Press Happily Parrots Verizon’s Claim That Its $20 Billion Purchase Of Frontier Will Be A Huge Boon To Consumers
from the merge-ALL-the-things! dept
Tell me if you’ve heard this one before: a major U.S. regional telecom monopoly is looking to buy another major U.S. regional telecom monopoly in a massive transaction that both companies insist holds vast benefits for American consumers.
This time it’s Verizon stating it intends to purchase Frontier in a massive $20 billion deal that would transfer ownership of Frontier’s fiber, voice, and DSL networks back to Verizon. The deal, Verizon insists in a press release, will make U.S. broadband better and (somehow) more competitive:
The acquisition of Frontier is a strategic fit. It will build on Verizon’s two decades of leadership at the forefront of fiber and is an opportunity to become more competitive in more markets throughout the United States, enhancing our ability to deliver premium offerings to millions more customers across a combined fiber network.
In telecom, pre-merger promises are always meaningless. These deals generally saddle companies with massive debt, resulting in the surviving company cutting corners and imposing countless layoffs to regain equilibrium. The consolidation exists simply as a way to temporarily boost stock valuations, drive massive new tax breaks, and give overcompensated executives the false belief they’re savvy deal makers and bold innovators who definitely haven’t run out of any actual, innovative ideas.
Frontier perfected something I affectionately call “fiber to the press release,” where a telco makes a bunch of fiber deployment promises nobody independently verifies, and the press happily parrots them. Every merger or request for tax cuts, subsidies, and deregulation is accompanied by a promise of massive fiber deployment that never actually happens at the scale that’s promised.
This deal — which will transfer Frontier’s 2.2 million subscribers across 25 states to Verizon — is particularly amusing because in 2015 Frontier bought a huge chunk of Verizon’s network making all the same promises. None of those promises came true; the transition was an historic mess resulting in Frontier’s bankruptcy, untold layoffs, numerous network failures, and terrible overall broadband service.
Such a transaction might wind up being a better deal for Frontier consumers if Verizon winds up being more competent in upgrading aging networks to fiber and improving abysmal industry customer service. But given the lack of U.S. broadband competition and the fecklessness of captured U.S. Telecom regulators, there’s very little real financial incentive for Verizon to do that.
I suspect the timing of this deal is mostly triggered by Verizon’s interest in getting Frontier’s share of the $42.5 Billion in BEAD broadband subsidy money soon heading to the states courtesy of the 2021 infrastructure bill. As per tradition, a good number of those states (like Pennsylvania) will largely just take that taxpayer money, dump it in Verizon’s lap for promised fiber network investment, then fail to follow up.
The “fun” part is if you peruse the U.S. press coverage of this deal, almost none of the outlets can be bothered to truly explain all of the numerous, terrible problems the last merger caused. Or the fact that both of these companies have zero credibility when it comes to promising much of anything, especially as it pertains to what major mergers will or won’t accomplish.
Nor can major press outlets be bothered to explain more generally that mindless consolidation and pathetic regulatory oversight is why U.S. broadband is patchy, expensive, and slow (with routinely awful customer service) in the first place.
None of that is deemed to be useful, relevant context for readership. They’ll just parrot the companies’ promises of untold new consolidation synergies because the primary focus is money — not tech, or broadband, or actual people, and certainly not the real world impact of a relentless attack on competition.
This is the U.S. Telecom industry: a rotating collection of massively unpopular regional monopolies that have carved the country into fiefdoms. All protected by a largely feckless regulatory apparatus disinterested in antitrust reform, and propped up by a lazy corporate press equally disinterested in documenting the impact of monopoly power or mindless consolidation.
Filed Under: broadband, consolidation, fiber, monopoly, telecom, wireless
Companies: frontier, verizon
BestNetTech is off for the holidays! We'll be back soon, and until then don't forget to




Comments on “Press Happily Parrots Verizon’s Claim That Its $20 Billion Purchase Of Frontier Will Be A Huge Boon To Consumers”
The fact that my part of the country (Upstate NY, and not too far from where Karl Bode grew up) has a number of independent fiber companies popping up all over the place is one of several reasons I’m reluctant to leave said part.
Re:
I’m in a neighboring state, and we just had another company roll out fiber as well as Frontier just rolling out fiber. I had already switched to the other company for internet, and am now considering going with their phone offering as Frontier is planning to kill the plain old copper telephone service. This merger just makes the decision to switch easier.
Corporate media does not do investigative journalism, corporate media does press releases.
Similar to the way our laws are written, rich people write stuff and politicians recite.
I find this ironic because just the other day, Kroger stated that their merger with another grocery chain would lower prices. How many times is the FTC going to just nod and smile.
So ah, just a question. Is there a specific god I gotta pray to, in order to cause the telecom monopolies to be broken up? Or at least end up on the hook like Google did?
Just asking, no reason in particular.
Re: History Lesson first...
…before asking to break up a telecom monopoly, remember what REALLY happened with the AT&T breakup.
Re: Re:
Are you talking about the companies slowly reconstituting or is there some story about the breakup process itself that I’m not aware of?
Re: Re: Re:
Different AC here .. I recall the breakup was advertised, in part, as a vehicle for job creation – the only problem was most of the new jobs went to Canada.
Re: Re: Re:2
I hadn’t heard about job creation being promised; but, for what it’s worth, those Canadian jobs only lasted about 15 years, and then most of those businesses imploded spectacularly. Nortel wasn’t the only Ottawa telecom business with massive layoffs.
Perhaps the intended point was that stuff didn’t really change for customers—with the notable exception of people being able to get cheaper long-distance services. But, locally, everyone was still dealing with a monopoly that didn’t have to care. There were also a few CLECs of some significance, but their inability to use remote DSLAMs kind of killed them when VDSL came along. The regulations were not forward-looking, and, 25 years later, we were kind of back where we started. So, no, the jobs being in Canada was not “the only problem”.
I think we need some serious and enforceable(/enforced) conditions here. Like, they can merge if they spin off their internet service as an independent company, and then open their networks up to all third-party competitors (that is, a fully “open-access” network). Make them extend fiber to a certain number of households, with automatic per-household fines if they fail to meet the goal (and bigger fines if they lie about availability). Maybe something similar for wireless services and 5G extensions too.
In amazing and shocking news it’s found that the useless rich are in bed with the useless rich whores running government
I think this paragraph summarizes quite a lot of the US industries (the first that came to mind was healthcare including pharma). Not that it’s too different in the rest of the world but considering how lobbying (effectively buying politicians in my opinion) is legal and encouraged in there it’s no surprise it’s so bad there.
Re:
Not just the US, seems to be ubiquitous.
Re:
From what I can tell the sclerosis is considerably worse with US telecom than with most industries, including pharma.
Pharma companies are rife with overpricing (especially in the US) and there are issues (especially in the US) with single points of failure for numerous specific things (a messy discussion that has as much to do with health insurance and bad government policy as it does pharma companies), but telecom is so much less competitive and less innovative it makes the former look functional in comparison.
Over the years, you’ve accused AT&T, British Telecom, CenturyLink, Google Fiber, and now Frontier of “fiber to the press release,” but never set a benchmark for which ISPs did it right. Is it better to stop expanding, like Verizon did more than a decade ago everywhere except Boston? Or to risk your ire on city-wide deployments that we all understand would take years to complete?
Re:
The ire isn’t on timescale. Your false dichotomy relies on the idea that the core issue mike is complaining about is timescale, but that’s a strawman. The issue with fiber to the press release is the deployment described in the press release has little relation to the reality when the buildout is complete.
You’ve taken the complaint that we give them lots of money, for a long time, and get nothing, and focused on the “long time”, and not the lack of results. I want to believe you aren’t trolling us, but it takes a really bad faith read of Mike’s words to suggest that Mike’s complaint is that it just takes too long to build out fiber, and not that the result is far less than we were promised when we gave them subsidies in the first place.
I remember back in ’02/’03 when they media was happily parroting claims of WMDs and Al-Qaeda in Iraq.
Million+ dead bodies from that one.
“The acquisition of Frontier is a strategic fit.”
“…Frontier’s bankruptcy, untold layoffs, numerous network failures, and terrible overall broadband service.”
Perfect fit. indeed.
Language Use
Sadly, this is actually true. It reads: Verizon can now force its offerings on 2.2 million Frontier-clients.
Re:
And only The Mirror in the UK was the only newspaper to publish the truth, which is why it puzzled me as to why Piers Morgan seemed to be gaining the heat of everyone’s ire until he attacked Meghan Markle and dismissed her struggles with her mental health, an utterly deplorable and ableist thing to do.
Verizon's fiber rollout in our neighborhood...
…did not go well. It fact, it went horribly. The contractors that they had doing the digging were so careless, stupid, and sloppy that they cut 1-2 Comcast cable lines every day they were on-site. Comcast finally started rolling a truck every morning and having it park at the neighborhood entrance while waiting for the inevitable service calls. This went on…for months.
And mind you, this was not a complex feat of network engineering involving complex BGP configurations or sophisticated load balancing or anything like that. This was just trenching fiber, a rudimentary task that we’ve understood how to do for decades.
To this day, Verizon has never admitted or apologized for this fiasco. Which makes for interesting conversations when their reps ignore our posted “no soliciting in this neighborhood” signs and show up at our door.
Re:
Upon reading your post I was reminded of the several stories years ago where a telecom outfit started the house on fire during their install. Was it Verizon, I do not recall.
Re: Re:
Perhaps you’re referring to this incident.
Re: Re: Re:
yup, that’s the one.
Not signed up for the news? You're not missing anything worth the price
Nor can major press outlets be bothered to explain more generally that mindless consolidation and pathetic regulatory oversight is why U.S. broadband is patchy, expensive, and slow (with routinely awful customer service) in the first place.
Between corruption and cowardice it would seem most if not all of the ‘major’ press outlets have been nicely defanged, and now serve not to investigate and report but merely to parrot whatever someone rich and/or powerful tells them to(when they’re not dancing with glee over another mass/school shooting they get to obsessively cover by making the asshole responsible famous for a few weeks anyway), turning them into PR outlets for whoever wants to use them at a given time.
And they wonder why they’re having such a rough time convincing people to give them money in exchange for their ‘news’ service…
Frontier
A point of reference, my parents were captives/customers of Frontier for several years, Frontier’s DSL being the only option in their area. Finally,they opted for Starlink. Their area is still waiting for the promised fiber upgrade… maybe this might induce some movement?
Re:
Funniest comment for sure.
I'm sorry WHAT
I was one of those Verizon customers who was forcibly made a Frontier customer in 2015 and all I can say to this is WHAT. Are they JOKING?
It will not improve. When Frontier bought the Verizon lines in my area and started rolling out FIOS there was a brief flowering of good service, and then Frontier went to shit, to the point where one business client paid to have Comcast run a line and switched. FWIW Ziply took over from Frontier and has been providing good speed and service so you can take over a network and make it better but Verizon won’t
giant, expensive circle
odd that its never mentioned that Verizon sold their landline and fiber business to Frontier many years ago. Now only to buy it back.
Re:
The article does mention that in the 6th paragraph.