A recent Bank of America equity research report concluded that Verizon’s launch of its FiOS video service has “elicited thinly advertised, yet highly competitive pricing responses for incumbent cable providers” (including Cox Communications). It’s a nuanced statement referring to “save” pricing that companies offer reactively to customers considering a switch to another provider. At Cox, it’s a practice used in response to multiple competitive providers—not just Verizon. Indeed, save offers are commonplace, not only in Cable and telecom (Verizon certainly uses save offers itself), but in virtually all businesses.

Despite what the BofA report may imply, the fact is that while Cox does offer save pricing, there has been no change in prices in response to Verizon’s video entry into Northern Virginia. Unfortunately, when an already misleading statement gets fed through RBOC spin machines, there’s a very good chance it will be reported as fact. And soon it’s being cited in the RBOCs’ ongoing campaigns to get a sweetheart deal from policy makers to boost their entry into the video marketplace.

The truth is the NoVa market has been one of the most highly competitive in the country for years—well before Verizon's video service came to town—and Cox has used save pricing there for a long time. And of course, satellite TV competition in the market has long been fierce. So, RBOC claims that there’s no competition in the cable marketplace are ludicrous, as is the contention that the RBOCs need special regulatory favors to enter the business.

Unlike Verizon, Cox spent hundreds of millions of dollars building a state-of-the art broadband network in NoVa without any government subsidies and without seeking any special favors from legislators. Indeed, Cox virtually helped invent competition in the communications marketplace following the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which enabled competition in the telephone business and gave the RBOCs four different options for entering the video business—options they essentially ignored for 10 years.

When Verizon finally began its video entry, it has done so in NoVa without obstacles, readily securing franchise agreements with a lighter regulatory burden than Cox. In fact, Cox even testified during Verizon’s Fairfax County franchise hearing in support of competition. So, we’re not anti-competition, as the RBOCs may claim. Unlike Verizon, we’re for fair competition, on a level, equal playing field where consumers—not the government—choose the winners and losers.