Search:  

 
 
   News
newer
story category Qwest Says No Thanks To Stimulus Funds
Only wants money for more developed areas...
06:03PM Wednesday Aug 12 2009 by Karl Bode
tags: competition · coverage · business · bandwidth · consumers
Qwest apparently isn't interested in obtaining stimulus funds after saying a few months back that they could deliver 7Mbps DSL to 95% of their footprint with a cool $1 billion in taxpayer dollars. Apparently the carrier, which has a bit of a history of skimping on next-generation upgrades, then trying to cripple the efforts of towns and cities when they want to deploy faster alternatives, doesn't like the rules affixed to the funds.

Why? The rules focus on providing service to the most under-served first, something that -- even with a billion dollar head start -- doesn't provide the kind of ROI that pleases hungry investors. Qwest may apply for later rounds of funding, if the rules allow them to use the money on more profitable ventures.

Click for full size
Of course that runs contrary to the entire point of the broadband investment package, which is to get some financial help to the more rural communities companies like Qwest have left disconnected in order to please investors.

Qwest barely provides speeds faster than 1.5Mbps to suburban markets, and while they recently announced VDSL upgrades, Qwest lacks the resources (most notably a wireless division and cash cow SMS revenues) to deploy the service to more than the most profitable of customers. If you're not seeing the irony of them refusing taxpayer dollars to help aid this process, you probably should.

Lobbying organizations like U.S. Telecom, of which Qwest is a member, have worked hard to strip the funding of all rules. As such, you can expect other incumbents to stick up their noses in "protest" at this first round of funding. Whether Uncle Sam folds or opposes this pressure should give you a solid indication of how the final national broadband policy plan turns out.

Related:
  1. Product Spotlight: EV-DO Showdown - Verizon vs. Sprint
  2. Verizon's Open Development Initiative? So Far It's A Joke
  3. Qwest: Remember How We Said Speed Didn't Matter? Forget That.
  4. Echostar Joins Push For Lower Broadband Definitions
  5. What Network Neutrality Is REALLY About
  6. FCC Study: Open Access Lowers Prices, Improves Competition
  7. TDS Telecom Launches 50 Mbps Fiber
  8. Wall Street Journal Tries, Fails To Cover Metered Billing Debate
Forums » Qwest Says No Thanks To Stimulus Funds
view: topics flat text 
Post a:

Duramax08
Oh rly?

join:2008-08-03
San Antonio, TX

Unserved here

Serve the unserved and if theres any money left, you can go serve the underserved. Landline for me please.

en102
Canadian, eh?

join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME

Crazy

Lets see... Gov't (also known as us taxpayers.. well some of us) would be willing to 'give' Qwest a billion, as long as it went towards deploying some rural / underserved areas, and refused?

I could see the following reasons:
1. 1 billion investment in rural will cost more than 1 billion to support/maintain, and there isn't enough out there to pay for it.

2. 'Rules' affixed to the money outside of item #1 may be a poison pill.

3. Qwest thinks they'll get a better deal.
--
Canada = Hollywood North
Michael C

join:2009-06-26
Cedar Park, TX

Re: Crazy

There's a fault with #1. No company outside of non-profits does anything on a zero-sum basis. Not only must that $1B cover deployment, maintenance, and administrative, but it also better turn a profit that makes investors happy. And those investors will expect to see a big boost to their pockets if they take it.

dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ

said by en102 See Profile :

Lets see... Gov't (also known as us taxpayers.. well some of us) would be willing to 'give' Qwest a billion, as long as it went towards deploying some rural / underserved areas, and refused?
Wasn't that what the telco slush fund ehrmmm USF supposed to go towards?
--
When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee
patcat88

join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY

Re: Crazy

said by dvd536 See Profile :

said by en102 See Profile :

Lets see... Gov't (also known as us taxpayers.. well some of us) would be willing to 'give' Qwest a billion, as long as it went towards deploying some rural / underserved areas, and refused?
Wasn't that what the telco slush fund ehrmmm USF supposed to go towards?
No, it was to keep solvency/profitability/stock price up of for profit rural telcos. No parts of it are for deployment of new services, only corporate costs and physical maintenance of plant.

ropeguru
Premium
join:2001-01-25
Bridgeport, WV
clubs:
·VOIPo

said by en102 See Profile :

2. 'Rules' affixed to the money outside of item #1 may be a poison pill.

I am thnking that #2 applies here. Look at what happened to the two automakers after they took stimulus money from the government. Ford was the only smart one by just saying no.

Now, look at the after effect. Out of the top 5 cars being purchased for the cash for clunkers project. Ford is the only American owned company in there.

I think Qwest may have actually done something right for a change here.

TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast

Qwest won't be only 1 rejecting funds

I suspect that Qwest won't be the only major telco or cable company rejecting these funds. The gov't put enough strings on them and the money, for a big company like AT&T or Verizon or Comcast, isn't that huge to make them accept the strings for the money.

Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02

Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech

Re: Qwest won't be only 1 rejecting funds

You're right. Verizon just got done selling half of rural America. I very much doubt they want to renew their business ties there. That really has less to do with "strings," and more to do with rural America investment simply not suiting the tempo dictated by investors.

danawhitaker
Space...The Final Frontier
Premium
join:2002-03-02
Urbandale, IA
·MSN
·Mediacom

Re: Qwest won't be only 1 rejecting funds

I don't live in "rural" America by any stretch of the imagination (a well-populated suburb of Des Moines, Iowa) and Qwest STILL won't upgrade us past 1.5 in areas. Please for the love of frakking god take the stimulus money and update us. Qwest doesn't seem to really care about making improvements, and as such, most of the people around here continue to leave them for Mediacom.
--
You're watching Sports Night on CSC so stick around...
elray

join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA
·SONIC.NET
·RoadRunner Cable
·Verizon Online DSL

Re: Qwest won't be only 1 rejecting funds

said by danawhitaker See Profile :

... Qwest STILL won't upgrade us past 1.5 in areas. Please for the love of frakking god take the stimulus money and update us.
Sorry, while I can't see why my tax dollars should be used to provide any broadband at all, I certainly wouldn't want the money they ARE wasting to be used to "update" your service beyond 1.5.

danawhitaker
Space...The Final Frontier
Premium
join:2002-03-02
Urbandale, IA
·MSN
·Mediacom

Re: Qwest won't be only 1 rejecting funds

And what's your speed, if you're so satisfied with other people being stuck at 1.5 while neighborhoods around them can get 7-20mbit? I think the thing that annoys me is that they're turning down money they could be using to update their infrastructure and provide better service to their customers. I love when the "haves" always come in and talk about how, since they already have it, the government can just ignore all the people who don't because no one else in the universe exists.

When I left Qwest for Mediacom (with whom I will soon be getting 15/1 speeds when they update this fall), my neighborhood started having major issues to which the only solution was to try and force people to downgrade to 640/256 or 256/256. It wasn't even training at 640 on a good day.

1.5 is slow, I'm sorry to say. 640 is ridiculously slow. Being told I needed to *downgrade* after years of having 1.5 and having it mysteriously stop working properly was the breaking point. Being treated like crap by their customer service people was a further breaking point. Hell, for all I care, they could at least use the stimulus money to hire employees who aren't from India who actually are interested in helping their customers with issues.

There are a lot worse things taxpayer money could be spent on than helping to expand broadband options to rural areas or areas that need development. Are you against government money being used for roads or anything too? Because I personally find the internet as essential to me, in terms of the ability to make a living, as the roads we drive on.
--
You're watching Sports Night on CSC so stick around...
patcat88

join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY

Re: Qwest won't be only 1 rejecting funds

Every time you repair plant, you kill a penny off the yearly dividend.
elray

join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA
·SONIC.NET
·RoadRunner Cable
·Verizon Online DSL

said by danawhitaker See Profile :

And what's your speed, if you're so satisfied with other people being stuck at 1.5 while neighborhoods around them can get 7-20mbit?

1.5 is slow, I'm sorry to say. 640 is ridiculously slow. Being told I needed to *downgrade* after years of having 1.5 and having it mysteriously stop working properly was the breaking point.

There are a lot worse things taxpayer money could be spent on than helping to expand broadband options to rural areas or areas that need development. Are you against government money being used for roads or anything too?
I have 1.5/384 and 1M/384 circuits. They're more than sufficient.

If someone thinks they "need" more than 768K, I'm not looking to restrict their choice. I just don't feel I should subsidize it. As for your service degradation, well, many people contend with RBOC copper plant issues; there is no magic bullet, but exercising diligence with your local techs is usually the most productive approach. Installing a siecor/corning splitter often yields substantial performance improvement.

As you say, "there are a lot worse things" - well, actually, if the money wasn't being spent, it could be refunded to the taxpayer, who probably knows BEST what to do with it, including paying more to their ISP for better products.

I get the "universal service" argument, to a degree (there are still places without power or water or telephone service, despite such policies), but if you have 1.5 service, you have no right to expect ME to pay for your upgrade. And according to you, you aren't "rural".

I am never happy that one neighborhood has better services than another, and I understand wanting to stay in place. But life isn't fair, and it isn't my job to pay to make it fair for you. If you want higher speeds, buy them or form a coop and build them. If you can't buy them, consider moving. If you don't want to move, WAIT, and eventually, someone will offer you a better mousetrap.

Am I against government-paid roads? Well, generally, yes. We would get a lot better value from our "public" routes if they were developed and maintained by coop and charged direct tolls based on congestion/usage in lieu of gas tax - people would have actually economic incentives to carpool, bike, or take a bus, members would receive the benefit of any "windfall profits", and employees would actually work in the public interest.
Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Re: Qwest won't be only 1 rejecting funds

I find this entire post simply amusing.

bender
Bite my shiny metal ass
Premium
join:2005-03-19
Evanston, IL
clubs:
·T-Mobile US
·Vonage
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Midwest
·Mediacom

Re: Qwest won't be only 1 rejecting funds

no kidding. 1.5 is slow. its so slow you dont even know if it is working.

i used to live in Iowa and I know exactly what they are talking about with Qwests slow ass internet. I had them for about 2 months before canceling and going to mediacom.

1.5 wouldn't be bad if the latency was good too, but for some reason qwest doesn't have that.

TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast


2 edits
said by Karl Bode See Profile :

You're right. Verizon just got done selling half of rural America. I very much doubt they want to renew their business ties there. That really has less to do with "strings," and more to do with rural America investment simply not suiting the tempo dictated by investors.
»www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co···433.html
"It's not cost effective for the big network operators to play in rural [markets] in the first place and if they take federal money that comes with all these strings attached to it, they are opening themselves up to being regulated even further," said Roger Entner, head of communications research for Nielsen IAG.

Verizon said its officials decided not to apply before conditions were announced. Comcast, which mainly served urban and suburban areas, said it also won't apply. AT&T said it won't likely apply but it is open to partnership with state and local governments who win the grants.
Looks like Verizon, Comcast, & AT&T have jumped OFF the stimulus bandwagon as predicted.

Transmaster
Don't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus

join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY
·Qwest.net

Qwest can just stay out

Wyoming has been burned so many time by US West and then Qwest we no longer trust them to do anything for the less juicy area's of this state. If they could use this money to fix up Boulder, or Highland Ranch they would , but being forced to spend it in Burns,Wyoming, or Watch Nunn Grow, Colorado no way.
--
I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man's reasoning powers are not above the monkey's.
- Mark Twain in Eruption

Hpower
Roflmao

join:2000-06-08
Glendale, CA
·Charter Pipeline

No thx for funds

I wouldn't want the governments funds either. That $1 billion won't come easy without some strings attached. I think they're doing the right thing even though they really need to develop their infastructure.
--
The Internet is about to go down....it is actually.

Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02

Re: No thx for funds

Yes, one wouldn't want the millions in legal fees Qwest has spent on crushing town and city plans to deploy better infrastructure to go to waste.

bender
Bite my shiny metal ass
Premium
join:2005-03-19
Evanston, IL
clubs:

Re: No thx for funds

+5 points to you good sir.
Metatron2008

join:2008-09-02
Stockbridge, GA
·AT&T Wireless Broa..
·DIRECTV
·Charter Pipeline
·America Online
·Skype
·Vonage
·AT&T Southeast


1 edit

Retarded.

If the CEO had any business sense, use the money for a small area that would be profitable. At 1 billion you could doa good buildout.

Where do these 'next quarterly earnings' instead of '5 years of business growth' idiots come from?

It's like these CEOs think nobody will ever leave their business.
dynodb
Premium,VIP
join:2004-04-21
Minneapolis, MN

Re: Retarded.

If they the strings attached to the grants and/or loans would lead to a profit increase, I'm sure they'd take the money in a heartbeat.

However, if the attached strings mean that accepting the money results in a financial loss, of course they're not going to take it.

That the Federal government might be running this program in an inefficient manner with too many bureacratic hoops to jump through shouldn't come as a surprise to any observer of how the government operates.
Metatron2008

join:2008-09-02
Stockbridge, GA

Re: Retarded.

Yes, I am aware that the only loop Qwest wanted was 'take the money to the bank'.
tmc8080

join:2004-04-24
Floral Park, NY

Good!

Now, it's high time the local municipalities start deploying their own broadband services! Screw qwest! They've had far, far, far too long a history of screwing the local consumer and comcast isn't further behind chuckling with the old punch line, who are you going to go to? Qwest? Hahahahaha... Go and see what piss poor service they offer!

THE TIME IS NOW to get those MUNI FIBER TO THE HOME builds underway! If it can be done in the East, it can certainly be done in the West!

anononon

@charter.com

Good

Good! The federal government has no business subsidizing businesses anyways!

Now give me back the ~$10K you stole from me in taxes last year!

BF69

join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN

Re: Good

said by anononon :

Good! The federal government has no business subsidizing businesses anyways!

Now give me back the ~$10K you stole from me in taxes last year!
A) you didn't pay $10K in taxes.

B) No one "stole" anything from you.

I guess you think the government runs for free. I guess we should stop paying our troops that protect YOUR ass so you can have a few more $$ in your pocket.

pspcrazy
Anime Freak

join:2008-02-06
San Diego, CA
·DSL EXTREME

Re: Good

A) And you would know that how?

B) Not stole. I believe the word would be exploited.

The government has it's cost, but offensive war in countries that aren't directly attacking us aren't costs we should take or can afford to take. Yet to this day we're still taking them even with this massive amount of debt. We don't need our troops in Iraq/Afghanistan protecting us. We need them here wiping gangs off the street, and dealing with internal problems first.
--
My Anime Site - AnimeCrazy.net
patcat88

join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY

Re: Good

said by pspcrazy See Profile :

We don't need our troops in Iraq/Afghanistan protecting us. We need them here wiping gangs off the street, and dealing with internal problems first.
I wonder which city has a high homicide rate, Baghdad or Baltimore?

Noah Vail
Premium
join:2004-12-10
Lorton, VA
·RoadRunner Cable

said by pspcrazy See Profile :

The government has it's cost, but offensive war in countries that aren't directly attacking us aren't costs we should take or can afford to take.
YEA! I want the money back we wasted in Europe attacking that Hitler guy who never did a thing to us.

NV
--
In my perfect religion, a giant hole appears and sucks up all the lousy people.
I call it the Crapture.

Mr Neutron
Hopped up on what you mopped up
Premium
join:2005-05-30
Gorham, ME

Re: Good

Why is it that every time someone brings up Iraq and Afghanistan, and talks about how much money we're pissing away there, (we'll ignore the toll of minds and lives) someone invariably compares the current morass with the Second World War? Why?

It may interest you to know that we fought WWII for four years with a very definite end result. We have, however, been in Iraq for six years-plus and Afghanistan for eight years this fall with no end in sight.

I understand the allure of fighting World War II all over again (really, I do). But we're not fighting conventional conflicts right now and it's not quite so simple to win battles when the bad guys aren't obliging enough to wear uniforms. And alas, not every third world dictator is a threat to world peace on the scale of Hitler, contrary to what our government keeps asserting.
--
Singing 'O Willow Waly'
By the tree that weeps with me...

cdru
Go Colts
Premium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN

Re: Good

said by Mr Neutron See Profile :

Why is it that every time someone brings up Iraq and Afghanistan, and talks about how much money we're pissing away there, (we'll ignore the toll of minds and lives) someone invariably compares the current morass with the Second World War? Why?
That would be an extension of Godwin's Law.
chimera

join:2009-06-09
Washington, DC
Tell that to several generations of Americans who only have electricity thanks to the TVA.
patcat88

join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY

Re: Good

That communist shill that tried to destroy our Supreme Court!!Q!!

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

Smart Move

No private business has any place taking taxpayer money for nothing under any circumstances.

Qwest probably saw what happened to GM, Chrysler and the numerous banks on the dole and decided that having government as a majority shareholder is not a good idea.
--
Blagojevich / Madoff 2012!

See 10 replies to this post

RARPSL

join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY

Refusal of the Money and its effect on Multi-Cable

The fact that they are refusing the money should AUTOMATICALLY make any effort to block Muni-Cable illegal. IOW: By rejecting the money they should be ruled as having no standing to go to court to block any Municipality that wants to set up their own system.
dynodb
Premium,VIP
join:2004-04-21
Minneapolis, MN

Re: Refusal of the Money and its effect on Multi-Cable

said by RARPSL See Profile :

The fact that they are refusing the money should AUTOMATICALLY make any effort to block Muni-Cable illegal. IOW: By rejecting the money they should be ruled as having no standing to go to court to block any Municipality that wants to set up their own system.
Huh? That they're refusing taxpayer money means they can't make the case that they shouldn't have to compete against taxpayer-funded municipal offerings that can use tax money to operate at a loss?

anon10char

@suddenlink.net

Re: Refusal of the Money and its effect on Multi-Cable

they routinely block municipals on the basis that they plan to and are going to serve these areas in the future.
dynodb
Premium,VIP
join:2004-04-21
Minneapolis, MN

Re: Refusal of the Money and its effect on Multi-Cable

said by anon10char :

they routinely block municipals on the basis that they plan to and are going to serve these areas in the future.
And they can't do that without government money? In most cases, they're already serving those areas to some extent.

Killa200
Premium
join:2005-12-02
Spring City, TN
·AT&T Southeast

Cool Deal!

Sweet, let the incumbents say "no thanks" to this money....

I know plenty of people in places like This Forum who would just love to serve all these "unprofitable unserved and underserved rural areas" with this govt money hand out.
patcat88

join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY

Re: Cool Deal!

said by Killa200 See Profile :

Sweet, let the incumbents say "no thanks" to this money....

I know plenty of people in places like This Forum who would just love to serve all these "unprofitable unserved and underserved rural areas" with this govt money hand out.
512/256 for $60/mo, with caps or enforced AUPs that ban P2P (because the backhaul is a fractional T1 to a bonded T1 to the IXP), goes out every time it rains or the wind moves trees, or an abused microwave oven is turned on or there is a HFC cable RF leak. 3G cell service (including the caps) wipes the floor with small business WISPs.

Killa200
Premium
join:2005-12-02
Spring City, TN

Re: Cool Deal!

obviously if you think that is how they all work, then your sadly misinformed....

bender
Bite my shiny metal ass
Premium
join:2005-03-19
Evanston, IL
clubs:
said by G cell service (including the caps) wipes the floor with small business WISPs.
[/BQUOTE :


last I checked 3G cell service isn't in very many rural markets.
Desim

join:2001-11-03
Portland, OR

qwest at is best

They really do suck, First time I came to this site was to check if I qualified for DSL, about 10 years later, I am still at 22,000 feet from CO. I have no idea how they still stay in business.

Thank god for cable, or else I would still be on crappy dial-up. Only if Verizon served North Portland area.
WhatNow
Premium
join:2009-05-06
Charlotte, NC

Does any one run the numbers

Wilson NC $28 million for fiber network 18660 housing units population 48k. The cost is $1500 per household. If every household took just the lowest price internet for $35/mo it would take 42 months or 3 years to pay off the $28 million. This does not include any on going costs. This is 100% take up rate. They do have a package of TV, internet , and phone for about $120

In rural areas the cost is much higher and many customers could not afford even the $35/mo. The Embarq phone customers outside of Wilson now do not have the town to off set the rural costs so you have a Verizon situation where you pick off the profitable areas and leave the dialup areas with even less hope. I am not even talking about the really out of the way rural areas out west.

yolarry

join:2007-12-29
Creston, WV

hmm

I would be happy if frontier would take it. they need a upgrade on hardware.
tuminatr

join:2003-03-19
Saint Paul, MN

They must have not liked the terms

I know most of the banks have been trying to give gay the money they got maybe Qwest did not like the conditions that applied

ropeguru
Premium
join:2001-01-25
Bridgeport, WV
clubs:

Re: They must have not liked the terms

Yeah, like oust CEO's and give unions monetary preference over the company instead of the investors??

Cannot say that I blame them.

Ldys12

@qwest.net

qwest 7.mpbs??

Qwest can't even give a person 7mbps!! A tech person from qwest told me that I will never get 7 mbps even thou I pay for it because the modem needs 20% just to get the bandwidth through!.. I have qwest but don't like them, at all.
cyclone_z

join:2006-06-19
Ames, IA
·Qwest.net

Tired of the vagueness

I get tired of all the vagueness that goes on here. Qwest rejected the first round funding; they say it's because the conditions make it a bad business decision. Maybe someone should contact management and ask which particular conditions were objectionable. Anyone interested in finding what all the terms and conditions are that companies have to agree to?

And why aren't there some sort of public meetings with all the stake holders -- customers in underserved/unserved areas, government officials, Qwest management? It makes little sense to have a stimulus plan for which carriers may apply if they all end up turning it down; and just the same if it doesn't service to those customers it was supposed to help. At the same time, as a taxpayer, I want to see some strings attached so that companies don't just take the money and run.
Forums » Qwest Says No Thanks To Stimulus Funds


Friday, 27-Nov 13:16:02 Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo | feedback | contact
over 10 years online! © 1999-2009 dslreports.com.republican-creole