Powell

A former chairman of the Federal Communications Commission turned top cable lobbyist rang the warning bell at an industry convention this week, recommending America’s cable operators hurry out usage caps and usage-based billing before a perception takes hold the industry is trying to protect cable television revenue.

Michael Powell, the former head of the FCC during the Bush Administration is now America’s top cable industry lobbyist, serving as president and CEO of the National Cable & Telecommunications Association (NCTA). From 2001-2005 Powell claimed to represent the interests of the American people. From 2011 on, he represents the interests of Comcast, Time Warner Cable, Cox, and other large cable operators.

Attending the SCTE Cable-Tec Expo 2013 in Atlanta, Powell identified the cable industry’s top priority for next year: “broadband, broadband, and broadband.”

The NCTA fears the current unregulated “Wild West” nature of broadband service is ripe for regulatory checks and balances. The NCTA plans to prioritize lobbying to prevent the implementation of consumer protection regulations governing the Internet. Powell warned it would be “World War III” if the FCC moved to oversee broadband by changing its definition as an unregulated “information service” to a regulated common carrier utility.

Powell is very familiar with the FCC’s current definition because he presided over the agency when it contemplated the current framework as it applies to DSL and cable broadband providers.

While Powell has a long record opposing blatant Net Neutrality violations that block competing websites and services, he does not want the FCC meddling in how providers charge or provision access.

Powell believes some of cable’s biggest problems come from bad marketing.

Powell disagreed with statements from some Wall Street analysts like Craig Moffett who earlier predicted the window for broadband usage-based limits and fees was closing or closed already.

Powell does not care that consumers are accustomed to and overwhelmingly support unlimited access. Instead, he urged cable executives to “move with some urgency and purpose” to implement usage-based billing for economic reasons, despite the growing perception such limits are designed to protect cable television service from online competition.

“I don’t think it’s too late,” Powell said. “But it’s not something you can wait for forever.”

Powell pointed to the success wireless carriers have had forcing the majority of customers to usage capped, consumption billing plans and believes the cable industry can do the same.

The NCTA president also described many of the industry’s hurdles as marketing and perception problems.

The cable industry, long bottom-rated by consumers in satisfaction surveys, can do better according to Powell, by making sure they are nimble enough to meet competition head-on.

Powell described Google Fiber as a limited experiment unlikely to directly compete with cable over the long-term, and with a new version of the DOCSIS cable broadband platform on the way, operators will be able to compete with speeds of 500-1,000Mbps and beyond. He just hates that it’s called DOCSIS 3.1, noting it wasn’t “consumer-friendly” in “a 4G and 5G world.”

Kevin Hart, executive vice president and chief technology officer of Cox Communications joked the marketing department would get right on it.

An enterprising reader of the Broadband Reports‘ AT&T Forum stumbled on proposed pricing for AT&T’s faster speed services for U-verse and, presumably, their planned fiber-to-the-home rollout in Austin, Tex.:

The prices are no bargain in comparison to the $70 a month Google charges Kansas City residents for 1,000/1,000Mbps service, but on the lower end, AT&T’s 45Mbps U-verse option is comparable to Time Warner Cable’s 50/5Mbps tier, which now sells for $65-75 a month on a one-year promotion:

Time Warner Cable’s latest broadband offers

Frustrated YouTube fans have complained all year about degraded performance, videos that don’t play, and endless rebuffering of online videos. Now a third-party has placed the blame for this on YouTube’s owner Google, which is allegedly running server farms overloaded with YouTube video traffic.

Sandvine’s Dan Deeth argues that super fast broadband speed and the providers that deliver it are not always the best indicators of subscribers’ ‘Internet quality of experience.’ More important, Deeth writes, is how well an Internet-delivered application or content works for consumers.

Broadband users typically blame their Internet Service Provider when a website refuses to load or an online video staggers from one “buffering” pause to the next. But the bottleneck is sometimes beyond the control of your provider and may even reside at the content distribution network sending you the streamed video.

Among the most frustrating online video experiences this year comes from YouTube, owned by Google. Users complain videos never start, timeout, constantly buffer, or downshift to lower video quality.

“The enormous increase in ads all seem to play fine, but there are dozens of times the video itself never begins at all or quickly times-out to rebuffer,” said James Bellwar.

Hyun Soo Park, a YouTube contributor that earns side income from sharing ad revenue says YouTube is getting hopeless.

“My fans are giving up and are occasionally even angry at me because they think I am responsible for the ads that play fine and the videos that do not,” said Hyun.

Blame Google, says Deeth:

We can rule out ISPs being the root cause of YouTube’s quality issue. Instead, we can conclude that the root cause of the degradation in quality is likely occurring because of an oversubscription in the Google server farm (where YouTube is hosted) which makes YouTube unable to meet high lunch time and evening video demand. This oversubscription would result from a commercial decision by YouTube to regarding how much capital they wanted to invest in server capacity to maintain quality.

For those interested in examining further, YouTube has a ‘my speed benchmark’ that seeks to measure ‘maximum demand’. You can use these benchmark tools to not only view your historical YouTube performance, but also measure in real-time the performance of a video you are viewing.

YouTube performance at Stop the Cap! HQ

While consumers are caught in the middle of the finger-pointing, there is a solution to keep YouTube videos from endlessly buffering. PC World offers a way to force YouTube to send the entire video instead of the current system that only pre-buffers small segments of content. Make sure to browse the comment section in the article for tips on getting it to work with your browser.

*-Terms, conditions, and a whole lot more applies.

Austin residents are getting spoiled with promises of gigabit broadband — the first major city in the country offered a competitive choice of 1,000Mbps Internet providers — Google and AT&T.

But one of those claiming to offer a “100-percent fiber Internet broadband network that will deliver up to 1Gbps per second,” is already fudging on that commitment before activating its first fiber customer.

AT&T’s sudden interest in selling 1,000Mbps service came as a surprise to Austin residents that have been told for years their broadband service was fast enough as is. Grande Communications had been the choice for customers seeking the fastest speeds — they sell up to 110/5Mbps for $110 a month. Time Warner Cable still tops out at 50Mbps and AT&T’s U-verse, still not fully deployed in Texas, sold up to 24Mbps ‘screaming fast’ Max Turbo service as its top offering until recently, when AT&T began limited roll-out of up to 45Mbps service.

Mere hours after Google announced Austin as its next choice for Google Fiber, “me-too” AT&T was announcing it would build its own gigabit fiber to the home network in the same city. That was a complete 180 for AT&T, which has consistently argued that running fiber to the home was an unnecessary expense. While Verizon faced the wrath of Wall Street for its decision to launch FiOS — an all-fiber-network — analysts were complaining Verizon was spending too much while AT&T was spending considerably less on its fiber to the neighborhood U-verse system that keeps existing copper wire into the home.

Right from the beginning, AT&T has always accompanied certain terms and conditions for any fiber deployment — winning equal concessions that Google received from local officials with respect to pole attachment fees, zoning, permits, and other expenses. If those were not forthcoming, AT&T could walk away from its fiber commitment at any time.

On Monday, AT&T announced it had started deploying fiber for AT&T U-verse with GigaPower, with a plan to launch in December in neighborhoods with the highest number of votes to get the service. AT&T is taking names and numbers of interested customers seeking to show their interest in fiber service. No deposit or commitment is required to vote, but you will be placed on AT&T’s marketing mailing lists.

“Austin embodies innovation and social consciousness, and is the heart of a vibrant, ever-evolving tech culture and entrepreneurial spirit,” said Dave Nichols, president of AT&T Texas. “With our all-fiber U-verse services, we are building the foundation for a new wave of innovation for Austin’s consumers, businesses, and civic and educational institutions. It’s about engaging the full community and empowering the city and its people with all that technology can offer us. This investment will help attract new business and new jobs to Austin.”

Phillip Dampier

As long as those consumers, businesses, and jobs are within the first deployment zone for AT&T’s fiber network.

For the rest of this year and well into the next, that will be a very exclusive neighborhood.

AT&T’s press release claims it will “initially reach tens of thousands of customer locations throughout Austin and surrounding areas this year, with additional local expansion planned in 2014.”

The five-county Austin–Round Rock metropolitan area has a population of 1,834,303 residents. Assuming AT&T managed to offer fiber service to 100,000 residents — and that is a generous figure, that represents only 5.5% of Greater Austin. The old U-verse is still a work in progress in several Texas cities, so it could take years for AT&T to deploy fiber in Austin. Expect AT&T to start with the low-hanging fruit — multi-dwelling units such as apartments, condos, and other similar buildings, some that already have existing fiber connections in place.

AT&T may never get around to offering fiber to more rural locations in Austin’s suburbs: “There are many factors involved in stringing an advanced fiber network, so having your neighbors vote to be notified about U-verse with GigaPower is no guarantee we’ll get to your neighborhood first, but it does give us some idea of where we want to focus our efforts; and besides, things are always more fun when we work together.”

AT&T is already backing away from its commitment to offer gigabit service, at least initially.

“The December launch will initially feature symmetrical speeds of up to 300Mbps, […] with an upgrade to speeds up to 1 Gigabit per second when available in mid-2014, and at no extra cost,” AT&T writes in its press release.

Speaking of cost, nobody at AT&T is willing to give us one for the 1,000 300Mbps launch tier.

If AT&T is smart, it better set it lower than what Google is likely to charge, considering AT&T will initially only deliver less than 1/3rd of the promised gigabit speed.

While thinking about that, AT&T might also want to dump usage caps. The fastest U-verse tiers come with a 250GB usage allowance, which can really crimp a screaming fast fiber experience once your allowance runs out.

Verizon is “redefining the power of the Internet” in select FiOS areas with the introduction of a new 500/100Mbps speed tier that blows away Time Warner Cable and leaves Cablevision and other competitors woefully behind.

Just weeks after Cablevision boosted upload speeds, Verizon has responded with service offerings up to a half gigabit in speed, telling customers FiOS Quantum 150/65Mbps, 300/65Mbps, and 500/100Mbps plans will “radically change everything you do online right now – and in the future.” It is ten times faster than the fastest service available from Time Warner Cable in the northeast: 50/5Mbps.

Verizon’s fastest broadband does not come cheap, however. The 500Mbps package starts at $294.99 a month for new customers with a two-year contract. Verizon Voice service is required to get the promotional price and a $165 early termination fee applies (reduced by $7.50 for each month a customer maintains service). A $59.99 activation and other fees, taxes, charges, and terms apply. Customers must also pass a credit check to avoid a deposit. Skip the contract and other requirements and the rate is only slightly more: $304.99 a month.

Verizon is charging nearly four times more than what Google charges for its twice as fast gigabit service. But analysts believe that Google will never venture into Verizon FiOS territory so price competition is unlikely in the near term. Cable operators that compete with Verizon would have to dedicate a considerable amount of bandwidth to best Verizon’s download speeds, and matching upstream speeds will be even more problematic unless and until cable operators transition their systems to all digital video to free up bandwidth.

But Verizon’s fastest Internet speeds are not available in all FiOS areas. The company warns “500/100Mbps service availability may be limited in your area based on network qualification requirements.”

Verizon’s competitors, which don’t have the benefit of an all-fiber network, continue to stress consumers simply don’t need any speeds faster than what they now offer. Frontier Communications believes most consumers do just fine with 6Mbps DSL. Verizon’s larger cable competitors range from Time Warner Cable, which does not even try to match its competitor’s fiber speeds, to Bright House, which competes with Verizon FiOS in Florida, to Comcast, which offers faster Internet service but regularly threatens to cap how much customers can use each month. Verizon FiOS has, in practical terms, no usage caps.

“For some, the discussion about the broadband Internet seems to begin and end on the issue of ‘gigabit’ access. The issue with such speed is really more about demand than supply. Most websites can’t deliver content as fast as current networks move, and most U.S. homes have routers that can’t support the speed already available.” — David Cohen, chief lobbyist, Comcast Corp., May 2013

“Residential customers, at this time, do not need the bandwidth offered with dedicated fiber – however, Bright House has led the industry in comprehensively deploying next-generation bandwidth services (DOCSIS 3.0) to its entire footprint in Florida – current speeds offered are 50Mbps with the ability to offer much higher. We provision our network according to our customers’ needs.” – Don Forbes, Bright House Networks, February 2011

[flv width=”640″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Verizon FiOS Introduces 500Mbps 7-22-13.mp4[/flv]

Verizon FiOS introduces faster broadband speeds to help customers accomplish more of what they want to do online. Verizon’s Fowler Abercrombie says ‘it’s only the beginning’ as Verizon continues to innovate on its fiber to the home network. (2 minutes)