Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!mailrus!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request
From: motcid!segal@uunet.uu.net (Gary Segal)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Make Sprint Put it in Writing!
Message-ID: <12053@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Date: 11 Sep 90 15:01:22 GMT
Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu
Organization: Motorola INC., Cellular Infrastructure Division
Lines: 26
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 638, Message 5 of 13


cambler@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU (Fubar) writes:

>I got the "in writing" information that I had requested. It consisted
>of mostly propoganda about the quality of their lines, the NAMES of
>all of their "plans" and SOME rates. Absolutely NO comparison, and NO
>INDICATION that their plans and rates are better. It would take the
>better part of a day, a good spreadsheet or statistical program, and
>all the rates of other systems to figure out which is best.

Now I'm curious ... has anyone ever asked AT&T to "put it in writing?"
If so, how does their propaganda compare to Sprint's (or MCI's for
that matter)?  AT&T has been making a lot of noise about getting it
"in writing" from thier competition, I'm surprised everyone seems to
be taking them at face value.

>In short, their "in writing" campaign is just so much smoke.

I'd be inclined to believe that AT&T is the one that started blowing
the smoke, and now Sprint is attempting to blow it back.


Gary Segal	...!uunet!motcid!segal		+1-708-632-2354
Motorola INC., 1501 W. Shure Drive, Arlington Heights IL, 60004
The opinions expressed above are those of the author, and do not consititue
the opinions of Motorola INC.