Hopefully the current company still somewhat follows the direction of it's founder, Dr. Lumpkin. Perhaps the future of New England's telecommunications grid is looking brighter.
Fairpoint really got off to a bad start. I wasn't following telecom news in those days, so I can't make an intelligent argument one way or another. It seems to me the criminals that are Verizon left this area in shambles when they sold out to FP originally. Their records were lousy, equipment was left in various states of disrepair, and it was general mayhem as far as the industry went. Once FP took over, they weren't prepared to tackle the problems Verizon left them and the large expansion they had just bought themselves. Service went to hell and they lost customers they would never get back. My experience with FP has been nothing but positive, but from what I gather I am in the minority. I left a message on their website asking about the costs of various levels of service and I was promptly called back. I was given a pretty wide range of options and they were all explained clearly to me. I was able to make an informed decision then and there and ordered service. By the time I got home from work that SAME night, my service was working and had no problems.
The gripe I personally have with FP is the lack of alternatives for broadband service. In many of the smaller surrounding towns there is fiber to the premises. In non-FP areas around here (mostly TDS Telecom) there has been fiber to the premises for even longer. However, Manchester, the largest city in New Hampshire, has absolutely ZERO fiber. I can't say I want to trade in my copper just yet, but for internet our only real choice is Comcast. FP's DSL just doesn't cut it these days. The maximum speed in the city is about 15Mbps, and it varies geographically. They say they offer up to 30, but unless you're within a few blocks of the CO you can forget about that. I'm on the outskirts, I'd be lucky to get 5. That's a long way off the 250Mbps I currently get from Comcast.
I think FP would probably have substantially more subscribers if fiber were widely available. It's a catch 22 for them. They need subscribers to be able to afford the fiber buildout, but they cant get the subs without the fiber. I know most of the area would love a viable alternative to Comcast. Their service is .....ok..... around here, but not without it's problems. After the big business phone outage a few months ago, every take out place in the city was LIVID. The problem is Comcast can give them voice service WAY cheaper than FP. Like I said to one pizza place, Would you have made enough money that night if you had FP service to pay that month's phone bill? The answer is of course yes. To me it comes off as paying more for reliability. What if that outage had dragged on into the next day, or for a couple days? Comcast is not a phone company, and we desperately need a phone company up here to step up to the plate and offer us a real alternative. Here's hoping Consolidated is going to do that!
