Industry, Consumer Groups Add to Divide Over Fixed Broadband Competition, Deployment
The divide over the state of fixed broadband competition and deployment deepened in comments posted Monday for an FCC communications marketplace report due by year-end under the Ray Baum's Act. Several industry commenters cited robust market rivalry and activity benefiting consumers, but consumer advocates generally noted shortcomings in competition, deployment and the data used to measure progress. Parties also disagreed on policy proposals. NCTA and USTelecom painted a positive picture and Incompas offered a circumspect view, in comments posted Friday in docket 18-231 (see 1808170049).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
The FCC should conclude the broadband market, fixed and mobile, "is competitive and that broadband is being deployed in reasonable and timely fashion throughout the United States," said Verizon, noting a related inquiry on a Telecom Act Section 706 duty to report about advanced telecom capability (see 1808100040). Verizon said broadband providers' investments in next-generation networks are giving consumers "access to an ever-growing array of innovative and high-quality services," including incipient 5G small-cell wireless. The American Cable Association said the fixed broadband market is "substantially competitive." The Satellite Industry Association (here) and EchoStar/Hughes Network Systems (here) said fixed broadband is competitive, and urged the FCC to recognize satellite service is increasingly important.
Consumer-oriented groups disputed such characterizations. "The existing evidence makes clear that the current broadband marketplace is not competitive," said Common Cause, Public Knowledge, Center for Rural Strategies and the Benton Foundation. They urged the FCC to "measure fixed and mobile broadband as distinct product markets," because "conflating the two services" would "distort competition analysis." The Electronic Frontier Foundation said cable approaches "monopoly status" for broadband speeds above 100 M]bps in most areas. The agency "must explore why telecom carriers have failed to launch fiber to the home to compete with cable companies in the high-speed broadband market," the EFF said.
Others said the FCC must improve data gathering. The government relies "on self-reported data" from ISPs, "which results in a poor understanding of where broadband is deployed, how much it costs, and whether the advertised speeds match the actual performance," said New America’s Open Technology Institute (OTI), the Institute for Local Self-Reliance, NATOA, the National League of Cities and Next Century Cities. Ookla, "a global leader in internet testing, data and analysis," suggested ways the FCC could use the "capabilities of private data companies" to deepen its "data sets and analyses."
OTI and its allies warned the FCC of "hyperbolic" claims that "future 5G networks" will provide a viable competitive alternative to fixed broadband. "These claims are extremely premature, as 5G technologies are years away from large-scale deployment," the groups said. "Further, 5G service is likely to focus on urban areas and rely heavily on fixed backhaul -- which could enhance the market power of fixed ISPs."
Adtran said an urban-rural broadband gap is "narrowing but remains significant." The 5G rollout "should allow multiple service providers to offer fixed broadband," which the FCC is facilitating, but "these efforts are still unlikely to bring multiple competitors to the most remote areas," Adtran said.
The Wireless ISP Association said its members have 4 million customers in the residential, business and government markets: "Many of these consumers lack choice in how they receive access to broadband services and content." It urged the FCC to address barriers to entry, including "abrupt and material changes in regulations that impact small provider access to spectrum, spectrum policy that does not adequately consider the needs of rural Americans, government subsidies that fund larger carriers’ overbuilding of unsubsidized WISPs, lack of adherence to the Regulatory Flexibility Act, and inadequate cost-benefit analyses to determine the unique economic impact of regulations on small providers." FCC spectrum policies "hinder fixed wireless providers," said GeoLinks, which said it has "the largest coverage area" of a fixed-wireless ISP in California.
Verizon said the FCC should focus on deregulatory steps to spur investment, including by removing roadblocks to small-cell deployment, granting USTelecom's forbearance petition for ILEC wholesale unbundling discount relief and streamlining reporting duties. ACA backed further infrastructure streamlining, avoiding excessive regulation, "reining in video programming costs" and "protecting against anti-competitive overbuilds." SIA and EchoStar/Hughes supported "technology-neutral" regulation. Adtran said the FCC should "persist" in its broadband-oriented efforts on USF subsidies, deregulation and encouraging new technologies "such as 5G and mega-satellite systems."
OTI and allies opposed the USTelecom petition and criticized ISP practices they said were anti-competitive, and state municipal broadband restrictions. Common Cause and allies said the FCC "must reinvigorate" its unbundling rules, criticized multiple-tenant agreements limiting competitive choice, and said municipal broadband, smaller ISPs and "other varied" technologies were all part of the competitive solution.