Path: utzoo!telecom-request Date: Sun, 09 Jun 91 10:02:55 CST From: Jim Redelfs Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Hollings and Pac*Bell Reply-To: ivgate!macnet!jim.redelfs@uunet.uu.net Message-ID: Organization: Macnet Omaha Sender: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu 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 441, Message 8 of 8 Lines: 101 [Disclaimer: I am an 18+ year employee of US WEST Communications - JR] John Higdon wrote: > Pac*Bell has given those of us who care to look a glimpse of the > future under the Hollings bill that permits the RBOCs to enter the > world of equipment manufacturing. It is call "The Message Center", > and while it is not exactly "hardware", it is a good example of how > Pac*Bell intends to compete in the marketplace. The "Message Center" > is a voicemail service... Sir, I believe I have seen enough advantages of the uniqueness of TelCom within the state of Nebraska that I can conclude that (nearly) complete DEregulation of the these companies are in the ratepayer's best interest. By some accounts, L.B.835, the landmark legislation that was passed into law by Nebraska's Unicameral several years ago, was RAMMED down the representative's throats. Be that as it may (but I disagree), the horrible effects that were predicted by the opponents have not come to past. Our local rates have not risen disproportionately. Competition has not been swallowed up - indeed it has thrived. Service is excellent and the rates are "reasonable" (certainly among the average, if not below). US WEST Communications began offering "Business Voice Messaging" quite a while ago, and it has been in the residential market for some months. All is going well, it is being well accepted and subscribed to. > [This service] ...will answer your phone after a preset number of rings, > allow you to retrieve your messages from anywhere, and will put "stutter" > dial tone on your phone if there are messages waiting. It is an excellent service. (I do not subscribe to it.) > [This service] ...directly competes with voicemail service bureaus. Horrors! > What is wrong with this? First, it is priced well below most > service bureaus. I have not checked, so I cannot dispute your claim, but what's wrong with charging less than your competition - even in this case? Do you suppose the regulatory agency would approve of the TelCo charging substantially MORE that it costs to PROVIDE the service? No way. > Using the vast capital resources available courtesy of its > ratepayers, Pac*Bell can offer this service at a preditory price that > is designed to murder the competition. When the field has been > thinned out sufficiently, then the price can be whatever it wants. Given that exagerated scenerio, you should be the first on your block, possibly state, to appear during their rate hearings and request that Pac*Bell charge MORE for their service! [Re: House Resolution that would relax some of the constraints that were placed on the Bell Operating Companies as a result of the Modified Final Judgement in 1984] ... > Let us hope the Hollings bill dies a well-deserved death in the House. I hope not. In fact, this concern may cause me to write my FIRST letter to my elected representatives - in SUPPORT of the bill. I think it is time for a little SUBSIDY of my local service! And if the little guy can't hack the competition (REAL competition) that is SLOWLY entering his domain after an absence of almost EIGHT years, so be it. The Bell Operating Companies have a great potential - a LOT of which was hogtied by Judge Harold Greene. I think the time is LONG OVERDUE that they be allowed to ENDOW us lowly ratepayers with some of this FABULOUS technology that, until now, had been either in development, legally KEPT from us, or available or AFFORDABLE only to business customers! I am not advocating, and would certainly resist, a return to the good, old days when the phone company was the only show in town. (Remember when they OWNED the wire and jacks in your home, as well as everything that was plugged into the system?) But, I think a little relaxation of the MFJ would be a good thing. The BOCs have concentrated their efforts since deregulation on those areas where they were legally allowed (with the odd exception [blush]), and the time has come to see what they can do in their other areas of expertise. JR [Dislclaimer: The above does not necessarily reflect the opinions of my employer - JR] --- Tabby 2.2 MacNet Omaha 402-289-2899 On loan from Mrs MacWidow (1:285/14)