Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!att!bu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request
From: glenn@rigel.econ.uga.edu (Glenn F. Leavell)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Sprint's New Calling Card
Message-ID: <68874@bu.edu.bu.edu>
Date: 15 Nov 90 19:10:05 GMT
Sender: news@bu.edu.bu.edu
Organization: University of Georgia Economics Department
Lines: 29
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 826, Message 5 of 12


In RISKS-FORUM Digest 10.60, Jerry Glomph Black <black@MICRO.LL.
MIT.EDU> writes:

[concerning Sprint's FONCARD:]

>Sometimes it's annoying to dial 11 digits of access
>code(1-800-877-8000), then the 11 digits of the destination number, then the
>bloody 14-digit number.  My wife refuses to do this, so we got an AT&T card,
>where all you have to remember is FOUR DIGITS (tacked on to your 10-digit home
>number, which you presumably know).  Anybody know why Sprint didn't just adopt
>this method?

I believe that AT&T offers two different kinds of calling cards.  One
kind is "anchored" to your home phone number - the first ten digits of
the calling card number are the same ten digits which make up your home
phone number.  Then other ("unanchored") type is similar to Sprint's
card in that the numbers on the card are "random".  This means that
you can get an AT&T calling card even if you don't have a private
phone number.  For some reason, all Sprint calling cards seem to be
"unanchored".

Does anyone know why Sprint chose to use "unanchored" cards?
Corrections are welcomed.


Glenn F. Leavell  glenn@rigel.econ.uga.edu  404-542-3488  Systems Administrator
 University of Georgia Economics Department. 147 Brooks Hall. Athens, GA 30602