CCG Consulting

I have been complaining for years about the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) mapping rule that allow internet service providers (ISPs) to claim marketing speeds instead of something closer to actual speeds. That allows ISPs to report speeds that benefit them in some manner rather than being truthful to the public. There have been big consequences as a result of this FCC decision. Historically, the maps didn't mean much, as they were only used for the FCC's reports to Congress.

The press is suddenly full of articles talking about how some internet service providers (ISPs) are offering affordable rates to low-income homes now that the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) monthly subsidy has died. Some ISPs are extending the $30 discount for a limited time, while others are offering more affordable broadband plans than in the past. Other ISPs are only making a nod towards affordable broadband and some aren’t giving any discounts to low-income households.

The Federal Communications Commission made some changes to the recent Net Neutrality Order between the version that got approved on April 25 and the final version that was released to the Congressional record. One of the most interesting changes was to clarify rules pertaining to carriers creating fast lanes. The original order included language that prohibited paid prioritization, which is generically referred to as fast lanes.

I always find it interesting when old regulations bubble up into the news. As reported by Jon Brodkin in Ars Technica, an administrative law judge at the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) rejected a petition by AT&T to walk away from its carrier of last resort obligations for voice service.

Congress inserted an interesting requirement into the bill that reauthorizes the funding for the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). Both the House and Senate added language that would require that a national broadband plan be created that would try to put the Federal Communications Commission, the NTIA, US Department of Agriculture, and other agencies on the same page.

Most State Broadband Offices have decided that DSL is an obsolete technology, regardless of the bandwidth that it can deliver.

Sowmyanarayan Sampath, CEO of Verizon’s consumer business, recently said that Verizon expects to have 4 to 5 million fixed-wireless access (FWA) customers at the end of 2024, up from 3.4 million at the end of the first quarter of 2023. Financial analysts at TD Cowen who predict that Verizon will add 888,000 new net subscribers in 2024 while T-Mobile will add 1.3 million more customers to add to the 4.8 million customers at the end of 2023. FWA broadband has majorly disrupted the broadband industry.

The Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) that provides a discount for millions of homes will disappear unless Congress takes action to continue it. Most big internet service providers (ISPs) have announced how they will handle broadband for low-income homes after the end of ACP. 

I have been asked my opinion several times about Rural Digital Opportunity Fund (RDOF) amnesty—letting RDOF winners walk away from their obligations without big penalties. There is no easy answer to the question. It’s certainly a timely topic, since we are seeing internet service providers (ISPs) walk away from RDOF. There are several good arguments to be made that favor some kind of amnesty.

Big internet service providers (ISPs) have been using the same arguments against being regulated for the last decade. These arguments were used to justify killing Title II regulation under the Ajit Pai FCC and have been resurrected today to try to get Congress to override the FCC’s decision to reimpose broadband regulation. From my perspective, their arguments have gotten stale and out of touch with the way the market really operates. The big ISP trade associations have been telling the public for years that broadband prices have been falling in ‘real terms’.