virginia. There’s absolutely no reason to gamble West Virginia’s telecommunication’s future just to increase Verizon’s bottom line,” Harris added.
The CWA is running radio ads across the state of West Virginia opposing the deal.
Audio Clip: Communications Workers of America Radio Ad (1 minute)
You must remain on this page to hear the clip, or you can download the clip and listen later.
Verizon spokesman Harry Mitchell said Verizon wants to sell its access lines so the company can focus on its wireless and broadband business. Mitchell told The Charleston Gazette the union has opposed the deal from day one.
“They’re spending their members’ dues on advertising in an effort to cloud the issue,” he said.
Frontier Communications has protested accusations that their purchase of Verizon assets will result in the same kinds of colossal failures impacting other Verizon sell-offs. Company officials claim Frontier already has a successful customer support operation in DeLand, Florida, and billing and operating systems in place.
In West Virginia, those existing operations serve 144,000 Frontier customers. If the deal is approved, Frontier will take on the responsibility of serving 1.3 million landlines across the southeastern U.S. alone.
Regulators in the 14 states where Verizon now proposes to sell its landlines to Frontier face an almost identical situation as New England regulators did last year. Frontier Communications is proposing to buy Verizon’s entire wire line operation in West Virginia – as well as Verizon’s scattered landlines across 13 other states – in a similarly structured deal.
In both cases, Verizon chose a much smaller company in order to take advantage of an obscure tax loophole. With the Frontier sale, Verizon will avoid paying any taxes on the $3.3 billion it will receive from Frontier. Frontier will have to cope with three times more employees, three times more access lines and a 75 percent increase in its debt from $4.5 to $8 billion.
Verizon has a very poor track record in these sales. Verizon sold its Hawaii operations to Hawaiian Telcom in 2005 and it filed for bankruptcy. Customers, service and employees have suffered as a result.
Frontier – just like FairPoint – is a making promises that it may not be able to meet. Like FairPoint, state regulators are being asked to approve a deal where a small company will attempt to simultaneously run a much larger operation, pay off billions of dollars more in debt, integrate Verizon’s computer systems and spend more money to expand broadband.
In the end Verizon will profit but consumers, workers and communities are put at real risk.
Expanding broadband access is an especially critical factor for all rural areas. But Frontier has failed to make any specific commitments, set any timeline or offer a plan for its broadband buildout.
Union leaders believe that states shouldn’t risk their telecommunications’ future just so Verizon can fatten its bottom line. Regulators shouldn’t approve this sale because the risks are too great. Instead, our legislators, regulators and the Governor should require Verizon to meet its service responsibilities. Verizon shouldn’t be allowed to walk away with $3.3 billion tax free, and leave the fate of its customers in the hands of a company with a lot less resources. If Frontier should falter, customers and the public would be required to pick up the pieces – not Verizon!
The track record for Verizon spinoffs has hardly been one of success.
FairPoint Communications, the company to which Verizon sold its Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont operations in 2008, is foundering as it tries to integrate operations and is choking on the debt it incurred to finance the transaction Since the deal was announced, FairPoint’s stock price has declined by about 95%, and the company has been forced to suspend dividend payments.
Hawaiian Telecom, the company to which Verizon sold its Hawaii operations in 2005, filed for bankruptcy. Verizon sold its 715,000 access lines in Hawaii. Since then, Hawaiian Telcom has experienced significant transition issues that resulted in major financial and customer service problems. In three years, the company lost 21% of its customers. In December 2008, Hawaiian Telcom filed for bankruptcy.
The yellow pages company that Verizon spun off also filed for bankruptcy. In November 2006, Verizon spun off its yellow pages directory business to Verizon shareholders, loading the new company, Idearc, with about $9.5 billion in debt and extracting a cool $9 billion in cash and debt reduction. Last year, interest payments alone on Idearc’s debt accounted for almost one-quarter of its total revenues! Representing something of a Verizon failing company “hat trick,” Idearc filed for bankruptcy in March 2009.
WSAZ-TV Huntington, West Virginia reported on the growing opposition to the Frontier sale by employee groups on October 14th. (3 minutes)
In Washington State, IBEW Local 89, outside Seattle, says the sale could cripple one of America’s most tech-savvy regions.
“We’ve always been a leader in communications in this part of the country,” said Ray Egelhoff, business manager of IBEW Local 89. “If this happens, we’re afraid businesses won’t move in, and some may even move out.”
Egelhoff, along with more than 1,500 Verizon workers who may become Frontier employees, deluged officials with letters and e-mails expressing their concerns. More than 500 have gone out so far to senators, house members, governors and business leaders. The workers worry Frontier —at about the a third the size of Verizon—won’t be able to absorb the huge Verizon assets, won’t be able to keep customers happy and, eventually, will have to shed staff.
Robert Erickson, International Representative in the IBEW’s Telecommunications Department said, “The deal poses risks to consumers and employees. Frontier is making all kinds of promises about synergy and how they’ll expand broadband. FairPoint Communications made the same grand claims and now they can’t meet their commitments and fulfill the promises they made. It’s clear that Frontier will be in a similar situation and not have the resources to fulfill the commitments they are making.”
Consumer groups are also raising objections to the sale.
The National Association of State Utility Consumer Advocates urged the Federal Communications Commission, which is reviewing the proposed transaction, to reject the deal.
“The merger proposed by Frontier and Verizon is not in the public interest,” said David Springe, president of the consumer advocate group. “The failure of the companies to offer adequate consumer benefits or protections puts customers at risk of being served by a company without enough financial strength to make necessary improvements to local telephone facilities and widen the deployment of broadband access.”
Free Press, a nonpartisan group that works to reform the media, also raised concerns about the sale in a filing with the FCC. Free Press cited Verizon’s sale of lines in New Hampshire, Maine, and Vermont to FairPoint, which subsequently acquired substantial debt, was unable to accommodate the increased service area, and is now on the edge of bankruptcy.
“This trend has the potential to leave rural areas with ill-equipped companies offering inadequate service at high prices,” says the Free Press report. “This is in direct contrast to the stated intent of Congress and the Obama Administration to foster universal broadband to all Americans.”
[flv]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/WCHS Charleston Verizon Sale Fight 10-14-09.flv[/flv]
WCHS-TV in Charleston, WV talked with the CWA and company officials about the sale of Verizon operations to Frontier Communications. (1 minute)
One of the major consequences of having insufficient experience and resources running a telecommunications network FairPoint inherited from Verizon is that when something goes wrong, it often turns into a catastrophic service failure that leaves people without service for days on end.
As we continue to watch the teetering FairPoint Communications lurch towards either a “white knight” rescue or bankruptcy court, ponder being one of 12,000 Vermont residents who suffered through a DSL service outage that lasted nearly a week this past June.
“The first day I was mad, the next day I was angry, the third day I was begging for Internet service so I could continue on with day to day activities of running a business,” said Bret Knapp, co-owner of Hilltop RV Center in New Haven.
Knapp relies on his FairPoint DSL service to stay in contact with his customers.
Knapp spent hours on the phone with FairPoint customer service representatives in Texas trying to resolve the problem to no avail. At one point, after 50-60 calls, a FairPoint representative hung up on him.
Beth Fastiggi, a FairPoint spokeswoman agreed the problems were unacceptable.
“We are making significant progress; internally, we still have a lot of work to do,” she told WPTZ news.
The state telecommunications regulator in Vermont told the station complaints regarding FairPoint arrive daily from across the state.
Be Sure to Read Part One: Astroturf Overload — Broadband for America = One Giant Industry Front Group for an important introduction to what this super-sized industry front group is all about. Members of Broadband for America Red: A company or group actively engaging in anti-consumer lobbying, opposes Net Neutrality, supports Internet Overcharging, belongs to […]
Astroturf: One of the underhanded tactics increasingly being used by telecom companies is “Astroturf lobbying” – creating front groups that try to mimic true grassroots, but that are all about corporate money, not citizen power. Astroturf lobbying is hardly a new approach. Senator Lloyd Bentsen is credited with coining the term in the 1980s to […]
Hong Kong remains bullish on broadband. Despite the economic downturn, City Telecom continues to invest millions in constructing one of Hong Kong’s largest fiber optic broadband networks, providing fiber to the home connections to residents. City Telecom’s HK Broadband service relies on an all-fiber optic network, and has been dubbed “the Verizon FiOS of Hong […]
BendBroadband, a small provider serving central Oregon, breathlessly announced the imminent launch of new higher speed broadband service for its customers after completing an upgrade to DOCSIS 3. Along with the launch announcement came a new logo of a sprinting dog the company attaches its new tagline to: “We’re the local dog. We better be […]
Stop the Cap! reader Rick has been educating me about some of the new-found aggression by Shaw Communications, one of western Canada’s largest telecommunications companies, in expanding its business reach across Canada. Woe to those who get in the way. Novus Entertainment is already familiar with this story. As Stop the Cap! reported previously, Shaw […]
The Canadian Radio-television Telecommunications Commission, the Canadian equivalent of the Federal Communications Commission in Washington, may be forced to consider American broadband policy before defining Net Neutrality and its role in Canadian broadband, according to an article published today in The Globe & Mail. [FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski’s] proposal – to codify and enforce some […]
In March 2000, two cable magnates sat down for the cable industry equivalent of My Dinner With Andre. Fine wine, beautiful table linens, an exquisite meal, and a Monopoly board with pieces swapped back and forth representing hundreds of thousands of Canadian consumers. Ted Rogers and Jim Shaw drew a line on the western Ontario […]
Just like FairPoint Communications, the Towering Inferno of phone companies haunting New England, Frontier Communications is making a whole lot of promises to state regulators and consumers, if they’ll only support the deal to transfer ownership of phone service from Verizon to them. This time, Frontier is issuing a self-serving press release touting their investment […]
I see it took all of five minutes for George Ou and his friends at Digital Society to be swayed by the tunnel vision myopia of last week’s latest effort to justify Internet Overcharging schemes. Until recently, I’ve always rationalized my distain for smaller usage caps by ignoring the fact that I’m being subsidized by […]
In 2007, we took our first major trip away from western New York in 20 years and spent two weeks an hour away from Calgary, Alberta. After two weeks in Kananaskis Country, Banff, Calgary, and other spots all over southern Alberta, we came away with the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly: The Good Alberta […]
A federal appeals court in Washington has struck down, for a second time, a rulemaking by the Federal Communications Commission to limit the size of the nation’s largest cable operators to 30% of the nation’s pay television marketplace, calling the rule “arbitrary and capricious.” The 30% rule, designed to keep no single company from controlling […]
Less than half of Americans surveyed by PC Magazine report they are very satisfied with the broadband speed delivered by their Internet service provider. PC Magazine released a comprehensive study this month on speed, provider satisfaction, and consumer opinions about the state of broadband in their community. The publisher sampled more than 17,000 participants, checking […]