The FCC has decided that it should give $9 billion for the deployment of wireless 5G, but the FCC has never examined that there has been a massive cross-subsidies of the wireless networks, where Local phone customers have ended up being charged for the fiber optic networks used by Verizon and AT&T wireless. We filed for the FCC to investigate these cross-subsidies, which include 5G wireless. Click to Read the Filing
Verizon Massachusetts Fiber Optic Failure, 1994-2020
1994: Verizon Massachusetts files with the Mass Department of Public Utilities to have fiber optic services, to replace the existing copper wires. The included colleges and universities, hospitals, as well as 330,000 residence and businesses.
1994: This same plan was also filed with the FCC known as “Video Dialtone”, and claimed the majority of the entire state would be finished by 2010.
“NYNEX proposes to deploy hybrid fiber optic and coaxial (HFC) broadband networks that will provide advanced voice, data, and video services, including interactive video entertainment, multimedia education and health care services… “NYNEX plans to deploy this type of network to the majority of its customers by the year 2010.”
1995: Verizon filed and was granted “alternative regulations”, which gave the company
1999: In New Networks institute filed a complaint in Massachusetts outlining how Verizon (then New England Telephone) convinced regulators that they would rewire the state starting in 1995 if the company got massive financial incentives – Deregulation — the removal of regulation that examined and limited their profits. The Massachusetts Department of Telecommunications and Energy, never acted on our complaint.
2005: Verizon announces FiOS and gets some municipality franchises for cable TV
2007: We presented testimony in front of the Massachusetts Joint Committee on Telecommunications Utilities and Energy.
2010: Verizon announces it is halting the fiber optic deployments in all states.
2016: Bait and Switch: Verizon announced it would be upgrading 100% of Boston and spend $300 million dollars. Instead, most of this has been a bait and switch to use the fiber optic wires that should go to homes to instead roll out wireless, and 5G Wireless.
We documented the story in articles in Huff Post and Medium.
- Verizon’s FiOS Deployment in Boston Is Fiber-To-The-B.S.
- Billions in Cross-Subsidies Could Bring Fiber Optic Broadband to Massachusetts Cities—But Remain Unchallenged, 2017
- Verizon’s Boston FiOS Fiber to the Home Plan Needs Investigating—Now.
- Verizon’s Boston FiOS Fiber-Wireless Bait-N-Switch
- Verizon, Fiber, Boston, Wireless: History Repeats Itself, Yet Again., 2016
- Verizon’s Boston Faux-FiOS, “One Fiber” Strategy Exposed
- More Exposed: Verizon’s FiOS-Wireless Bait & Switch in Boston
- Verizon’s $300 Million Shell Game in Boston and Cross-Subsidizing Wireless
- Verizon, Boston, Bernie, Fiber and the Facts
- Verizon Wireless’s 5G Deployment is a 1 Gig Fairy Tale.
- Verizon’s Massive East Coast FiOS Scandal: 41 Percent Coverage Using ‘Weasel Room’ Math 2015
DEEP DIVE ARCHIVE:
Huffington Post/Medium articles about AT&T and California
- The Trump-FCC-AT&T-Et Al. Plan: The Insidious “Wheel of Mis-Fortune”.
- The Corporate Takeover of the Trump-FCC Is in Full Attack Mode.
- Open Letter to California about SB-649: You’re being Played by ALEC & AT&T Et Al.
- The Copper-Wire World of AT&T: The Reason to Investigate AT&T, Now
- Solve Net Neutrality, Privacy, & Bring Back Competition: Break Up AT&T and Verizon… Again.
- Expose: AT&T California Fiber Optic Scandal: Billions Charged for Broadband that Never Showed Up.
- Californians Paid Billions Extra: The State Assembly Should Investigate AT&T’s Cross-Subsidies.
- IRREGULATORS: Stop the FCC and Investigate AT&T, Verizon, Et Al.
- Brendan Carr Omitted Critical Facts in His Testimony to Congress: He Worked for AT&T, Verizon, Et Al.
- Regulatory Capture of the FCC: Stacking the Deck with the New Proposed Republican Commissioner
- Verizon and AT&T Should be Required to Deliver FTTP, Fiber to the Home – Finally.
- California Wireless Legislation: Paid for by AT&T Et Al.
- AT&T, ALEC, FCC. The FCC’s plans are based on AT&T’s Petition, which is from ALEC Model Legislation.
- AT&T’s IP Transition Trials Lost 32% of “Legacy” Customers, yet the Overhyped Con Continues.
- AT&T’s 1000 Foot Violation of AT&T-DirecTV Merger Conditions?
- AT&T and Verizon’s Wireline and Wireless Cross-Subsidies Harm Competition and Every Communications Service You Use
- Corporate Greed vs Critical Infrastructure: Greed Won. America Lost.
- R.”I.P.” Rest in Peace, AT&T IP Transition Trials.
- Will the FCC Stop Verizon & AT&T’s Manipulation of Financial Accounting & Special Access (BDS) Overcharges?
- AT&T & Verizon, With the FCC, Blocked My Access to Critical Broadband Data
- Have You Received a Disconnect Notice From Verizon or AT&T Yet?
- AT&T’s IP Transition Trials Are a Superhyped, Yet Unsuccessful, Con
- The Age of Noise, Clutter and Spying on Us
- AT&T Slams AT&T. AT&T & Verizon File to Block Kushnick from the FCC’s “Special Access” Data… Again.
- AT&T’s Fiber Optic Construction Last Six Years — $140 Billion, or One Slice of Pizza and “FiberHype”?
- AT&T to FCC: Stop Kushnick From Examining the Special Access Data
- AT&T’s ‘IP Transition’ Trials Appear to Be a Total Bomb
- The FCC and AT&T Don’t Care About Rural Areas and They Can Just Make Crap Up
- Are the FCC and AT&T Harming the Children of Rural Communities?
- MobTel: Some of America’s Most Hated ISPs, Cable TV and Wireless Companies Have Their Associations Suing the FCC Over Net Neutrality
- I Do It For My Aunt Ethel
- Verizon & AT&T’s Wireless Broadband: $1,125.00 for One Month of Cable TV; $375.00 to Watch Netflix — and that’s Not Even ‘HD’.
- Stop the AT&T-DirecTV Merger or History Will Slap Us in the Face
- Will the FCC Ignore Our Complaint? Did AT&T Commit Perjury, Claiming it had Covered 100 Percent of 21 States With Broadband?
- Did AT&T Commit Perjury? Does AT&T have 100 Percent Broadband Coverage in 21 States?
- Did AT&T, Verizon, Et al., Garner Over $17 Billion in ‘Very Small Business’ Spectrum Licenses?
- Telecom Sleaze: ALEC and Its Communication’s Funders — AT&T, Verizon, Centurylink, Comcast and Time Warner Cable
BACK IN THE STACKS: 2002-2010
- FREE REPORT on Telecom Charges. Phone, Broadband, Wireless, Internet & Cable Charges in San Diego, California.
- With the removal of AT&T as a competitor, the prices of service increased and there was a clear harm to customers in terms of choice of service, Also, it is clear that this impacted previous AT&T customers adversely, especially low volume or low income families. — Based on survey of actual phone bills in San Diego CA working with UCAN, on a grant from the CA Consumer Protection Fund, done originally in 2004 then repeated in 2008.
- Teletruth Files Two Comments about AT&T-BellSouth Merger:
- Competition: FCC Can’t Create Enforceable Merger Conditions.FCC/Bells Harmed Competition — 43% Drop in Wholesale Lines. The Mergers Eliminated Competitors.
- Teletruth Sends Letter to Judge Sullivan Regarding the Bell-AT&T-MCI Merger Review.
- The Bell Mergers Harmed Broadband Deployment, Competition and the Economy.
- The AT&T and MCI Deals Added New Harms to the Public Interest – New Neutrality Concerns
- Wireless Spectrum Fraud by AT&T, Verizon, Cingular — Are they Very Small Businesses?
- Very Large Phone Companies have been able to create ‘fake fronts’ to bid on wireless spectrum as Very Small Businesses? Is this fraud?
- FTC Complaint for Commercial Speech, Deceptive Practices in Mergers,
- Teletruth files this Complaint with the FTC, claiming that the previous Bell mergers were based on a massive, 10-year pattern of misrepresentation, untruthful and outright fraudulent statements made to customers. How many misleading, deceptive or fraudulent statements does it take to become a case of fraud?
- TO READ THE RELEASE
- To Read this Complaint
- To Read the MINI-REPORT on SBC’s Mergers (PDF)
- TO TAKE ACTION AND READ MORE
- Break Up SBC, Break Up Verizon
- Teletruth Requests Congress Start Immediate Investigations into the Previous Bell Mergers.
- Do Not Let 2 Companies Control America’s Digital Future! — More Materials.26 States Lost Fiber Optic Broadband After each merger, SBC and Verizon cut fiber optic deployments. It impacted 26 states, over 200 million people.
- The AT&T-SBC, Verizon-MCI Mergers. Death to Competition. Investigate and Break Up SBC, Break Up Verizon.
- Comments: FCC in WC Docket 05-65, May 10th, 2005 TeleTruth Asks Senator Hollings for Hearings to Break Up SBC-Ameritech and Pay $1.2 Billion in Penalties. By April 2002 SBC was supposed to be competing in 30 cities outside their region. The commitments were set because SBC merged with Ameritech, another Bell company. According to the agreement, the FCC can “Divest” SBC of Ameritech and it is required to pay $1.2 billion in penalties. Therefore, TeleTruth (with New Networks Institute) is calling on Congressional hearings. This failure has raised the rates of every local subscriber because competition did not come into the markets to lower prices.
- For more information about the SBC Ameritech Merger
- To read the letter to Senator Hollings
- For a list of the cities SBC was supposed to compete
- To Take Action
Click for the FCC Numbers-Only Version of this Exhibit.
As I stare at the various pie charts and exhibits in the FCC’s latest report on broadband in America, “Internet Access Services: Status as of June 30, 2017”, published November 2018, only one thing comes to mind: Congress needs to investigate how this smoke and mirrors data is being used to create harmful public policies.
Back in March, 2011, I wrote about the FCC’s highly inaccurate National Broadband Map Database, where the companies listed did not offer service at my address or at the speeds listed.
Seven years later, and trying to reverse-engineer the number of broadband services, especially the accounting of the “Fiber to the Premises”, FTTP, here are a few startling long-term issues and new discoveries. In the industry, these are some of the dirty, little secrets.
Quoting the FCC, there are various caveats.
· “All facilities-based broadband providers are required to file data with the FCC twice a year (Form 477) on where they offer Internet access service at speeds exceeding 200 kbps in at least one direction.
· “Fixed providers file lists of census blocks in which they can or do offer service to at least one location, with additional information about the service.
Please notice the words and phrases: “census blocks”, “200Kbps in at least one direction”, “they can” and “at least one location”. We will address them in a moment.
How Big Is One Census Block?
A census block is sort of like the area of a postal zip code. And it is directly tied to a specific geography with people living and working at specific locations. Sounds obvious until you examine how they count these locations.
According to Current 360
“Block groups generally contain between 600 and 3,000 people, with an optimum size of 1,500 people… Each census tract contains at least one block group, and block groups are uniquely numbered within the census tract. A block group is the smallest geographical unit for which the census publishes sample data.”
Smoke & Mirror Competition
The FCC and phone companies claim that there is competition and yet, this next FCC caveat about this data tells us that while the database may show a competitor, you, the customer, may never be able to get service from them.
The FCC writes:
(PART 2: DRAINING THE TOXIC SWAMP)
Some of the most hated companies in America are the ISPs, wireless and cable companies, which include AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, and Charter (Spectrum). However, in 2018 America also has the distinction of having the most expensive, excessive wireless gigabyte prices in the world.
In fact, with the made-up fees and surcharges (that are revenues to the companies or taxes on the companies that are passed through to you) the price of almost all communications services in America continues to rise, even though the FCC claims that there is competition.
At the same time, a new study by the US Census shows that there are large areas of the US, both rural areas as well as inner cities, that have not been properly counted and they don’t have basic broadband-internet services at reasonable rates, creating a much larger amount of people and businesses impacted. Known as the “Digital Divide”, the FCC’s own broadband internet data has been proven to inflate the speed and coverage, covering up the extent of the harms.
This is because the FCC, the Agency that is supposed to be protecting our interests, has been captured by AT&T and Verizon. The Chairman, Ajit Pai, is a former senior Verizon attorney.
Does anyone think that this situation is going to get better under this buffoon’s co-opted guidance? He is aided and abetted by his former staffer and now Commissioner Brendan Carr. While at Wiley Rein, Carr worked as an attorney for Verizon, AT&T, as well as the CTIA, the wireless association. In fact, he was part of the legal team that sued the City of San Francisco over wireless issues — as a first amendment right of the wireless carriers; AT&T and Verizon control the wireless association.
It gets worse. In 2018, Carr introduced the FCC’s new 5G wireless regulations, claiming it would fix the Digital Divide, but all it does is to preempt the cities and states’ rights over wireless deployment in their own towns. These regulations appear to be a copy of ‘model legislation’ created by ALEC, the American Legislative Exchange Council (which was most likely funded by AT&T and Verizon) — Carr’s conflicts and ties to his former clients needs immediate investigations. Read More….
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: JULY 17th, 2018
New Networks Institute (NNI) & the IRREGULATORS— just helped to get Verizon to install 10,000 fiber optic lines in Verizon New York’s unserved areas as well as get the needed repairs for the copper networks. — We estimate this to be about $300 million to $1/2 billion dollars over time.
Our research and calls for an investigation started in 2010, and our reports, filings and analytical approach helped to initiate and was used in the investigation.
We are mentioned in the decision and will be taking next steps on this as we filed to block this settlement agreement —it left out billions in cross-subsidies and customer overcharging.
- Our filings and work: https://newnetworks.com/ny-related-filings/
- About the issues and our involvement. https://bit.ly/2JCdQne
We congratulate Communications Workers of America (CWA) and PULP, Public Utility Law Project, for their dogged persistence and putting our research and analysis to good use.
Press release -- https://on.ny.gov/2L1NccN "PSC Approves Verizon Service Quality Improvement Plan — Telecommunications Company Agrees to Expand Broadband Service to 32,000 Customers, Helping to Fulfill Governor Cuomo’s Goal to Expand Broadband Service in New York; Make Much-Needed Repairs to Existing Copper Service; Remove Unused Telephone Poles to Improve Safety —
Settlement -- https://on.ny.gov/2mnE8QY "The Commission declines to follow New Networks Institute’s recommendations to reject the JP, continue investigating Verizon’s financial practices, and require that wireline customers be reimbursed for the alleged improper cross-subsidization of Verizon’s wireless affiliates. The Commission’s primary objectives in this proceeding were to investigate and evaluate the quality of service Verizon is providing to its customers (Core and non-Core). More particularly, this proceeding was commenced when changing circumstances called into question the Commission’s premise for continuing Verizon’s service quality focus on Core customers. The Commission was concerned by Verizon’s announced plans to stop expanding its fiber network beyond areas currently served. The Commission also pointed to data indicating fewer customers were leaving Verizon’s networks. Given these indications, and the fact that more than 2 million of Verizon’s current customers remain reliant on an aging copper network, the Commission decided to examine whether changes to Verizon’s service quality oversight are necessary. The Commission recognized that this investigation would inherently include an examination as to the state of the copper system and whether Verizon’s investment in its network has been sufficient to provide adequate levels of service to consumers on regulated services. But, the Commission did not state any intention to revisit rate-of-return regulation. The Commission did recognize an expectation that the Company will continue to invest in its New York regulated operations as the Public Service Law unequivocally requires Verizon to provide adequate service. The Commission also made it clear that it would take the necessary action under the Public Service Law to address shortcomings if the market fails to provide Verizon an appropriate incentive to meet its statutory obligations. That said, the Commission has broad authority under the Public Service Law to initiate further investigations if the circumstances so warrant. The Commission focus has long been on ensuring compliance with minimum standards of service quality for customers lacking competitive choice. The Commission has previously investigated claims that Verizon has not been adequately investing in its copper network. In that context, the Commission has acknowledged that, in response to technological advances, the telecommunications landscape has changed dramatically. The Commission has also recognized that, in evaluating Verizon’s performance, it must consider the extent to which investment in the legacy copper network would be cost effective when that network is becoming competitively and technologically obsolete. The terms of the JP will implement specific improvements in Verizon’s system that will directly improve the service quality deficiencies that led to the commencement of this proceeding. In light of all this, we disagree with New Network’s recommendation to reject the Joint Proposal. The terms of the JP should result in service quality improvements that promote the public interest. Moreover, with regard to other commenters’ complaints about Verizon’s maintenance of its copper network and being forced onto more expensive wireless and fiber networks, the Commission notes that Verizon is required to offer its tariff services and tariffed-based rates regardless of the type of network delivering the telephone call. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Commission has long recognized the benefits and resiliency of the fiber network over the older vintage copper network a nd we note here that the JP will further that goal. Finally, in the Commission’s Initiating Order, we raised the question of whether “Verizon’s service quality processes and programs pertaining to all the Company’s regulated customers” are sufficient “to determine if modification of Verizon’s revised SQIP is warranted.” In light of the JP’s terms and conditions being approved herein, the Commission does not believe any changes are required at this time. However, as