# Cord Cutters - The Next Generation; "The Copper Droppers"



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

Several articles out there today about AT&T developing a test plan to eliminate their copper network entirely. I can't tell, but it looks like they want to switch everything over to wireless.

So far, it seems to be all based on cutting costs of maintaining the wired network, without mention of how or if those cost savings would be passed on to consumers.

I also can't tell if they are trying to go to fiber or piggyback onto cable TV systems, only that they want to be IP based.

And so far, no mention of rates or capacity and speed.


----------



## gov (Jan 11, 2013)

SayWhat? said:


> . . . So far, it seems to be all based on cutting costs of maintaining the wired network, without mention of how or if those cost savings would be passed on to consumers . . .


Unintentional humor is the best kind, thanx, you made my day there!

:righton: :righton:


----------



## jimmie57 (Jun 26, 2010)

They already have wireless home phones and plans. I looked into it but it did not allow me to use all 7 of my handsets since they were 2 different sets.
If you could plug it into the wired network ( telephone wires ) in the house and all phones use it, it would save me quite a bit of money per month.


----------



## Drucifer (Feb 12, 2009)

Verizon tried to go wireless in some Sandy damage areas, but their customers fought 'em and won.

I'm live in Verizon 4LTE area. My chance of getting FiOS now is almost nil.


----------



## Cholly (Mar 22, 2004)

My guess is that they want to elimiate copper and go all fiber and wireless. It would be a big boost for ATT Uverse.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

The big boost is they would get rid of the millions of lines of fees they have on bills now and the massive oversight from the puc in California and other states. 

It would truly be the end of the phone service becoming a truly separate business rather than government run like it was many years ago. 

It is so heavily regulated now they just want out if that. This is the path to that.


----------



## yosoyellobo (Nov 1, 2006)

Just wondering would these legacy line be worth anything to somebody?


----------



## Cholly (Mar 22, 2004)

yosoyellobo said:


> Just wondering would these legacy line be worth anything to somebody?


If they replaced the copper lines with fiber, the copper could be recycled for cash, which would help offset the cost of fiber installation.


----------



## dennisj00 (Sep 27, 2007)

Unfortunately, the labor to get the copper down or out of the ground is higher than it's salvage value. Only the idiots stealing it to recycle think they make money because they don't include their cost of stealing it.


----------



## satcrazy (Mar 16, 2011)

Drucifer said:


> Verizon tried to go wireless in some Sandy damage areas, but their customers fought 'em and won.
> 
> I'm live in Verizon 4LTE area. My chance of getting FiOS now is almost nil.


No fios here either, with none in sight, according to Verizon.

They want to get rid of land lines because of the maintenence. I doubt cost would go down if they got their wish to go wireless, it Never does.

Umm, is there enough bandwidth if everyone went in this direction? Seems like something would suffer?


----------



## kaminar (Mar 25, 2012)

ATT bought Alltell and Leap last year..IMHO they want spectrum assets in the US and other assets in Europe..looking for acquisitions and expansion.

-=K=-


----------



## TBoneit (Jul 27, 2006)

They are pushing hard where I am. I called in to get the one copper landline repaired. I got lots of pressure to go to a better phone service for free, Fios is in this area. I said no. When Sandy hit and I had no power for over a week. My copper landline worked, The Cellular service was so overloaded You could only get a dial tone after midnight. Her (CSR) response was it has a battery backup. Mine was that will not run for days will it.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

:rant:

Being a Californian in an ATT copper service area, I can say without a shadow of a doubt that should they succeed in dumping land line service, my phone service will be Verizon which is my cell service.

I was getting regular phone calls from ATT offering me high speed internet service. I asked how is that going to work? They told me new fiber lines had just been installed in our area. I asked where as I haven't seen any fiber installation going in within 30 miles of my house. So then they backtracked after checking somehow....

The problem is, of course, that the only remaining universal (meaning to almost every home) access to emergency service and well as to calling family is the land line. Cable does not, by any stretch of the imagination, cover all or nearly all American homes. Cellular service in many, many rural areas is hit and miss. But back when people cared what happened to other people, most of America was wired for phone service.

Naturally, this discussion is prompted by ATT and Verizon both of which are making huge profits. It's a real case of figures don't lie, but liars sure can figure and this idea regarding no wired service in use is simply untrue. The last data available on total lines was published by the FCC in 2006. When we examined the AT&T and Verizon's companies, as listed by the FCC's Statistics of Common Carriers and compared this to what was listed in the AT&T and Verizon annual reports -- mysteriously, 70 percent of all lines disappeared:








I recommend that the American people take a look at the correlation between poverty and the plans of ATT and Verizon regarding abandonment of land lines. Check out this web site:



> Regardless of what the companies say, using their own data, closing whole areas of the U.S. will impact everyone including small businesses, residential customers, schools, libraries, municipalities, among others. And this won't be only in rural areas. We found:
> 
> 
> AT&T's U-Verse is probably 99 percent copper-to-the-home. Out of 76 million locations, AT&T only has 5 million U-Verse TV locations-less than 7 percent.
> ...


I have cell service. I have cable high speed internet. But many, many homes in my area have no access to either and many of the people in those homes have very low incomes. How do they make a 911 call without copper? Our community relies on "robocalls" for emergency notifications - do we just let these folks burn in a wildfire? For in return for having access to all the customers in California, ATT is stuck providing a basic land line service to low-income households as follows:

Unlimited local calls - The lesser of range $5.47 to $6.84 or 1/2 of the carrier's residential flat-rate local telephone service.
Measured Local Telephone Service (60 calls a month) - The lesser of range $2.91 to $3.66 or 1/2 of carrier's residential measured rate for local phone service. 
To eliminate this service is to say to some Americans that they simply are not worth worrying about.

The great cell phone and fiber revolutions in the United States have been implemented in such a way that many Americans were told that the U.S. has become a nation that no longer cares about the least among us.

:rant:


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

phrelin said:


> The problem is, of course, that the only remaining universal (meaning to almost every home) access to emergency service and well as to calling family is the land line. Cable does not, by any stretch of the imagination, cover all or nearly all American homes. Cellular service in many, many rural areas is hit and miss. But back when people cared what happened to other people, most of America was wired for phone service.


I think that what the trial and pilots programs are trying to find out --- how to address those issues.


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

SayWhat? said:


> Several articles out there today about AT&T developing a test plan to eliminate their copper network entirely. I can't tell, but it looks like they want to switch everything over to wireless. So far, it seems to be all based on cutting costs of maintaining the wired network, without mention of how or if those cost savings would be passed on to consumers. I also can't tell if they are trying to go to fiber or piggyback onto cable TV systems, only that they want to be IP based. And so far, no mention of rates or capacity and speed.


For many areas, complete coverage by wireless could mean TV, broadband internet, cell and land line substitutes could be possible where only one or two are available now. It'd be a boon for some. Maintenance costs would go down, but rates to the consumer won't.

I am under the impression that land line service cannot simply be abandoned but don't know the exact regulations (or even the inexact or loose ones!) -so poor people won't get totally hosed.


----------



## scooper (Apr 22, 2002)

It would not surprise me to see in a decade or 2, any / all "copper landline" POTS service will probably have to be heavily government subsidized if not actually run by them. The "big phone companies" (AT&T / Verizon) very dearly want OUT of the copper landline business in favor of the mostly unregulated / heavily capped wireless business - check the example of what Verizon "stuck" Fairpoint with in New England (and what else has been happening in the telecom sector in the last couple years). As far as home internet - most households will have 3 choices - cable, highly capped wireless, or none (and don't be too surprised that cable isn't capped either unless some serious laws get passed protecting the consumer in favor of the ISP (fat chance)).

I would also like to foresee a day that internet access starts getting treated as a basic utility (like water and electricity), but you know the ISPs will fight that one tooth and nail...


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

scooper said:


> I would also like to foresee a day that internet access starts getting treated as a basic utility (like water and electricity), but you know the ISPs will fight that one tooth and nail...


I see that for both ISPs and wireless providers.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

Since many ISPs are already regulated (Telcos for DSL, cable franchises, etc.), why shouldn't they all be?


----------



## billsharpe (Jan 25, 2007)

satcrazy said:


> They want to get rid of land lines because of the maintenence. I doubt cost would go down if they got their wish to go wireless, it Never does.


Cost to the provider might go down. Price to the consumer probably not.


----------



## bobnielsen (Jun 29, 2006)

jimmie57 said:


> They already have wireless home phones and plans. I looked into it but it did not allow me to use all 7 of my handsets since they were 2 different sets.
> If you could plug it into the wired network ( telephone wires ) in the house and all phones use it, it would save me quite a bit of money per month.


I have one of the wireless home phones (it is with Consumer Cellular but the device has the ATT logo). I connected it to my home wiring and it works fine, although I only have one connection (to a cordless base station with 3 phones). It costs me $10 per month and the minutes are shared with my cell phone.


----------



## scooper (Apr 22, 2002)

Again - that only works if you get decent cell phone coverage in your house. I don't - Voip is currently and for the concievable future be how I get telephone at home (over cable internet).


----------



## bobnielsen (Jun 29, 2006)

Certainly one size doesn't fit all. I tried VOIP but my Clearwire wireless internet (4 down/0.4 up) wasn't adequate. Prior to the homephone device, I tried a device which connected my phone line to my cell phone via bluetooth but that didn't work every time.


----------



## satcrazy (Mar 16, 2011)

Laxguy said:


> For many areas, complete coverage by wireless could mean TV, broadband internet, cell and land line substitutes could be possible where only one or two are available now. It'd be a boon for some. Maintenance costs would go down, but rates to the consumer won't.
> 
> I am under the impression that land line service cannot simply be abandoned but don't know the exact regulations (or even the inexact or loose ones!) -so poor people won't get totally hosed.


Could also mean caps. bye, bye netflix and others. If your thinking of cutting the cord this could nix that idea. Guess the tv providers would like that.....


----------



## TBoneit (Jul 27, 2006)

I had to get Verizon in to repair a landline. When I called for repair there was lots of pressure to go to FIOS. Then they called every day offering a free conversion to FIOS as the repair. I kept repeating "Not Interested" when they asked why, I did not fall for that either. If I had given a reason I believe they had a set speech as to why I was wrong.

TBoneit


----------



## billsharpe (Jan 25, 2007)

TBoneit said:


> I had to get Verizon in to repair a landline. When I called for repair there was lots of pressure to go to FIOS. Then they called every day offering a free conversion to FIOS as the repair. I kept repeating "Not Interested" when they asked why, I did not fall for that either. If I had given a reason I believe they had a set speech as to why I was wrong. TBoneit


I switched to FiOS phone service over three years ago and haven't had any real problems. My cell phone is the backup in case of an outage. Caller ID and call blocking are two services i really like.


----------



## TBoneit (Jul 27, 2006)

When the power was during Sandy for 11 days. The Landline kept working. When The power was out for days from a previous storm the landline kept working.

When The power was out because of sandy, The cellphone worked some of the time and did not work some of the time. It seemed that it depended on time time of day whether it was overloaded and unavailable or not. It was reliable after Midnight until sunrise, Wheee.

I think I'll keep the $27 a month landline for now.

TBoneit


----------



## Drucifer (Feb 12, 2009)

I wouldn't call switching to fiber as giving up the copper as there is still a physical connection.

It's in area where the communication companies are only offering wireless as an upgrade, that I find unsettling.


----------



## dennisj00 (Sep 27, 2007)

Drucifer said:


> I wouldn't call switching to fiber as giving up the copper as there is still a physical connection.
> 
> It's in area where the communication companies are only offering wireless as an upgrade, that I find unsettling.


But we've used wireless almost the last century for AM- FM, TV and other radio communications. Why is it unsettling to you?


----------



## TBoneit (Jul 27, 2006)

Drucifer said:


> I wouldn't call switching to fiber as giving up the copper as there is still a physical connection.
> 
> It's in area where the communication companies are only offering wireless as an upgrade, that I find unsettling.


The problem is that the battery backup for the FIOS equipment in the home will not keep the system going for days. If I had VOIP or FIOS when the power was out over a week, My phone would have been out too.

TBoneit


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

In an extended power outage, I think Fiber would be the least desirable.

Voice over copper is fairly independent of utility power. As long as their system has power and/or their batteries hold out and the wiring is intact, you'll have dialtone even if you don't have power. You may or may not have DSL or other data though, even if you have local power for the modem.

With wireless/cellular, you have to hope the towers have power and there isn't too much traffic clutter.

For fiber and cable, you have to have power for the set-top box/modem to get anything now since most cable systems have gone digital. You would not have voice if you didn't have a way to power the adapter.


----------



## TBoneit (Jul 27, 2006)

SayWhat?, Thank You. In terms of desirability from best to worth for voice, That is more or less how I feel.

Prior to Sandy the person that bought the location (franchise) where I was working switched over to VOIP. It took the cable people several days and visits trying different models and brands of equipment to get Voice, Internet, The Fax machine and the Credit card reader to be able to connect. They were able to get 3 out of 4 working reliably, Getting all four going took a while. In a location where many of the transactions were via credit card and the work bench needed Internet and the Phones were needed to call customers and tell them their equipment was repaired that wasn't good.

Then there were the times the Phone would go out for 1 or 2 days. When we had Verizon landline phone at least everything did not have one point of failure. Then There were the Verizon Lies. We were a little far for DSL and never got the full rated speed. So when Cable became available for our location we jumped on it. Internet speed went from 500K to 20meg so I got the task of calling Verizon to cancel the DSL. I was told why not keep it and see if You want to switch back. Keep it for a year at no cost. Sure enough they kept billing anyway. Since it was verbal no way to contest it either.

Which explains my desire not to go to FIOS fiber or Cable phone service.

Cheers
TBoneit


----------



## Drucifer (Feb 12, 2009)

*Verizon Accused of Forcing Internet Phones on Land-line Users*

SOURCE LA TIMES


----------



## Drucifer (Feb 12, 2009)

I find this statement rather amazing . . . .



> Now Verizon is squabbling with customers and government regulators who want the company to rebuild the network exactly as it was.
> . . . .
> And many replacement parts for Sandy-flattened infrastructure aren't manufactured anymore - *forcing repair crews to scour eBay for hardware*.


SOURCE


----------



## dennisj00 (Sep 27, 2007)

With the change in technology, it makes absolutely no sense to rebuild it as it was.


----------

