[Random-bits] ISPs and DSL

[James Love]

This is Bruce Kushnick's reminder about anticompetitive issues in the
DSL  platform. Jamie


---------------------
Subject: about ISPs and advanced networks ---- Where's the data for Open
Access?
   Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 18:10:30 -0400
   From: Kushnick <bruce@NEWNETWORKS.COM>
     To: CYBERTELECOM-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM


Right now the real battle for ISPs is staying alive. 

The Bells charges for DSL are predatory at best. We did the math with
two NY ISPs and found that it is virtually impossible to make money and
compete
http://newnetworks.com/baadslscrewisp.htm

Next, many of the ISPs and CLECs beleive there is a "Code Red" within
the Bell system that is systematically trying to put them out of
business through 'bad acts". In our survey with CIX and the USISPA, we
found that the treatment of the ISPs was, at best sub-standard
http://newnetworks.com/ispsummary.html

The data from other sources seems to have corroborated these findings. 
http://newnetworks.com/Putting%20the%20Survey%20into%20Perspective.htm

Remember, only two Bells have been able to show that their markets are
even "minimially" acceptable. 

Also, this pattern of abuse of the ISPs driectly effects their business.
In NYC, we found that approx. 30% of all orders, the Bell doesn't show
up for the install, and about 75% the order didn't go through for weeks.
We've argued that the ISP and the customer should be compensated for
these problems... In our interviews we found that the small ISP has to
dedicated staffers just to remedy the Bells' poor handling of customers.
It cost them monery they do not have. And they do not have the money to
take these problems to court. 
http://www.newnetworks.com/paycompensation.htm

And is there serious violations of the laws? Here's just one quote. This
ISP from Washington using US West, explains how the Bell promised to
deliver DSL to its ISP customers, then has made it ?uneconomical" to
compete. Even more surprising, according to this ISP, a former US West
employee states that the Bell is not paying for their own Internet
service but is getting it subsidized. This is a clear example of
monopoly abuse.

        "Failed to offer DSL in our primary market area despite early
promises to do so. We had a DSL connection and essentially NO customers
for more than a year. I would not in good conscience advertise DSL when
it was not available. More than a year later, after canceling our
service and getting a full refund, US West is beginning to offer DSL in
a limited area in our primary service area. Our experience with US West
and DSL has been uniformly AWFUL. I currently do not offer DSL because
the phone company (in my view) has made it deliberately uneconomical to
compete in this arena. We have reports from a former US West employee
that US West, by policy, is not making their internet arm pay their
bills to US West, although they are being billed. She was told ?don't
worry about it? and to ?ignore it? when she brought this to the
attention of her supervisor. Part of her job, by the way (if I recall
correctly), was collecting delinquent accounts."
And the data for Open Access is --------???????????/


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bruce Kushnick
Executive Director, New Networks Institute
Bruce@newnetworks.com
http://www.newnetworks.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
=======================================================
James Love, Director           | http://www.cptech.org
Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org 
P.O. Box 19367                 | voice: 1.202.387.8030
Washington, DC 20036           | fax:   1.202.234.5176
=======================================================