National Franchising: What’s In It (or Not) Nicholas P. Miller March 28, 2006 SEATOA Seminar Asheville, N.C.
Overview <ul><li>Industry Developments </li></ul><ul><li>State/Federal Efforts </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Legislation </li></ul...
The Milieu:
RBOC Wing Walking to the Future: <ul><li>Obsolescence of Circuit Switch Voice </li></ul><ul><li>Short Term Revenue Gains <...
Cable Still Dwarfed by RBOC <ul><ul><li>Size </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Political Clout </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>See, e...
RBOC 3-D Chess: Local/State/Federal <ul><li>Play All Forums Simultaneously </li></ul><ul><li>Move to the One with Earliest...
Federal Legislation- <ul><ul><li>Comprehensive Rewrite Unlikely </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>No BITS III? AT&T opposes <...
Federal Video Franchising Easier to Pass—Only 3 Players <ul><ul><li>Cable vs. Telco vs. LFAs </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Wh...
Highlights of Barton (3/28) <ul><li>“ Keeps LFAs whole” (kind of) </li></ul><ul><li>Good definition of Gross revenues </li...
Highlights – Not <ul><li>IPTV not defined as “cable service” </li></ul><ul><ul><li>The MOST IMPORTANT Issue of all </li><...
Highlights – Not (con’t) <ul><li>10 year term in name only </li></ul><ul><li>The incumbent can abandon the existing franc...
Highlights – Not (con’t) <ul><li>Shifts from Contract to Ordinance </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Enforcement mechanisms? </li></u...
State Legislation - Lessons Learned <ul><li>The Law of Unintended Consequences. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Can incumbent aband...
WHAT’S MISSING IN STATE LEGIS TO DATE? <ul><li>1. Termination or abandonment? </li></ul><ul><li>2. Sell out to the other? ...
WHAT’S MISSING IN VA AND TX? <ul><li>10. No emergency alert system. </li></ul><ul><li>11. No upstream connections for PEG ...
FCC — Hey Don’t Forget Us! <ul><li>Cable Franchise NPRM </li></ul><ul><li>Preemption of IP (IPTV?) Service Regulation </li...
Conclusion <ul><li>RBOCs are Coming to Video this time </li></ul><ul><li>Core Debate over Video Franchising: </li></ul><ul...
Contact Information Nicholas Miller [email_address] Miller & Van Eaton, P.L.L.C. 1155 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. Suite 1000 ...
of 18

"National Franchising: What's In It (or Not)"

Published on: Mar 3, 2016
Source: www.slideshare.net


Transcripts - "National Franchising: What's In It (or Not)"

  • 1. National Franchising: What’s In It (or Not) Nicholas P. Miller March 28, 2006 SEATOA Seminar Asheville, N.C.
  • 2. Overview <ul><li>Industry Developments </li></ul><ul><li>State/Federal Efforts </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Legislation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>FCC </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Some Perspective </li></ul>
  • 3. The Milieu:
  • 4. RBOC Wing Walking to the Future: <ul><li>Obsolescence of Circuit Switch Voice </li></ul><ul><li>Short Term Revenue Gains </li></ul><ul><li>Major Long Term Gains </li></ul><ul><ul><li>No fiber unbundling </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Reconstituted AT&T </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Price and Service Discrimination </li></ul></ul>
  • 5. Cable Still Dwarfed by RBOC <ul><ul><li>Size </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Political Clout </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>See, e.g. Mr. Icahn’s plans for Time Warner vs. Mr. Whiteacre’s plans for AT&T </li></ul></ul>
  • 6. RBOC 3-D Chess: Local/State/Federal <ul><li>Play All Forums Simultaneously </li></ul><ul><li>Move to the One with Earliest Relief </li></ul><ul><li>Use FCC as Trump Card to win no matter the hand dealt: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>If No federal legislation: FCC defines IPTV as “non-cable service” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>If federal legislation: FCC threat of preemption puts pressure on locals to accept the deal </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>If anti-RBOC state legislation: FCC preempts </li></ul></ul>
  • 7. Federal Legislation- <ul><ul><li>Comprehensive Rewrite Unlikely </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>No BITS III? AT&T opposes </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Net Neutrality? RBOCs and Cable oppose </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Universal Service? Basic telephone is priority </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Ensign-style deregulation? Large enterprises oppose </li></ul></ul></ul>
  • 8. Federal Video Franchising Easier to Pass—Only 3 Players <ul><ul><li>Cable vs. Telco vs. LFAs </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Where are the consumers? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Inouye/Burns vs. Ensign/Rockefeller </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Barton vs. Dingell </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Election year complexities </li></ul></ul>
  • 9. Highlights of Barton (3/28) <ul><li>“ Keeps LFAs whole” (kind of) </li></ul><ul><li>Good definition of Gross revenues </li></ul><ul><li>Up to 5% franchise fee </li></ul><ul><li>1% PEG support for all </li></ul><ul><li>Existing PEG channels and INets are protected - </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>increased 10% every 10 years </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>FCC defines for other LFAs </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Municipal Provisioning </li></ul><ul><li>VoIP 911 requirements </li></ul>
  • 10. Highlights – Not <ul><li>IPTV not defined as “cable service” </li></ul><ul><ul><li>The MOST IMPORTANT Issue of all </li></ul></ul><ul><li>No Buildout Requirement </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Telco can withdraw at will </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Preempts local consumer protection authority </li></ul><ul><ul><li>LFA’s to enforce (without teeth) the FCC’s rules </li></ul></ul><ul><li>No New INets </li></ul>
  • 11. Highlights – Not (con’t) <ul><li>10 year term in name only </li></ul><ul><li>The incumbent can abandon the existing franchise </li></ul><ul><ul><li>as soon as a new “cable operator” offers service to one subscriber </li></ul></ul><ul><li>The enforcement mechanisms won’t work </li></ul><ul><ul><li>revocation – the nuclear option </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Revocation is a sham – affiliate can take over the revoked facilities without review or restriction </li></ul></ul>
  • 12. Highlights – Not (con’t) <ul><li>Shifts from Contract to Ordinance </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Enforcement mechanisms? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>No unique deals based on community needs </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Confuses LFA’s with PROW Managers </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Inadequate Registration/Certification </li></ul><ul><ul><li>No control over transfers/sales </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>No renewal review </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Eliminates explicit LFA buy-out authority </li></ul>
  • 13. State Legislation - Lessons Learned <ul><li>The Law of Unintended Consequences. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Can incumbent abandon </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>the franchise? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>current service obligations? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Cash is Not an adequate substitute for in-kind. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>2. Need forward-looking PEG </li></ul><ul><li>3. VA and TX bills DO NOT “keep LFAs whole” </li></ul><ul><li>The “process issues </li></ul><ul><li>Right-of-way problems and catastrophes </li></ul>
  • 14. WHAT’S MISSING IN STATE LEGIS TO DATE? <ul><li>1. Termination or abandonment? </li></ul><ul><li>2. Sell out to the other? </li></ul><ul><li>3. No consumer rebates, refunds and credits. </li></ul><ul><li>4. No construction and repair notices. </li></ul><ul><li>5. No RF interference restrictions or other non ROW safety issues. </li></ul><ul><li>6. No stand-by power. </li></ul><ul><li>7. No CPE and cable-ready TV compatibility. </li></ul><ul><li>8. No mention of disabled community. </li></ul><ul><li>9. No record of customer service complaints. </li></ul>
  • 15. WHAT’S MISSING IN VA AND TX? <ul><li>10. No emergency alert system. </li></ul><ul><li>11. No upstream connections for PEG signals. </li></ul><ul><li>12. No signal testing or performance evaluations. </li></ul><ul><li>13. No restrictions on operator editorial control of PEG. </li></ul><ul><li>14. No reference to “non-standard installations.” </li></ul><ul><li>15. No consumer rights re </li></ul><ul><li>a. Availability of CSRs </li></ul><ul><li>b. Billing and late fees </li></ul><ul><li>c. Notice of service offerings, prices and changes, policies </li></ul><ul><li>16. No privacy rights and disclosures. </li></ul><ul><li>17. No EEO and Small Business Procurement practices. </li></ul><ul><li>18. No prohibition of anti-competitive pricing within the franchise area. </li></ul>
  • 16. FCC — Hey Don’t Forget Us! <ul><li>Cable Franchise NPRM </li></ul><ul><li>Preemption of IP (IPTV?) Service Regulation </li></ul><ul><ul><li>E911? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>CALEA? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Consumer Recourse? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Net Neutrality? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Interconnection? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Non-Discrimination? </li></ul></ul>
  • 17. Conclusion <ul><li>RBOCs are Coming to Video this time </li></ul><ul><li>Core Debate over Video Franchising: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>LFA v. Telco v. Cable Operators </li></ul></ul><ul><li>RBOCs can win without Congress but can We? </li></ul>
  • 18. Contact Information Nicholas Miller [email_address] Miller & Van Eaton, P.L.L.C. 1155 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. Suite 1000 Washington, D.C. 20036-4301 phone 202-785-0600 fax 202-785-1234 www.millervaneaton.com

Related Documents