Stop The Cap! has gleaned some interesting information from their source inside Frontier noting that Frontier's next-generation plan for many users will be -- AT&T U-Verse? According to documents obtained by the website, Frontier is in talks with AT&T to license AT&T's U-Verse technology and offer it to select portions of Frontier's footprint sometime in the latter part of 2012.

The 100,000 FiOS customers (or what's left of them after extensive price hikes) will still be supported, but any new "next gen" expansion will be AT&T U-Verse. It's not clear if the deal includes broadband and TV, but the arrangement was apparently born out of their existing wireless partnership:Frontier generally benefits from limited competition in many of its markets, allowing the company to make upgrades less of a priority. In markets where Frontier does compete with a DOCSIS 3.0 upgraded cable operator they're generally outclassed -- with DOCSIS 3 providing speeds up to 50 or even 100 Mbps while Frontier's services top out at 10 Mbps. Most Frontier customers see closer to 1.5 - 3 Mbps. While U-Verse will improve Frontier's competitive position, AT&T too has trouble competing with cable given their top offered speed is 24 Mbps.

AT&T's U-Verse build is over, leaving roughly half of AT&T's DSL users stuck on slower speeds with no upgrades in sight.

Frontier today announced that the company has successfully completed the integration of all the Verizon DSL and landline networks acquired in an $8.5 billion deal announced in 2009. "Consistent processes and procedures help get new products and services to customers faster, enhance customer retention and market share, and improve the overall customer experience," insists Frontier CEO Maggie Wilderotter. The integration wasn't without problems, most notably Frontier suddenly making it very clear (in the form of price hikes and new $500 installation fees) after deal approval they didn't want to continue offering TV services to the 100,000 FiOS customers acquired in the deal. Next up for Frontier: bringing millions of customers on sluggish 1-3Mbps DSL into the modern age sometime in the next decade.

Frontier just got done swearing to the heavens they were dedicated to the FiOS TV customers they acquired from Verizon, after socking those customers with huge price hikes and whopping new $500 installation fees. The company can't afford to be in the TV business or expand fiber to the home services, but couldn't acknowledge as much pre-merger to regulators when they were busily promising new jobs in order to get the deal approved. Frontier's now reducing about a quarter of their Fort Wayne FiOS installation staff, something workers say will extend customer wait times -- which a local installer claims is already ten days for a technician visit. Verizon's other big deal with Fairpoint, which both companies also claimed would create jobs, has resulted in significant job losses for locals.

Frontier Communications has been rather ungracefully trying to offload or otherwise scare away the 100,000 FiOS TV customers it acquired in its deal with Verizon because of high programming costs. First the company imposed a huge 50% price hike and botched DirecTV offer, then added a new massive $500 installation fee to frighten off new customers.

Frontier Communications today announced that the company is going to begin reselling AT&T wireless service to Frontier customers. According to a press statement, the two companies will test the offering during the first half of the year, expanding it across Frontier's entire footprint "once operational processes are complete." "Teaming with one of the most respected brands in global communications will cost-effectively address our customers’ desire for a single-source provider for all their communications needs," says Frontier CEO Maggie Wilderotter on the deal. Such partnerships generally haven't exactly thrilled customers, given the service comes at a premium over what they can expect to pay should they go to the wireless provider directly (though users do get the benefit of a single bill).

According to Frontier's latest quarterly earnings, the company saw their earnings decline 30% and revenues decline 8% year over year. The company, which spent $8.6 billion to buy Verizon DSL and landline networks across fourteen states, says it gained 16,200 broadband customers on the quarter. However, Frontier posted 3.17 million overall residential customers and 319,379 business customers, down 10% and 9.8%, respectively, from one year earlier. The company also noted that they lost 9,900 FiOS TV subscribers and 3,100 FiOS Internet subscribers during the third quarter -- something that's not too surprising given the company's attempt to drive those customers away with rate hikes and massive new $500 installation fees.

In 2008 Verizon offloaded their New Hampshire, Maine and Vermont DSL and landline networks to Fairpoint Communications for $2.7 billion. The deal was a crafty and complicated one for Verizon, company lawyers using a Reverse Morris Trust to not only offload networks they had no interest in upgrading -- but to saddle Fairpoint with $1.7 billion in Verizon debt while netting a nifty $600 million tax write off.

After acquiring some Verizon FiOS customers in a massive 14-state deal to obtain millions of rural DSL and phone users, Frontier has been trying to exit the TV business -- first with a huge 50% price hike and botched DirecTV offer, and then with a massive $500 installation fee for FiOSTV to frighten off new customers. Earlier this month we noted how Comcast was taking advantage of this move by running ads stating Frontier was "pulling the plug" on FiOS, and that users should switch to Comcast.

Frontier Communications has been rather ungracefully trying to offload or otherwise scare away the 100,000 FiOS TV customers it acquired in its deal with Verizon, first with a huge 50% price hike and botched DirecTV offer, and now with a massive $500 installation fee to frighten off new customers. All the while (alongside starting the ball rolling to back out of TV franchise agreements) Frontier has been insisting they aren't leaving the TV business, despite efforts to migrate all of these customers to DirecTV as quickly as possible.

Frontier Communications has been rather ungracefully trying to offload or otherwise scare away the 100,000 FiOS TV customers it acquired in its deal with Verizon, first with a huge 50% price hike and botched DirecTV offer, and now with a massive $500 installation fee to frighten off new customers. All the while (alongside starting the ball rolling to back out of TV franchise agreements) Frontier has been insisting they aren't leaving the TV business, despite efforts to migrate all of these customers to DirecTV as quickly as possible.

Earlier this month Frontier Communications imposed an unprecedentedly-massive TV rate hike on the 100,000 FiOS customers they acquired in their deal with Verizon. Frontier, unwilling to pay programming costs like Verizon did, clearly wants out of the TV business and is pushing those users toward DirecTV service (though not necessarily doing a very good job of it).

When Frontier acquired Verizon's unwanted networks across fourteen states, the deal included about 100,000 FiOS customers, who'll be getting a new post-acquisition present for the new year. The Oregonian is the first to report that Frontier will be increasing the cost of TV service for these acquired customers by as much as 46%.

Verizon neglected infrastructure in West Virginia for years in order to focus their attention on more profitable markets. That's why it's not too surprising to see Frontier struggling with transition support in West Virginia, but doing much better with the transition in the Pacific Northwest, where Verizon deployed FiOS service to about 100,000 customers. Oregon regulators say the transition has been smooth so far for the roughly 400,000 phone, DSL and FiOS customers -- though first bills haven't gone out yet, and users are still a little annoyed about that suddenly missing FiOS TV functionality. Frontier tells The Oregonian they pulled that extra functionality (like remotely programmed DVRs) "based on concerns expressed by the cable networks" about "unauthorized distribution."