Did Verizon Scam Pennsylvania?Teletruth releases some scathing claims ( old news - 03:05PM Wednesday Feb 19 2003) tags: business · telcoTipped by Karl Bode  NY-based TeleTruth today released a report claiming that Verizon failed to keep their end of the bargain in a 1994 broadband deal with the state of Pennsylvania. That deal, which benefitted Verizon (then Bell Atlantic) to the tune of $2.1 billion dollars, promised the delivery of broadband infrastructure capable of 45Mbps symmetrical speeds to the door. TeleTruth claims Verizon intentionally misled the state and public simply to boost profits and ease regulation. Chairman Bruce Kushnick, a telecom analyst and consultant for the last two decades (with access to a lot of telco dirty laundry) founded TeleTruth in January 2002 in the hopes of "fixing the problems in telecommunications" and protecting consumers from, as their mission statement indicates, " customer overcharging....and customer issues surrounding Broadband deployment and competition". Last week, Teletruth urged the Securities and Exchange Commission to investigate Verizon's accounting practices, citing more than $5 billion in assets the group claims were improperly accounted for during Federal Communications Commission staff audits in the 1990s. (read more about that in this PhonePlus article) Today's report, which focuses on Verizon's activities in Pennsylvania, (which should be read, and is available here in Word format) focuses on a 1994 agreement in which Bell Atlantic was granted financial incentives by the state of Pennsylvania if the company met certain broadband rollout criteria. As part of that agreement, Bell Atlantic agreed to have 20% of the state broadband wired by 1998, and 50% by 2004. The TeleTruth report suggests that this wasn't copper based DSL they were talking about...but 45MB/s symmetrical fiber service right to the door of homes and businesses, ambitious and impractical for certain, but nonetheless included in the language of the agreement. The report goes on to note that by March 28, 2002, the Pennsylvania PUC acknowledged Bell Atlantic's failure to adhere to the state's Alternate Regulation plan: " ...this Commission has a legal obligation to reject Verizon PA’s 2000 Update and require it to submit a new update specifying its plans to satisfy its legal obligation to provide a modernized network with broadband capability of at least 45 Mbps upstream and downstream, to be available within five days from the customer request date." That update, which will need to show Verizon is working toward that 45Mbps goal, is expected by the end of next month, and will be reviewed and ruled on by the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission shortly thereafter. The bottom line? Teletruth argues that Bell Atlantic made false and misleading statements about future broadband rollouts to the Pennsylvania PUC and the public in order to reduce regulation and significantly ramp up profits. According to the report, Bell Atlantic " succeeded in getting large financial incentives for a broadband network they could never deliver." Speaking to the Philadelphia Inquirer, Ronald F. Weigel, director of government relations for Verizon's Pennsylvania division, says the company could provide any school, business, or residence within Verizon's service area with a 45 Mbps connection, provided they could pay for it. " I don't care if they're in Altoona or Philadelphia, we're prepared to offer it," he suggests. Teletruth puts the profits made by Verizon thanks to the 1994 deal at roughly 2.1 billion dollars, $1.5 billion of which consisted of extra tax deductions the company received from significant tax write-offs thanks to the deal. Bruce Kushnick suggests this breaks down to $785 per household, a total he believes Verizon should be forced to pay out in refunds for broken promises to Pennsylvania residents. But the claims don't end there, in addition to urging an SEC accounting investigation, and slamming Verizon for broken promises, Teletruth is also taking the FCC to task, criticizing the commission for using research that fails to include state level data analysis, and for allowing the telcos to "game the system". Additional details on all of Teletruth's recent moves and accusations can be found at the organization's website.
Related:- Unions Blame Verizon For Fairpoint Disaster
- Verizon Offers 'Quadruple Play' Discounts
- Unions Ramp Up Opposition To Verizon/Frontier Deal
- Droid Launch November 9?
- Wisconsin Realizes 'Franchise Reform' Was A Con
- FiOS Growth Slows
- Frontier Shareholders Approve Verizon Deal
- U-Verse Invasion Of BellSouth Territory Continues
|
 
Archivis
Your Daddy
Premium
join:2001-11-26
Earth
 ·Verizon FIOS
| It does more then regulate your poop Yeah, I'd definitely like fiber to my home (here in PA, hahah suxors to be all of j00). In all seriousness though, it's not like BA/VZ made a promise to have 45mbps FTTH just "cuz". They got something from the deal as well. If they don't hold up to their end of the deal, then we revoke everything that we gave to them. If that means that we benefitted them 5 billion dollars, then I guess the PA citizens should expect 5 billion dollars.
--
Hitman Forums | The Internet Hitman | Mr. Game & Watch owns all of you. | |
|  | 
NOVA_Guy
Obama- Commander in Thief
Premium
join:2002-03-05
 ·VOIPo
| Re: It does more then regulate your poop said by Archivis :
If that means that we benefitted them 5 billion dollars, then I guess the PA citizens should expect 5 billion dollars.
I would expect more if I were you.
Actual Damages:
- $5,000,000,000
- Interest on that $5,000,000,000 for the years that the money was in Verizon's posession
Punitive Damages (this is where I would have fun if I were a judge and a case involving this came before me):
- $15,000,000,000 (or whatever the maximum the law stipluates I could award)
As these were promises made to public officials, I would also suggest that the state see if they can prosecute Verizon's upper management (at least those who managed the PA operations) in some fashion. There needs to be both civil and criminal penalties thrown at Verizon and their crooked management; that's the only way they will learn that being the bad corporate entity they choose to be can (and will) cost them big time.
When they promise something they have no intention of delivering, they should be made to hurt. Make Verizon bleed over this. Screw them as they screw others. Make an example out of them-- that's the only way to prevent this from happening in the future.
--
Cox cable: the hallmark questionable business practices and lousy cable service! | |
| | |
Archivis
Your Daddy
Premium
join:2001-11-26
Earth
·Verizon FIOS
| Re: It does more then regulate your poop Yeah, you're right... I only hope that the PA board continues to have a backbone to stick to their guns.
I'd much rather have them spend whatever money they're forced to on what they originally promised. This would SERIOUSLY boost the economy. Can you imagine all the tech jobs that would come into place? I could make a killing just splicing fiber for another decade and a half.
Make them own up to it, force them to hold up to their end of the bargain, don't just make them pay it all back. I'll be lucky to see five dollars of that back.
--
Hitman Forums | The Internet Hitman | Mr. Game & Watch owns all of you. | |
| | | |
NOVA_Guy
Obama- Commander in Thief
Premium
join:2002-03-05
·VOIPo
| Re: It does more then regulate your poop said by Archivis :
Yeah, you're right... I only hope that the PA board continues to have a backbone to stick to their guns.
I'd much rather have them spend whatever money they're forced to on what they originally promised. This would SERIOUSLY boost the economy. Can you imagine all the tech jobs that would come into place?
That would be great. I'm originally from Western PA, living in Northern Virginia-- some day I would like to return "home" and find some work in the tech sector and live around Pittsburgh. (I've got plenty of family and friends there) Having the whole state wired like this would be a serious boost to the tech sector there, and just might allow me to return-- much sooner, if not immediately...
I too hope that the PA PUC decides to fight the good fight-- not just for the residents of the state, but for people everywhere. There are those of us who would like to move back to PA that would benefit from it. There are also countless others who would benefit indirectly by having a company like Verizon be forced to keep its promises for once.
--
Cox cable: the hallmark questionable business practices and lousy cable service! | |
| | | | |
Archivis
Your Daddy
Premium
join:2001-11-26
Earth | Re: It does more then regulate your poop Anyone know the address of a government official that I could write to that has a say in this? | |
| | | mglunt
join:2001-09-10
Fredericksburg, VA |
Sue them for 15 Million, and where do you think they get the money to pay that off? | |
| | | | | | 
bistro777
Donuts-Is There Anything They Can't Do?
Premium
join:2002-02-07
Englewood, CO
| From Verizon's Web site - - - "Make progress every day. We understand that life is not always about dramatic change, but more often about the small steps and achievements we make each day. Whether you want to make progress in your life or business, we can help. We're standing behind you to help you move forward, however you define progress in your life."
All PA taxpayers should rise up, demand that progress, and shout, "Can you hear us NOW?"
Some say the glass is half full; others say it’s half empty. I say, “Are you going to drink that?” | |
| | |
Archivis
Your Daddy
Premium
join:2001-11-26
Earth
·Verizon FIOS
| Re: It does more then regulate your poop Heh... I just want to see what happens.
Leviathon, if you're watching. Could you do me a favor and keep track of updates? You've got better contacts in this media biz then I do.
--
Hitman Forums | The Internet Hitman | Mr. Game & Watch owns all of you. | |
| | | | bandw1dth
join:2003-02-07
Hoboken, NJ | Can the PUC pull Verizon's license to sell phone service in the state or is it a mandated thing somewhere that Verizon is the only people that can sell phone service there? Imagine if they threatened to toss them out? | |
| | | | 
Pathfinder
Dazed Confused
Premium
join:2000-03-26
Mount Vernon, NY
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| Question I haven't been able to read it all yet but it strikes me that it's a stretch that Vz promised 45Mb to 20% of all homes by 98.
It promised to 45Mb available and 20% of homes wired for broadband but that is 2 different things.
--
support the Hunley | |
| | 
Dewi
Premium
join:2001-09-28
united kingd | Re: Question I've not been able to read it at all because it is a word doc (I'm on a linux box, which is a dev machine without openoffice). I would surely be mucho pleased if some could post the salient contents in plain text (or link to pdf) | |
| | |
Archivis
Your Daddy
Premium
join:2001-11-26
Earth
·Verizon FIOS
| Re: Question The doc file is way too huge to paste. Here's the summary. It goes into depths about the scams done at Verizon. I'm still reading it. I'd recommend finding a machince capable of reading it, and possibly print it out. Here's the summary
------------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Verizon Pennsylvania Commitment and Outcome
In 1994, Verizon Pennsylvania (then Pennsylvania Bell a subsidiary of Bell Atlantic) was granted the 'deregulation' of state laws that essentially gave the Bell company financial incentives to rewire the state with fiber optics for broadband services.
The Commitments:
"In view of Bell¡¦s commitment to providing 45 Mbps for digital video transmission both upstream and downstream, we look forward to Bell¡¦s providing this two-way digital video transmission at 45 Mbps."
"Verizon PA has committed to making 20% of its access lines in each of rural, suburban, and urban rate centers broadband capable within five days from the customer request date by end of year 1998; 50% by 2004; and 100% by 2015."
"In order to meet this commitment, Bell plans to deploy a broadband network using fiber optic or other comparable technology that is capable of supporting services requiring bandwidth of at least 45 megabits per second or its equivalent."
"It is apparent that DSL, as it currently exists today, (March 2002), is unable to provide the broadband availability of 45 Mbps both upstream and downstream that the Company voluntarily committed to and the Commission approved in 1995."
What is being promised is the replacement of the older copper wiring with a new, fiber-optic service that has speeds of 45 mbs in both directions. This is 50-100 times the current ADSL service, which goes over the 100-year-old copper wiring and is a mostly one-way product. The agreement also requires Verizon-PA to wire both rural as well as urban areas---- 20% by 1998, 50% by 2004. And this service is fiber-optics directly into the home and office, not ending at the street. Today, there are no homes with this wiring or that delivers the speed.
On March 28, 2002, the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission rejected Verizon Pennsylvania's compliance with the state Alternate Regulation plan, stating that the Bell company had not satisfied its legal obligations to supply broadband services at 45mbs.
"¡Kthis Commission has a legal obligation to reject Verizon PA¡¦s 2000 Update and require it to submit a new update specifying its plans to satisfy its legal obligation to provide a modernized network with broadband capability of at least 45 Mbps upstream and downstream, to be available within five days from the customer request date."
TeleTruth and its members applaud the actions by the Pennsylvania Commission and await their continued analysis of the failure of Verizon, PA to deploy broadband. However, our position is that this situation warrants additional investigations into the possible fraudulent acts by Verizon, among other claims.
We believe:
„h Verizon over the last decade make false and misleading statements about proposed 'broadband" services to the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, the public and other regulatory bodies in order to reduce regulations and make more profits. They succeeded in getting large financial incentives for a broadband network they could never deliver.
„h Verizon lied when it said it could rewire 20% of the state with fiber-optics by 1998, 50% by 2004, including both rural and urban areas, and delivering speeds of 45mbs in both directions.
„h Verizon pulled a "Bait-and Switch" promising a new broadband fiber-optic digital future that could change the state's entire economy, and instead Verizon is barely rolling out an inferior ADSL product over the old, already existing wiring.
„h Verizon is illegally using ratepayer monies through excess charges on phonebills to fund the DSL business and other businesses, including wireless services and long distance services. Known as "cross-subsidization", services that should be funded for by shareholders are instead being charged to customers.
„h Yellow Pages Scam: Verizon also received major financial gains from the shifting of Yellow Pages subsidiary, who¡¦s revenues were used to subsidize local phone service. Yellow Page Advertising is one of the most profitable businesses in America ¡V paid for through higher fees from small business advertisers.
„h Customers paid for a network they will never receive. We estimate that the Company received $2.1 billion from this deregulation, including an additional $1.5 billion in extra tax deductions the Company received from excessive write-offs of the still existing networks.
„h We estimate this cost each household $785, by year end 2002, about $165 in just 2002. Customers are owed refunds.
„h There is ample documentation that this scam occurred in most, if not all of the other Verizon states (including Bell Atlantic and NYNEX). Therefore, we believe there was collusion between the Bell companies to not make public the truth about fiber-optic broadband deployments.
„h Verizon's failure to deploy broadband in the state (and elsewhere) has had a serious impact on the overall economy, as well as harm to the Tech sector and the value of shareholder stocks.
„h Rural Customers have been particularly harmed since the law to deliver them broadband -- like everyone else -- is being ignored.
„h The costs for all services have been incrementally increased through deregulation and snake-oil accounting.
„h The price for services should be declining because the costs have been decreasing --- in PA alone, 3,400 Bell employees have been let go since 1994 --- a drop of 23%, and construction from 2001 is down 36% in the state.
Therefore, we are calling on the State Commission and Attorney General's office, the IRS and the FTC, and FCC, to:
Conduct a Broadband "True-Up":
Step One: We are requesting a complete audit of the Bell's books to determine exactly what happened to the monies collected through deregulation. While we have used due diligence in going through the annual reports, these are closer to works of fiction than documents to be relied on for minute analysis.
„h How much money was collected because of the changes in regulations, including taxes and tax write-offs?
„h How much extra charges on phonebills does this equate to?
„h How much of this excess profit is being charged through higher rates to competitors trying to offer their own services over the Bell networks?
„h How much of this money was spent to roll out ADSL products or other services not related to the Bell's fiber-plans?
„h What fiber-optic services are being offered to residential customers? Was anything wired?
TeleTruth is Recommending:
„h A complete investigation into fraudulent acts. When did the Bell companies know they couldn't build these networks?
„h The Bell company's regulation should reflect its actions and therefore, the company should have the current deregulation plan revoked.
„h An estimated $2.1 should be collected in penalties and refunds.
„h $1.5 billion should be investigated for improper tax write-offs.
„h The state should start proceedings on whether customers should own its own fiber-optic infrastructure, which is built through competitive bidding. This network could be paid for through the current excess rates. It should not be owned by the Bell companies, who have proven to not be trusted with these important matters.
--
Hitman Forums | The Internet Hitman | Mr. Game & Watch owns all of you. | |
| | | |
Dewi
Premium
join:2001-09-28
united kingd | Re: Question Thanks for your effort! I think that gives enough of a summary for me. I might do as you suggest this evening (I have openoffice at home.)
Thanks again!
Dewi | |
| | | ross
join:2000-08-16
·Digizip
| Penn Complaint in PDF Here is your requested document | |
| | | | | lesopp
join:2001-06-27
Land O Lakes, FL
| No Way! Well I for one would never believe that a large telco would lie and deceive anyone, especially consumers and state regulators. They only have our best interests in mind.
I can't speak like a French diplomat, but I can act like one. 
[text was edited by author 2003-02-19 15:29:38] | |
|
NOVA_Guy
Obama- Commander in Thief
Premium
join:2002-03-05
·VOIPo
| And I thought Cox Communications was bad... ...But they are nothing compared to Verizon. When Cox didn't keep its promise last year to have digital cable to 100% of Fairfax county, I thought that they needed to be severely punished. Unfortunately the Board of Supervisors down here didn't agree with me, and only fined them $2,000,000 (plus fines for each day after the target date that they don't deliver).
But this is amazing. Verizon made these promises, apparently with no intent to deliver on them. And then they go ahead and make stupid statements to the effect of being able to deliver 45Mbps speed to places like Altoona if someone wants to pay for it. Wake up Verizon. You made the agreement to deliver. The people of PA have already paid you through tax breaks and the like-- they shouldn't have to pay a second time to have that cable delivered. You should deliver it for free, and the RJ45 connection at the end of each cable should be gift-wrapped for the amount of money that PA has essentially given you.
If $2,100,000,000 doesn't pay for 45Mbps broadband to be delivered to every home, then I don't know what does. Again, it just goes to show how large companies like Verizon are corrupt and will stop at nothing to scam the government and the public. It once again proves how these companies put profits first, and the people they service last.
Verizon should now be forced by the state to implement this service to all of its residents, and operate the network for free to anyone in PA who wants to use it for the next several years. Barring this, Verizon should be forced to pay every penny of the $5,000,000,000 plus interest back to the state. They should then be forced to pay punitive damages for the lies that they told in an amount large enough to make things painful for the company.
[Edited the amount of money that Verizon stole from Pennsylvanians]
[text was edited by author 2003-02-19 15:58:57] | |
| |
Archivis
Your Daddy
Premium
join:2001-11-26
Earth
·Verizon FIOS
| Re: And I thought Cox Communications was bad... wait wait wait wait....
don't start tossing around this 5 billion dollar figure.
I just used that hypothetically in my post.
The actual figure is a little less then half that. Quite large, but lets keep the facts straight.
--
Hitman Forums | The Internet Hitman | Mr. Game & Watch owns all of you. | |
| | |
NOVA_Guy
Obama- Commander in Thief
Premium
join:2002-03-05
·VOIPo
| Re: And I thought Cox Communications was bad... Whoops.... You're right. The figure I'm seeing above is $2.1 billion.... But that still should be enough to pay for wiring the state, or at least a large part of it. (some of the state can probably go without wiring anyways, as I can't think of too many times I've been on trails throughout the Allegheny Forest and really cared about plugging my iPAQ in to check my email... )
[text was edited by author 2003-02-19 15:59:30] | |
| | | |
Archivis
Your Daddy
Premium
join:2001-11-26
Earth
·Verizon FIOS
| Re: And I thought Cox Communications was bad... You also have to keep in mind that this is the money break that they've made SO FAR. They'll continue to get this break until at least half way through the next decade. You're talking at least 3-4 times more then the current figure over the next 10-15 years or so.
--
Hitman Forums | The Internet Hitman | Mr. Game & Watch owns all of you. | |
| lesopp
join:2001-06-27
Land O Lakes, FL
| And this.... " Speaking to the Philadelphia Inquirer, Ronald F. Weigel, director of government relations for Verizon's Pennsylvania division, says the company could provide any school, business, or residence within Verizon's service area with a 45 Mbps connection, provided they could pay for it. "I don't care if they're in Altoona or Philadelphia, we're prepared to offer it," he suggests."
How about DSL from a remote terminal Mr. Weasel? | |
| DonLibes
Premium,ExMod 2001
join:2003-01-19
| Sorry but not guilty I am not a Verizon sympathizer but I read Teletruth's report and I'm not convinced of their allegations. I don't see where Teletruth made a convincing case that Verizon promised something they didn't deliver. VZ didn't promise to provide 45Mbps service; they promised only that they could provide it in 5 days from a customer order. And why shouldn't they be able to? At the current rates for 45Mbps service, a customer is going to be payings tens of thousands of dollars a month!!!
Anyway, I didn't see anything in the report that addresses rates.
The bottom line is: I don't see that Teletruth's allegations will stand up in court. I wonder if the PA official who signed off on VZ's deal understood it the way Teletruth does. If so, it's the PA officials who are negligent for signing something that had huge gaping loopholes in it. Either that or Teletruth is simply way off base. | |
| | 
Minister
join:2002-01-02
Fleeting
| Re: Sorry but not guilty Yeah, I'm not sure yet either....that's a lot of information contained in the report to really digest with a quick glance...
But the PUC seems to acknowledge that Verizon promised 45Mbps capabilities that have yet to show:
quote:
It is apparent that DSL, as it currently exists today, (March 2002), is unable to provide the broadband availability of 45 Mbps both upstream and downstream that the Company voluntarily committed to and the Commission approved in 1995."
So it is quite frankly more than just promising a 5 day window....
Whether it was an intentional lawyer-screw on the part of BA attorneys, or is simply the case of some vague word related loopholes is the question..... | |
| | 
N10Cities
SILENCE I Keel You
Premium
join:2002-05-07
Roland, OK
clubs:
 ·Cox HSI
·World Lynx
| said by DonLibes :
I am not a Verizon sympathizer but I read Teletruth's report and I'm not convinced of their allegations. I don't see where Teletruth made a convincing case that Verizon promised something they didn't deliver. VZ didn't promise to provide 45Mbps service; they promised only that they could provide it in 5 days from a customer order. And why shouldn't they be able to? At the current rates for 45Mbps service, a customer is going to be payings tens of thousands of dollars a month!!!
Anyway, I didn't see anything in the report that addresses rates.
The bottom line is: I don't see that Teletruth's allegations will stand up in court. I wonder if the PA official who signed off on VZ's deal understood it the way Teletruth does. If so, it's the PA officials who are negligent for signing something that had huge gaping loopholes in it. Either that or Teletruth is simply way off base.
Hmmmm..... I'm sure Verizon can set up broadband to anyone right now, but not via a DSL variant. T1 or T3, no problem, but will pay rates ($$$$!) for that service.... that is probably what they will claim...
See also another section I pasted from article...
'Speaking to the Philadelphia Inquirer, Ronald F. Weigel, director of government relations for Verizon's Pennsylvania division, says the company could provide any school, business, or residence within Verizon's service area with a 45 Mbps connection, provided they COULD PAY (caps mine) for it.'
Yea, anybody can get T1 or T3 service to your door, BUT YOU WILL PAY FOR IT at the standard business rate....sneaky wording.. 
[text was edited by author 2003-02-19 17:02:25] | |
| | | 
Does it Matter
@rr.com
| Re: Sorry but not guilty Hmmmm. Once the infrastructure has been paid for (2.1 Billion should cover it right?) The cost does not need to be so high for monthly service. No need for QoS with 45M at a residence, so why would a high cost be necessary (other then gouging of course). I believe the tax breaks should cover future infrastructure costs. | |
| | | | | | | |
asdfdfdf
@xtraport.net
 from:
ross
KrK
furlonium
| This is exactly why you can deal with weasels and liars. Lawyers can always twist words, this is why people consider lawyers a step above child molesters on the human totem pole.
"On March 28, 2002, the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission rejected Verizon Pennsylvania's compliance with the state Alternate Regulation plan, stating that the Bell company had not satisfied its legal obligations to supply broadband services at 45mbs.
"…this Commission has a legal obligation to reject Verizon PA’s 2000 Update and require it to submit a new update specifying its plans to satisfy its legal obligation to provide a modernized network with broadband capability of at least 45 Mbps upstream and downstream, to be available within five days from the customer request date."
"
It seems pretty clear that the PUC was not satisfied that commitments were met. Apparently their "interpretation" was not satisfied.
The rhetoric surrounding the regulatory pushes in the middle of the decade swirled with talk of video services and fiber optic lines into the home. We aren't talking about a 10,000$ a month line or a "you can get anything if you are willing to pay for it" type of line.
For example(bell atlantic at the time)
""We expect Bell Atlantic's enhanced network will be ready to serve 8.75 million homes by the end of the year 2000. By the end of 1998, we plan to wire the top 20 markets"
Notice the term enhanced network, which doesn't mean dsl. Also notice the term homes(i.e. we aren't talking T3 service or "bazillion dollar a month you can get anything with enough money whatever yada yada belch")
We all know what was meant. The fact that verizon comes back later and claims that the words don't say that is only further proof that you can't deal with these people. These people will hand you cow dung and claim it's filet mignon and they'll have a lot of overpaid sacks to deny the validity of objective reality, discuss the complexities of human perception, yada yada belch, until any sane normal human being would rather stick a spike through their own skull than play any more bullshit games. You can condemn the government for not nailing them down explicitly enough but in the final analysis you can't make deals of any kind with sleazy liars who will twist everything in any way they can. Ultimately business can only function if there is some integrity behind the deals and negotiations made. | |
| | |
See 6 replies to this post | |
| my2centswrth
join:2003-02-17
Bessemer, AL | Aw, come on now! An allegation of wrong doing by an RBOC is all that is necessary to justify making the RBOC pay through the nose!! Please don't muddle up the works by using common sense and objective thinking! | |
| | 
alex4life
Alex4life
Premium
join:2001-06-22
Delta, BC
| said by DonLibes :
VZ didn't promise to provide 45Mbps service; they promised only that they could provide it in 5 days from a customer order.
I'm guessing the "within 5 days" clause was put into place so as to force Verizon to build out all the infrastructure so that it would be available if and when someone wanted it. I sincerely doubt that Verizon could run fiber to any house in Pennsylvania in 5 days. | |
| | | DonLibes
Premium,ExMod 2001
join:2003-01-19
| Re: Sorry but not guilty said by alex4life :
said by DonLibes :
VZ didn't promise to provide 45Mbps service; they promised only that they could provide it in 5 days from a customer order.
I'm guessing the "within 5 days" clause was put into place so as to force Verizon to build out all the infrastructure so that it would be available if and when someone wanted it. I sincerely doubt that Verizon could run fiber to any house in Pennsylvania in 5 days.
Your sincere doubts aren't going to win a lawsuit. Anyone who has contracted with Verizon for a 45Mbps fiber run and didn't get it within 5 days, please step forward. | |
| Nightwchtr
join:2001-09-10
Falls Church, VA | WHAT VERIZON LIED??? NAH I DONT BELIEVE IT NOT!!!!! All big business are the same they are out to screw everyone for the green. Nothing NEW. | |
| | | |
See 7 replies to this post | |
saturation p
join:2002-06-07
Philadelphia, PA | Suspension of Disbelief As a Verizon splicer I find it hard to believe the company could (even on a good day) provision and get working a 45Mbps line in five days. An order like that will have to pass thru at least five departments. | |
| | BunnYwood
Premium
join:2002-06-19
Sioux City, IA
| Re: Suspension of Disbelief Does anyone have any really rich family or friends in Pennsylvania. Ask them to order a 45Mbps line and see how long it takes to install. If it even works at that speed once it's up is another question. It the Infrastructure in the state isn't good enough to support it you would be paying for 45Mbps and getting maybe 20Mbps even from someone across the county that also has a 45Mbps line. | |
| | | Marckus0513
Just Because
join:2003-01-11
Vernon, VT
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: Suspension of Disbelief said by BunnYwood :
Does anyone have any really rich family or friends in Pennsylvania. Ask them to order a 45Mbps line and see how long it takes to install. If it even works at that speed once it's up is another question. It the Infrastructure in the state isn't good enough to support it you would be paying for 45Mbps and getting maybe 20Mbps even from someone across the county that also has a 45Mbps line.
I believe that if you get a 45Mbs (T3) line from Verizon or any other company that could give you one it would require fiberoptics to your location. I also believe that a T3 is not like DSL where you may not get the full Advertised speed. If you get a T3 you get fiber and the full 45Mbps that you are paying for. If it is a Pt to Pt T3 you will indeed get the full 45Mbs thru-put end to end. If it is a T3 to an Internet Provider the actual thru-put to the provider is 45Mbs but to the net depends on tons of factors that are out of the control of the T3 Provider.
As far as installation goes, if the provider including Verizon does not already have fiber to their location it would be a miracle if they could get it there in 5 days! In fact I suspect that it would not and could not happen!! | |
| 
plk
bo may sleep in loft
Premium
join:2002-04-20
Ogden, IA | definition of broadband Hey maybe the automotive industry should do the same thing. Cut the distance of the mile to 2640 feet. Then they can claim they improved gas mileage buy 200%. It's probably an inside joke in GM's board room. | |
|
AAMetamorphosis
@suscom.net
| Pennsylvania is NOT a state ... Pennsylvania is NOT a state ...
by AMetamorphosis (AAMetamorphosis@aol.com) on Wednesday, February 19th, 2003 @ 04:45PM
Pennsylvania is NOT a state ... we are a " Commonwealth " ... which in its self is a misnomer ... the plethora of local boroughs ( read: Gestapo's ) , townships, municipalities & such cause overlaps in services , taxes & in " state " fighting ... its no wonder we have some of the highest taxes in the country ... Frankly, I'd like to see Verizon be forced to pay back this money to our " Commonwealth " ... Sounds like Verizon/Bell or whatever they are called this month works much like the Mafia | |
| | | | FlameBait
join:2001-07-18
Taft, CA
| Commonwealth. Does that mean they can steal your money and give it to me?  Or can do the reverse. Just joking.
[text was edited by author 2003-02-19 22:12:45] | |
|
Inttteresting
| Interesting Verizon can't install a DS3 in five days, and neither can anyone else. That claim seems a little unreasonable. I doubt that Verizon would agree to install a DS3 in five days, because they know they can't.
Teletruth's primary argument is that your phone bill is too expensive and the phone companies should invest in more capital expenditures. I wonder why investors do not think that the RBOCs are as profitable as Teletruth suggests, phone company stocks have plunged with the rest of the telecommunications industry.
When they Teletruth talks about accounting scandals, they point to Worldcom and Global Crossings. When they discuss competition in the long distance market, they mention how MCI is keeping costs down. Teletruth briefly states that when they discover long distance companies breaking the law, they will report it. Teletruth does not mention the well pulicized allegations slamming and cramming by AT&T and MCI-Worldcom.
Teletruth also [incorrectly] claim that the RBOCs are a monopoly, which is not true because there are competitors in the marketplace.
Their site seems quite biased and un-objective and the arguments cater to the naive. Bruce Kushnik admits that he has worked for AT&T. I wonder if they are still paying him.
Their site reminds me of websites that suggest the federal income tax is unconstitutional.
In their defense, Teletruth does link to DSLreports. It is interesting persuasive writing.
There seems to be a big bias against the phone companies. I don't blame people for getting pissed when they lose dial-tone or when they have high latency on the DSL, but if the phone companies lose money, the phone company won't be as capable of fixing these problems. How many MCI and Sprint trucks do you see driving around?
If the phone companies start to lose more money on broadband, you will have to wait longer for your service to get fixed when it brekas. | |
| | 
sporkme
drop the crantini and move it, sister
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-01
Morristown, NJ
·Optimum Online
| Re: Interesting said by Inttteresting:
There seems to be a big bias against the phone companies. I don't blame people for getting pissed when they lose dial-tone or when they have high latency on the DSL, but if the phone companies lose money, the phone company won't be as capable of fixing these problems. How many MCI and Sprint trucks do you see driving around?
The phone companies are not losing money due to the piddly amount of competition they have. They are losing it because they are poorly run beaurocracies that reward sloth from the lowly 411 operator to the CEO.
They are slow, glacially slow, to adapt to changes in technology. They want to be trend-setters, but they are too damn ignorant and stubborn to even come close to innovating. This is *not* due to TA '96, this is not due to those darn CLECs, the state these companies are in is due to their own ineptitude and lack of vision.
ATM, remember when that was all the rage? Total telco hype. Now the only place you'll find it is in DSL aggregation and in wan links, but with the customer end set to emulate frame relay.
Without the rise (and fall) of the DCLECs, we would all still be on dialup, ISDN or 56K frame relay lines. Cable, another bastion of swolen heads with small brains, would not even think about high speed access without competition, they'd still be trying to convince us we need Video on Demand.
Morons, all of them. Don't be so gullible as to think these chumps would operate on a loss if they delivered on the many things they promised back when they were freshly pulled from Ma Bell's teat.
As to all the ILEC employees, why bother? I mean, unless you're a VP of something, is what they pay you really worth coming in here and defending your senior morons? Would anyone here really enjoy having dinner with Ivan?
I mean, just look at this hit-parade of shoe salesmen:
»investor.verizon.com/profile/lea···idenberg
That poor guy on the bottom there, man I can't tell if he should be in real estate or be a lobbyist. | |
| Vespid
join:2002-09-24
Sharon, MA
| Verizon DSL actual deployment numbers as of Q4 2002 for PA:
Total COs deployed: 240 out of 500 total (48%)
Total Hhlds served by DSL COs: 3.2M out of 3.8M total (84%)
In-Range DSL Hhlds: apprx 2.5M (66% of total VZN hhlds)
While the lawyers churn through $$ each hour, debating the merits and damage...the fact is that Verizon has deployed DSL in PA about on par with every other state. PA has certainly not suffered greater "damage" by Verizon's broadband deployment schedule when compared other states. The only other big pipe option is cable. Comcast has pretty good coverage of the PA major metros...they can deliver 45MB to over 20% of the PA households today!
The only ones making money here are the lawyers. | |
| |
sporkme
drop the crantini and move it, sister
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-01
Morristown, NJ
·Optimum Online
| Re: Verizon DSL actual deployment numbers said by Vespid :
While the lawyers churn through $$ each hour, debating the merits and damage...the fact is that Verizon has deployed DSL in PA about on par with every other state. PA has certainly not suffered greater "damage" by Verizon's broadband deployment schedule when compared other states.
Well, the agreement wasn't about DSL. And if we want to round off the corners a bit and make everyone happy, the the state should rescind whatever tax breaks were given to VZ. No harm, no foul, right?
The issue isn't what type of crack Bell Atlantic was smoking when they started blabbering about a whole new "enhanced network" they would build that was capable of turning up 45Mb/s in 5 days, that's irrelavent. They should have thought that out a little better. If they took the tax breaks though, in all fairness, give them back. Or just give 44/45ths back.
DSL is certainly not an "enhanced network". It's end nodes hooked up to the same optical transport that carries voice and traditional data services. When you call the entire service footprint your network and talk about "enhancing" it, you're talking about end-to-end, which DSL is not.
If I recall correctly, ATM technology was just starting to bubble up then; it was to be the magic bullet that would reduce network costs by letting the same pipes carry voice, data and video; it was the first (and apprently the last) time the Bells were thinking about packetizing voice rather than dedicating a 64Kb channel for the duration of every call. As we know, this whole technology went down the crapper for the most part and plays a more general purpose role now. | |
| | | Vespid
join:2002-09-24
Sharon, MA
| Re: Verizon DSL actual deployment numbers Verizon was pitching technology they didn't have to regulators (& politicians) who were very happy to rubber stamp a deal that lacked teeth (but sounded great.) So now aside from TeleTruth's effort this entire matter would have been swept under the rug. Certainly the PUC should have been all over this commitment...especially if billions of dollars was involved. The PUC is possibly as guilty of inept regulation as Verizon is in selling broadband vapor.
The regulators need to be held accountable as well as the Telcos. | |
| | | Gordon Gekko
join:2003-02-18
North Little Rock, AR
| It's end nodes hooked up to the same optical transport that carries voice and traditional data services
Your right it still hooks up the the optical transport at the speed at which the dslam is provisioned. unlike cable which at times is faster then dsl but not as dependable has to worry about load on the coaxial distribuiton line and also after it hooks up to the optical transport. That is a fact! | |
| | lesopp
join:2001-06-27
Land O Lakes, FL
| What about
Total RTs deployed that are DSL ready: ???
Total Hhlds served by RTs that are DSL ready: ???
In-Range DSL Hhlds fed from a RT: ???
I have heard nationally 40% of their customers are served from remote terminals. Assuming the same holds true for PA, the numbers would be significantly lower.
My neighbor works for Verizon and tells me they are busy deploying the Next Generation DLC specifically to support DSL. He also said Vz has not openly deployed DSL to RTs yet, but a test was underway at three RTs in Verizon's territory.
Verizon (aka, Bell Atlantic) never said they would deliver DS3's to the home. They said 45 Mbps for digital video transmission both upstream and downstream.
Can they deliver digital video to 20% of the homes in PA today? I believe the answer here is no since they unloaded their business that was competing with cable TV.
[text was edited by author 2003-02-20 10:30:23] | |
| | | Marckus0513
Just Because
join:2003-01-11
Vernon, VT
·Verizon Online DSL
|  Re: Verizon DSL actual deployment numbers
Bring on the RT DSL Verizon!! | |
| neftv
join:2000-10-01
Broomall, PA |  I hate verizon
If I knew better I would disconnect the phone from the wall too. | |
| 
Sisqo
World Champs. Babe Who?
Premium
join:2002-08-14
Methuen, MA
| This will not hold up!! Let's be logical can we sit here & honestly believe that ANY company would just offer 45MBPS to the door? Verizon said they would have the CAPABILITY to do so. Not that every customer that paid $35-$50 would be getting these speeds! This is ludicris without a doubt in my mind this is a simple scheme by teletruth trying to destroy what is left in SOME telcom credibity! Not all Telecom companies are the AT&T COMCAST'S OR THE MCI'S of the world! Let's face it grab your pants & stop crying! According to the document every home would be wired to receive up to 45mbps! You want 45mbps sure go ahead & pay $600 a month, this is just makes me irate I am a firm believer that not all companies are bad therefore I still believe in our countries' telecom sector like Verizon & Bellsouth! God forbid these companies try to run a profitable business, now a days everybody wants everything for free!!! Things do not just work this way! Please READ & get the FACTS before assuming ANYTHING! To all consumers over the world, in the end we DO WIN! If a company for any reason does not satisfy you with their service then by all means do what you need to do to get the problem fixed or change providers! But do not try to ruin companies credibilty over misleading charges! | |
| fist5
join:2002-03-07
Effort, PA
| Tiger by the tail Lets see, last DS3 I ordered and installed for a customer, 7mb with bursting to 10 [billing to match] was $7000 a month. Average T1 is about $1100 [don't be fooled by the $450 month T1's advertised, ask for the total recurring monthy cost, loopback charges and bandwidth access]. So, Joe Citizen gets a 45mb pipe [vdsl] and pays $50 a month, wonder how long the corps will stand for paying $50,000 per month for an OC3. not long I'll bet. 1.5mb dsl is about the slowest you can go, but what is the telco supposed to do with all those extra T's after small business's roll over into business DSL for 1/10 the cost. You have people, salesman, mangers, presidents who make residuals off all those T1 and larger lines that they have sold over the years and they are not going to give them up easily. Where I live in monroe county PA, the Poconos, they 'Verizon' upgraded all the phone systems to the lighwave or lightpath system, ATM fiber links between the CO's and where the MDF were, adding DSL is easy, just some hardware in the slic's and CO. But they are stalling, there are alot of isolated companies here that NEED high speed access and as a result have alot of T's and larger, make DSL available and then business dsl follows pretty quick, those T's will be dropped like the overpriced potatoes they have turned into, that is why the telcos don't want the competetion to be colocated, as soon as they turn on DSL other companies move in and provide better services. They are holding DSL as ransom to get that legislation passed so that they again have a lock on the services. Nope, I don't figure to see DSL here until some other technology that totally bypasses the telco and cable companies completely finally kicks them in their collective asses and has a direct effect on their wallets, or actually their stockholders wallets. Until then they have a tiger by the tail and are top heavy enough to hold on as long as they can. | |
| fgoldstein
join:2003-01-21
Newton Highlands, MA
·RCN CABLE
| Fiber to the home was assumed to be on the way Let's set the wayback machine to 1985. That was the year I joined an ATIS ANSI-accredited subcommittee that was writing standards for digital telecom networks. I represented a large computer company, putting me in a minority there (surrounded by Bellheads, some very smart and some, well, bellheads). There was "narrowband ISDN" (what is normally called ISDN), which was a couple of years away from trials. There was frame relay, which was just being thought up as a replacement for X.25. And there was a new CCITT (now called ITU-T) project that we were the US input to, called "Broadband ISDN". In CCITT terms, Broadband began at 50 Mbps; 2-50 Mbps was merely "wideband".
B-ISDN was starting to be developed by telcos (remember PTTs?) worldwide as their response to the potential threat of cable. I first saw a cable modem being marketed in 1982. (It didn't catch on with the cablecos at the time, but they could have bought the product.) The telcos in 1985 thus figured that the best defense was a good offense. If they could offer video, then they'd be able to fight the cablecos on their own turf. Now in 1985, cable TV was old technology, all analog, mostly one-way 300 MHz coax with lots of repeaters. To get over 100 channels on the brand-spankin'-new Cablevision Boston system, they pulled dual coax. The telcos figured they could jump-start this with fiber optics.
So the B-ISDN project focused on what were outrageously long time frames, even by telco standards (for whom it takes three hours to watch "60 minutes"). We figured we'd see narrowband ISDN widespread around 1990, and B-ISDN roll out in volume somewhere in the late 1990s.
It was around the beginning of 1986 when CCITT really adopted "ATM" as the core technology of B-ISDN; before that, there was interest in using TDM over OC-3. B-ISDN with ATM was assumed in 1986-1990 to begin at OC-3 (155.52 Mbps); that was expected to be wide enough for one HDTV channel plus whatever else a house might need. (Today's 20 Mbps HDTV compression was not anticipated in the days when an 80286 was a "turbo" CPU.) The old copper telco plant was depreciating, so replacing it with FTTH over 20 years or so seemed, well, both sensible and inevitable. We continued using these assumptions well into the 1990s.
That, my friends, was the background of Bell's broadband promise. DSL was not on the table. In 1993, the Internet wasn't even open to the public yet; the high-speed applications were expected to include telecommuting, LAN interconnection, videoconferencing, video-on-demand, and as-yet-uninvented services. The Bells figured that they were going to do this FTTH thing to keep ahead of CATV. And they wanted out of the old rate-of-return regulation, because they foresaw higher productivity (or perhaps union busting, knowing Bell Atlantic) leading to lower costs. Rate caps would let them keep their higher profits.
Of course when it came time to actually look hard at FTTH, the numbers didn't add up. The Bells saw DSL as a mid-life kicker for the old copper plant. And they didn't see enough demand to pay for FTTH. They still don't -- the FCC's bargain in the UNE review is no bargain! But TeleTruth's argument is truthful; the Bells were talking about FTTH broadband, and conveniently forgot it after winning rate caps. | |
| | clecrupt9
join:2002-01-22
GA
| Re: Fiber to the home was assumed to be on the way These are good posts,
you know it does make sense that they would want to squeeze every last dollar out of the copper plant. Of course they do spend money for muxes and conditioning those lines, but that cant be near as much as fiber muxes and all that kind of network.
I think t-1 still has a leg up on DSL. You have lots of voice T's out there and t-1 is just more reliable. Plus some telco's really like the idea of splitting services on channel banks. | |
| | | philipw2
join:2001-12-19
Chevy Chase, MD
| Re: Fiber to the home was assumed to be on the way There was a recent article in the Washington Post on how copper had a lot more life in it. While FTTH may be the ultimate ideal...
Copper Lines Regaining Luster
With the Obstacles to Fiber, Phone Companies Are Tapping the Old Infrastructure
Friday, February 7, 2003; Page E01
»www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dy···=printer | |
| dsless
join:2001-05-16
Pittsburgh, PA | I do have Fiber in my home | |
| | | |
|
|
