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.

Verizon’s flooded headquarters on West St., lower Manhattan (The Wall Street Journal)

As cleanup efforts continue across New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut, some of America’s largest telecommunications companies are coming under increased scrutiny for being caught flat-footed after Hurricane Sandy roared across the tri-state region, causing damage Verizon’s chief technology officer now admits is worse than 9/11.

As of this morning, Verizon Wireless’ network is reportedly straining, particularly in Manhattan and Brooklyn, where cell service that worked immediately after the storm is now increasingly failing.

Verizon said 94% of its cell sites were operational after the storm, but some local officials in the area believe 94% of Verizon’s wireless network has now failed them when they need it the most.

Many telecom companies, particularly AT&T, are being criticized for excessive secrecy about the ongoing state of their networks post-Sandy. AT&T, which left its customers in the dark about service restoration as late as last night while asking customers to contribute $10 to the American Red Cross, finally mass e-mailed customers a statement devoid of much detail signed by Steve Hodges, president of AT&T’s northeast region.

“Restoring our wireless network is our top priority,” Hodges writes. “The vast majority of our cell sites in the Northeast are online and working. We are working issues in areas that were especially hard-hit, where flooding, power loss, transportation and debris all pose challenges. Our crews are working around the clock to restore network service to areas that were impacted by the storm. We will not stop until we repair all of the damage to our network and restore service back to its full capacity.”

The Federal Communications Commission correctly predicted the situation with mobile phones could get worse before it gets better, as backup power wears down and flooding persists. At a press conference held yesterday, FCC chairman Julius Genachowski revealed at least a quarter of all cell sites in areas damaged by Sandy were not operational. Those numbers were less optimistic that those provided by carriers.

The FCC this week activated the Disaster Information Reporting System, a central reporting point for telecommunications companies to update the agency regarding outages and other service disruptions. The FCC also alerted providers that in emergency circumstances, they can assist companies getting fuel for generators and help locate portable cell tower equipment for companies caught unaware.

AT&T’s belated letter to customers affected by Hurricane Sandy

Some may need the help.

New York State Assemblyman Alec Brook-Krasny and Brooklyn Borough President Marty Markowitz both reported Verizon Wireless’ outages are worsening in Brooklyn and midtown Manhattan.

Brooklyn Borough president Marty Markowitz

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) today told Sen. Chuck Schumer the federal agency will reimburse New York for 100 percent of the costs incurred restoring power across the storm areas. But that may not expedite how quickly power returns.

Power restoration is expected to bring most cell towers back online. Worsening service is being attributed to battery backup or generator equipment exhausting on-hand fuel supplies, which usually keeps service up and running for up to three days. That means cell towers without power and unreachable by workers will have begun failing late Wednesday into today.

Damage assessments are further behind in New Jersey, the state that took the worst impact from Hurricane Sandy.

Stop the Cap! obtained some new figures from cell phone companies regarding the state of their networks:

• Verizon: Still holding to 94% operational in storm areas;
• AT&T: Declined to comment except to say “the vast majority” of their network is operational;
• T-Mobile: 80% operational in NYC, 90% operational in Washington, D.C.
• Sprint: 75% operational

[flv width=”384″ height=”228″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/WSJ Verizon Offices Damaged 11-1-12.mp4[/flv]

Verizon’s critical network takes another hit. “We’ve been here before,” says one Verizon executive, referring to the destruction from the 9/11 terrorist attacks which severely damaged the same facility on West Street now flooded out. (3 minutes)

Our readers report that cell service becomes spotty to non-existent in coastal New Jersey and Connecticut. In Manhattan anywhere south of 29th Street, readers report almost no signals at all.

Verizon’s damaged facilities include those on West and Broad Streets in Manhattan (circled).

Residents are trading tips about “magic spots” where cell service does suddenly pop up, and Gizmodo notes the only place in Alphabet City (the east side in southern Manhattan) to get service is on literally one street corner, where crowds congregate to make and receive calls.

The other salve for telecom withdrawal is the nearest pay phone.

Amusing stories of 20-somethings waiting in long lines only to be confounded by unfamiliar pay phones are appearing in the New York media. One radio station even aired basic instructions for members of the Millennial Generation that have never heard of inserting coins into telephones.

The biggest challenge for the city’s pay phone vendors is clearing them of coin overloads, something unheard of before the storm.

The often maligned pay phone has exposed the limits of the “more advanced” and expensive networks that were supposed to replace them. Despite claims of superiority for wireless service, northeast residents have once again discovered it has its limits:

• They don’t work during major weather events that knock out power and limit access to maintain backup generators;
• Cell networks are less capable of handling large call volumes, a problem made worse when cell phone refugees in other areas seek out remaining cell signals, further congesting the network;
• Wireless is just as susceptible to wireline or fiber failures on the ground. Cell towers typically connect to providers through wired backhaul circuits, which knock out cell service if they fail;
• Cell phone users need power to recharge their power-hungry smartphones. Batteries drain even faster searching for a weak or non-existent cell signal;

Hardest hit remains Verizon, which allowed reporters access inside damaged facilities to help New Yorkers better understand the scope of the problem.

[flv width=”384″ height=”228″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/WSJ Wireless Network Outages 11-1-12.mp4[/flv]

The Wall Street Journal takes a look at the state of the wireless communications networks across the northeastern U.S. and when service will be back.  (4 minutes)

Eleven years after the 9/11 terrorist attacks that took out Verizon’s West Street office when buildings collapsed at the nearby World Trade Center, Verizon is likely going to have to re-learn some lessons about catastrophe management as flood waters recede.

Verizon has deployed this 53-foot Emergency Mobile Communications Center for use by the Nassau County Office of Emergency Management that provides Internet and phone service.

The Wall Street Journal was able to obtain access inside the damaged facilities, and the reporter covering the event was left somewhat stunned by the scope of the damage.

In the middle of organized, yet chaotic recovery efforts was Verizon’s chief technology officer Tony Melone who had seen enough to declare the damage worse than 9/11.

The pictures of several feet of muddy water from the nearby Hudson River covering the lobby of the company’s headquarters on West Street said it all. The mostly salt water was an unwelcome guest in Verizon’s building, especially considering the five level basement below the lobby contains critical cables and telecommunications equipment. Almost four of those basement floors were completely flooded. After the water was pumped out, dampness and leaves from nearby trees remain littered on the floor.

One lesson learned after 9/11 was not to place critical phone switches below ground level. After reconstruction, the switches were moved to a higher floor and consequently were left undamaged. But while Verizon moved its backup generators upstairs, it left the pumps and fuel tanks that power them in the basement — leaving them inoperable.

This morning, passersby on West Street have to step around Verizon’s network of generators now running outside of the building, right next to large temporary fuel tanks to power them.

Verizon central offices in other parts of Manhattan, particularly further southeast on Broad Street, were never upgraded and are in worse shape, with electrical equipment damaged perhaps beyond repair. The force of the water was strong enough to bend the 86 year-old steel and bronze doors. Workers there are still trying to get water out of the building, shoving a pipe down an elevator shaft to facilitate pumping.

Verizon has some redundancy built into its network to protect its most valuable customers. That kept the landline phones working at the New York Stock Exchange, even though other landline and wireless customers will have  to wait longer for service to resume.

AT&T’s generator staging area near Meriden, Connecticut. (Credit: Brian Pernicone)

Some critics of the increasingly concentrated telecommunications landscape think Verizon and other companies have still not learned enough to prevent the kinds of service disruptions that will leave some customers without service for weeks.

It is hard to miss the bustle outside of Verizon’s offices damaged by the storm, watching flood water drain down the street. But things are murkier at cell phone providers who have been less than forthcoming about specific outage information and service restoration assessments.

Some have advocated the federal government step in and require cell phone service, now deemed essential by an increasing number of Americans, be protected with robust backup solutions to keep service up and running after catastrophic weather events.

After Hurricane Katrina, the FCC in 2007 tried to issue new rules that required a minimum of eight hours of backup power for all cell sites. The industry balked, predicting it would lead to “staggering and irreparable harm” for the cell companies. One wireless trade association warned their members might take several cell sites down if they were forced to provide backup power.

The CTIA Wireless Association and Sprint-Nextel sued the agency in federal court and the Bush Administration’s Office of Management and Budget eventually killed the proposed regulations.

T-Mobile and AT&T have cut an emergency deal to share their cellphone networks in areas affected by Superstorm Sandy. They’re trying to make it a little easier for customers to get a signal as carriers restore their networks. Some say companies should be forced to make their networks more resilient. National Public Radio’s Morning Edition has the story. (November 1, 2012) (3 minutes)
You must remain on this page to hear the clip, or you can download the clip and listen later.

Phillip “I can see the duopoly from my house — why can’t the FCC?” Dampier

The New York Times is pondering whether Americans are paying too much for wireless broadband based on Long Term Evolution (LTE) technology. A new study now offers proof, noting U.S. customers pay three times as much, on average, for each gigabyte of data in contrast to European consumers.

The UK-based mobile industry group GSM Association offers evidence Americans are not getting the lower wireless broadband prices promised by the more advanced, cost-efficient LTE technology, although customers in other parts of the world are seeing savings.

According to the group’s findings, Verizon Wireless customers effectively pay $7.50 per gigabyte of data over the company’s 4G LTE network. That is three times more expensive than the European average of $2.50/GB, and more than 10 times higher than what Swedes pay: $0.63/GB, cheaper than many wired broadband providers’ overlimit fees.

Verizon Wireless’ Brenda Raney tried to defend the discrepancy, claiming that Verizon offers enhanced value bundles with unlimited voice, text, and mobile hotspot service. Having a data-only plan, Raney told the newspaper, would reduce the cost to $5.50/GB.

That is still more than twice as much as what Europeans pay.

So what is the real reason for the enormous price difference?

The wireless industry regularly claims that the vast expanse of the United States means a much larger investment in wireless technology and infrastructure, notably cell towers, to reach customers in suburban and rural areas. European countries, in contract, are much more compact and urban-focused, making infrastructure less costly.

But that has proven to be nonsense for Sweden’s Tele2, which not only operates a nationwide 4G cellular network in Sweden — a country with its own vast rural regions — but promises to deliver service to 99% of the country by the end of the year and already covers more than 100 Swedish municipalities. They deliver service at a fraction of the cost charged by Verizon. Tele2 remains undeterred by the “rural cost argument,” taking on the world’s largest country — the Russian Federation. It has already acquired 12 regional mobile operators in Russia, expanding service to more than 43 regions with over 22 million customers, and plans additional investments.

The real reason for the inflated price of service, unsurprisingly, is America’s lack of robust wireless competition, according to GSMA.

Europe has the largest number of competing providers — 38 of 88 operators with LTE technology are in Europe. Even the smallest countries have at least three major competitors. The U.S. has two major competitors, two smaller national carriers, and a dozen or more regional or prepaid operators totally dependent on the larger four to deliver national roaming service.

Until recently, Verizon Wireless had a veritable monopoly on LTE service as AT&T tries to catch up — one of the very rare moments Verizon directly challenged AT&T in advertising that distinguished the coverage differences between the two. These days, AT&T and Verizon mimic one another, often offering identically priced service plans. Customers who want to pay less have to reduce their expectations with smaller competitors that offer reduced coverage.

If you don’t want access to premium wireless broadband, American carriers will also gouge you for lesser 3G service.

U.S. consumers on two year contract plans spend an average of $115 a month for 3G service, according to a survey conducted by Ernst & Young. In the Netherlands, the average was $51; in Britain, $59 — about half the price.

The growing mobile phone bill has now reached the point where Ernst & Young’s Jonathan Dharmapalan suggests it is literally interfering with smartphone adoption and causing others to shut off the devices permanently after an experience with bill shock.

“The No. 1 reason for customers’ discontinuing their use of a smartphone service or not taking the option is the fear of overspending,” Dharmapalan said.

A former FCC senior Internet technology adviser attempted to explain away the vast discrepancies in pricing, offering this bit of analysis: Europeans talk and surf  less.

The Federal Communications Commission has granted cable operators permission to completely encrypt their television lineups, potentially requiring every subscriber to rent set top boxes or CableCARD technology to continue watching cable-TV.

The FCC voted last week 5-0 to allow total encryption, a reversal of an older rule that prohibited encryption of the basic tier, allowing cable customers to watch local stations and other community programming without the expense of extra equipment.

The cable industry said the decision is a victory against cable theft, claiming that nearly five percent of all cable television hookups are illegally stealing service, at a cost estimated at $5 billion in lost revenue annually.

But some third party companies offering alternatives to costly set top boxes with endless monthly rental fees claim the industry move towards encryption is more about protecting the cable monopoly than controlling signal theft.

Current licensing agreements do not allow third party set top manufacturers to support scrambled channels without an added-cost, cable company-supplied set top box or card. That means a would-be customer would have to invest in a third party set top box and a cable company-supplied set top box to manage scrambled channels. That may leave customers wondering why they need the third party box at all.

This presented a problem for Boxee, which manufactures third party set top boxes, some with DVR capability. If cable systems completely encrypt their lineups, Boxee customers will need to rent a cable box and work through a complicated procedure to get both to work together.

Boxee officials suggest both an interim and long term solution to the dilemma — both requiring the goodwill of the cable industry to work out the details.

For now, Boxee and Comcast have agreed to work together on an HD digital transport adapter (DTA) with built-in Ethernet (E-DTA). A Boxee user would then access basic tier channels directly through an Ethernet connection and change channels remotely using their enhanced set top via a DLNA protocol.

A longer term solution would be to create a licensing path for an integrated DTA solution included inside third party set top boxes. This would eliminate the need for an added cost E-DTA box.

Cable operators planning to encrypt their entire television lineup will soon begin notifying customers of their plans. Under an agreement with the FCC, those with broadcast basic service will get up to two boxes for two years without charge (five years if the customer is on public assistance). Those who already have a cable box or DVR will get one box for two years at no charge. The cable company can impose monthly rental fees on additional boxes and begin charging for every box after two years.

Former FCC chairman Michael Powell, who now presides over the nation’s largest cable lobbying group, called the FCC decision “pro-consumer” despite the added expense and inconvenient many customers will experience.

“By permitting cable operators to join their competitors in encrypting the basic service tier, the commission has adopted a sensible, pro-consumer approach that will reduce overall in- home service calls,” said Powell, president of the National Cable and Telecommunications Association. “Encryption of the basic tier also enhances security of the network which reduces service theft that harms honest customers.”

Comcast is a leading proponent of total encryption, because it would allow them to start and stop service remotely, without having to schedule a service call to disconnect service. Cablevision already encrypts its entire lineup in certain areas under a previously-obtained waiver from the FCC. The company said it saved money reducing labor costs associated with service calls to physically connect and disconnect service.