Close Only Counts In Horseshoes, Hand Grenades… And (Apparently) Verizon's Fiber Optic Installs
from the semantic-ninja dept
We’ve been covering how Verizon has swindled a long line of states and cities into giving the company all manner of subsidies and tax breaks in exchange for uniform fiber deployment that never happens (or only partially happens). While fourteen Mayors recently wrote Verizon to complain about its dubious behavior, New York City has been the most vocal critic of late, after a June audit showed that Verizon completely failed to live up to a 2008 franchise agreement with the city promising 100% FiOS coverage to all five city boroughs by 2014. Verizon accomplished about half of that.
New York City held a hearing last week intended to hold Verizon accountable, but ran face first into a telco well-versed in semantic dodgeball. You see, by refusing to define the word “passed” in its agreements, Verizon can get away with claiming it serves a house with fiber — provided fiber gets somewhere, vaguely close to its intended target. As it has done countless times before, Verizon leaned on this ambiguousness when trying to defend the company’s behavior to city officials:
Verizon reps Leecia Eve and Kevin Service stated at the hearing that Verizon has unquestionably met its promise to “pass” all households in the five-borough area, which essentially means extending the fiber so that a building could theoretically then be connected to the network. As one councilmember pointed out, that’s like installing water pipes but not hooking them up to individual apartments: the water’s flowing on by, but no one can actually drink it.
But it was Verizon spokesman Kevin Service who stole the show, with some award winning tap dancing during the hearing:
“We consider it to be passed if we’re within the realm of substantial fiber placement,” Service said when pressed on how the term is actually defined. “I’m not a lawyer, but here’s what I would say: we’re passed if, when we get the request for service and have the necessary rights of way, what we have left to do does not create a delay in bringing service to that customer. Under that Kevin Service Definition, we’ve passed every household.”
In other words, Verizon claims that all of these houses it failed to reach actually have fiber if you squint your eyes and look at it just the right way. Understandably, customers somewhere “within the realm of substantial fiber placement” probably aren’t impressed by Verizon’s explanation, even though the spokesman goes the extra mile and tries to bizarrely name his bullshit definition after himself. In contrast, however, New York City’s full audit (pdf) found that there were 42,000 outstanding requests for FiOS installation, 75% of which were outstanding for more than a year. For many of them, the fiber “passes” their homes — sometimes up to a mile away.
While the city now claims it’s exploring its legal options, those options are likely to be limited. The previous city administration signed off on this deal after closed door negotiations, not only ignoring calls for transparency and public input at the time, but thirty years of precedent when it comes to Verizon’s failure to hold up its end of the bargain.
Filed Under: broadband, close, fiber, installs, kevin service, new york city, nyc, promises
Companies: verizon
Comments on “Close Only Counts In Horseshoes, Hand Grenades… And (Apparently) Verizon's Fiber Optic Installs”
“Passed” as in, as far as providing you service, we’ll pass (the exact opposite of what “pass” is supposed to mean).
'Pass' alright
“We were all passing the bucks. You gave us dollars, we gave responsibility to someone else.”
How Machiavelian of them
The question these cities need to ask themselves is what does Verizon need from them besides our money that is.
Does anyone from middle management on up live there.
Know those and start pulling the same crap on them.
Water and sewer services followed by road access and finally kill off their eelectricity if it comes that far.
Say what you will about Comcast, but when I moved in to my new apartment, I went from 0 to fully-functional broadband in less than 2 days. If Verizon’s got over 30,000 prospective customers who have been waiting longer than a week, much less an entire year, there’s no way that counts as “not … a delay in bringing service to that customer.”
Re: Re:
You know, I had the same experience just a couple of weeks ago. They were prompt, friendly, and gave me my choice of time window that was only 2 hours instead of the old “They’ll be there sometime Tuesday” shit they used to say. My only issue is that all of the apartments around me have wireless so there’s tons of interference when I’m not directly connected and my speeds tank, but that’s not their fault.
Couple that with no caps in my area and Comcast is looking better than some of these other companies. Of course there is some actual competition where I’m currently living so that’s probably why.
Re: Re: Re:
My only issue is that all of the apartments around me have wireless so there’s tons of interference when I’m not directly connected and my speeds tank, but that’s not their fault.
Have you looked for less crowded channels? Most people leave their routers on the default channels, and I think most routers use the same two or three, so there may be some less used ones you could try.
Re: Re:
So I have had the complete opposite experience with comcast. Moved in current apartment almost 7 years ago and still waiting for them to “see” my building. See according to them my building doesn’t exist. The building to the right, comcast services them, building to the left comcast services them but my building even after three years of trying to get service in Philadelphia and a nice neighborhood of Philly I am still told that my address doesn’t exist. I had given up after about a year and a half of having their “service techs” never show up and never hearing back but my fiancee started it all over again when she moved in. That was five years ago. Still no high speed internet, using verizon dsl right now.
Retaliation
To the extent permitted by law, the affected cities should refuse any discretionary agreements (e.g. new franchise requests) with the relevant telephone companies until the company satisfies the general public understanding of the agreement.
close ...
Horseshoes, hand grenades, and sometimes dancing. The latter is what Verizon is doing and getting well paid for it.
Not that I think it will ultimately matter, but Verizon has painted themselves in a corner. If they define “passed” the way Kevin Service did, they should be able to provide service to those 42,000 people. If they can’t, then, even using their definition of “passed”, they have failed to meet their franchise commitment.
I would sure hate to play Monopoly with Verizon. They’d claim to be passing Go on every turn.
Distance is irrelevant...
I watched with glee as Verizon installed fiber – not only in my neighborhood, but right through my property. Their repeater was on the pole in MY yard.
So, I called to order. “Not available in your area”.
Re: Distance is irrelevant...
And then you promptly went out and dug up that unknown cable that they didn’t pay to pass through your property, right?
If it’s “not available” in your area then there’s no reason for them to “have cable” buried in your yard now is there?
Cut on both sides of your property, extract, pour concrete blocks on either end, and tell Verizon to fuck off.
Re: Re: Distance is irrelevant...
If Verizon has an easement, but denies any knowledge or ownership of the repeater on the pole, then obviously someone has misrepresented themselves as Verizon to steal the easement.
Cut down the forgery and help the economy! =)
‘what we have left to do does not create a delay in bringing service to that customer’
surely that MUST MEAN that all that has to happen is for the cable to be connected to the actual property in such a way that with a simple action of plugging the modem. router or whatever equipment is needed inside the dwelling, fiber broadband would not just be available, but damn well work!!
create a set of rules in the city , If they don’t abide by them fine them daily until they comply , I’m sure the city can get creative when dealing with criminals , even if it’s nickel and diming them, until they meet or move out , leaving the city ample time to roll out their own broadband while funding it through the fines.
Could they not just sue this company for breaking their contract or levy fines against them if they want to operate in these towns/states.
Politely asking a criminal to give back what they stole never works.
Re: Re:
That’s just. They’re saying that they fulfilled the terms of their contract, and given the fuzzy language, they probably did. A lawsuit wouldn’t work.
Re: Re: Re:
*That’s just it.
Hey NYC... Redefine "monopoly" and
Since we’ve redefined the terms “monopoly”
Re: Hey NYC... Redefine "monopoly" and
Interesting that TD decides to “post” an incomplete entry for no apparent reason.
Hey NYC... Redefine "monopoly" and "exclusive"
Since we’ve redefined the terms “monopoly” and “exclusive”.
Then open up NYC for any other company to provide fiber internet using Verizon’s fiber.
It’s only “fair” right? They redefined “passed”, you redefine “exclusive” and “monopoly” and tell Verizon to go piss up a rope.
Turnabout
It would be great if the contract had some way to return the favor for sleazy tactics like this.
“So you argue that theoretically being able to connect a house means it’s been served? Alright, we can accept that. Of course in return it looks like we only theoretically have to pay you and/or give you tax breaks for your work, so payment and/or tax breaks might be a little slow in making it through the red tape. You know how it is I’m sure.”
Re: Turnabout
They’ve probably already been paid.
Kevin “Service”? That a serious disservice to the meaning of service.