Media excitement about recent iterations of allegedly “4G” networks aside, no currently available wireless broadband service will replace the need for traditional wired broadband so long as providers limit consumption to 5GB (or less) per month.

As average consumption per household is now at least three times that level, wireless broadband customers will be faced with three choices:

1. Supplement a wireless broadband account with an unlimited, wired broadband service;
2. Be prepared to pay overlimit fees or purchase additional accounts or “usage packs;”
3. Reduce usage to remain within plan limits.

Sprint currently remains the largest carrier offering unlimited access to its 4G network, also sold independently under the Clearwire brand.  But as Clear subscribers found out, “unlimited” comes with “unlimited hassles” if Clear’s “intelligent network management” software catches you using it “too much.”  Speeds are quickly throttled downwards, well below even Sprint’s slower 3G network.

Many of Clear’s customers signed up in response to ads promising the 4G wireless service as a “home broadband replacement.”  Ditch your cable modem or DSL service for a wireless alternative!  Some salespeople even dared to suggest Clear was faster than cable or DSL.  Only for most it is not.

Every carrier has their own version of “4G” here or on the way, most of which can deliver better and faster service than the 3G alternative, but wireless providers are hellbent on ensuring customers never get used to the concept of truly unlimited service.

Glenn Britt, CEO of Time Warner Cable, admits the wired broadband industry erred when it got people used to all-you-can-use broadband.

“We made a mistake early on by not defining our business based on the consumption dimension,” Britt told investors back in 2009 when the company was contemplating its own metered usage trials.

Wireless providers are working hard not to repeat that mistake.

AT&T found usage caps anger customers, but got away with implementing a 2GB monthly wireless usage cap tied with the introduction of the wildly popular newest iPhone (and helped by grandfathering existing unlimited customers until their next phone upgrade.)

“If I had a baby in my hand and my iPhone and I had to drop one, I’d drop the baby,” laughed Dallas iPhone owner Luisa Benton.  But Benton’s love for her Apple phone does not extend to AT&T’s network, noting she has dropped calls and had poor reception in certain areas.

Many iPhone owners retain their cable or DSL broadband service because AT&T’s wireless usage cap limits what they can manage online, and the company’s network problems only adds insult to pocketbook injury.  With many locked into two year contracts, few are going to brave early termination fees to find an alternative.

As providers upgrade their networks, they are also upgrading their prices.  Verizon’s new LTE network, for example, carries a premium price tag for those wishing to use it.

Customers looking for a faster wireless experience will pay $50 for 5 GB or $80 for 10 GB of data on Verizon’s new network.  Run over those limits and an overlimit fee of $10 per gigabyte kicks in.

“People are never going to use wireless networks the way you see them on the commercials,” writes Stop the Cap! reader Jo-Anne in Seattle.  “They are always watching movies or TV shows — services you absolutely don’t want to risk at those prices.”

J0-Anne asked a Verizon representative if new 4G smartphones would be permitted to use unlimited data plans.

“‘Don’t bet on it,’ was the reply I got — Verizon may keep unlimited around for 3G network users only,” she said.

If true, Verizon will deliver overpriced, inadequate service for any customer looking to leave their home broadband account behind.  As soon as multimedia gets involved, usage caps rapidly become a dealbreaker.

Verizon recently contracted with Bridgewater Systems Corporation to supply it with data management software.  Bridgewater is also a major supplier of network throttling solutions to ferret out heavy users and impede their speed, as part of “fair use policy” regimes.

Some wireless companies are trying to have their cake and eat it too — selling “unlimited” wireless broadband service hampered by an aggressive “policy control” network management scheme.  You’ve seen the ads promising unlimited access, but probably missed the fine print warning the provider will throttle your wireless broadband speed to something comparable to dial-up once they deem you a data hog.

Cricket and Clear are both notorious for throttling customer speeds and delivering disclosures of the practice more impenetrable than North Korea.

A Clear blog entry tried to simplify the legalese:

During times of high network utilization our network management system may limit speeds, but we never limit the amount of data a customer with an unlimited data plan may use. The algorithm in place reviews several factors including long and short-term usage, current network capacity, and network demand to determine if network management needs to be applied.

The end result is that a few heavy users temporarily give up some speed during limited times of high demand so that everyone can have a good experience. A majority of customers are having a positive experience and experiencing faster speeds during times of greatest demand since these enhancements were enacted.

The “positive experience” Clear’s blogger reports may be wishful thinking, however, after reading the company’s support forums.  They’re overloaded with thousands of angry customers and probably many more ex-customers.  An “unlimited” broadband experience is meaningless if customers endure speeds well below the minimum acceptable definition of “broadband,” often for days on end.

Cricket is no better:

Cricket sets usage levels on the amount of data a customer can upload and download within stated periods of time. If you exceed your rate plan usage levels, Cricket will temporarily reduce the speed at which you can send and receive data over the Cricket network. You will still be able to use the service but your speed will be slower. Cricket may use other traffic management and prioritization tools to help ensure equitable access to the Cricket network for all customers. Your service speed is not guaranteed and is subject to this Fair Use Policy.

Cricket has set a data usage level (“Usage Level”) per customer. As shown in your rate plan brochure or on www.mycricket.com, this Usage Level varies based on the rate plan you’ve selected. Every day, we measure your upload and download data usage (“Actual Usage”) to determine if your total Actual Usage, as aggregated over your bill cycle (“Usage Total”), exceeds the Usage Level for the rate plan you selected. During hours of operation, you can inquire about your Usage Total versus your monthly Usage Level by calling 1-800-Cricket and speaking with a Care representative.

Once you begin a new bill cycle your rate plan Usage Level upload and download speeds will be restored.

The average Cricket customer is unlikely to grasp anything beyond the fact their speed sucks if they are targeted by Cricket’s throttle.  It’s not as simple as breaking through your monthly usage allowance.  Cricket can and does throttle customers who seem like they could exceed the limit, based on their daily account activity.

In the end, most wireless customers pay more for less service.  The primary benefit is portability, and carriers consider that worth the premium prices charged.  But as the Internet’s love affair with all things multimedia continues, none of these providers will provide a suitable alternative to the traditional home-wired broadband account.

[flv width=”432″ height=”260″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/WFAA Dallas iPhone Frustration 11-30-09.mp4[/flv]

Last year like this year, WFAA-TV in Dallas reports frustrations continue with AT&T’s wireless data network.  The company’s response?  Limit customers’ use of it and push more of them off to Wi-Fi alternatives.  (2 minutes)

Verizon Wireless is willing to be aggressive to keep your business — if you are a good customer that pays your bill on time.

The company has been trying to deal with a growing number of its long-time customers who have gone “off-contract” and are still using phones they bought two, three, and even four years ago.  The issue?  Pricey data plans.

“A Verizon Wireless phone bill for a family of four can easily exceed $200 a month when smartphones come into play,” writes Stop the Cap! reader Jim in Honeoye Falls, N.Y. “Forget about $1.99 mystery data charge-inspired bill shock.  Just getting your regular monthly bill can cause your hair to fall out.”

Jim says his recent visit to Verizon left him numb when he ran the numbers about adding his teen children to his existing Verizon account.

“My daughter is fed up with AT&T and she wants out at the end of her contract, and she’s willing to sacrifice her iPhone to manage it,” Jim says. “Her brother shares the account and he’s offered choice words about AT&T’s dropped calls to all in earshot.”

“But I was stunned by the Verizon in-store representative who started throwing numbers at me about texting, data fees, and insurance — not to mention plan changes,” Jim said.  “I don’t remember cell phone service ever being this expensive.”

Jim is grandfathered into a plan sold by Verizon around five years ago, one that eats mobile web usage from the plan’s monthly minute allowance.

Those days are long gone.  A Verizon representative told Stop the Cap! the company did away with that arrangement “for the benefit of customers.”

“Customers would sometimes forget and leave their phone running a data application overnight and consume most of their plan’s minutes for the month,” was the story told to us.  “Customers would be angry and upset when they realized their minutes were gone.”

We countered it’s far worse to get a bill reflecting data use charged at $1.99 per megabyte, per instance — Verizon’s current policy for customers not on data plans.  That has led to some unfortunate bill shock incidents where customers have ended up with bills in the tens of thousands of dollars.

Verizon “helped” its customers there as well — mandating expensive data plans for customers owning today’s higher-end phones.  Verizon argues a $30 a month flat rate data plan is better than being socked with a huge bill at Verizon’s extraordinary pay-per-use price.

“That’s like telling a mugging victim to be thankful they weren’t also raped,” Jim retorts.

What burns Jim about all of this is that unlimited data service plans do not include unlimited texting.

“It’s offensive that Verizon asks you to pay $30 a month to push mobile data around, but that doesn’t include a single text message,” Jim writes. “If you forget to add a text plans, it’s 20 cents a message.”

Verizon offers a budget package of 250 text messages for $5 per month.

Jim’s journey is a familiar one we’ve heard repeatedly from Verizon Wireless customers who are interested in exploring today’s advanced feature phones, but are turned off by the corresponding fees levied by the wireless carrier — fees that can dramatically increase customer bills.

“We pay around $100 a month for two lines with Verizon when all of the taxes are added up,” Jim says. “To bring my kids on board, we’d have to upgrade away from our current cell phone plan to one with at least two mandatory data plans, which would add $60 a month to our bill just for that.”

Verizon’s back-of-the-envelope calculations suggest Jim’s new Verizon bill would easily exceed $200 a month based on their usage and plan features.

“That’s crazy,” Jim feels.

Those prices cause customers like Jim to head for the door, telling Verizon to leave their account the way it was when they walked in the door.

Verizon seems to be getting that, because the company is increasingly targeting upgrade offers to contract-renewal-resistant customers, especially with family members eager to jump into smartphones.

The most welcome news — rumors the company may explore offering a FamilyShare Data Plan that carries a usage allowance, but is charged per account, not per phone.  For casual users and those more than happy to switch to Wi-Fi where available, that could represent serious savings.

Find incredible deals on a vast array of products at Shoppok, your ultimate online shopping destination. Browse through various categories, from electronics to apparel, and experience a smooth shopping journey at Shoppok.com.

In the meantime, two promotions that are available offer some help for customers looking to upgrade:

FamilyShare – Smartphones Talk Free a/k/a $10 off data plan

Marketed in two ways, this promotion targets multi-line customers with one or more members seeking a smartphone upgrade, but do not want to have a stroke when they open the bill.

The promotion works with existing Verizon Nationwide Family SharePlans starting at $69.99 monthly access for 700 Anytime Minutes.  Add a $29.99 data plan for each additional smartphone and get $9.99 off your bill for each smartphone, per month, for the next two years. Sometimes this is pitched as “$10 off our unlimited $29.99 data plan” — because it is the price of the data plan that usually scares would-be smartphone customers back to their old phones.  Charging $20 instead of $30 is soothing enough to ease some customers on board the smartphone revolution.

“This is an ideal option for customers with a spouse or child wanting to move to a smartphone,” said Marni Walden, vice president and chief marketing officer for Verizon Wireless.

The caveats.  Your new smartphone will probably come with a two year contract extension and the primary line on the account is not qualified for the discount.  But there is an easy way around this.  If one or more lines on your account are not going to upgrade, simply have Verizon reassign one of those lines to be the primary line.  Legacy service plans no longer offered will have to be abandoned, and there is no way back to them.  This promotion expires January 7, 2011.

Talk (450 Minutes) With Unlimited Text and Data for $69.99 per month

Price conscious consumers have started giving carriers like Sprint a second look.  Rated the most improved carrier by Consumer Reports, Sprint’s aggressive pricing has begun to attract some Verizon customers.  In response, Verizon has been testing a new promotional plan that makes data and texting unlimited for one flat price.  The plan was initially open only to those who received an invitation in e-mail, but a quick call to Verizon Wireless customer service finds at least one call center that can add this plan for anyone — no invite required.

The plan’s price for single line accounts is $69.99 per month and a one year contract renewal is required for those with less than one year remaining on existing contracts (or those off-contract altogether.)  If you still have more than a year remaining on your contract, no further extension is required.

A companion FamilyShare plan delivers 1,400 minutes per month.  The monthly $139.99 price delivers service for two lines.  Each additional line is $19.99 per month, which includes unlimited texting and data.  For heavy users with several smartphones on an account, this plan can represent significant savings, and does not expire.

Caveats: Getting either plan might take a few calls to customer service.  Not every call center can add this promotion for customers.  Voice minutes might be too limited for some customers, but Verizon also offers the Friends & Family option, allowing unlimited calling to a select group of numbers.

Phone Promotions

This holiday season, selecting your new phone is probably going to be the cheapest part of your relationship with Verizon over the next two years.  The carrier is literally giving away several smartphones, offering buy one, get one deals on others.

Consumer advocates acquainted with the wireless market traditionally suggest the biggest savings come from online merchants like Wirefly, Dell Mobile, or Amazon.

At first glance, that advice seems sound.

Jim’s daughter and son both want the Droid X which sells for $199.99 on Verizon’s website. Verizon offers a Buy One, Get One special on the Droid X currently so the effective cost for two phones is $199.99.

But hang on a moment.  Dell Mobile (powered by Wirefly’s parent company) has the same phones for much less — $19.99 each, based on how the phones would be added to Jim’s account.  Until last evening, Dell even threw in a $25 gift card to sweeten the deal.  Excluding that, the difference in price between Verizon and Dell was a whopping $160 for the exact same phone.

Trying to narrow the difference used to be an exercise in futility for many Verizon customers.  With a market leadership position, Verizon doesn’t have to viciously compete on price.  As a result, hard fought negotiations often yielded little more than an accessory like a car charger thrown in to sweeten the deal.

But those days are starting to change, especially when Verizon considers you an excellent customer prepared to change carriers.

Lesson one for Jim was to avoid Verizon stores if he wanted the best possible deal.  As he discovered, Verizon store employees are recalcitrant about giving away the store as they try and protect their commissions and sales numbers.  Besides, many of the employees Jim dealt with seemed to know less about Verizon’s plans than he did.

Jim decided he could handle Verizon’s Smartphones Talk Free promotion, but he wasn’t about to leave $160 on Verizon’s table for the phones.  He visited a Verizon store in nearby Rochester to see what could be done about the price of the phones.

“Basically nothing was the answer,” Jim says.

“These guys will say anything to make a sale,” says Jim.  “But when you try and negotiate with them, they have little authority and less to offer.”

He reports a sales representative finally offered him free cell phone cases and a spare charger (a $100 value according to the Verizon rep — a value Jim disputes) instead of a price discount.

“I walked out,” said Jim.

While inquiring about how to place his order with Amazon, the online retailer instructed him to call Verizon directly to reconfigure something on his account before placing the order.

That was a fatal mistake… for Amazon.

“I was very surprised that the Verizon Wireless representative immediately started to fight for my business in ways the in-store reps never did,” Jim reports.

When Jim made it clear he was not about to give Verizon $160 more than he had to, the Verizon Wireless representative reviewed his account and placed Jim on hold.  Moments later, Jim learned Verizon would match Amazon’s offer.

“That was actually a relief for me because those third party online retailers have their own contracts you have to sign yourself committing to no account changes for six months, and you are never really sure whether they’ll configure the account properly,” Jim said.

Jim also scored free overnight FedEx shipping in time for Christmas and the representative promised to call him back after the phones arrived to finish setting up the account.

The only downside is that Verizon is still sticking Jim with mail-in rebates that will be fulfilled with debit cards.  His charges for the new phones will get added to his regular Verizon bill, however.  No credit card required.

Verizon’s willingness to extend offers can depend on your business relationship with the company.  Making late payments or arriving credit challenged can dramatically reduce how far Verizon will extend its hand.

Our advice to others in Jim’s position:

1. Call Verizon customer service and deal with them, not store employees when trying to negotiate the best deal.  A good phone rep will deliver discounts in-store salespeople know nothing about and won’t be willing to offer even if they did;
2. Make it about the price.  If you have a competing offer, share it with them.  Verizon can easily adjust prices downwards with their New Every Two $50 credit and do better with additional credits such as a free month of service to effectively knock your price down;
3. If they offer accessories, hold out for actual billing credits.  Buy your own accessories later;
4. Be prepared to hang up and call back if you get a difficult representative.  Some call centers are better than others;
5. Consider the competition.  Customers on individual plans might find far better deals with prepaid carriers like Page Plus that use Verizon’s network.  Or it may be time to consider a different carrier.
   

The Federal Communications Commission voted today to pass what Chairman Julius Genachowski called “Net Neutrality” — reforms that will guarantee a free and open Internet.  But critics charge any similarity to actual Net Neutrality is purely coincidental.

In a 3-2 vote along party lines, the Democratic Commissioners approved Genachowski’s framework to keep providers from blocking access to websites.

Genachowski claims the rules will protect consumers from providers controlling the free flow of online content and will provide regulatory certainty for the broadband marketplace.  Providers, who have either lined up behind the chairman or have muted their criticism of the proposal in recent days, suggest they weren’t about to censor Internet content in the first place and that Net Neutrality is a cause in search of a problem.

Public interest groups were less than satisfied, dismissing today’s proceedings as “Net Neutrality-lite,” or “Net Neutrality with more (loop)holes than Swiss cheese.”  In particular, Genachowski’s willingness to exempt wireless broadband from the rules was a very sore spot among Net Neutrality proponents and some in Congress.

“Maybe you like Google Maps. Well, tough,” said Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) “If the FCC passes this weak rule, Verizon will be able to cut off access to the Google Maps app on your phone and force you to use their own mapping program, Verizon Navigator, even if it is not as good. And even if they charge money, when Google Maps is free.”

Franken is convinced excluding wireless networks from open Internet rules is the first step towards a free speech calamity.

“If corporations are allowed to prioritize content on the Internet, or they are allowed to block applications you access on your iPhone, there is nothing to prevent those same corporations from censoring political speech.”

Craig Aaron, managing director at Free Press bemoaned today’s vote over rules he suggests were written by the industry itself.

“These rules don’t do enough to stop the phone and cable companies from dividing the Internet into fast and slow lanes, and they fail to protect wireless users from discrimination. No longer can you get to the same Internet via your mobile device as you can via your laptop,” Aaron said. “The rules pave the way for AT&T to block your access to third-party applications and to require you to use its own preferred applications.”

The Obama Administration is likely to claim credit for the new rules and declare Net Neutrality a campaign promise fulfilled, a claim that makes several net activists’ blood boil.

“Chairman Genachowski ignored President Obama’s promise to the American people to take a ‘back seat to no one’ on Net Neutrality,” says Aaron. “He ignored the 2 million voices who petitioned for real Net Neutrality and the hundreds who came to public hearings across the country to ask him to protect the open Internet. And he ignored policymakers who urged him to protect consumers and maintain the Internet as a platform for innovation. It’s unfortunate that the only voices he chose to listen to were those coming from the very industry he’s charged with overseeing.”

Aneesh Chopra, Obama’s chief technology officer said on Dec. 1 that the FCC proposal was an “important step in preventing abuses and continuing to advance the Internet as an engine of productivity growth and innovation.”

Genachowski’s two fellow Democratic commissioners agreed, noting the policies probably don’t go far enough, but it’s a start and they wouldn’t oppose them.  But Commissioner Michael Copps made it clear he remains unhappy with how the entire debate was managed.  He fears corporate control of broadband content will bring the same mediocrity large corporations have managed to deliver Americans over radio and television.

“I don’t want the Internet to travel down the same road of special interest consolidation and gate-keeper control that other media and telecommunications industries — radio, television, film and cable — have traveled,” Copps said. “What an historic tragedy it would be,” he said, “to let that fate befall the dynamism of the Internet.”

If today’s mild net reforms are a step forward, it’s a small one say critics like the Center for Media Justice.  They suggest the FCC’s idea of Net Neutrality offers “minimal protections” for consumers.

“Our greatest fears have been realized,” said Malkia Cyril, Executive Director of the Center for Media Justice. “The Internet can only work if it’s a truly level playing field. Telecommunications companies have used their considerable wealth and lobbying might to exclude some of the most vulnerable communities from the only protection there is from their corporate abuses. These rules aren’t fair, and they don’t provide a path to equity or opportunity. We’re deeply concerned that today’s vote sends a clear message to our communities that if you access the Internet through your cell phone, you don’t count. The FCC has sadly shirked its responsibility to protect all Internet users equally.”

All of the debate may ultimately mean nothing should one of the providers decide to challenge the new rules in court.  The Commission failed to address an earlier court decision that ruled the Commission’s regulatory framework was based on nothing more than good intentions.  The agency was toying with the idea of reasserting authority over broadband using a different framework, but providers furiously lobbied against that, claiming it would “regulate the Internet” under rules designed for landlines.  The Commission’s decision to proceed under a foundation condemned by an earlier federal court ruling exposes an obvious weak spot providers could attack in additional lawsuits.

“We know these rules will be hotly contested,” said Betty Yu, MAG-Net Coordinator. “As they roll out, grassroots communities will continue to monitor the process, ensuring that the rights of wireless users are protected from the over reach and abuses of AT&T, Verizon, Comcast and other telecommunications companies. These rules are a compromise- unfortunately, what was lost in the deal are the rights of wireless users.”

Verizon may make things easier for Yu and other consumer groups to clear the playing field and start over again.  The company released a statement today that foreshadows a willingness to challenge the agency’s Net Neutrality rulemaking in court (underlining ours):

“While it will take some time for us to analyze the F.C.C.’s rules and the order once they are released, the F.C.C.’s decision apparently reaches far beyond the net neutrality rules it announced today,” the company said in a statement. “Based on today’s announcement, the FCC appears to assert broad authority for sweeping new regulation of broadband wireline and wireless networks and the Internet itself. This assertion of authority without solid statutory underpinnings will yield continued uncertainty for industry, innovators, and investors. In the long run, that is harmful to consumers and the nation.”

Net Neutrality Order Snippets

<

p style=”text-align: center;”>

The Federal Communications Commission’s Open Meeting introducing Net Neutrality and includes a vote on the rulemaking.  (2 hours, 42 minutes)

Credit crisis?  What credit crisis?  That’s for little people.

While “challenging economic times” and “a difficult business environment” were among the reasons cited by banks for raising consumer credit interest rates, closing accounts, and slashing credit lines, some of America’s largest corporations received special credit favors from the Federal Reserve — cheap and easy money with little collateral required.

Among the companies that feasted on $3.3 trillion dollars of bailout credit largess — Verizon Communications, which had its $1.5 billion in debt picked up by the Fed — easy credit accessed twice during a major credit crisis.

The Washington Post uncovered Verizon’s Federal Reserve “Platinum Card” while reviewing more than 21,000 recently released loan records, forced into the open by new financial regulatory legislation.

Most of Verizon’s credit came in the form of covering the company’s “short term paper” — temporary debt taken on to fund daily business activities.  Although the Federal Reserve got the loan money back, the fact only major corporations, Wall Street banks, and other inside players got access burns many Americans, especially small business owners forced into hardship or out of business when their credit lines dried up at the height of the credit crisis.

While banks like Advanta, popular with small businesses, shut down all of its credit operations and raised interest rates to 30 percent or more on current balances, large companies like Verizon never had a thing to worry about thanks to the federal government.

“The American people are finally learning the incredible and jaw-dropping details of the Fed’s multitrillion-dollar bailout of Wall Street and corporate America,” said Sen. Bernard Sanders (I-Vt.), a longtime Fed critic whose provision in the Wall Street regulatory overhaul required the new disclosures. “Perhaps most surprising is the huge sum that went to bail out foreign private banks and corporations. As a result of this disclosure, other members of Congress and I will be taking a very extensive look at all aspects of how the Federal Reserve functions.”

Verizon spokesman Robert A. Varettoni said that it was “an extraordinary time,” adding that there was no credit available otherwise at the time.

Ordinary Americans already knew that, of course.  But they didn’t get the same kind of help companies like Verizon received.

As far as Sanders is concerned, banks and large American corporations did splendidly during The Great Recession — some like Goldman Sachs are paying record-busting bonuses for the second year running — all thanks to the special favors given by the federal government during the last months of the Bush Administration.

Sanders told the Post the federal government could have made demands on those accessing easy credit to help ordinary Americans, such as requirements to lend to small businesses, modify mortgages of homeowners, or agree to hire more workers.

“We bailed these guys out, but the requirements placed upon them had very little positive impact on the needs of ordinary Americans,” Sanders said.

While America’s largest cell phone companies battle over map coverage and work towards limiting wireless data usage, one super-regional wireless carrier is willing to pay customers to dump their old carrier and switch.

Privately owned Cellular South, which delivers home coverage over its own network in Memphis, the Florida Panhandle, Rome, Georgia, and parts of Mississippi and Alabama, is offering $100 to hand over your AT&T iPhone and get a brand new Android phone.  The company will even cover up to $200 of any early termination fees charged by AT&T or other carriers.

The company offers smartphone plans starting at $50 a month that includes unlimited mobile web access.  Customers with two or more smartphones on one account can get “unlimited everything” service for $59.99 per line.

Cellular South, virtually unknown outside of its service areas, has gained wider attention in recent days because of its stand against Verizon Wireless’ LTE network policies and an unrelated total meltdown of a Lauderdale County, Mississippi Board of Supervisors meeting that began with a debate about switching away from AT&T.

[flv width=”640″ height=”447″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Cellular South Ad.flv[/flv]

An ad for Cellular South promotes the fact its smartphone data plan delivers unlimited usage.  (1 minute)

The company is planning its own LTE network for its local coverage areas and got into a major dispute with Verizon Wireless, a fellow CDMA carrier, over the LTE standard’s roaming capabilities.  Wireless providers who belong to the Rural Cellular Association are disturbed that without interoperability requirements from the FCC, big national carriers will be able to exclude small players from their networks.  Even worse, companies like Cellular South may have trouble finding affordable wireless equipment that works on the frequency bands they are allocated to use.  What this means for consumers is that equipment purchased for Cellular South’s LTE network may not function while roaming.  The carrier told the FCC:

Lack of interoperability in the 700 MHz band will impose significant costs and burdens upon A Block licensees, which will competitively disadvantage smaller and regional carriers and their consumers. By delaying a decision on interoperability, the FCC is denying rural America access to 4G service. Cellular South paid $192 million dollars for licenses in Auction No. 73 and for months has been prepared to immediately put available capital to work to deploy its 700 MHz network in compliance with the FCC’s build-out requirements and for the benefit of its rural and regional consumers. But, without the certainty of interoperability across the 700 MHz spectrum, Cellular South’s capital will remain on the sidelines – unable to create jobs or increase economic activity within its 700 MHz license area.

Collectively, the rural and regional carriers holding Lower A licenses do not have the scale or scope to attract equipment manufactures making Band Class 17 or Band Class 13 equipment to produce Band Class 12 equipment at reasonable costs. Even where Band 12 equipment can be made available, the costs are unnecessarily inflated by the limited scale resulting from the lack of interoperability across the 700 MHz bands. If such equipment were produced, it would not be technically capable of roaming outside of Band Class 12 deployed networks. Nevertheless, rural and regional carriers like Cellular South may have no choice but to reduce the speed and size of their 700 MHz deployment and pay the unnecessarily inflated costs of Band 12 equipment and devices if it wants to compete with Verizon Wireless and AT&T in the 4G market.

The Rural Cellular Association noted the FCC inquired whether or not rural carriers could simply rely on the good will of Verizon Wireless, which is running its own private interoperability initiative, the Rural American Partnership Program.  Verizon says it will work with rural carriers and sign roaming agreements with participants to help ensure equipment was standardized across multiple carriers.  But the Rural Cellular Association claims Verizon’s offer was akin to a digital Trojan Horse — a gift to rural operators on the outside, but one that benefits Verizon far more than rural carriers on the inside.

“Verizon’s Plan provides a limited number of rural carriers with nominal opportunity to add or extend their 4G coverage in a way that only fills Verizon’s coverage gaps. Additionally, Lower A licensees paid a significant amount of money for their spectrum, more than Verizon paid for the C block per MHz/pop, and have stringent geographic-based build-out requirements,” Rebecca Murphy Thompson, the rural carriers’ general counsel wrote the Commission. “Considering these strict build-out requirements, Cellular South will focus on building its own business, not helping Verizon expand its network.”

The Rural Cellular Association (RCA) also continued its campaign against what it sees as anti-competitive behavior on the part of AT&T and Verizon.

“In addition to interoperability, RCA described how its members have limited options to obtain nationwide data roaming, but their customers still expect nationwide coverage and comparable services to their urban counterparts. Larger carriers are blocking rural and regional carriers from obtaining data roaming with reasonable terms and conditions because there is no regulatory mandate. RCA plans to supplement the record to provide examples of how AT&T and Verizon have blocked rural and regional carriers from negotiating data roaming agreements with reasonable rates. After a year of negotiations, Cellular South now has a data roaming agreement with one of the larger carriers.”

For rural America, unaccustomed to getting good cellular coverage, the presence of rural carriers specifically targeting underserved communities as their main business function is a welcome change from “extended service” provided by larger carriers, mostly for travelers, as an afterthought.  These smaller carriers also often deliver savings in the communities they serve.

In Lauderdale County, Mississippi, the Board of Supervisors met earlier this week to review potential savings of at least $10,000 a year for the county sheriff’s department, just by ditching AT&T for Cellular South.  While Sheriff Billy Sollie had no objections to that, a follow up discussion about what to do with the savings started an on-camera debate that quickly descended into personal attacks and traded accusations.

District 5 supervisor Ray Boswell and Sheriff Sollie turned the meeting into a spectacle with allegations of drug and alcohol abuse, illegal use of county property, culminating in claims the sheriff was a “crybaby” and “a disgrace.”  A sheriff’s deputy even joined in at one point, yelling at Boswell for making unsubstantiated allegations and suggesting Boswell was arrested on felony charges but had his record expunged.

While other members of the board, including its president, sat stunned into silence, no one bothered to gavel the shouting match out of order.  The resulting 15 minutes of fame has created a sensation, and many area residents are embarrassed and upset.

Cellular South will probably win the county’s business, but heaven help the customer service representative that takes a call from Ray Boswell about a service problem.

[flv]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Lauderdale County Meltdown 12-6-10.flv[/flv]

Watch for yourself as a county meeting descends into chaos.  As it goes from bad to worse, nobody bothered to intervene to stop the escalating accusations and counter-accusations that have since become an embarrassment for residents of Lauderdale County, Miss.  (18 minutes)