Site Search

Entries from December 1, 2011 - December 31, 2011

Thursday
Dec292011

2012 Regulatory Outlook: New Year, Same Basic Goals

FCC Agenda Likely to Stay Laser-Focused on Broadband, Spectrum

2011 was undoubtedly a landmark year for Julius Genachowski & Friends, but will 2012 include great leaps forward as USF/ICC reform, Connect to Compete and the White Spaces? The FCC certainly has its work cut out tying up loose ends on all three of these seminal issues. We can likely anticipate further powerful thrusts to improve wired and wireless broadband deployment and adoption in 2012, as well as initiatives to alleviate the spectrum crunch.

2012 might be the Year of the Reverse Auction. Reverse auctions could be spectacularly disastrous or sensationally effective, depending on a variety of factors including auction design and industry participation. Two other issues that RLECs should watch for in 2012 are solutions for the rural call termination problems and the PSTN transition—I would expect proceedings on both in 2012, and hopefully a swift resolution to the call termination problems.

A December 8 speech by Commissioner Robert McDowell to the Federal Communications Bar Association titled “2012: The Year of the U.N. Regulation of the Internet?” revealed some clues about what may come in 2012 at the FCC. I was most excited about this possibility: “Until it actually happens, I will keep talking about launching and concluding a proceeding to reform our Universal Service program’s contribution methodology by mid-year.” As the USF contribution rate reaches an all-time high of nearly 18%, the FCC should have adequate pressure to make a move on contributions reform. Additionally, USF contributions reform is basically the last box left to check under the National Broadband Plan goals for modernizing USF. The question is: who will have to contribute under the new methodology? Will all broadband service providers and consumers be on the chopping block? What about major content providers like Google and Netflix? I expect that the contributions reform proceeding will be every bit as action-packed and controversial as the 2011 USF/ICC reform proceedings.

We aren’t nearly finished grappling with the November 18 USF/ICC Reform Order either—not by a long shot. Comments in response to the FNPRM are due in several rounds throughout January, February and March. Following these comment cycles, we will possibly get some resolution on 2011 rural telecom cliff-hangers like rate-of-return re-prescription, CAF methodologies for RLECs, broadband public interest obligations, IP interconnection, and the Remote Areas Fund.

A Policy “Roulette Wheel”

The dreaded HCLS regression analysis will cause no end of headaches for RLECs in 2012 as these companies will need to play a rather sadistic guessing game with their costs in order to avoid placement at or above the ninetieth percentile. The precise regression analysis methodology will be finalized through the FNPRM—it is very concerning that the proposed methodology inserts such a great deal of unpredictability in HCLS because RLECs will not know in advance if they will fall above the ninetieth percentile—this level of unpredictability is far greater than the rather constant artificial increases in the NACPL used to cap current HCLS.

The FCC appears to protect itself from legal challenges by adopting a regression analysis methodology that will be used, predictably, but the methodology itself is where things get murky. In other words, it is predictable that the FCC will use the regression analysis, but it is unpredictable as to how individual companies are impacted by the model. The unfortunate carriers who fall in or above the ninetieth percentile of similarly situated carriers may face a double-whammy punishment: clipped support and ineligibility to receive redistributed support.

John Staurulakis Inc. economic and policy director Douglas Meredith provided the following statement about the regression analysis: “The FCC regression methodology proposed to limit capital and operational expenditures is fraught with policy and technical challenges. This method is an order of magnitude less predictable for individual carriers than the current HCLS mechanism—even with the current capping procedure. This method has been summarized as a ‘race to the middle.’ If adopted, we should consider whether a capital expenditure race to the middle will promote and advance universal service in high-cost and remotely populated areas of the nation.”

Meredith continues, “I submit that the proposed method fails to achieve the Congressional goals for universal service. In addition to serious policy concerns, the technical aspects of the proposed method are also suspect: study areas that are missing from the FCC’s analysis, descriptive independent variables missing from the model, relatively low goodness of fit measures and a high reliance on covariance relationships among carriers makes the application of this regression method look more like a roulette wheel in Las Vegas than well-established public policy.”

There’s a First Time for Everything

As mentioned above, I expect 2012 to be the Year of Reverse Auctions. The FCC is responsible for designing—for the first time ever—reverse auctions for second phases of the Mobility Fund and the wireline broadband Connect America Fund. Furthermore, if Congress releases under-utilized government spectrum in 2012, the FCC may also be tasked with designing auctions for this spectrum too. According to McDowell’s December 8 speech, “If that were to occur in 2012, suddenly the Commission could be working furiously on auction and service rules, band plans and such throughout the year.”

Voluntary incentive auction legislation has passed in the House, which Genachowski praised as a “major achievement.” Genachowski’s December 13 statement explains that the legislation “would authorize the Federal Communications Commission to conduct voluntary incentive auctions as recommended in the FCC’s National Broadband Plan. This would free up new spectrum for mobile broadband, driving investment, innovation, and job creation; generating many billions of dollars in revenue; and helping foster U.S. leadership in mobile broadband.” Genachowski insists that FCC incentive auction authority “needs to become law;” but warns that the House bill “could be counterproductive” by downplaying FCC policies to promote unlicensed spectrum and limiting the FCC’s ability to develop band plans and auction structures “in ways that maximize the value of licensed spectrum.”

How will the FCC avoid pitfalls associated with reverse auctions, which have been implemented internationally with less-than-stellar results? How will the FCC ensure that small rural carriers have a fair shot in future auctions? The Mobility Fund Phase II proceeding may provide an excellent opportunity for small carriers to state their demands and recommend a methodology that is fair for companies of all shapes and sizes. But... will the FCC listen, or pull a Consensus Framework 2.0, demanding industry input then essentially ignoring it?

Broadband for President in 2012

The FCC built up considerable momentum in 2011 with broadband adoption and deployment initiatives; but the U.S. has a whole lot of work to do before reclaiming #1 in the world for broadband adoption, deployment and speed—a spot in the top ten would be a nice goal for now. You can debate how important international broadband rankings are in the grand scheme of things, but with a presidential election on the horizon it probably wouldn’t be out of line to speculate that America’s sub-par international broadband ranking could become a hot-button issue in 2012.

A December 14 FCC blog post by Josh Gottheimer and Jordan Usdan includes a line that could easily be inserted into any run-of-the-mill campaign sound-byte: “Closing the digital divide isn’t just an economic issue, it’s one of the great civil rights challenges of our time. Broadband can be the great equalizer – giving every American with an Internet connection access to a world of new opportunities that might otherwise be beyond their reach.” The common assumption among politicos is that more broadband means more jobs, so increasing broadband will surely make it into multiple presidential-hopefuls’ campaigns. As a result, the FCC could be pressured to take further drastic steps to influence broadband adoption and deployment, even if 2011 initiatives (like Connect to Compete, for example) prove unsuccessful at actually adding percentage points to deployment and adoption rates.

The Legislative and Legal Fronts

2012 is also looking to be a significant year for telecom and Internet-related legislation and legal decisions. The Internet ecosystem is in an uproar over House and Senate legislation to combat online piracy and “rogue” foreign websites, to the extent that the uproar over net neutrality almost pales in comparison. Given the public outcry, it seems unlikely that SOPA or PIPA will pass as they stand, but we can probably expect similar legislation to go through in 2012—hopefully it won’t kill the Internet as we know it.

A House bill to actually reform the FCC is still a live wire on the Hill, so we might continue to see a power struggle between Congress and the independent agency charged with regulating telecom that we all love so much. According to a December 20 Politico article, Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) “called the FCC ‘way out of control,’” and stated, “’We need to reign them in and remind them that their job is not to manage the industry but to provide just a light hand of regulation to make sure there is fairness.’”

Additionally, courts in DC and Denver will hear appeals cases on net neutrality and USF/ICC reform, respectively. Although it is too early to tell how these cases will conclude, we can’t rule out the possibility that the decisions could throw a wrench into the regulations and reforms that the FCC spent the better part of the last 3 years bringing to fruition.

If the regulatory theme of 2010 was the National Broadband Plan (with net neutrality a close second) and USF/ICC reform dominated 2011; what will be the one thing that we will remember the 2012 FCC for accomplishing? You know my guess is designing and implementing reverse auctions for the Mobility Fund, CAF and re-released spectrum, but what do you think?

Thursday
Dec292011

2011's Broadband Bonanza Means New "Explorations" in 2012

While researching for a profile on Paul Bunyan Communications several months ago, I was struck by the cooperative's 60-plus years of underdog status—a fitting 2011 year-end metaphor for many of the companies I talk to across the country. There, in Minnesota, was a cooperative that organized in 1950 to connect underserved areas, and was helped along in its goal by federal legislation that sought to improve rural telephone service. Now, as 2011 draws to a close and we look ahead to what 2012 will bring, many companies I've interviewed this year are still trying to reach underserved areas—this time with broadband—and doing so is part of the larger, national plan to bring valuable high-speed internet connections to every home and business, in every community. With the year ending, these companies and co-ops are also hoping that broadband subs will help offset landline losses; this may be the last year for such a ying-yang balance, too, as broadband growth slows and it becomes less likely these adds will be able to offset the losses going forward.

A sweeping dedication to broadband will certainly continue into 2012, but boy has the game gotten more complex.Thanks to the recent detailed analysis offered by our own Cassandra Heyne, I won't use this space to parse out the specifics of federal funding for broadband or other regulatory hurdles facing rural providers. But I would like to reflect on what 2011 has meant for the rural service providers, cooperatives, start-ups, and advocacy groups I've spent the year researching and interviewing. Whether the goal was to tap into vertical markets, harness the potential of the cloud, or test out new services and platforms, without a question the name of the game this year was broadband—how to build-out fiber networks, how to increase speeds, how to offers services via broadband, how to pool resources and efforts through alliances and consortiums, how to share resources and infrastructure, how to get into the data storage market, and so on. Ultimately 2011 centered on a challenge and a source of opportunity; both are captured in the phrase I heard over and over again—“broadband build-out."

2011: Betting on Broadband

Just last week, new ceo of 3 Rivers Communications David Gibson summed up one of the most fitting characterizations for rural and independent companies. In an interview for the Great Falls Tribune, he said that, without a doubt, “Fiber is the way of the future... When you replace all that copper [with fiber] the service quality is better; you get much faster broadband speeds. You can offer IPTV. It's just good all around, it's where we need to be to position ourselves.” But Gibson went on to note the snags in building out rural broadband—threats to funding by “problems... in the mechanics” of the new Connect America fund and threats of stiff competition from satellite and wireless broadband, encroaching cable companies, municipal-owned broadband and others.

This year, I've talked to rural co-ops, independent providers, advocacy groups and consortiums in Kentucky, Ohio, Minnesota, Tennessee, Virginia, Georgia, South Carolina, West Virginia, Texas and the Dakotas, and for all of them, broadband was central to their goal of providing new services and connecting unserved or underserved rural communities. In some cases, broadband meant better connectivity for local high schools, community colleges or universities; in other cases, there were advances in telemedicine, improvements for tribal communities, or farming technologies. But in every case, the directors and spokespersons I interviewed insisted that broadband brought with it the possibilities for a changed community and more vibrant opportunities for rural residents and businesses. And they had examples of these improvements... many, many examples.

The question remains, however, do these broadband build-outs actually mean more stability for the ILECs and co-ops, many who find themselves in an increasingly competitive market? Will all of the federal dollars in broadband grants and build-outs in 2011 equal more advancements to rural areas in 2012? Will rural providers need to delve more deeply into new options like LTE and cloud services to remain relevant? Or will fiber as the “way of the future” actually mean subscriber retention and added revenue? These are all questions to investigate in the coming year, by talking to the experts on the front lines: the rural providers themselves.

2012: Building on Broadband, Exploring New Territory

Just recently we've seen announcements about IPTV and LTE—two services that are getting attention from rural ILECs and co-ops who consider them potential golden tickets. Most likely, 2012 will bring more in-depth look at what these services might mean for the independent communications provider industry—most specifically for the rural companies I talk to regularly. LTE's potential is up in the air (pun intended), but IPTV has already become a key talking point for ILECs who want to attract and retain customers in their communities. Earlier this year, we ran the numbers and found that, for the companies who disclosed that they provided video services, “their rate of decline in access lines... was sharply lower than those in the survey who did not provide data on video subscribers.”

Several of the companies I profiled to this year—Palmetto Rural Telephone Cooperative and Paul Bunyan Communications, to name two—named IPTV as central to their business strategy going forward. Earlier this month, Texas ILEC Valley Telephone Cooperative announced that it would offer a hybrid IPTV service that combines HDTV, DVR and cloud services through a single TV input and interface. And last month, Griswold Cooperative Telephone Company announced it would use its hefty $12.7m RUS loan, in part, to lay fiber that would support advanced services like IPTV.

As for LTE, it will be interesting to see what comes of the partnership between rural ILECs/ rural cellular providers and Verizon's Rural 4G LTE Program. Just last week, Pioneer Cellular (of Kingfisher, OK-based Pioneer Telephone) announced its first successful end-to-end data test with Verizon's 700 MHz spectrum, and so far Pioneer is just one of 13 rural providers partnering with Verizon for use of its LTE network. The goal, of course, is to provide LTE services in areas where Verizon does not plan to extend coverage, and, through the program, rural partners are allowed to build and operate their own LTE network, using some elements of Verizon's core network. Just as cooperatives and partnerships have helped bring fiber to rural areas, it's possible that partnerships between small, rural providers and the Big Guys could supplement existing services and retain customers. It's possible.

Ultimately the influence of LTE in rural areas remains to be seen, but it is a step toward spectrum use that so many rural providers have looked into but not developed. In my own discussions this year, I have heard numerous company spokespersons say that they were currently “exploring the possibilities” of spectrum for a variety of services, but had not made any definite commitments. Perhaps 2012 will bear the fruit of these, and many other, “explorations.”

Thursday
Dec292011

ACA Calls on FCC for Transparency in Retransmission Consent Negotiations

Source: ACA Press Release

The American Cable Association announced that they have called on the Federal Communications Commission to impose transparency requirements to prevent television station owners that coordinate their retransmission consent negotiations from keeping their price-fixing schemes a secret from the public and regulators charged with enforcing station ownership limits, retransmission consent rules, and antitrust statutes.

ACA said the FCC should require broadcasters to place in their online public file any agreement, regardless of name or purported "efficiencies," one station enters into with another separately owned TV station in the same market for ready inspection by the public, regulators and others.

Thursday
Dec292011

TCI Founder and Cable Pioneer Dies at 95

Source: State College - Centre Daily Times

E. Stratford Smith, a retired professor who played a major role in the birth of cable TV, died on Christmas Day at age 95. Smith was best known for his role in the Fortnightly Corp. v. United Artists Television Supreme Court case. Decided in 1968, the case protected the fledgling cable TV industry from having to pay potentially crippling fees to the major networks for bringing their broadcasts to households that otherwise wouldn’t have received them.

Smith, along with Ted Turner & John Malone, founder of media giant TCI, became one of the first 10 people to be inducted into the Cable Hall of Fame.

Thursday
Dec292011

Kick off 2012 by Reconsidering USF/ICC Reform 

Petitions for reconsideration of the FCC's USF/ICC Transformation Order were due on December 29, 30 days after the rules were published in the Federal Register. Not to be confused with appeals filings or the upcoming comments in response to the FNPRM, the petitions for reconsideration will likely hone in on specific aspects of the Order that pose significant challenges for the filers. Therefore, we could see a range of petitions challenging everything from bill-and-keep to the regression analysis to the waiver process.

So far only one petition is posted in the docket on FCC.gov, from the Public Service Commission of the District of Columbia. The DC PSC is concerned about the Access Recovery Charge (ARC), and that price cap ILECs can calculate the ARC at a holding company level. According to the petition, "there are no intrastate access charges to reform in the District of Columbia...It is patently unfair for District of Columbia consumers to be required to make up the loss of revenues, when the District of Columbia's price cap incumbent LEC would not have lost any intrastate access revenue from the District of Columbia. This transfer of intrastate access revenue would essentially constitute an unjust reallocation of costs among jurisdictions."

JSI Capital Advisors will keep an eye on the petitions for reconsideration as they are posted over the next few days. Starting next week, Cassandra Heyne will provide in-depth analysis of the petitions as well the appeals case coming up in Denver early in the year.