While most realize the residential broadband market isn't all that competitive, lesser talked about is the lack of competition in the special access and Business Data Services (BDS) market. This market connects everything from banks, ATMs and cell towers to the internet, but has long faced monopoly control by only a handful of large telcos (usually AT&T, Verizon or CenturyLink). In fact, FCC data states that 73% of BDS markets are dominated by just one provider, 24% are served by a duopoly, and only a tiny fraction have more than two choices of BDS providers.
Needless to say, companies like AT&T and Verizon have worked pretty tirelessly at keeping it this way, despite a
decade of efforts by consumer advocates and smaller companies (like Sprint & T-Mobile).
And while the sector has seen some modest additional competition from cable providers in recent years, the lack of BDS competition is still a major problem. Last year, after a decade of debate, former FCC boss Tom Wheeler began taking the ultimate step toward some reforms of this market, including something the agency rarely does for broadband: applying price caps that limit how much these mono/duopolies can over charge.
But that unfinished effort was killed by new FCC boss Ajit Pai soon after he became FCC head. Now Pai is expected to have the FCC vote on his own proposal during tomorrow's meeting. Pai's solution? Peeling back the already inadequate rules governing these large providers. In a blog post, Pai was quickly to proclaim that his solution will only pare back regulations in BDS markets deemed "competitive":
quote:
The extensive record compiled by the Commission’s excellent staff shows substantial and growing competition in many areas of the country, thanks to new market entrants like cable companies. Where this competition exists, we will relax unnecessary regulation, thereby creating greater incentives for the private sector to invest in next-generation networks. But where competition is still lacking, we’ll preserve regulations necessary to prevent anti-competitive price increases."
But Pai's specific definition of "competitive" is annoying some smaller companies and consumer advocates, who point out that it's
intentionally over generous:
quote:
Pai's definition of "sufficient competition" has drawn fire. The plan would treat an entire county as competitive "if 50 percent of the locations with BDS demand in that county are within a half mile of a location served by a competitive provider." A county would also be considered competitive if 75 percent of Census blocks in the county have a cable provider.
This is a sort of flashback to the Michaell Powell era at the FCC, where the agency happily declared an area "competitive" if users had access to just one broadband provider in a zip code. Senator Ed Markey and Rep. Mike Doyle were quick to issue a statement urging the FCC to hold off on tomorrow's vote.
"In the BDS market, we need more protections for competitors and small businesses, not great market control by incumbents," they wrote. "We are concerned that the proposed BDS Report and Order does not adequately promote competition or apply appropriate pricing protections where competition does not exist."
Given Pai's 2-1 understaffed party split at the commision, that isn't likely to happen tomorrow. As a result, making life easier on BDS monopolies will join Pai's growing early legacy at the FCC, which includes
working to kill net neutrality, making it easier for
phone monopolies to rip off inmate families, killing attempts to bring
competition to the cable box, and deconstructing efforts to bring
broadband to the poor. There's a consistent beneficiary to all of these efforts, and it certainly isn't the consumer.