PDF Version
of Mass. ISP Survey
SPECIAL: FCC
Data Supports Findings
TREATMENT OF MASS. ISPs AND DSL CUSTOMERS
Thomas O'Reilly, Attorney General
George B. Dean, Chief
Regulated Industries Division
Public Protection Bureau
The enclosed are the results of a survey conducted by New Networks Institute (NNI) of Massachusetts Internet Service Providers (ISPs). It is part of a larger survey of New York and Texas ISPs. As you may know, Texas and New York were the first two states allowed into long distance, after they supposedly proved that their networks are open to competition. The New York and Texas report can be found at: http://www.newnetworks.com/isptexasnysruvey.html
The Massachusetts report can be found at:
http://www.newnetworks.com/MassISPReport.pdf
The findings from these surveys lead us to conclude:
- The Bay State's telephone networks are not open to competition, especially for Internet Service Providers (ISPs)
- Services provided to Massachusetts ISPs are sub-standard, and this affects both the ISP as well as their Customers.
- Other data filed in Verizon's Long Distance (section 271) application, including material from the Competitive Local Exchange Companies (CLECs), numerous associations, and individual corporations, all corroborate the survey's findings.
- A survey of New York and Texas ISPs reveals that service got worse in states where the Bell was allowed to enter Long Distance -- and this is a model of what to expect in Massachusetts.
Most importantly, it is ultimately the customer who is the loser. There is a ripple-of-harm inflicted by Verizon's unfair use of monopoly power that impacts small business customers and residential customers, not only the competitors. Their pattern of anti-competitive behavior has limited choices, delayed service, and cost customers millions annually. More and more people are starting to realize the pervasive harm this is doing to the entire "Internet economy".
There are two other items we would like to include for your consideration.
- First, information supplied by Verizon to the FCC for its compliance with the conditions of the NYNEX-Bell Atlantic merger, shows that there has been a serious decline in some services to competitors since 1997. In Massachusetts, from 1997 through June 2000, Verizon's service to its customers remained mainly unchanged for an installation. However, services supplied to competitors had a 60% decrease. This information, which was supplied by Verizon to the FCC, seems to directly contradict the information supplied by the KPMG study (the study used to determine that the phone networks are open to competitors.)
To read this material on the web: http://www.newnetworks.com/massfccslides.htm
And to see the specific Installation information pertaining to Massachusetts see:
http://www.newnetworks.com/P3b2%20(1).pdf
- Secondly, in October of 1999, Peter Brennan (with NNI), filed a Consumer Complaint with the DTE pertaining to the Verizon's advanced network deployments and the cost to customers. (attached). Our Complaint found that in 1994 and 1995, NYNEX made explicit promises to the public that they would rewire the state with fiber-optics. According to hundreds of Bell statements, this deployment was to reach 330,000 customers in the Bay state by 1995, and that rollout would have had at least half the state completed by 2000. This deployment never happened. However, the promises were directly related to changes in state Alternate Regulations that have cost customers over $1 billion dollars in excessive charges. Also, NYNEX wrote-off some $800 million dollars, as well as added charges for network wiring that was never used for its intended purposes. This Complaint can be found at: http://newnetworks.com/Masscomplaintsummary.html
The DTE to date has failed to respond to this Complaint and has ignored our attempts to find out the status of this Complaint. Obviously, if the Bell received excess profits from a network they never built, then allowing them into Long Distance before they fulfilled their state obligations shows a failure to protect the Public Interest.
Therefore, we request that the Attorney General:
- Immediately open an investigation into the treatment of ISPs and their customers.
- Requests that the DTE reject Verizon's entry into Long Distance.
- Include ISPs as part of its deliberations for Verizon's entry into Long Distance.
- Request that the DTE examine the FCC-filed Verizon information for their treatment of competitors vs. their own services
- Investigate the status of our original DTE Complaint pertaining to Bay State Advanced networks.
Yours truly,
Bruce Kushnick Peter J, Brennan,.
Executive Director Director, TPI Group, Citizen of Massachusetts