AT&T and Verizon: The Doublemint Twins of Wireless

Mirroring AT&T’s announcement last month that it would begin implementing speed throttles for wireless unlimited data plan customers who are among the “top 5% of users,” Verizon Wireless quietly made changes last week allowing the company to throttle its own unlimited data plan “heavy users” who consume more than 2GB of usage per month on its 3G network.

But Verizon claims it isn’t actually throttling the speeds of customers, it is simply engaging in “network optimization practices” and using “network intelligence” to reduce speeds (sometimes to near-dial-up) while connected to a “congested cell site.”

That will prove a distinction without much difference to customers who rely on 3G data usage using cell sites Verizon deems congested.  They may also find the time spent in Verizon’s penalty box unusually long.

“You may experience [reduced speeds] for the remainder of your then current bill cycle and immediately following bill cycle,” Verizon’s FAQ states.

That can mean customers paying $30 a month for an “unlimited data plan” may find 3G usage a very slow experience for a maximum of two months before they are off Verizon’s throttle list.

The new speed throttle policy began Sept. 15.  Verizon:

Network Optimization practices and throttling is network intelligence.  With throttling, your wireless data speed is reduced for your entire cycle, 100% of the time, no matter where you are. Network Optimization is based on the theory that all customers should have the best network possible, and if you’re not causing congestion for others, even if you are using a high amount of data, your connection speed should be as good as possible. So, if you’re in the top 5% of data users, your speed is reduced only when you are connected to a congested cell site. Once you are no longer connected to a congested site, your speed will return to normal. This could mean a matter of seconds or hours, depending on your location and time of day.

Verizon has not said exactly how many of its cell sites it deems as “congested,” at what times that congestion is most likely to occur, and admits there is currently no way customers can learn when they are connected to a congested site so they can make an informed decision about their usage.

But the company does say customers can avoid the penalty:

1. Upgrade to a 4G phone and hope for good 4G LTE coverage.  Customers using Verizon’s 4G network are not currently subject to a speed penalty for “excessive use.”
2. “Upgrade” to a tiered data plan with usage allowances.  Verizon will not throttle the speeds of customers who are not on unlimited data plans.
3. Reduce your data usage, especially in areas where congestion is likely.

Choke collars are in season at AT&T and Verizon Wireless, leaving Sprint's unlimited service looking more consumer-friendly by the day.

Those suggestions require potentially pricey new handsets, require customers to abandon their existing unlimited data usage plan, or simply get you thinking twice before launching a data session, fearing being grounded for up to two months with a dramatically reduced level of service.

The biggest impact of the network speed throttles will be among data-heavy iPhone users.  Apple’s iPhone doesn’t support 4G, and is likely to continue to rely on 3G network coverage when the next version of the popular phone is introduced in October.  Ultimately, Verizon’s new policy means iPhone devotees using more than 2GB per month may have to abandon their phone or their unlimited data plan if they want to avoid the throttle.

Verizon also found a way to keep customers from canceling penalty-free, noting contract changes that reserved the right to implement network management techniques were made in February.  The 60-day window for the “materially-adverse” contract change cancellation policy expired in April.  Verizon:

By alerting customers in February 2011, and including the notice in our terms and conditions as of February 3, 2011, we made sure customers knew we began reserving the right to implement Network Optimization practices.  In February 2011, we began alerting customers:

• Data Management – (note: now named “Network Optimization” to more accurately describe the tools) – Verizon Wireless may reduce data throughput speeds in a given bill cycle for customers who use an extraordinary amount of data and fall within the top 5% of data users.  The reduction will only apply to those using congested cell sites and can last for the remainder of the current and immediately following billing cycle.  The reductions will only apply when appropriate in locations and at times of peak demand.
• Data Optimization – (note: now named “Video Optimization” to more accurately describe its function) – Verizon Wireless is implementing optimization and transcoding technologies in its network to transmit data files in a more efficient manner to allow available network capacity to benefit the greatest number of users, and although unlikely, the process may minimally impact the appearance of the file as displayed on the mobile device.

Interestingly, AT&T’s own speed throttle penalty was estimated to kick in after 4GB of usage, not the 2GB Verizon is using as its benchmark for “network optimization.”  Verizon also says customers with their Mobile Hotspot feature will find that usage exempted from counting towards the 2GB threshold.

Verizon has opened up a new web page explaining the throttling policy.

[Thanks to Stop the Cap! reader Mileena, among many others, who shared the news with us.]

Verizon Wireless has announced a new $50 unlimited talk, text, and web prepaid plan for price sensitive new customers who don’t mind being stuck with a lower-end feature phone.

The new Verizon Unleashed unlimited plan has been test-marketed since April to prepaid customers in southern California and Florida, but will now be available nationwide from Verizon stores, Best Buy, Wal-Mart and Target.

Although existing Verizon Wireless prepaid customers may be able to sign up for the plan on their existing phones, new customers in test markets were limited to a selection of just a handful of “feature phones” that make web use and texting cumbersome:

• LG Cosmos™ 2 — Now into its second generation, this basic feature phone slightly improved its slide-out keyboard.  The phone was rated “adequate” for an entry-level feature phone, but CNET’s detailed review notes it lacks 3G EV-DO service.  That means you will be web browsing on Verizon’s painfully slow 1xRTT data network.  Verizon has no worries customers using this phone will chew up a lot of wireless data.  Customers rated the build quality as adequate, but found the keys on the first generation of this phone did tend to wear out with a lot of use.  It’s a true “throwaway” phone once the warranty expires.  Repairs always cost more than buying a new phone.  Verizon’s website prices the phone at a stiff $189.99 for month-to-month customers, but it will probably remain priced at around $99.99 for prepaid customers choosing the Unleashed plan.
• LG Accolade™ — A real workhorse basic phone for Verizon Wireless, the Accolade is much better for making and receiving calls than doing anything with texting or web use.  The phone has no QWERTY keyboard to type on, and no 3G service either, so its usefulness for data and texting is extremely limited.  But it is cheap, routinely selling for under $40.  CNET has a video review.  We suspect this phone will not be major part of the nationwide rollout of Unleashed, as Verizon appears to have discontinued it recently.
• Pantech Caper — A front facing tiny keyboard features prominently on this phone, which would have been considered cutting edge five years ago.  Now, it’s considered a ho-hum “feature phone” for the non-smartphone crowd.  It received a fair rating from most reviewers, with the biggest complaints coming from unintentional pocket dialing and button pressing, and a lousy built-in camera.  No 3G service.  The Caper also won’t win any awards for its ergonomics.  Verizon Wireless had been selling this phone in test markets for $80 earlier this year.  CNET’s video review is here.

There is a good chance a few different, more current feature phones will be introduced for the Unleashed plan later this week.  But they will all likely dispense with support for 3G service and lack features many customers increasingly seek on smartphones.

Verizon Wireless has traditionally done poorly in the prepaid market, because its plans are considerably more expensive that those offered by competitors, especially T-Mobile and Sprint.  Verizon Wireless had been charging $95 a month for unlimited talk/text prepaid service plus $0.99 per day for web use.  At those prices, Verizon has been losing prepaid customers, now down to 4.4 million.  Many of those customers fled to providers like Sprint’s Virgin Mobile, which saw a 23 percent increase in its customers, which now number 13.8 million.

Verizon’s $50 unlimited plan matches AT&T’s $50 prepaid unlimited GoPhone plan.  Analysts suggest both companies have set prices (and limitations on the phones that work with the plans) at a level that allows them to compete with lower-priced rivals, but does not encourage their contract customers to switch to a cheaper prepaid plan.

For data-hungry smartphone users, there is little here to persuade anyone to downgrade to a $50 prepaid plan.

Shamrock Museum

The city of Shamrock, Okla. may not be a city for much longer, facing unincorporation and liquidation of its remaining assets, which include the abandoned police cars that used to earn the city enough ticket revenue to keep the doors open.  But fast (and free at the local community center) Internet prevails (with competition, too) in a city with fewer than 100 remaining citizens.  It’s all thanks to a federal broadband grant and an existing Wireless ISP.

Shamrock’s unlucky predicament comes at the expense of the boom-and-bust oil business that launched dozens of small towns in rural Oklahoma, only to leave them largely abandoned when the oil dried up, or the cost to access it becomes too prohibitive.  Once a community numbering 10,000, Shamrock, located nearly halfway between Oklahoma City and Tulsa, had recently been surviving on revenue earned from writing traffic tickets in infamous speed traps set up along Highway 16.  Shamrock, along with Big Cabin, Caney, Moffett, and Stringtown, became so notorious for their dependence on traffic ticket revenue to keep the towns afloat, at one point the state government publicly designated them “speed trap towns” and banned them from writing tickets on state and federal highways. When Creek County officials learned the city was using non-commissioned officers to write tickets, they shut down the whole operation.

Soon after, residents found the city hall padlocked, with coffee cups still on the desks and police evidence lockers still stuffed with property from active criminal cases (although seized marijuana and beer has since disappeared.)

In fact, the only service now in operation at the city hall, now converted into a “community center,” is Internet access on 10 computers made possible by @Link Services LLC, an Oklahoma City-based Wireless Internet Service Provider (WISP) that provides service in rural areas, with the help of a broadband grant from the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture.

The broadband grant, amounting to $536,000, with matching funds of $134,000 kicked in by @Link, covers the costs of running the community center for two years and extending wireless access with the construction of a new wireless radio tower in Stillwater, which allows the company to reach Shamrock residents.

In addition to providing free access at the former city hall, @Link also sells Internet access to area residents (the only remaining business in town is a diner):

“This is going to be the last place anyone would provide Internet without government funding because there is no chance of turning a profit,” Kerry Conn, chief financial officer of @Link Services told The Oklahoman. “But if you don’t have Internet services, your town is going to die.”

@Link CEO Samual Curtis says their wireless Internet access sells itself.

“Broadband is a very easy sell where there is no broadband,” Curtis told the newspaper.

The only problem with that is Shamrock currently does receive service from another Wireless ISP — OnALot, a service of HDR Internet Services, Inc.  OnALot operates from 70 systems in more than 25 cities and communities across rural Oklahoma.  @Link’s arrival in town, with the assistance of a federal broadband grant, came as a surprise to some Shamrock residents who already had Internet service from OnALot.  Now those customers have two choices — both wireless — for Internet service.  OnALot, the incumbent, is often cheaper, too:

OnALot does not sell traditional speed tiers.  Instead customers share access points rated at speeds of 11 and 54Mbps.  Customers do not actually see anything close to those speeds, because they are theoretical maximums and each access point is shared by several users.  But since many residential customers do not have a firm understanding of what different speed levels represent, it has proven workable for HDR Internet to sell services based on price, not speed.

OnALot does sell dedicated, private wireless circuits to customers who don’t want to share, but they are comparatively expensive:

OnALot.com operates both standard Line-of-Sight and Near-Line-of-Sight systems on the 80' tall water tower on the west side of Shamrock.

One Oklahoman reader, Bobbi, wondered why @Link received federal grant money to provide Internet service in a community that already had access.

“Why this company didn’t do their homework before they used government money to provide a service to a town that had that service,” Bobbi asked. “Wouldn’t that be a misuse of the grant money?”

Broadband grant funding has come under criticism at times for funding projects that incumbent providers accuse of duplicating services.  A study funded by the National Cable & Telecommunications Association, the cable industry’s top lobbyist, found several instances of grants that would deliver broadband service to areas already served by other providers.

“While it may be too early for a comprehensive assessment of the [government]’s broadband programs, it is not too early to conclude that, at least in some cases, millions of dollars in grants and loans have been made in areas where a significant majority of households already have broadband coverage, and the costs per incremental home passed are therefore far higher than existing evidence suggests should be necessary,” the study says.

Thus far, much of the funding for rural Oklahoma seems to be directed towards wireless Internet access projects, which typically serve sparsely populated areas cable and phone companies have traditionally ignored.

The NCTA’s criticism, in particular, was directed against its would-be competitors.  The lobbying group suggests the price of competition was too high.

Based on the cost of the direct grants and subsidizing the loans, the NCTA study estimated that the cost per incremental home passed would be $30,104 if existing coverage by mobile broadband providers was ignored, and $349,234 if mobile broadband coverage was taken into account.

Wireless ISP operators have told Stop the Cap! many of their projects are self-financed and do not receive government assistance.  Some WISP operators have accused the government of making broadband grants to wireless operators a cumbersome, if not impossible prospect because incumbent telephone companies are often most likely to meet the government’s grant criteria.

For Shamrock residents, one piece of good news: @Link Services and OnALot both have no Internet Overcharging schemes like usage caps.  However, OnALot prohibits the use of peer-to-peer software (torrents) and @Link Services maintains the right to curtail speeds for those who create problems for other users on their shared wireless network.

OnALot’s usage policies are among the most frank (and common sense) we’ve seen, because they are up front with customers about the impact certain traffic can have on their wireless network:

1. You are paying us to download from the Internet. We do not limit you on that. You can download anything you want 24/7. Games, email, web pages, radio stations, and so on – we don’t care, downloading is what you are paying us for. That said, we would prefer that you do not leave an active game un-attended, or run a radio station continuously, as these eat up bandwidth that others could be using. When you’re done with your game, please turn it off.
2. We do have restrictions when it comes to uploading TO the Internet. P2P or Peer-to-Peer programs are NOT allowed. These limitations apply primarily to file sharing programs. We do NOT allow music or video sharing programs, bit torrent programs or other programs where outside users can extract files from your computer with or without your express consent. And seriously, do you actually WANT others to have full access to your computer? That’s what you’re giving to file sharing programs! Please call us if you are unsure if the program you are using is a file sharing program.
3. Yes, you can upload to your favorite website, send big emails, and transfer any size files that are under your control. That’s OK with us – these are intermittent in nature and under your full control. It’s the unattended uploading that sharing programs do that we do not allow.
4. If your computer has a virus and is “spewing” out onto the Internet, we expect you to have it cleaned. Causing others to become infected is wrong, and we may take steps to disable your Internet connection. We will call you first, explain what is going on and ask that you have your machine cleaned. If you decide not to do this, we will then cut you off until you do.

The Chicago Tribune‘s advocacy for the merger of AT&T and T-Mobile leaves the facts far behind, and raises questions about just how much the newspaper understands about telecommunications company mergers.

In this morning’s edition, the newspaper claims efforts by the Justice Department to block the merger will “slow [wireless] progress to a crawl.” That’s a half-baked conclusion, considering AT&T’s own accidentally-public internal documents reveal a willingness to spend $39 billion on a merger while balking at spending one-tenth of that amount to upgrade its own 4G network.  The injury to rural America the Tribune fears most was self-inflicted by AT&T even before the merger was announced.

Access to advanced wireless Internet is the key. A merger of AT&T and T-Mobile would bring an under-served swath of America into the 21st century of high-speed mobile data communication. Much like the rural electrification movement of the 1930s, this deal offers a chance for many Americans to leap ahead technologically.

If Justice gets its way, progress will slow to a crawl. We think the FCC should approve the merger after obtaining appropriate concessions — and Justice should settle its case sooner, not later. Dragging out this proceeding stands to hurt a nation that can ill afford more damage from a government too often hostile to business interests.

Evidently the editorial writers at the Tribune have been drinking AT&T’s Kool-Aid.  There is more to see here than AT&T’s advocacy kit, if one is willing to look beyond lucrative, saturation advertising campaigns and lobbying.

The government got the bright idea of helping wire rural America for electricity when commercial providers refused.

AT&T’s own merger announcement spoke glowingly of the “increased efficiencies” a more concentrated wireless marketplace will deliver, but said very little to investors about T-Mobile’s cellular network being the key to unlock rural wireless.  The reason is simple: T-Mobile doesn’t have a rural wireless network.  In fact, T-Mobile’s long-standing focus on urban markets means considerable duplication of resources in medium and large cities — resources that might help reduce the number of dropped calls in cities like New York, Chicago or San Francisco, but hardly a boon for residents of Ottumwa, Iowa, who barely get a signal today from AT&T, much less T-Mobile.

We agree with the Tribune editors when they say improved advanced wireless Internet is important to rural America. But nothing within AT&T’s massive document dump guarantees rural 4G service, especially after four national companies judged it didn’t make much business sense.  Three national carriers hardly strengthens the case.  In fact, investors will expect AT&T to use precisely the same Return on Investment-formulas that have always ruled rural 4G wireless out of bounds.

The Tribune forgets rural electrification came in spite of private power companies, who viciously opposed government electrification projects (unless they benefited from them).  The reason rural Americans went without electrical service until the late 1930s was the same reason rural Iowa doesn’t have lightning-fast 4G service — it doesn’t make much business sense to provide it.

When President Franklin D. Roosevelt declared electricity an essential utility service every American should be able to access at a fair price, government resources picked up where Wall Street left off — financing electric generation projects and encouraging the development of power cooperatives and municipal utilities. It often took more than 20 years to pay off the costs of the infrastructure — at a price (and wait) unwilling to be covered by giant power companies like Chicago’s Commonwealth Edison at the time.

It’s much the same story for AT&T today.  The enormous telecommunications company was provided an estimate of $4 billion to upgrade its network to 4G service nationwide.  Company executives refused, suggesting the time required to recoup that investment was too far out for their tastes.  But a $39 billion dollar merger with T-Mobile, despite the much higher price tag, delivers immediate benefits they can take to the bank: decreased competition and pricing innovation.  T-Mobile delivers both on its own, and even in fourth place influenced the service plans and pricing at other wireless carriers.  By eliminating that competition, the pressure to reduce prices or enhance service is diminished.  The ability to raise prices, or reduce the number of services, is enhanced.

Astonishingly, the Tribune writers completely ignore the biggest reason why AT&T cannot afford to slow progress to a crawl.  Its name is Verizon Wireless, and AT&T ignores its own network at its peril.  That’s why competition, even from America’s #4 carrier, remains critically important.

While the Chicago Tribune seems comfortable rallying for the cause of one of their advertisers — a multi-billion dollar corporation it sees as a victim of government “anti-business” hostility, we’re more concerned about protecting American wireless consumers from the results of AT&T’s efforts to cut competition (and consumer-friendly services) to a bare minimum.  AT&T’s carrot is the illusory promise of enhanced wireless service in rural communities the company routinely ignores.  The Justice Department, thankfully, prefers the stick — recognizing an anti-competitive, anti-trust feeding frenzy when it sees one, and is correct when it gives it a good whack.

A new study from the University of Michigan suggests one U.S. cell phone company is intentionally throttling cell phone speeds by as much as 50 percent, potentially to engage in “deep packet inspection” of their customers’ wireless traffic.

The researchers also found bad network management may be costing you up to 10 percent of your daily battery life.

The study, published by a team of researchers at the university and Microsoft Research, relied on nearly 400 volunteers running a diagnostic application while using 107 wireless providers around the world.  Researchers found company policies at several carriers in conflict with practices guaranteeing the fastest wireless data speeds, maximum battery life, and protection from malware and other hacker actions like IP spoofing.

The researchers refused to name the biggest offending carriers, citing legal reasons, but rang the alarm that network performance and security was clearly hampered by management decisions designed to keep costs down and maximize company network efficiency, at the expense of the quality of your service.  Among the conclusions:

• Microsoft engineer Ming Zhang believes the one U.S. carrier with dramatically reduced speed performance is probably using “deep packet inspection” techniques to analyze what individual customers are doing with their wireless connections.  The overhead from that inspection process is implicated in reduced speeds and performance;
• At least 11 wireless carriers are hurriedly shutting down TCP data connections that applications want to leave open in order to communicate on the network.  When an app discovers the data connection has been closed, it has to request a new connection, wasting up to 10 percent of daily battery life;
• Four of 60 cellular networks allow IP spoofing, which can make hosts vulnerable to scanning and battery draining attacks even though they are behind a firewall.