Category Archives: Special Access

The FCC’s Intellectual and Empirical Vacuum Over Market Power for Special Access Services

Posted on by

It’s been over eighty years since the Communications Act of 1934 created the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) for the purpose of overseeing the nation’s communications industries.  Still, as revealed most recently in the Commission’s Tariff Investigation Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Special Access Services (hereinafter “BDS Further Notice”) the Agency has no idea how to define or measure market power in telecommunications markets.  In fact, its BDS Further Notice offers no apparent definition of market power, which is a significant deficiency for a regulatory regime allegedly based on the presence of market power. There are some hints Continue Reading »

Some Preliminary Thoughts On Dr. Rysman’s Special Access Empirical Analysis…

Posted on by

As part of the Federal Communication Commission’s Tariff Investigation Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Special Access Services, the Agency included as Appendix B a commissioned empirical study by Dr. Marc Rysman of Boston University.  While there’s a lot to say about Dr. Rysman’s analysis, because it just came out two days ago I want to take the time to make sure I fully understand Dr. Rysman’s technique and modeling choices before passing judgement.  That said, while I won’t provide a thorough analysis of Dr. Rysman’s econometric analysis in this blog, there are some glaring items that are Continue Reading »

Special Access and the FCC’s Regulatory Revival…

Posted on by

There is a Chinese proverb, though some call it a curse, which says “May you live in interesting times.” For those involved in telecommunications policy over the last few decades, I think it’s safe to say we are now living in interesting times. Since before and certainly after the 1996 Telecommunications Act, the communications industry has undergone a competitive and deregulatory revolution. Twenty years ago the cross-entry of phone companies into video markets and video companies into phone markets was a running joke, but no longer. It’s a reality. Video regulation, which was a disaster even under monopoly conditions, has Continue Reading »

The FCC’s Special Access Fiasco: No Data and Wrong Policy Question…

Posted on by

Late Wednesday night, the Federal Communications Commission released a Report and Order that would suspend, on an “interim” basis, its rules for automatic grants of pricing flexibility for special access services “in light of significant evidence” that the current deregulatory trigger—i.e., two competitors have collocated in a single Metropolitan Statistical Area (“MSA”)—is “not working as predicted.”  In particular, the Commission found that the geographic territories contained in most MSAs are “overly broad” and, in contrast, most competitive entry is occurring only in areas with “extremely concentrated demand.”  Although the Commission concedes that it “currently lack[s] the necessary data to identify Continue Reading »

Some Thoughts on this Week’s FCC Oversight Hearing…

Posted on by

This week, the House Energy and Commerce Committee held an oversight hearing of the Federal Communications Commission.  As to be expected, the issues covered ranged far and wide, demonstrating once again the diversity, multitude and complexity of issues pending before policymakers.  While I have no intention of commenting on them all in this blog post, I would like to highlight a few observations. First and foremost, it was a pleasure to watch new FCC Commissioners Jessica Rosenworcel and Ajit Pai answer questions with both thoughtfulness and, more importantly, significant substantive knowledge about the complexities of our industry.  Both have certainly Continue Reading »

Well, this is interesting…

Posted on by

Earlier this month, the trade press reported that FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski was circulating an order among his fellow Commissioners that not only would re-evaluate how the agency de-regulates special access services provided by incumbent local exchange companies (“ILECs”) but would also “temporarily suspend consideration of pricing flexibility pending the development of as new framework.”  In a recent blog, Phoenix Center Chief Economist George Ford criticized this plan, arguing that the admitted failure of regulation is not a valid reason to suspend deregulation, and that this “regulate first mentality” threatens investment in the industry.  As George stated, “the agency’s decision Continue Reading »

Sending the Wrong Signals on Special Access Deregulation…

Posted on by

As both the courts and the Federal Communications Commission have consistently recognized, price regulation is “far from an exact science”.  For this reason, since the late 1980s, the FCC has slowly and steadily sought to eliminate the direct price regulation of communications services at nearly every possible opportunity.  (See, e.g., the FCC’s Competitive Carrier paradigm, which culminated in the total forbearance from tariffing requirements.)  Given this long-standing policy, it is indeed curious that the FCC is reportedly circulating an order among its Commissioners that not only would re-evaluate how the agency de-regulates special access services provided by incumbent local exchange Continue Reading »

When in Doubt, Regulate…

Posted on by

In 1999, the FCC began to grant incumbent LECs pricing flexibility on special access services in some Metropolitan Statistical Areas (“MSAs”) when specific evidence of competitive alternatives were proven to be present.  Ever since, whether or not the Commission was justified in following the path toward deregulation of special access services has been disputed.  A proceeding initiated in 2002 on the topic of special access pricing flexibility remains open today. Recent press reports indicate that FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski is now circulating a proposal that would transform the way the FCC regulates such high capacity services.  Among other things, this Continue Reading »