SaskTel is raising prices … and broadband speeds. (Image: CBC)

Internet access on the prairie is getting more expensive as provincial-owned phone company SaskTel notifies its Saskatchewan customers it is raising certain DSL and fiber broadband prices by $5 a month — a 14% rate hike.

Effective Feb. 1, prices for High Speed Classic DSL and fiber service will rise to at least $39.95 a month. For DSL customers, that means nearly $40 a month for 1.5Mbps service.

SaskTel, a crown corporation, is telling customers it needs the money to upgrade its network and maintain customer support.

The phone company has a bold plan to replace copper wire infrastructure with fiber to the home service in each of Saskatchewan’s nine largest communities: Saskatoon, Regina, Moose Jaw, Weyburn, Estevan, Swift Current, Yorkton, North Battleford, and Prince Albert. The fiber network, dubbed infiNET, is already operational in parts of Moose Jaw and will be introduced in Prince Albert this spring.

SaskTel has a range of price points for its fiber network ranging from $39.95 a month for 2/1Mbps service to 260/30Mbps service for $139.95 a month.

[flv]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/SaskTel – Building the future with infiNET 5-30-13.mp4[/flv]

Sasktel’s $800 million fiber to the home project is Canada’s most ambitious, because it will blanker urban, suburban, and near-rural customers. This video explores innovations Sasktel is finding to deal with Saskatchewan’s harsh climate, including fiber cables that stay flexible at -40 degrees and directional boring to quickly and inexpensively install underground fiber to homes. (3:28)

AT&T today announced it was selling off its residential wireline network in Connecticut to Stamford-based Frontier Communications for $2 billion in a deal that includes an expanded license for U-verse TV that could eventually be available to Frontier customers nationwide.

Frontier will assume control of the Southern New England Telephone Co. (SNET), a wholly owned subsidiary of AT&T, and its 2,700 employees and 900,000 telephone lines. Included in the deal is AT&T’s U-verse network in the state and the right to expand U-verse TV into all 27 states where Frontier provides service. The deal comes three years after Frontier paid $8.6 billion in stock and cash to buy landline operations in 14 states from Verizon Communications.

In a Stop the Cap! exclusive story published last year, we reported Frontier was interested in acquiring licensing rights to the U-verse brand to potentially offer its customers a unified product suite of television, broadband, and phone service over a fiber to the neighborhood network. Maggie Wilderotter, CEO of Frontier Communications, told the Wall Street Journal the deal between AT&T and Frontier had been on the table for years waiting to be finalized. With today’s announcement, AT&T New England president Patricia Jacobs acknowledged Frontier will use the U-verse name at a secondary brand for video service. Frontier now relies on satellite reseller agreements to bundle video service into its packages for consumers.

Frontier’s acquisition will give the company hands-on experience with AT&T’s U-verse network in Connecticut and offer a path to bring improved service to Frontier customers elsewhere. Company officials also acknowledged a key reason for the transaction was boosting Frontier’s lagging dividend, a critical part of its share price. By taking on nearly 1,000,000 new customers, Frontier will boost its cash flow, returning some of that new revenue in a higher dividend payout to shareholders. But the company will take on an extra $2 billion in debt to manage higher dividend payouts.

JPMorgan Chase & Co. arranged the financing for the acquisition and Frontier will likely raise about $1.9 billion from debt markets by selling bonds. Frontier already has $8.13 billion in debt on the books, much of it acquiring landlines originally owned by Verizon.

AT&T’s departure from Connecticut was no surprise to analysts. AT&T operates most of its landline network in the midwest, south, and in the state of California. The company has focused primarily on serving business customers and its wireless network in the northeast, not residential landlines. Frontier described the deal as a perfect fit for Connecticut residents, because Frontier specializes in residential phone and broadband service.

“AT&T has been trying to sell its rural wireline businesses for some time,” Gerard Hallaren, an analyst with Janco Partners Inc., told Bloomberg News. “It looks to me like Frontier cherry-picked a nice asset at a nice price from AT&T.”

SNET began operations in 1878 as the District Telephone Company of New Haven and pre-dated the Bell System. The company founded the first exchange and printed the world’s first telephone directory. It remained independent of Bell System ownership until 1998, when SBC Communications (formerly Southwestern Bell) acquired the company. In late 2005, SBC purchased AT&T and AT&T Connecticut was born.

Over the past seven years, AT&T has watched customers decline from more than two million customers to fewer than one million. AT&T introduced U-verse to improve its position in the market to mixed results. The company’s investments in fiber upgrades have not been as profitable as its wireless network, likely leading to today’s sale.

AT&T says it is not leaving Connecticut altogether. The company plans to keep business and wireless customers in the state.

Much of the proceeds from the deal will be invested by AT&T in its wireless network, mostly to help pay for 4G LTE upgrades. The rest will be spent bringing U-verse to more customers in the midwest and southern U.S.

The acquisition faces regulator approval from both the Federal Communications Commission and Department of Justice, likely to be forthcoming in the first half of 2014.

Frontier executives promised shareholders the deal will result in $125 million in cost savings over the next three years — code language for layoffs. Some of them are likely to be among the 2,400 workers represented by the Communications Workers of America, which has had a contentious relationship with AT&T Connecticut over job cuts in the past.

Rural Norway is getting a broadband upgrade. Out goes last century’s DSL service and in comes gigabit fiber to the home service for villages and towns that American providers would consider unprofitable to serve.

Despite the harsh winter conditions, Altibox has already begun work installing the new fiber network in the fjord and mountain district of Hjelmeland on Norway’s west coast. The aim is to offer a fiber optic connection to each of the 2,800 residents and 1,000 seasonal vacation homeowners who want one by the end of 2016.

Hjelmeland
Photo by: Bjarte Sorensen

Installation has already begun in the fjord and mountain district. The first customers will be online by the first half of 2014. At launch, customers will be offered a package including 1,000/1,000Mbps Internet access, cable TV, and a phone line with calling and feature package for around $165 a month, considered steep for Europe but not unusual in high cost service areas.

With its widely spaced buildings and vacation homes, Hjelmeland is perhaps one of the most challenging districts in Norway to install a fiber-optic network, according to Toril Nag of Altibox.

“This project will set a new standard for what it is possible to achieve when local government, local residents and the service provider all work towards a common goal,” Nag said. “In our assessment, there are currently only a few households that are situated so far from the trunk cable that it would not make economic sense to invest in a fiber connection.”

Not every resident can get broadband service as the district relies heavily on DSL, which underperforms in rural areas. Fiber optics solves the problem distance creates for high-speed copper-based DSL service and is cheaper to maintain in a district known for its difficult terrain and rugged character.

Altibox is using Hjelmeland as a rural broadband laboratory to learn more about how the company can profitably offer fiber optic broadband in higher cost areas. Eventually every Altibox customer across Norway will get gigabit speeds from the provider.

Norway is rushing ahead of North America in broadband deployment and speed. The government has set a target for every resident to have access to a minimum of 100Mbps service by 2017. The European Union has been less demanding, seeking 100Mbps service for at least 50 percent of subscribers by 2020.”We can look forward to an incredibly exciting year,” said Hjelmeland’s mayor, Trine Danielsen. “We believe that the installation of the most advanced data-communications infrastructure in Norway will make us an even more attractive area to live in for people of all ages.

“In the long-term, for example, the fiber-optic network could enable our older residents to live at home for longer, with the help of smart-house technology and new self-help solutions,” she added. “In addition, the new fiber-optic network will boost business development throughout the district, and provide a strong platform on which to build for both existing business enterprises and brand new ones.”

HissyFitWatch

A senior executive at Frontier Communications stormed out of a public meeting in Charleston Wednesday after being questioned about Frontier’s DSL broadband speeds that critics claim are below state standards.

Dana Waldo, senior vice president and general manager of Frontier’s West Virginia operations, got up and left the meeting after Citynet CEO Jim Martin began questioning Waldo about Frontier meeting the minimum broadband speed requirements mandated by the state legislature. It was not the first time the two have sparred.

Martin has been a frequent critic of the way the state has spent broadband stimulus funding. Much of it, Martin alleges, paid for the construction of a Frontier-owned and controlled statewide fiber network that will benefit the company more than the state and its residents.

Frontier and the State of West Virginia received more than $126 million of taxpayer money to subsidize the fiber network and the expansion of broadband service into rural areas of the state. Frontier agreed to offer a minimum of 4/1Mbps service to each home connected through the subsidy program.

Martin alleges Frontier has failed to offer consistent access to at least 1Mbps upstream speed, a charge Waldo vehemently denied.

“That is not correct, Jim,” Waldo said. “I wasn’t going to bring this up, but I am absolutely beside myself. I feel so sorry for you, that you are so desperate to make you and Citynet relevant and, apparently, keep it afloat. You make all these characterizations about us and everybody else.”

Waldo also accused Martin of making “misleading and defaming” comments about “my company and myself.”

Waldo

“My God,” Waldo added, “every allegation you make and everything you said, [federal officials] dispute, and you still bring up these allegations. I’m tired talking to you about this stuff. I’m tired of the misrepresentations you make. Jim, it’s over. I’m done talking to you. I’m done wasting my time responding to your mischaracterizations. I’m not going to sit here and waste my time and hear more of his nonsense. I’ll excuse myself.”

Martin said nothing in response as Waldo picked up his papers and left the Broadband Deployment Council meeting room.

Martin later told The Charleston Gazette he was just asking a question and repeated his assertion Frontier’s rural DSL service does not offer rural West Virginians at least 1Mbps upload speeds across the state. Martin added Waldo’s defense relied on news articles and documents now three years out of date.

“Both an independent consultant hired by the Governor’s Office, and the legislative auditor have confirmed what I said was true,” Martin said.

Horse and buggy broadband in the slow lane.

One of Australia’s largest broadband suppliers has declared the country’s satellite solution for rural broadband hopelessly overloaded to the point of being “almost unusable” and has stopped selling access.

iiNet announced this week it would no longer sign up new customers of NBN Co’s rural satellite network because the service is oversold in their view.

“We could not continue to offer a service markedly below both our own and our customers’ expectations,”  iiNet’s chief executive Michael Malone said in a statement. “During occasional peak periods the service was so slow as to be almost unusable. As more people are added to the network, quality will only decline further. In the absence of any action by NBN Co to increase transmission capacity, I call on the rest of the industry to respect their existing customers and also cease sale.”

NBN Co, however, claimed it still had room for an extra 5,000 customers — mostly on its spot beam targeting central and western Australia. A spokesperson for the satellite venture did admit satellite beams covering NSW, Tasmania and Queensland were near capacity. NBN Co is investigating leasing more bandwidth on board the satellite, but cost concerns may make that impossible.

The venture claims 48,000 Australians can satisfactorily share the interim satellite broadband service, which is supposed to offer 6Mbps speed. But as Australians join others around the world favoring online video and video conferencing over services like Skype, those original estimates have to be scrapped. In the evenings, some customers report speeds drop below 56kbps or the service simply freezes up and stops working altogether. In response, NBN has adopted a strict monthly usage limit of 9GB and has told customers they will likely have to wait up to two years for a capacity increase.

The government is planning to launch two new custom-made satellites in 2015 to ease capacity concerns. NBN Co claims the two satellites will deliver 25/5Mbps service for 200,000 rural Australians, assuming usage estimates of today’s average broadband user.

Critics contend satellite broadband is not a good long-term solution except in the most rural of sparsely populated areas. Although providing wired service may be too costly, ground-based wireless services could be the most capable technology to contend with future demand and capacity concerns.

iiNet and other ISPs may already be headed in that direction. Some are advising customers to choose fixed wireless options from Australia’s cell phone providers, although those plans are heavily capped and very expensive.

Broadband availability has a direct impact on property sales in rural Australia. A couple that purchased a home in Mount Bruno, near Wangaratta in north-east Victoria discovered only after closing the deal that NBN Co would not sell them satellite broadband because the spot beam targeting Victoria was full.

The couple needs Internet access for work and their telephone line is unsuitable for ADSL. Mobile broadband in the Mount Bruno area is sub-par and expensive as well. As a result, the couple will have to rent office space in Glenrowan or Wangaratta that qualifies for wired broadband until at least 2015, when the next NBN satellite is launched.

iiNet regrets having to turn customers away.

“At its peak, we had 500 customers signing up every week for our NBN satellite services. There is clearly a significant demand for higher quality broadband in remote Australia, and we’re absolutely gutted that we’ve had to withdraw this crucial service from sale,” said Malone.