Come on AT&T, get naked

[Maddy McCall]

Come On AT&T, Get Naked

Still waiting on territory wide dry loop DSL
05:18PM Monday Aug 13 2007


In order to gain government approval for its acquisition of BellSouth, AT&T conveniently authored their own merger conditions (pdf). Among them was the promise that they'd offer $10 DSL and "naked" (aka standalone, no landline) DSL service territory-wide.

While AT&T does now offer $10 768kbps DSL to comply, they neither announced or advertised the price point in the hopes that nobody would notice. AT&T's new CEO says they don't advertise it because nobody wants it.

As for dry loop DSL, the company had twelve months from the date of merger approval to offer it, so before year's end they will unveil 768kbps dry loop DSL for $20. Some naked DSL is offered now, but the deals aren't consistent across service regions.

For instance in May, users in BellSouth territory were told they could order naked DSL if they bundled AT&T wireless service. As of this month it appears that users on Ultra or faster tiers can now get naked DSL (click for prices) if they call up and ask for "bundle 96."

AT&T already has to offer naked DSL in some markets to comply with conditions of the SBC acquisition of AT&T, but charges customers a dollar more for it than they charge for their DSL & landline bundle. AT&T at the time said setting that price was "a way to let customers know that buying several services at the same time is always the best value."

The company tells the Chicago Tribune that they're trialing another naked DSL variant aimed at college students in Austin, Chicago and Jacksonville. Users in those markets can get 1.5Mbps naked DSL for $23.99 a month, or $19.99 a month if you bundle wireless service. AT&T tells the paper the same thing they told USAToday last January: territory-wide $20 naked DSL is coming:
"AT&T will launch a stand-alone DSL service for under $20 a month later this year to comply with that pledge, said Cara Birch, a company spokeswoman. That service will feature speeds of 768 kilobits a second, which is half as fast as the 1.5-megabit-per-second speed offered now. But AT&T says it is investigating stand-alone DSL service as a marketing strategy."

MORE: http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Come-On-ATT-Get-Naked-86596

*********************************************
Have any DUers been able to get naked DSL through Bellsouth/ATT? If you're a current customer, have you tried? According to the federal merger agreement, ATT was supposed to start offering stand-alone DSL for $19.99, for 30 months after beginning to offer it. If you call ATT to ask about it, though, they tell you that only "Ultra" DSL is available in your market, for $33 + $5 access fee + taxes and other fees. Which means they haven't cut the price of DSL at all. Or they tell you, yes, you can get DSL for $19.99, but only if you also purchase Cingular wireless.

So, in other words, they aren't standing up to their end of the merger agreement. Really, who ever thought they would.

[wordpix]

1. since Cingular became AT&T, I have ATT for both landline & cell phone---read my story:

I recently called ATT to stop my long distance service on the land line since I use the ATT cell for this, which is cheaper. I thought ATT would have no problem since I remain with them for LD via my cell. I was told ATT cannot do it since I have LD service to Canada on my land line, also.

Talk about a monopoly! My local service used to be provided by SBC but that was swallowed up by ATT. My cell service used to be provided by Cingular, which was also swallowed up by ATT. :puke:

[Maddy McCall]

2. That is insane.

I don't know how they get away with it.

:grr:

[sharp_stick]

3. I hear you

Although technically SBC swallowed ATT, it's still a gigantic monopoly building up again and I can't see that being good for anyone.

Personally we dumped SBC when the merger was announced and went with Vonage for home service. Even with their legal issues we've had no problems with service possibly because of pretty decent cable internet. If they are forced out by Verizon I'll find another VOIP service, not Comcast, I think.

For the cell we use Verizon because they had the best reception in the area, based on nothing more than talking with neighbors.

[Liberal Veteran]

5. I wouldn't necessarily believe what they said.

I spent 30 minutes on the phone with AT&T trying to get rid of my long distance service on my land line and they hemmed and hawed and told me a bunch of bullshit and finally transferred me to a retention person and stayed firm until they complied.

[liberal N proud]

4. I wish I could find something to free from Time Warner

We dumped the local phone company for Adelphia Cable service and High Speed Internet service. Then we switched to Vonage for our Phone.

Well, thanks to some crooked Adelphia execs, we are now stuck with Time Warner. Talk about a service nightmare. Poor quality service with both the internet and the Cable but customer service sucks. I would even use ATT if I could get it in my area to get away from TW.
I was an ATT customer for years with Long Distance, they asked why. I told them I was switching to VOIP they quickly offered me their VOIP service but it was too late, I had already signed on with Vonage for two lines.
If they had advertised the service I probably would still be one of their customers.