Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!wuarchive!decwrl!hayes.fai.alaska.edu!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request
From: ho@csrd.uiuc.edu (Samuel W Ho)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Make AT&T Put it in Writing? Why Not MCI?
Message-ID: <12954@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Date: 2 Oct 90 15:57:10 GMT
Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu
Organization: TELECOM Digest
Lines: 36
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 706, Message 5 of 13


The only specific claim I have seen AT&T make is call completion "40%
faster."  For that, they did give, at least on the TV version,
specific numbers in the fine print.  I think AT&T averages a 3.5
second completion time, while MCI was about 6 seconds.

In fact, MCI did sue them alleging deceptive advertising, but it was
thrown out of court.  The judge ruled that 40% is 40%, even if it is
matter of less than 3 seconds.

The ad ran something like this:

AT&T calls complete 40% faster.
(Numerous shots of person twiddling thumbs while holding phone.)

That's like paying someone to do nothing.

(Shot of paper airplane sailing into wastebasket. Fine print
detailing statistics.)

AT&T The Right Choice

The funny thing is that at four seconds a call, full time doing
nothing requires 7200 calls a day.  These are only inter-lata calls,
mind you.  If these calls cost even 0.25 each, this is a monthly
inter-lata long distance bill of $36,000.  That is a good-sized
telecom budget.

Fact is, completion time is (within bounds) not that important.  If
somebody has to repeat something once because of noise, that wipes out
a four-second difference.  Noise lasts the whole call, too.

It's a rough world out in ad-land.


Sam Ho (ho@csrd.uiuc.edu)