Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!samsung!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!pacbell.com!decwrl!hayes.fai.alaska.edu!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request From: 0004133373@mcimail.com (Donald E. Kimberlin) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Questions About Local Service and Long Distance Rates Message-ID: <9741@accuvax.nwu.edu> Date: 15 Jul 90 01:42:00 GMT Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu Organization: Telecommunications Network Architects, Safety Harbor, FL Lines: 101 Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 485, Message 5 of 6 ..In article (Digest v10,iss479) Brendan writes: >I have two questions regarding local phone operation and one regarding >long distances rates which I am curious... >First, does anyone have a clue why Southwestern Bell here in Austin, TX wants $60.00 to hookup a phone? Yep, it's a charge on the higher fringe of what Telcos nationwide tend to get for a once-manual, now-automated operation. It even has components, like (let's say) $25 for "writing the service order," and $15 for "wiring on the distributing frame," and $5 for "updating the directory entry," and so on. These prices, once established as a means to hold off rate increases by creating the Telco equivalent of government "user fees" and "impact fees," have never been reviewed by PUCs to see if they are still valid. And we all know who is _not_ about to ask for a review, don't we? >Also... was told ... if I wanted to pay to have them pull a wire from >the 478 exchange to the 458 exchange ... *and* I would have to pay >extra monthly. ... how does the local service work? Is a city really >broken into sections, where moving a number between them requires a >hardware change? Well, I sure hope the lady didn't say "pull a wire" across the city. That would constitute naievete in extremis! What she described was a "foreign central office" (within a city; "foreign exchange" between two cities) line. The transmission channels already exist; Telcos will, if you wish, rent you a channel to that other exchange to get your dial tone from there. You pay the "service order charges" (usually higher for a "special service" and a monthly rental for the extension transmission channel ... and there's usually cute components in the monthly charge for the "special equipment" they "need" to make a longer-than-normal loop operate. Now, here's the dirty truth: The sort of "special equipment" that's used is the same as is used for many other classes of "phone lines," further, it often is not needed. The most extreme case I know of is the boundary between Boca Raton, FL and Deerfield Beach, FL. There, the two "exchanges" are in the SAME Southern Bell building, and an "FX line" consists of ONE jumper wire on the distributing frame. BUT, the two "exchanges" are several miles apart on the long-standing "official description" of thw two areas. No matter, an FX there costs (I recall) about $65 a month ... for 100 feet of wire! What you pay for a phone line has at best a VERY small resemblance to what it costs to put any given line in. The Telco mushes all the costs together into a heap called the "rate base" and then apportions out what it thinks you should pay for each thing. It's a principle proudly euphemized in Telco-Speak as "Value of Service Pricing," spoken of in reverent tones, because Telcos are sure God gave them that right. And, they'll fight you into the ground to preserve it. One study a decade ago found that press, hospitals, police, broadcasters, residences and business all paid difference prices for identical wires in the SAME cable! The real kicker: press paid the lowest price. The politics behind it are obvious. Don't let anyone ever tell you the "phone company" isn't one of the most political animals in town. >About the long distance pricing ... (describes MCI rate structure) > ... I thought is kinda bizarre that I can call California during >business hours for *less* than calling my brother in Dallas after >5pm. Any ideas? No "ideas" needed. It's another of the nationwide unrealities of telephone company rate-making. State by state, the regulators long ago found they could look good and keep the Telco's much-watched price for a local line down by letting INTRAstate short-haul LD charges rise. It goes back to a point in time when none of us as individuals hauled off and dialed the phone for just any old thing. Since we all became "telephone junkies," the usage has soared, but the protected rate for the local telco do haul LD in-state remains. Others, like MCI, are _required_ to not undercut the "local" Telco on in-state rates. Yet, you see what the true costs must be like in the FCC-mandated (almost) free market of INTERstate rates. That's the answer, pure and simple: Another very visible proof that the price you pay for regulated phone services has little connection to the cost of the product. The sooner America wakes up and starts to let it be known it understands the regulatory "shell game" and ends the silly form of "regulation" that exists today, the sooner prices will begin to truly reflect costs. The Federal government would like to permit local "dial tone" competition immediately (and several technologies exist to do so ... right now), but the local Telco lobby is still shouting that one down. Oh, you have an example right in Texas: ARCO Oil moved its offices to Richardson, on the fringe of Dallas 6-8 years ago. Fed up with GTE "dial tone," ARCO put in a private microwave and imported SW Bell dial tone to their building in Richardson. WOW! Did the Telco feathers ruffle! GTE got their "brothers in the cloth," SWBT to shut off the dial tone. Both got the Texas PUC to say on paper they had done the right thing. ARCO dragged the FCC in, saying the dial tone was only _part_ of INTERstate business, and got an FCC order to turn it back on. SWBT went to the Federal courts, and only about four months ago lost on the final level of appeal short of the Supreme Court. Doubtful you'll ever get this news in your SWBT bill insert, but you _can_ put in your _own_ FX if you want ..and for larger businesses, the technology is not that expensive these days. If you want to do it at UT, I know a guy in Austin who can guide you!)