dslreports logo
 story category
DOJ May Impose Tough Conditions on Verizon/Cable Deal
May Limit Scope, Time of Co-Marketing Relationship

Early last month, anonymous insider sources started telling news outlets that while the FCC would likely approve Verizon's huge co-marketing deal with the cable industry, the DOJ appeared poised to put up a bit of a fight. A new Reuters report certainly supports that idea, a source telling the news outlet that the DOJ is likely to impose significant conditions on the deal -- if it gets approved at all. The spectrum part of the deal seems to be ok, but the co-marketing deal is raising eyebrows.

Consumer advocates have worried the deal lessens the incentive for the companies to compete on the landline broadband front, and the combined muscle of Verizon and the cable industry could decimate smaller competitors -- wireline and wireless alike. Three different anonymous sources tell Reuters that current condition talks include a block on cross-promotion in FiOS territories, and cross-promotion in the rest of Verizon's territory would only be allowed for a short while:
quote:
The path that the talks are on would lead to a consent decree that would forbid the cross marketing agreement where Verizon markets its FiOS product, according to the three sources, who were not authorized to speak on the record. Cross marketing in the rest of Verizon's footprint and the joint research and development project would be allowed but only for a limited period of time, the sources said.
Verizon has tried to gain regulatory approval by saying they'll sell T-Mobile spectrum if the deal gets approved. That carrot on a stick (alongside promising lower roaming rates) appears to have easily thrilled the FCC. The DOJ however appears to be aware of the massive competitive shift the deal involves, including the fact that Verizon is driving their DSL users into the arms of cable now that they're BFFs, and has already essentially given up on competing on the wireline broadband front.
view:
topics flat nest 

FFH5
Premium Member
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ

FFH5

Premium Member

Verizon abandoning DSL not created by cable deal

Verizon is driving their DSL users into the arms of cable now that they're BFFs, and has already essentially given up on competing on the wireline broadband front.

Except that Verizon's abandonment of DSL in non-Fios areas was already well underway before any deal with cable companies was crafted. A deal with cable or not, this dumping of landline in non-Fios areas will continue no matter what the DOJ decides.

Alex J
@speakeasy.net

Alex J

Anon

Re: Verizon abandoning DSL not created by cable deal

Except that Verizon's abandonment of DSL in non-Fios areas was already well underway before any deal with cable companies was crafted.

Verizon offloaded as many DSL markets to suckers (Frontier, Fairpoint) as they could, but was looking for a way to offload the rest of them after companies got wise. Cable deal comes along, and so they jack up the price (forcing landline bundles again) driving those users right to cable.

So what you're talking about is a company that had little incentive to compete, now having even less. A massive, vertical cable/Verizon organization solely focused on driving up prices and purging what little competition exists today.
25139889 (banned)
join:2011-10-25
Toledo, OH

25139889 (banned)

Member

Re: Verizon abandoning DSL not created by cable deal

And they will still dump the DSL newtorks.

j1349705
Premium Member
join:2006-04-15
Holly Springs, NC

1 recommendation

j1349705 to FFH5

Premium Member

to FFH5
said by FFH5:

Verizon is driving their DSL users into the arms of cable now that they're BFFs, and has already essentially given up on competing on the wireline broadband front.

Except that Verizon's abandonment of DSL in non-Fios areas was already well underway before any deal with cable companies was crafted. A deal with cable or not, this dumping of landline in non-Fios areas will continue no matter what the DOJ decides.

Exactly. And if they can't dump the non-Fios areas, they will continue to neglect them and people will continue to move to cable or wireless anyways, depending on what is available to them.

The Government and consumer groups can complain all they want, but denying this deal is not going to make Verizon suddenly start to re-invest in a market that they have already decided that they want out of.

ITALIAN926
join:2003-08-16

ITALIAN926 to FFH5

Member

to FFH5
Yes, but who knows how long these plans were truly in the works. If they block cross marketing in Verizon territory, that will help promote them to expand FiOS to those areas.

In fact, the DOJ should only allow this deal if they expand FiOS further. And while we're at it, also restrict any potential plans to sell off any more areas.

... and I thought the nerds of this site was PRO-FIOS? I thought we wanted fiber everywhere. This deal needs to be laced with conditions.
russotto
join:2000-10-05
West Orange, NJ

russotto

Member

Re: Verizon abandoning DSL not created by cable deal

said by ITALIAN926:

... and I thought the nerds of this site was PRO-FIOS? I thought we wanted fiber everywhere. This deal needs to be laced with conditions.

They won't be building out FIOS either way. Not because it's not profitable for them, but because wireless services are so much MORE profitable it makes sense to concentrate their investments there.

ITALIAN926
join:2003-08-16

ITALIAN926

Member

Re: Verizon abandoning DSL not created by cable deal

"This deal needs to be laced with conditions."
25139889 (banned)
join:2011-10-25
Toledo, OH

25139889 (banned)

Member

Re: Verizon abandoning DSL not created by cable deal

will never happen. In the end I don't see what the big deal is. The "pro consumer groups" would be pissed off if it was just the spectrum going to VZW. They'd be pissed off if with the marketing deal. Yet they don't bitch with CentLink having a VZW deal for wireless and a deal with DirecTV or Dish. ATT markets both U-Verse TV and DirecTV in the same markets yet nobody complains- and they still keep buying and buying.

VZ just needs to spin off CellCo make them a public company and kill Verzion landline. reverse on what Sprint did with Nextel. Let the wireline company worry about itself, and all those that think they still need the landline.

ITALIAN926
join:2003-08-16

ITALIAN926

Member

Re: Verizon abandoning DSL not created by cable deal

I think youre underestimating how many landlines are still out there. Like it or not, their wireline business is still huge.
CXM_Splicer
Looking at the bigger picture
Premium Member
join:2011-08-11
NYC

1 edit

1 recommendation

CXM_Splicer

Premium Member

Re: Verizon abandoning DSL not created by cable deal

Very true! It always amuses me how people think they can simply declare wireline dead despite the millions of people still working on copper. Verizon is frantically trying to move people over in areas where FIOS has been deployed (FIOS being wireline BTW) but that is only a small percentage of the footprint. In the non-FIOS areas is everyone just suppose to go to cable company dialtone? Or wireless? What do you think the local Allstate office, Citibank, or all the leased offices in Manhattan are told 'Sorry, we no longer support POTS in your area but we have an incredible deal on an iPhone 5 right now.'

Another thing that's easily forgotten is that all the business fiber is part of wireline. All the T1's (that aren't still on copper), OC3's feeding cell sites, OC48's feeding banks, stock trading companies, government buildings... ect. How do we cut these people loose? Check here to see if you would want to cut them loose:
»www.verizonbusiness.com/ ··· 5_09.htm

McAdam and his friends are constantly declaring wireline dead/dying/not-profitable. It is not true, wireline is highly profitable. POTS by itself is not profitable but then again it never has been... it has always needed to be funded by the business side of wireline. THAT is what they are trying to kill... small business and individuals.

ITALIAN926
join:2003-08-16

1 edit

ITALIAN926

Member

Re: Verizon abandoning DSL not created by cable deal

According to their quarterly, Verizon still has 20 MILLION lines, plus 2+million digital voice lines. :-o , and that doesnt count any CLEC or wholesale lines that theyre responsible to maintain.

IowaCowboy
Lost in the Supermarket
Premium Member
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA

IowaCowboy

Premium Member

Hopefully FiOS expansion will be a requirement

Hopefully FiOS expansion will be a requirement, particularly in urban areas like Springfield and Boston Massachusetts.
25139889 (banned)
join:2011-10-25
Toledo, OH

25139889 (banned)

Member

Re: Hopefully FiOS expansion will be a requirement

If the DOJ required that; it would open up case for them to be sued. You can't force a private company to build out any service to anyone; especially FiOS. internet is NOT a right. It's a privilege,and if the ROI is not worth it a company will not do it.

and the area of Boston I was in- did have FiOS. Regardless of what some people claim; it is there; just very very limited- as the rest of their FiOS network.
elefante72
join:2010-12-03
East Amherst, NY

elefante72

Member

Re: Hopefully FiOS expansion will be a requirement

You are wrong on so many fronts.

In fact the internet is mandated at every public library for free public access, so that is a right. So if 100% of the citizenry has access to the internet, that is not a privilege. On the contrary a drivers license is a privilege, because a gov't authority has to grant you that right for said access.

I guess you haven't gotten the memo on Franchise Agreements which are contracts in which telcos agree to fully wire a given area via a contract.

And I forgot to mention the lobbying at the State level to void competition at the muni level. That all seems fair to me...

As you probably may not know a S type corporation is an entity allowed by the government and it's charter can be void. Also, if you recall from grade school, LEGISLATION is the governments way of forcing companies and people to do things that they want, and it the case of telco's in their favor. The fact that everyone has hardwire telephone came from a time when the government had backbone and actually regulated for the good of the people.

So when a commodity (which cable is) is running OIBDA margins in the high 30%+s like say Microsoft or Apple, that is NOT normal.

You should read up on how VZ took a boatload of subsidies in NJ and was supposed to wire the entire state. Guess what they didn't and that is VZ home territory. The list goes on.
itguy05
join:2005-06-17
Carlisle, PA

itguy05

Member

Re: Hopefully FiOS expansion will be a requirement

quote:
You should read up on how VZ took a boatload of subsidies in NJ and was supposed to wire the entire state. Guess what they didn't and that is VZ home territory. The list goes on
That was in PA, not NJ.
pittpete1
join:2009-06-12

pittpete1

Member

Re: Hopefully FiOS expansion will be a requirement

More than a few residents will probably express an interest in seeing a greater penetration of verizon s FIOS network, which already has a franchise agreement with the state of New Jersey and is not required to negotiate agreements with individual cities.
25139889 (banned)
join:2011-10-25
Toledo, OH

25139889 (banned)

Member

Re: Hopefully FiOS expansion will be a requirement

and that is ONLY for TV. it does NOT cover anything else. does NOT cover, Internet nor phone.
tmc8080
join:2004-04-24
Brooklyn, NY

tmc8080

Member

Re: Hopefully FiOS expansion will be a requirement

said by 25139889:

and that is ONLY for TV. it does NOT cover anything else. does NOT cover, Internet nor phone.

If verizon would just offer voip phone service instead of POTS, they wouldn't need a state franchise for that. Video service has some arcane law that dictates & regulates what "content" may be serviced to the community for which cable-tv service is sold. Do you really know how outdated that is today with high speed internet? In reality, that was the old smoke screen... today it is a money grab for public access channels and fees for local community coffers. Franchise fees in a city like NYC can total into millions of $$ (ka-ching). Along with state and local taxes.

BTW, my real reason for replying... Verizon is winding down FIOS deployment.. even in NYC.. they are throwing just about every resource into wireless and LTE deployment-- so forget about NJ getting wireline FIOS, if it's stopping in NYC... it damn sure ain't gonna happen in NJ...

Verizon should rot in hell for this change which will cut their nose to spite their face in the long run. The wireless bubble will burst and they'll have spent billions and the day will come when customers shun wireless again (cyclical)

ITALIAN926
join:2003-08-16

ITALIAN926

Member

Re: Hopefully FiOS expansion will be a requirement

Verizon has a statewide franchise in NJ !!! theres a lot of areas in NJ with FiOS.

Verizon HAS VoIP service, its called Digital Voice, opposed to POTS over FiOS. You are so off base in just about everything you said.
25139889 (banned)
join:2011-10-25
Toledo, OH

25139889 (banned) to elefante72

Member

to elefante72
And actually many of those libraries and schools PAY for that service, and actually do NOT use the local phone companies nor cable companies. You must not have known that do you? the USDOE actually has created DTA sites in states to allow the use of shared resources and savings for communication needs.

And you must also not realize those states also have a clause that the local ILEC can get rid of their service with a 90day notice to the public. Go read that. Also they don't have "franchise" agreements.

And you must not know you are wrong. They took that money from PA- and PA got what they wanted- they got T3 speeds and fiber available to them. YOU PAY FOR IT like everyone else. The deal did NOT state that it would be free or basically free now did it? NOPE! It said it would be AVAILABLE. The same as with an MSO- you can order any speed of Internet you want. YOU PAY FOR IT!

ArrayList
DevOps
Premium Member
join:2005-03-19
Mullica Hill, NJ

ArrayList to 25139889

Premium Member

to 25139889
phone service was a privilege at one point also. So was electricity.
25139889 (banned)
join:2011-10-25
Toledo, OH

25139889 (banned)

Member

Re: Hopefully FiOS expansion will be a requirement

and it still is in areas of the Hills/Mountains.

ArrayList
DevOps
Premium Member
join:2005-03-19
Mullica Hill, NJ

ArrayList

Premium Member

Re: Hopefully FiOS expansion will be a requirement

that's because you can't pay someone enough money to go in them hills.

mikedz4
join:2003-04-14
Weirton, WV

mikedz4 to 25139889

Member

to 25139889
they could require them to wire areas for fios. But they can't say you must wire all of every city for fios. That is up to the states and local franchise authorities. Then again verizon could sell those rural areas to another company as another way to cirumvent the requirement.

ITALIAN926
join:2003-08-16

ITALIAN926

Member

Re: Hopefully FiOS expansion will be a requirement

Thats not true either. They can replace every copper customer with FiOS. Franchise agreements are for video offerings only. Its Verizons choice how they want to deliver phone service/internet. Eventually, CLECS will be allowed to offer services over fiber as well. Its one condition theyll have to meet if they want to melt down the copper.
25139889 (banned)
join:2011-10-25
Toledo, OH

25139889 (banned)

Member

Re: Hopefully FiOS expansion will be a requirement

in select areas of the former Ameritech CLEC options are gone. Copper has been replace and its direct FTTH to the homes. No 3rd party NOTHING from at&t. Monroe Count Michigan was one of those areas. It was part of LightSpeed when they were showing that off.

And as far as CLECs go- they could argue since VZ and T are getting USF funds to build their next-gen networks (USF is a tax)- they should have access to them. But they're not smart enough to do that.
Terabit
join:2008-12-19

4 edits

Terabit to 25139889

Member

to 25139889
Amazing how RWers cheer when VZ or AT&T sue our cities and counties and prevent us (i.e. We the People) from connecting our own communities using FTTH. Communities that these private corporations refuse to service, service adequately, or for a reasonable price.

On the other hand, you guys staunchly oppose them being required to cable these very same communities. A few years back, you guys disagreed with them being required to open up their network and offer wholesale access - to foster competition.

It's just mindbogglingly that so many Republicans and Libertarian voters support this rationale and greed, which comes at the 'expense of Americans, yet still consider themselves "Patriots".
elefante72
join:2010-12-03
East Amherst, NY

elefante72 to IowaCowboy

Member

to IowaCowboy
Verizon isn't giving this away, they are letting it die so they can come back in w/ fixed wireless and take this back over without the wireline folks who happen to be union.

There is lots of wireless tech out there and if verizon gets the cableco spectrum that is what they are going to do. Then you have OMGFAST which if the get the nod from the FCC can jack up their transmitters and be a real threat to wireline. Lots of spectrum there. With beamforming you can carry lots of channels in a region -- like SDV on cable now.

Economically this makes sense if the federal government doesn't wise up and wire every house w/ fiber like it should with those massive USF subsidies. As the bigboys own the politicians don't expect such a intelligent thing to happen any time soon. I mean when the FCC is raking in billions in license fees, what incentive do they have to actually have competition on the wireline?
25139889 (banned)
join:2011-10-25
Toledo, OH

25139889 (banned)

Member

Re: Hopefully FiOS expansion will be a requirement

If VZ was smart- they'd start treating CellCo Partners as a fully desperate company. Then they could argue that VZ and VZW are NOT the same company. When actually legally at this point they are not! VZ just owns part of them; the same as at&t with AT&T Mobility, Inc.
PX Eliezer704
Premium Member
join:2008-08-09
Hutt River

1 recommendation

PX Eliezer704

Premium Member

Re: Hopefully FiOS expansion will be a requirement

said by 25139889:

If VZ was smart- they'd start treating CellCo Partners as a fully desperate company.

I think you meant "fully separate".

ditdotdit
@rr.com

ditdotdit to 25139889

Anon

to 25139889
Verizon is already trying to do what you're suggesting. The problem is that Verizon appoints the management of Verizon Wireless, so Verizon's entire argument of claiming that they act independently is lacking credibility.

AT&T owns 100% of AT&T Mobility and they haven't tried to claim that the mobile division acts independently from the parent company (yet).

•••

VZSUX
@optonline.net

VZSUX to elefante72

Anon

to elefante72
Your seem to be missing the point, Yeah Verizon does want everything wireless, so than can charge excessive amount$$ in when you go over your capped data. Think!! watching a streamed TV show or a streamed Movies could cost you over $100 for your internet that month and maybe a lot more to.
25139889 (banned)
join:2011-10-25
Toledo, OH

25139889 (banned)

Member

Re: Hopefully FiOS expansion will be a requirement

and point? First- i don't use VZ for a thing. 2nd VZ no longer offers service in Ohio. Only CellCo offers service here. i'm happy with my cable and my TracFone/Straight Talk/Sprint phone.
Terabit
join:2008-12-19

Terabit to elefante72

Member

to elefante72
said by elefante72:

Verizon isn't giving this away, they are letting it die so they can come back in w/ fixed wireless and take this back over without the wireline folks who happen to be union.

There is lots of wireless tech out there and if verizon gets the cableco spectrum that is what they are going to do. Then you have OMGFAST which if the get the nod from the FCC can jack up their transmitters and be a real threat to wireline. Lots of spectrum there. With beamforming you can carry lots of channels in a region -- like SDV on cable now.

Economically this makes sense if the federal government doesn't wise up and wire every house w/ fiber like it should with those massive USF subsidies. As the bigboys own the politicians don't expect such a intelligent thing to happen any time soon. I mean when the FCC is raking in billions in license fees, what incentive do they have to actually have competition on the wireline?

Nailed it.

We need to learn from the Aussie model and have the fed gov establish a wholesale corporation, that owns a national FTTH network; with we the people the major shareholder.

Once close to every home is wired, 'various' businesses can use this FTTH for a set fee and sell their own services over it.
tmc8080
join:2004-04-24
Brooklyn, NY

tmc8080

Member

verizon gone astray...

the remake is usually never better than the original...watch as Comcast and Verizon go hand-in-hand to remake the eastern half of the country's competitive landscape.. cost more for the consumer and get less.

»www.youtube.com/watch?v= ··· ilNDXd0A


the DOJ won't be happy until there are 1 or 2 telecom/cablecom companies in the USA.. do the regulations on the books actually mean something?

pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium Member
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD

pnh102

Premium Member

Tough Conditions?

Just like they did with the Comcast/NBC deal... or the AT&T/SBC deal...

•••

vzsux
@optonline.net

vzsux

Anon

mmm

They should be forced to Divest all there wireline networks.. Look Frontier did buy those copper networks that included over 100,000 fios subs, They tried to shake everyone off Fios when they bought it,because they couldn't afford the content, which could be the case. They also charged subs $1000 for an the installation of Fios, which eventually they smartened up and got rid of the install charge. Frontier started to promote Fios heavily again, so what does that tell you? Everyone knocks Frontier, because Fairpoint took over the former Verizon New England networks and fell flat on their face/big time!!!!! My prediction Frontier or Google will eventually buy those networks and try to grow IPTV, and who knows, Google is now in the TV game and are building their own FTTP networks, anfd have a lot more balls than shitty Verizon
pittpete1
join:2009-06-12

pittpete1

Member

NJ Franchise

Verizon has franchise agreement with New Jersey

"More than a few residents will probably express an interest in seeing a greater penetration of verizon ’s FIOS network, which already has a franchise agreement with the state of New Jersey and is not required to negotiate agreements with individual cities. "
»www.newtelecomblogs.com/ ··· reement/

Frontier wasnt charging $1000 for installation.
I remember reading in the $400 range...

Do you people just make this stuff up or what?
BiggA
Premium Member
join:2005-11-23
Central CT

BiggA

Premium Member

FIOS

They should just force Verizon to double their FIOS footprint and roll it out in all major cities in their territory. That would be a positive outcome instead of silly little restrictions.
old_wiz_60
join:2005-06-03
Bedford, MA

old_wiz_60

Member

Waste of time..

The cable companies will either ignore the DOJ agreements or bribe the DOJ to let them do what they want.

The DOJ is putting up a "fight" in order to get bigger bribes.

Waiting
@myvzw.com

Waiting

Anon

Google Fiber

In years to come Google & Google Fiber will control the Nation.....

ITALIAN926
join:2003-08-16

ITALIAN926

Member

Re: Google Fiber

LMFAO

VZSUX
@optonline.net

VZSUX to Waiting

Anon

to Waiting
I totally agree