Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!apple!sun-barr!newstop!texsun!texbell!vector!telecom-gateway From: zygot!john@apple.com (John Higdon) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Sprint's Universal Points of Presence Message-ID: Date: 25 Jul 89 07:03:29 GMT Sender: news@vector.Dallas.TX.US Organization: ATI Wares Team Lines: 53 Approved: telecom-request@vector.dallas.tx.us X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@vector.dallas.tx.us X-TELECOM-Digest: volume 9, issue 256, message 3 of 5 In article , McConnaughey@cup.portal. com writes: > > 5) I called PacBell information (411) and NPA 555-1212 to get area codes and > exchange prefixes for the rural areas you mentioned. I then called US Sprint > Customer service at (1)800-877-4646 and inquired about Sprint service in Weed, > Baker, and Los Banos. The results are as follows: > > > Location NPA NXX Equal Access Date Sprint FGD offered > ________ ___ ___ _________________ __________________ > Weed 916 938 12/10/88 yes > Baker 619 733 not PacBell area FGD not available > Los Banos 209 826 not PacBell area FGD not available Better check again, only use a source that knows something of which they speak. Having recently been to both Baker and Los Banos, I can tell you that if they are not Pac*Bell areas, then there is a serious problem with a COCOT company pirating their name and logo on the public phones! You may be partially correct about Baker's lack of equal access. The CO is very "honker step by step", but it is definately, absolutely, and completely Pacific Bell. Regarding Los Banos, you are completely wet. It is #5 crossbar equipped with CONTAC and very Pacific Bell and very equal access. As far as calling Sprint Customer service is concerned, how on earth did you get through? I usually give up after a 30 minute wait; you must be much more persistent. Oh, that's right. You work there. You have demonstrated one of my gripes with OCCs: they really don't seem to have an handle on the nitty-gritty of the business. If Sprint is unaware of what operating company serves Los Banos and Baker, what else do they not have a clue about? > 8) Lastly, it seems that you believe that AT&T has provided universal service > out of the goodness of its corporate heart. Until the recent price cap > regulation (an outgrowth of divestiture and regulatory liberalization, the > results of which seem almost painful to you) AT&T was GUARANTEED an adequate > return on its capital investment in ALL areas, rural and metropolitan. This > has never been the case with the OCCs. It took no significant financial Then WHY are OCC rates practically the same as AT&T's? Since they have not been mandated to serve rural areas (and most certainly do not) they should be able to undercut the socks off of AT&T. But no, there are nickel and dime discounts off of AT&T rates, rates you claim were guaranteed to provide a decent rate-of-return for serving high *and* low profit areas. In many cases OCCs have higher rates than AT&T for a decidedly inferior product. -- John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.uucp | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !