Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!dsinc!telecom-request From: johns@scroff.uk (John Slater) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: UK Deregulation - Big News Message-ID: Date: 15 Mar 91 18:00:45 GMT Sender: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Reply-To: John.Slater@uk.sun.com Organization: Sun Microsystems UK Lines: 34 Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 204, Message 9 of 14 In article , tuvie!iiasa.local!wnp@ relay.eu.net (Wolf PAUL) writes: |> In article John.Slater@uk.sun.com (John |> Slater) writes: |> ) Good news on the whole, I feel. |> Your last sentence above does not sound so good to me. Why not? More competition should bring LD charges down further. And BT's last big monopoly, dialtone, is ripe for being opened up. |> And what is the |> good of allowing the P.O. to provide phone service once again -- why |> then was BT split off from the P.O. in the first place? Simple: in the Bad Old Days the P.O. was a monopoly provider of telecoms service. Now they'll be one of many LD providers, and the government would like to introduce competition in the mail sector too. |> On a different note: what exactly are "lifetime telephone numbers"? The idea is that you are given (or, for more money, you choose) a phone number which you carry with you for the rest of your life, wherever you go in the country. Nice idea, but a nightmare to administer, I fear. And the days of looking at the STD code to determine where a number is located are numbered. It's going to be hard to work out what the charge will be for a given number. John Slater Sun Microsystems UK, Gatwick Office