Phillip "Not Paid by AT&T" Dampier

When asked if the merger of AT&T and T-Mobile will limit customer choice, NAACP’s local executive director Stanley Miller told a Cleveland, Ohio television station, “I don’t think that’s an issue in today’s environment; I think the companies are smarter today and they will make people understand and give them the beneficial services that they’ll need.”

The civil rights group had nothing to say about how much AT&T will charge for these “beneficial services.”

At least WEWS-TV in Cleveland is bothering to ask the question.  Most of America’s television news has either ignored the enormous merger on offer from AT&T and T-Mobile, or didn’t wade much further beyond AT&T’s press release about the “benefits” the merger will bring.  Unfortunately, the television station never bothered to alert viewers to the fact the civil rights group receives substantial financial support from AT&T.

Miller’s performance trying to tout his parent organization’s unqualified support for the merger sent a very clear message to anyone watching NewsChannel 5 — he doesn’t really understand what he is talking about.

On the issue of expanding wireless service into rural Ohio, Miller was left tongue-twisting his way into advocating a monopoly because they’ll be best equipped to get service to those who need it.  That’s a fascinating prospect — a monopoly spending money expanding service where it is unprofitable to provide.  That’s the reason companies like AT&T have ignored rural America, and will continue to do so — merger or not.

Miller (WEWS-TV)

In fact, AT&T’s claim that it needs the network of T-Mobile to stop the persistent problems of dropped calls and slow data service doesn’t make much sense either.  Verizon, AT&T’s closest competitor, doesn’t seem to be suffering those problems, perhaps because it has made investments in upgrades AT&T has avoided.

In California, consumer advocate Jon Fox was taking an equally skeptical look at AT&T’s claims on behalf of CalPIRG, the California Public Interest Research Group.  Fox noted AT&T’s promotion of the merger in his state came at invitation-only cheerleading sessions run by company officials:

Earlier this month, AT&T California President Ken McNeely explained to an invitation-only audience that the proposed merger with T-Mobile will create new jobs, help communities and improve wireless phone service. AT&T preferred not to take questions from the general public on how that vision fits with AT&T’s history of consolidation, layoffs and aggressive market behavior.

Nearly 30 years after regulators broke up AT&T’s unprecedented control over the U.S. wired phone market, consumers are asked to believe that this time things will be different. This notion defies both experience and common sense. Unless significant market regulation is put into place that encourages a competitive wireless arena to flourish, this proposed merger will be bad for consumers, innovation and economic growth.

Fox notes the wireless marketplace in the United States is hardly a paragon of competitiveness today.  If the merger were approved, 76 percent of Americans would receive wireless service from two providers — AT&T and Verizon.  Fox observed America’s next-most-hated conglomerate — the oil and gas industry — wishes it could have that sort of market power.  The top two oil companies in the U.S. have a combined market share of only 24 percent.  America, he notes, wouldn’t tolerate that kind of consolidation in the gasoline market, so why should we tolerate it in the mobile market?

The California Public Interest Research Group

Fox advocates more competition, not less.  He suggests the government force AT&T and Verizon to open their cellular networks to independent third party competitors at fair prices, and let everyone compete.  That could germinate competition that would end the chorus of rate increases from the largest players and allow for innovative pricing plans that don’t force customers into the nearly identical service plans AT&T and Verizon want to force you to accept.  T-Mobile already provides the most innovative pricing in the wireless marketplace, and AT&T is about to swallow that innovation whole.

What ultimately happens to a well-dwarfed Sprint remains an open question, but one many on Wall Street have already answered, suspecting America’s third largest carrier simply won’t be in a position to compete.  Fox thinks the situation is dire when two companies will have a virtual lock on wireless data services Americans increasingly depend on.

That’s not the view of the NAACP, of course.  But then the NAACP is hardly an independent observer, being the recipient of a considerable amount of money and executive talent from AT&T.  That counts for a whole lot more than the rank and file members of the organization, who will be paying the increased prices AT&T has in store for everyone.

[flv width=”360″ height=”290″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/WEWS Cleveland ATT T-Mobile Merger 7-14-11.mp4[/flv]

WEWS-TV in Cleveland investigates the ramifications of a merger between AT&T and T-Mobile.  More than 94% of all Ohioans filing comments with FCC oppose the merger, but groups like the NAACP support it.  NewsCenter 5 wanted to find out why.  (3 minutes)

A Boston firm believes broadband is something best shared, and plans to put that notion to the test by bringing free access to wireless broadband to anyone in range of its equipment.

NetBlazr starts with gigabit fiber from Cogent Communications, and then delivers free or low-cost access to any customer that is willing to do two things:

1. Spend $299 for their basic installation kit, which includes a high speed router, three antennas, and some cabling;
2. Use the included equipment to receive service from NetBlazr and agree to share it with anyone in range of the wireless antennas included in the kit.

Reception of the wireless broadband signal, comparable to Business Class DSL, comes with no ongoing fees.  If you want dedicated, guaranteed speeds, NetBlazr will sell them to you at an added cost.  The more customers exchanging signals, the more robust and faster the network becomes, says NetBlazr CEO Jim Hanley.

Although the service is currently designed to operate for business customers in downtown Boston, Hanley sees the possibility of crowdsourcing a broadband platform eventually large enough to cover residential homes and businesses across the country, at almost no expense.

The venture is new, however, and the company’s FAQ warns businesses not to depend entirely on NetBlazr for dependable broadband just yet.

Because it’s still new, the quality and level of service is highly dependent on what kind of signal one can receive from the next nearest business that belongs to the cooperative.  If you are the only one for blocks around, the signal could be marginal to non-existent.

Such communal networks only work when they reach a critical mass of cooperative members to blanket areas with coverage.  At the moment, that means Boston’s Back Bay and downtown, where high-rise buildings help get the signals around densely populated neighborhoods.

NetBlazr’s marketing brochure touts the service can deliver symmetrical speeds up to 60Mbps for free, and is particularly suited to offices that need additional broadband resources, but don’t want to sign a pricey upgrade agreement with incumbent providers like Verizon.

NetBlazr’s competitors like the aforementioned phone company are reacting with a shrug of the shoulders so far.

Verizon spokesman Phil Santoro: “Competition is always healthy and the market for Internet service is already highly competitive.”

“We aren’t familiar with this company’s business proposition, but I can tell you that Comcast already offers secure and reliable high speed Internet,” spokesman Marc Goodman told the Boston Herald.

Earlier efforts to share Internet services in neighborhoods through Wi-Fi ran into trouble when Internet Service Providers found out.  Virtually all providers specifically prohibit customers from sharing their residential service with non-paying customers beyond the property line.  But since NetBlazr arranges for its own access, this stumbling block is overcome.

Company officials say they have enough connectivity to support the demand, although business users don’t traditionally pound networks with peer-to-peer file requests or lots of online video, so how NetBlazr will ultimately perform in a residential setting remains to be seen.

The company has impressed technology mavens at the Massachusetts Innovation & Technology Exchange.  NetBlazr won this year’s “Best Bootstrapped Start-up” award.  It was also a finalist for the $1 million MassChallenge competition held earlier this year.

Hanley’s ultimate goal is to provide cheap, commodity Internet access, and thinks within five years his idea will be a major game-changer for how broadband service is delivered in the United States.

[flv width=”480″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/NetBlazr.flv[/flv]

netBlazr CEO Jim Hanley indicts America’s broadband duopoly and says direct action through new competition will solve the problem faster than public policy can.  Hanley also explains how his service works. (10 minutes)

Meigs County, Ohio

Connect Ohio, one of the many state chapters working with telecommunications industry-backed Connected Nation, has released its 2011 Technology Assessment about how the state is adopting broadband technology.

Despite celebrating improvements, large parts of rural Ohio still do not receive any kind of broadband service, especially from the state’s dominant provider AT&T, one of the companies that has traditionally backed Connected Nation.

The friendly relations these broadband groups maintain with their sponsors results in reports that strenuously avoid any direct criticism of providers for ignoring rural Ohio, particularly in the southeastern part of the state where broadband is especially difficult to obtain.

Connect Ohio’s findings, mostly provided by voluntary data from Internet Service Providers and respondents to various surveys, downplays rural Ohio’s broadband drought:

Statewide, 5% of Ohio residents report that broadband is not available where they live, 85% say with certainty that broadband is available, and 10% do not know whether broadband service is available.  By comparison, Connect Ohio’s provider-validated Broadband Service Inventory found that 1.7% of households do not have terrestrial fixed broadband service access.

The disparity in Connect Ohio’s numbers is especially apparent in rural Meigs County, located in southeastern Ohio.

“Geographically speaking, nearly two-thirds of Meigs County does not have easy access to affordable broadband,” Meigs County Economic Development Director Perry Varnadoe told The Daily Sentinel. “In terms of infrastructure, access to broadband is just as important as water and sewer service to businesses.”

Varnadoe thinks the few major providers that do offer service in the county are basically done expanding their service areas, and Varnadoe believes broadband adoption has reached a ceiling in Meigs County.

With much of the county bypassed for DSL or cable modem service, the only exception to this is fixed wireless service from New Era Broadband.  Unfortunately, it’s a costly alternative to traditional DSL.

New Era Broadband of Coolville is a Wireless ISP

New Era delivers up to 1.5Mbps service for $60 a month with a $200 installation fee and a two-year service agreement, and provides service in the vicinity of the community of Racine.

The company is still waiting on a $2.9 million grant to expand service to an additional 3,000 residents, mostly in the area of Five Points, which only has access to dial-up Internet.

Only about half the residents of Belmont, Jefferson, Monroe and Harrison counties have broadband connections at home, the study also found.  The Intelligencer/Wheeling News-Register placed most of the blame for that on residents not being particularly interested in the Internet, but service and cost are likely more important factors, as cable and DSL service is also spotty in those counties as well.  If there is a computer in the home, there is a demand for broadband service, especially in households where children find Internet access increasingly important to complete study work.

For most residents, it has become a waiting game to see who will deliver access, if anyone will.  In most of Ohio, customers look to the phone or cable company for access.  Rural Ohio lacks good cable broadband coverage, and DSL from the phone company first requires an interest in providing the service, and AT&T has not proven to be aggressive in rural communities in the state.

In fact, the phone company has been seeking approval to discontinue providing rural landline service at a time and date of its choosing.  If the landline goes, the chance for wired DSL goes with it.

Phillip Dampier: "Where is the actual innovation in The Spectrum Innovation Act?"

Republican members of the Subcommittee on Communications and Technology on spectrum issues have circulated a draft bill — The Spectrum Innovation Act — which is breathtaking when you finish reading it.  For the first time I can recall, the United States Congress is proposing a way for business to bypass telecommunications laws by buying their way out.  The proposed bill would allow big spectrum holders like wireless phone companies, broadcasters, and others warehousing unused spectrum to win a “get out of regulation free”-card just by buying and selling the public airwaves.

A hearing on spectrum issues is scheduled for this Friday, and it promises to be fascinating if only to hear the reasoning behind Congress proposing to throw their own authority to the wind.

The bill’s contents are appalling for a variety of reasons:

• Public airwaves remain a private commodity that companies can buy, sell, or trade, with the not-so-fringe benefit of winning deregulation or being granted a legal free pass to ignore laws still in effect for others;
• The purchase of spectrum under this bill could allow wireless carriers to avoid even the pretense of today’s watered-down Net Neutrality policies;
• Unlicensed white space/spectrum which could be used for innovative new wireless applications could instead become warehoused by private companies for their own use (or more likely to keep others from using it.)

Harold Feld, legal director of Public Knowledge, says the impact of the House measure should not be underestimated.

Feld

“Until now, communications law has never been publicly put up for sale,” Feld said.  “This draft bill would do that by allowing broadcasters to choose which rules they will follow and which rules they won’t if they sell their broadcast spectrum at auction.”

That is distressing enough, but the implications for wireless innovation are in peril if this bill ever becomes law, according to Feld.

“The innovation and experimentation we have seen through the use of unlicensed spectrum would screech to a grinding halt,” Feld believes. “Rather than have the FCC decide how much spectrum would be used for unlicensed uses, the draft bill would require a collective bid for unlicensed spectrum higher than bids for licensed uses.  Given that unlicensed uses like Wi-Fi come from small and new companies, the future of new uses would be very bleak.”

Feld points to several provisions in the bill to prove his points:

• Pages 18-19, line 19 (regulatory relief). If you are broadcast licensee, instead of taking money from an incentive auction for repacking or moving to a different spectrum band, you can ask FCC for a waiver of any commission rule or any provision of law.

• Pages 28-29, line 8 (administration of auctions).  If someone buys a license at auction, the spectrum is exempt from even the weak Net Neutrality rules that have been approved to guard against basic anticompetitive activity in wireless service such as barring competitive services.

• Page 29, line 3.  Prohibits spectrum cap, and also eliminates the ability of  the Commission to favor small business and minority, women-owned businesses in auctions.

• Page 26, line 10. Unlicensed spectrum is subject to auction.  A block of spectrum would be put up for auction, with bidders specifying whether use would be for licensed or unlicensed use.  Unlicensed has to be higher for bid to be accepted.

• Page 30 (section begins).  Gives public safety spectrum to the states, without an auction, with a nebulous plan and some unspecified grant money to coordinate the public safety network.

He’s more than proved the point.

While such legislation would no doubt be celebrated by incumbent providers to reinforce the status quo — their status quo — it is a nightmare for everyone else — another piece of irony from some Republican lawmakers who name their bills the diametric opposite of their end effect.  We can’t think of a better way to crush innovation and destroy the potential of competition by granting today’s players deregulation and easy access to unlicensed spectrum.  It’s as oxymoronic as a level playing field in the Rocky Mountains.  That’s why we need some actual innovation in The Spectrum Innovation Act.

We have received dozens of e-mails from readers trying to add Verizon Wireless’ coveted 4G $30 unlimited-use Mobile Hotspot feature to their accounts, with varying results.  We’ve compiled, with the help of our readers, a guide to assist you in scoring the only good thing to come from Verizon’s recent changes in data pricing.  If you follow these steps, you should be good to go.

Q&A

1. What is a Mobile Hotspot and What Is Verizon offering? — Verizon Wireless offers customers a service to turn their 3G or 4G phones into a Wi-Fi provider, letting you connect your other portable devices, like a tablet or laptop, to your Verizon Wireless data connection to access the Internet over Wi-Fi.  Technically, this feature is built-in to most smartphones, but cell phone companies monetize it by charging you an extra monthly fee to use the service.  Traditionally, Verizon charges $20 extra a month (on top of your data plan) to enable this feature, and has limited it to 2GB of use per month.  Each additional gigabyte will cost you $10.  But when Verizon introduced its new 4G LTE network, early adopters to 4G phones got access to this feature for free, for a limited time.  On 7/7, Verizon’s new limited-use data plans took effect, and Verizon expired the free 4G Mobile Hotspot feature.  To placate 4G owners, it offered them the chance to continue getting unlimited use of this feature, for an extra $30 a month.

That’s a stiff price to pay on top of your monthly data plan, but because Verizon’s LTE network is currently fast enough to serve as a home broadband backup (we consistently get speeds of 11/3Mbps on LTE from our headquarters), $60 total for unlimited wireless Internet isn’t completely outrageous at those speeds.  Yes, it’s ridiculous Verizon disabled a feature built in and functional on phones in other countries, but it is the same story with other carriers as well.  We even agree with the proposition you should be able to use your unlimited data plan for anything you want, but that’s just not a reality at the moment.

2. Who exactly qualifies for the $30 unlimited Mobile Hotspot? — We have been able to confirm for sure that anyone who activated or at least ordered a 4G phone before midnight on 7/7 is qualified to upgrade to this plan.  You cannot, however, activate the plan on a 3G phone.  Only 4G models qualify.  Where things get murky is whether or not customers who currently have 3G phones can still upgrade to a 4G model after 7/7 and get this plan.  Droid Life believes the answer to this question may be “yes” based on two tweets sent from Verizon Support:

We are more skeptical, however, based on the accumulated responses we’ve collected from Verizon Wireless from our readers, which admittedly are all over the map.  Verizon reps have not been offering consistent information about the Mobile Hotspot plan since it was first announced more than a week ago.  The company is preoccupied with reassuring existing customers they were not at risk of imminently losing their unlimited data plans, an entirely different subject.

I would not upgrade to a 4G phone today in hopes of scoring this Mobile Hotspot plan unless you have the name of an employee you can use if you complete the order, try to activate the feature, and encounter resistance.  In truth, Verizon can do anything they want for any customer, new or otherwise.  The trick is finding an employee with the authority to make things happen.  Be prepared to escalate or call back if you encounter a roadblock.

3. What happens if I have a 4G phone and start a Hotspot session with a 3G signal, is it still unlimited? — Yes.  Any Mobile Hotspot session originated on this plan on a 4G phone is unlimited regardless of what network conditions you encounter, as long as you are on Verizon’s network.

4. Does this apply to mobile broadband, provided by a dongle or a MiFi device?  — No.  Only 4G smartphones qualify for this plan.

5. How many people can share my Mobile Hotspot connection at the same time? — Verizon traditionally says five, but my phone (Samsung Charge) supports up to 10 concurrent Hotspot connections.  That’s a lot, so if everyone piles on, expect some slowdowns from the shared connection.

6. Can you add and drop the featured plan and get it back later? — Verizon has not said.  The company has not responded to questions about the longevity of this plan, whether it could be withdrawn, or whether customers can add and drop it (and add it back) at will.  We see that as evidence this is a promotional add-on that is likely to be withdrawn for new customers at some point in the future.  Verizon traditionally grandfathers customers already on a plan indefinitely, which means if you have it, you can keep it.  If this feature is important to you, we recommend you add it and keep it active.  When it’s gone for new sign-ups, it’s gone.

7. I do not see the plan under Verizon’s My Services on their website.  Should I be concerned? — No.  The plan was being offered to customers initiating new Mobile Hotspot sessions on their 4G phones, but not to all.  We never found it on Verizon’s website.  The only indication it is active on your account is finding this: “4G SMARTPHONE HOTSPOT” listed on this page (to access, you must first login to your Verizon Wireless account and select the line on which the feature was ordered.)

Ordering Advice

We have found multiple methods of securing this plan, and with the thanks of Stop the Cap! reader DJ, we have even located the all-important plan number, which you can reference when contacting Verizon.  If you run into a roadblock calling Verizon customer service, or can’t get the plan added while visiting a Verizon Wireless corporate store, we have some other suggestions.

1. Customers who already had a 4G phone before 7/7 can call Verizon Wireless from your phone at 611 or 1-800-922-0204 Monday-Sunday 6am-11pm ET.  Tell them you wish to add plan code #76153 — $30 Unlimited 4G Mobile Hotspot.

2. If you activated a new 4G phone after 7/7, call VZW’s Orders & Activations Hotline at 1-877-807-4646.  Work through the prompts.  You may be prompted to accept a customer agreement and get “trapped” in a menu asking you to press “1” or “2” after accepting the customer agreement.  Press “0” and wait to be transferred to a live agent.  Tell them you wish to add plan code #76153 — $30 Unlimited 4G Mobile Hotspot.

3. If rebuffed by either, try calling 1-316-681-9940, the number to a Verizon store in Kansas that has employees active in several phone forums helping people trying to get on this plan.  They should be able to add the plan to any 4G phone account, whether you are in Kansas or not.  Again, reference plan code #76153 — $30 Unlimited 4G Mobile Hotspot.

Let us know if you still have any problems in our comments section!