Verizon Accused of Lagging on NYC FiOS Promises
Promised 100% Coverage by 2014, and That's Likely Not Happening
Back in 2008 Verizon negotiated a closed-door agreement with NYC mayor Mike Bloomberg that agreed to wire 100% of the city with FiOS by 2014
-- sort of. Fine print in the deal allows Verizon to back away from that promise if they pay a few small fines and/or aren't seeing the kind of TV subscriber uptake they'd like. It's now 2013 and Verizon has refused to offer any hard numbers on how far along in that goal they are -- but if you live in NYC and have been waiting for FIOS (particularly in outer boroughs), you know that the number of unserved apartments remains substantial.
NYC Mayoral candidate and Public Advocate Bill de Blasio last week took aim at Verizon in a press statement
and fiber availability fact sheet
(pdf), accusing Verizon of failing to deliver on their deployment promises. de Blasio took data from the New York State Office of Information Technology Services to make the claims:
As a benchmark, the contract required the company to reach more than three-quarters of City residents by the end of 2012, but according to data released through the New York State Office of Information Technology Services, only half of New York City’s 3.4 million housing units had access to fiber broadband services at year’s end—putting the company far behind schedule. Brooklyn and the Bronx lagged furthest behind, with only 40 percent and 46 percent of household having access to fiber, respectively.
As you might expect, Verizon is denying that they're behind schedule
but won't offer specifics, pointing out that they only promised they'd "pass" homes (fiber simply needs to run in the street outside), not necessarily "serve" them. The company also appears to be blaming landlords for any hold ups in deployments:
The franchise agreement governs Verizon's wiring to the exterior of buildings, not inside them. Verizon needs permission from building owners to gets its fiber-optic cable inside, so residents can begin receiving service. Sometimes that can be difficult to obtain, and in any event, it is out of the city's hands, which is why the franchise agreement does not hold Verizon to a schedule on that, sources said.
This isn't the first time that Verizon has accused New York City landlords of holding up FiOS installs. Verizon filed a complaint with the New York Public Service Commission
back in January that claimed some landlords were blocking access to buildings. While it's likely true that some landlords are causing headaches, State law prohibits landlords from interfering with the install of services, so it's unlikely this is something a majority of landlords are willing to engage in.
More likely, Verizon is exercising its rights in the fine print of their agreement with Bloomberg to play fast and loose with actual service statistics, and people in NYC are only just starting to notice. At the end of the day, Verizon is refusing to specifically state how many New York City residents can actually get FiOS because that end number is going to be a far cry from the 100% served goal many assumed Verizon agreed to. You can be sure Verizon tries to blame someone other than themselves for failing to deliver FiOS to most of NYC, despite the fact they signed a contract knowing full well they'd never have to.
South Richmond Hill, NY
said by rossies:So many delays at that airport that people have settled down.
Wow. Didn't realize there were so many low-income folks living at JFK Airport.
Re: State law regarding services. How stupid are people. FIOS is... FIOS. It's amazing. TWC is crap in comparison.
In terms of RCN, how do your franchise agreements work? I'm not 100% sure, but as far as I can tell, here in CT, if a second provider gets a franchise license (this has been done by the municipality of Groton for TVC, which was recently sold to private investors), they have to serve 100% of that franchise area, just like the incumbent. In the case of TVC, that meant Groton, Ledyard, Stonington, and North Stonington. I haven't seen anywhere in this franchise area that can't get either Comcast or TVC, including all the apartment buildings. They both run their plant to the demarc point, and then they can just swap the cable off to the individual unit, at least that's how I understand it. It shouldn't be that hard for a large MDU to run a second cable plant up the middle of the building to where the demarcs are, so that they could be swapped over.
FIOS is a little different because it is fiber, and telco TV, so I don't believe that it would have to serve 100% anywhere. I think AT&T got some sort of waiver based on the technology, since U-Verse is too pathetic to be able to serve 100%, although I kind of wish the DPUC had regulated them as cable and told them 100% or nothing.
| |thenderScreen tycoonPremium
Landlords can be problematic in NYC. In a big complex, there may be no trouble getting FIOS installed
Now let's move onto all those tiny brownstones and shingle shacks that got passed down to someone who lives off the rent and does nothing with their life but collect a check. Many probably throw Verizon's requests in the trash because it requires they actually lift a finger for nothing in return. Or rthey don't even get it to begin with. They know there's a violation when they're subpoenad to show up in court. You New Yorkers know exactly who I am talking about.
A vast majority of NYC's apartments are dumpy walk up buildings, a majority of whose tenants do not choose an apartment based on FIOS availability. Some care, but most don't. It's not like you send a fax, get a reply back in 1-3 business days, enter building and install. You have to track these fuckers down to get anything done, even if it's a legal requirement. Much less something as silly as faster internet service. Half of them don't even like having to show up to get a check, much less DO WORK..... and they show up, and they do the work for what? To make money. No. So you can enter their building and put shit in it, that doesn't make them money.
That's how the LANDLORD sees it. I'm not saying it's right, I'm saying that's the mentality you have to realize you are dealing with if you expect to be successful.
It's true Verizon may be yanking our chain, and I am pissed that my store can't go over 3 mbps DSL with FIOS vans advertising two blocks away from me. At the same time... who the f#&k else is trying to wire the entire city with fiber? I don't see anyone else.
Macbook Screen Repair
Macbook LCDs for sale.
Re: Landlords can be problematic in NYC. Small buildings generally don't really need any landlord interaction- there's no equipment to be installed in the building, so you just do an aerial, and drill through the outside. I guess technically that requires landlord permission, but at least around here, no one seems to care, the cable and satellite companies just wire whatever to whatever. For simple drop the fiber and connect, Verizon should just go and do it. If the Landlord is that lazy, they won't complain.
I'd have to say it probably is incredibly difficult for Verizon to wire NYC given how dense, and how much of the infrastructure is underground, but OTOH, it is an incredibly big and prosperous market that only has one other competitor, and the number of subs per cable mile (so to speak) is completely unparalleled anywhere else in the US, other than a few blocks here or there in major cities.
Re: more likely
said by HardwareGeek:If the building is not too far away, you could share the network over ether WIFI or a LOONG weatherproof Ethernet cable.. (don't cheap out, use the good stuff)
Verizon is always in my neighborhood trying to get landlord permission they go door to door to door asking for landlord permission to be able to install fios. Lucky for me my landlord allows them but others have not and my neighbor is depressed I get super fast feeds and he is stuck with either DSL or Cable.
Whats funny Verizon is allowed to install DSL just not FIOS because of the ONT.
Re: VZ is simply lying... The problem with the story is that EXISTING VERIZON_SERVED houses and buildings STILL CANNOT GET FIOS, try it online, VZ simply don't even list it as an option when you check the address.
Not the cable guys but VZ as a corporation is a lying sack of shit, seriously. I hope the next mayor of NYC will SUE THE FUCKERS.
said by bicker:
Waaaa waaaa waaaa. You just want what you want and don't care to factor in what is right or true. Your perspectives are un-American, and deserve far more ridicule than I'm prepared to pile on them.
BS Statistics The stat on the SFU completion percentage in Brooklyn is an outright lie.
Verizon's trucks were on my street 2 days ago running fiber down the block. Only instead of doing it through the backyards where their copper lines are, they're using the same poles as the power lines and cable lines, which are in front along the (city owned) sidewalk. Seems they're wiring up the entire neighborhood the same way, and not bothering to use the right of ways. It's definitely going quickly, as the poles offer nice straight runs, but until they start connecting that magic cable to peoples homes, it's nothing but a sham to let them say they're on schedule.
I've been on their FIOS waiting list since they opened it, and have yet to see any correspondence from Verizon. We own the house, there's no landlord to obstruct them in any way.
Verizon's legal team is probably working overtime to somehow make "availability" not equal actually offering service to anyone in the areas where they've run cable. Because I've yet to find a single person who's been contacted.
It really ticks me off because the only other alternatives for broadband in the area are Cablevision (I'll go back to dialup before ever dealing with them again) or DSL of questionable speed from Verizon. With the Megapath buyout of Covad, I don't think there are any other ISPs that offer DSL here besides Verizon anymore.
It really highlights how stock price trumps everything, including sales and revenue. I've been waiting for years for Verizon to offer me FiOS in exchange for money, but they've dragged their asses on it like they did with DSL before that. What sane business ignores people willing to give them money on a monthly basis?
Using their wireless broadband is fast, but tiny data caps, high prices, overage fees and home usage don't fly with me at all, especially on a weather sensitive connection.
At this point, I refuse to get my hopes up about them actually offering FiOS, despite the fiber cable not 10 feet from my front door. It's like they're taunting me with it.
Only now do you realize the depth of my insanity...