FCC's Pai Desperately Tries To Pretend He Was Right About Net Neutrality Rules Killing Broadband Investment

from the revolving-door-chicken-littles dept

Before the FCC passed new net neutrality rules, countless ISP consultants, think tankers, and various other sockpuppets desperately proclaimed that the rules would totally destroy the Internet and stifle all network investment. Now months after the rules took effect, everything seems to be operating as it was before -- if not better. Google Fiber continues to deploy to a growing number of underserved cities, municipal broadband providers and smaller ISPs continue to push gigabit upgrades, and even Comcast has announced it's deploying two gigabit service to around 18 million subscribers before the end of the year.

While the broadband industry still suffers from a lack of overall competition, it appears completely unbothered by what many claimed was "draconian regulation for a bygone era" that we were repeatedly told would "utterly crush innovation" and "stifle network investment." In fact, we've seen several instances where the rules already have put big ISPs on their best behavior, most notably on the interconnection front. Granted, numerous ISP execs predicted there'd be no issues, not that anybody heard them under the din of AT&T and Verizon fear mongering.

Of course, these folks can't just admit they were wrong and were motivated to make shit up to scare people away from net neutrality, so they're now trying to retroactively claim they were right -- despite the total absence of any real evidence. Case in point is FCC Commissioner (and former Verizon regulatory lawyer) Ajit Pai, who this week proclaimed that net neutrality chicken littles were right all along, and the FCC's use of Title II net neutrality rules has utterly depressed broadband investment:
"As evidence, Pai pointed to research that showed a decline in capital expenditures by the major wireless companies of 12% in the first half of 2015 compared to the same time period in 2014—when the FCC was still expected to restore open Internet rules without reclassifying broadband.

"In my statement dissenting from the Commission’s Title II decision, I warned that '[b]roadband networks don’t have to be built. Capital doesn’t have to be invested here,'" Pai said. "'Risks don’t have to be taken. The more difficult the FCC makes the business case for deployment—and micromanaging everything from interconnection to service plans makes it difficult indeed—the less likely it is that broadband providers big and small will connect Americans with digital opportunities.' And that I fear is what we are now witnessing."
Right, except we're not witnessing that at all. Pai can't be bothered to show his math, but it appears he pulled the 12% number from a recent editorial by industry-linked think tanker Hal Singer, whose work has been the backbone of a decidedly pointed attempt to mislead the public over the last few weeks. Singer's the same guy who was widely criticized for manipulating statistics for the broadband industry to help them claim that net neutrality would result in $15 billion in new taxes. You'll be shocked to learn that most of his worst-case-scenario predictions supporting these numbers show no indication of being true.

In his Forbes editorial, Singer makes these specific claims:
"They said it wouldn’t happen. They offered assurances from three Wall Street analysts, who insisted that Internet service providers (ISPs) would continue to invest at the same levels regardless of the regulatory climate...AT&T’s capital expenditure (capex) was down 29 percent in the first half of 2015 compared to the first half of 2014. Charter’s capex was down by the same percentage. Cablevision’s and Verizon’s capex were down ten and four percent, respectively. CenturyLink’s capex was down nine percent. (Update: The average decline across all wireline ISPs was 12 percent. Including wireless ISPs Sprint and T-Mobile in the sample reduces the average decline to eight percent.)
Except, causality does not equal correlation. If you bother to look at AT&T SEC filings, you'll note that AT&T already planned to scale back capex because it was already winding up an upgrade initiative dubbed "Project VIP," which had nothing to do with net neutrality. Indeed, Verizon and AT&T (which comprise the lion's share of the capex cuts) were already dramatically scaling back their fixed-line network investments, which also had absolutely nothing to do with net neutrality. Charter, meanwhile, just finished up its all-digital network upgrade, and its declines too have nothing to do with net neutrality.

On the wireless side, AT&T and Verizon have acknowledged winding down massive LTE network upgrades, and all of the wireless carriers have been engaged in a little belt-tightening as they deal with the disruptive behavior of T-Mobile. There are about a million reasons for capex cycles, including a lack of competition resulting in muted network upgrades, completed projects, to numerous ISPs in holding patterns as they wait for mergers and acquisitions. But there's absolutely no data that directly links these capex reductions to net neutrality or the FCC's implementation of Title II to govern ISPs. And, meanwhile, just a few days before Pai claimed that companies like Verizon were no longer investing in wireless... Verizon announced that it was ramping up its schedule for 5G deployment (the next big upgrade after LTE), which will lead to the next big round of capital expenditure in wireless. So, apparently the new rules did not scare off Verizon -- arguably the biggest opponent of net neutrality in the United States.

So basically you've got a revolving-door regulator who used to work for the broadband industry, citing statistics from a think tanker with ties to the broadband industry, both hoping that a wish, a dream, some out-of-context data and a little make believe will fool people into thinking these guys weren't utterly full of crap all along.

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 10 Sep 2015 @ 11:01am

    Thanks for returning to flakking Google Fiber! But the link you give: Phoenix one step closer to Google Fiber" does NOT support that it's growing, just that it MAY.

    Wikipedia still has it actually only in Kansas City, Austin, and Provo, plus tiny bit in Palo Alto.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Fiber

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 10 Sep 2015 @ 11:03am

    Thanks for returning to flakking Google Fiber! But the link you give: Phoenix one step closer to Google Fiber" does NOT support that it's growing, just that it MAY.

    Wikipedia still has it actually only in Kansas City, Austin, and Provo, plus tiny bit in Palo Alto.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Fiber


    Slow page load? Have to click to see comments the fanboys censored?

    Get all the text and none of the ads with the new Techdirt Lite!
    https://www.techdirt.com/?_format=lite

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 10 Sep 2015 @ 11:28am

      Re: Thanks for returning to flakking Google Fiber! But the link you give: Phoenix one step closer to Google Fiber" does NOT support that it's growing, just that it MAY.

      Thank-you kind sir. Your efforts to help the people of the United States will not go un-noticed. We need more patriots like you in the country.

      Most other people have their pet issues where they are emotionally attached and biased. I can see you always put people first in any side you take.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Rich, 10 Sep 2015 @ 12:20pm

        Re: Re: Thanks for returning to flakking Google Fiber! But the link you give: Phoenix one step closer to Google Fiber" does NOT support that it's growing, just that it MAY.

        ^-- sock puppet. How cute.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 10 Sep 2015 @ 7:07pm

        Re: Re:

        Fucking hell, Slonecker. Keep your sick out_of_the_blue fantasies to yourself.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      HegemonicDistortion (profile), 10 Sep 2015 @ 12:12pm

      Re: Thanks for returning to flakking Google Fiber! But the link you give: Phoenix one step closer to Google Fiber" does NOT support that it's growing, just that it MAY.

      This is deceptively conflating where Google Fiber is actually live versus where they're deploying it (you know, that thing many of us refer to as investment). They're actively deploying fiber in several cities right now, including, praise Cthulhu, here in Nashville.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 10 Sep 2015 @ 1:34pm

      Re: Thanks for returning to flakking Google Fiber! But the link you give: Phoenix one step closer to Google Fiber" does NOT support that it's growing, just that it MAY.

      I know lepers who get invited to more parties then this shill.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 10 Sep 2015 @ 11:23am

    i assume their "proof" for this looks something like this
     
                  |  amount invested  |
    ------------|----------------------|-------
    before nn | $1,000,000,000.000 |
    ------------|----------------------|-------
    after nn   |            $5             |
    ------------|----------------------|-------
                   |                           |

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Nastybutler77 (profile), 10 Sep 2015 @ 11:29am

    Holy shitsnacks. You are one pathetic shill. I pity you that this is how you chose to spend your life. How sad.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    ECA (profile), 10 Sep 2015 @ 12:01pm

    FORCE and Counter force

    Forcing a group that has an IDEAL to change, is a PAIN in the Buttox..
    The difficulty tends to be what THEY can do to augment/change the numbers..
    The problems here, is that the NET can be abused in both Hardware and Software.. The companies can Purposely CRIPPLE themselves just to Force something Worse to happen and say, 'See, we told ya so'...

    Another fun part of this, tends to be DNS..in that Many companies use THEIR OWN DNS..which can route you all over the place to get where you need/want.
    Then add in the security/insecurity of our countries Political militaria (FBI, CIA, and other 3-4 letter groups) and a DNS can send you in and out of the Limbo of having every packet Scanned and monitored..

    Until you can get a UNBIASED, middle man INSIDE the corp to watch/monitor what is happening...these folks can do ALLOT to mess with people.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Whatever (profile), 10 Sep 2015 @ 7:18pm

    The question won't be the short term investment, rather it will be the long term. As an example, 5G technology is not far off, with of course increases in speeds and bandwidth usage. The question will companies invest in this one, or will they drag their heels and roll it out very slowly?

    The story isn't written in 6 months.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      That One Guy (profile), 10 Sep 2015 @ 8:02pm

      Re:

      Well if past actions are any indication, they'll ask for massive tax breaks and/or subsidies in order to 'upgrade their networks', spend it all on executive bonuses, then in a few years pay off a few politicians so they don't need to hold up their end of the original deal, all the while claiming that no-one actually needs higher speeds anyway.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Karl Bode (profile), 11 Sep 2015 @ 5:40am

      Re:

      Right. Except there is ABSOLUTELY NO REAL INDICATION of any carrier seriously scaling back investment due to net neutrality. None. Short term or long. It was a bunch of crying and hand waving over some very basic rules of the road prohibiting anti-competitive behavior.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    toyotabedzrock (profile), 11 Sep 2015 @ 12:37am

    Verizon, T-Mobile lead Q2 network spending, but AT&T and Sprint poised to boost investment - http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/verizon-t-mobile-lead-q2-network-spending-att-and-sprint-poised- boost-inves/2015-08-10

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Shop Now: Math Is Not A Crime
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.