Xref: utzoo comp.misc:3933 alt.bbs:157 Path: utzoo!hoptoad!amdcad!ames!pasteur!ucbvax!hplabs!nsc!nessus From: nessus@nsc.nsc.com (Kchula-Rrit) Newsgroups: comp.misc,alt.bbs Subject: Re: Houston bbs's vs SW Bell - more Message-ID: <7360@nsc.nsc.com> Date: 27 Oct 88 16:47:28 GMT References: <4252@moray.UUCP> <1933@uokmax.UUCP> <3940@homxc.UUCP> Reply-To: nessus@nsc.nsc.com.UUCP (Kchula-Rrit) Distribution: usa Organization: The Patriarchy of Kzin, Kzin Lines: 96 In article <3940@homxc.UUCP> halle@homxc.UUCP (J.HALLE) writes: *In article <1933@uokmax.UUCP>, russ@uokmax.UUCP (Russ "Random" Smith) writes: *> -> CAN SOUTHWESTERN BELL TRULY JUSTIFY THIS RATE HIKE? *< -> by *> -> Thomas J.L. Bronsberg-Adas *< -> *> -> Recently, Southwestern Bell began raising the telephone rates *< ->of computer bulletin board systems (BBSs). The rates are being *> ->raised from $13.35 (the residential rate) to $32.85 (the *< ->commercial/business rate). This increase is an increase of over *> ->240%! I feel (as do most computer users) that this increase in *< ->not warranted, nor justified. *> -> *< Something similar to this happened in either '82 or '83 in the Oklahoma *> City area. A young (well, at the time) fellow named Robert Braver built up *< a suit against Bell. Bell eventually gave up (hurrah for the good guys!) *< Hope this one turns out the same way. *And I hope it does not. SWBell is really only doing what it must. Why do you *think they charge more for "commercial" lines than residential? Not because *of ability to pay, but because those lines cost more to provide than *residential lines. The cost of providing a line is significantly affected by *the amount of use the line gets, both incoming and outgoing. Business line *usage is typically several times more than residential lines (based on *minutes of use during the peak hour, e.g.). That's because most businesses use their phones during the day, with very little to no use in the "off-peak" hours, when most residential lines are relatively idle. Most residential lines that I know of get more use in the "off-peak" times when business lines tend to be idle. I'm sure that "ability to pay" enters into the equation somewhere, as well. > Of course there are exceptions here and there, but by and large the busi- >ness lines are much more costly to the phone company. As far as pattern >of use, BBSs are much closer to business use than to residential use. My USENET feed operates ONLY during the night-rate period(11pm-7am); the primary reason I do this is co$t; I cannot afford to get an extra line just for the modem. It does not seem right to me that I should pay daytime rates so I can use my modem at night. My impression is that "business use" implies an intention to make a profit from a particular activity; non-profit organizations by their nature [in theory] have other reasons for their existence. I do not operate my USENET node to make a profit, it is one of my "windows on the world"; as such it is very valuable to me. *Let me offer an alternative. How about if all lines are charged based on the *amount of time the line is busy, i.e. you get billed during incoming and *outgoing calls, but not when the phone is on hook. How would you feel then? *Now residential rates will probably not be affected much, most business lines *would stay the same or drop slightly, and BBS lines would skyrocket. Also, *any lines used at home with a modem would probably go up. Is that really what *you want? That's the way you should be charged for the lines. I find it interesting that your "alternative" is already what I have implemented on my phone; it's called "measured-rate service"; I pay a connect-charge followed by a per-minute charge, modified by a multi- plication factor which takes into account the [roughly approximate] time of day. Fortunately, in my case, the connect is 4 cents followed by 1 cent per minute of connect time; if these amounts were multiplied by 2.4 (the business/residential differential mentioned above), I would have to get off the net altogether. *Of course you could let the BBSs be charged residential rates, but then *ALL residential rates would have to be raised. (The phone company is not *a government agency; it too has to make a profit. And it is not allowed *to make a very big one.) Gosh, I stopped believing this when I gave up Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny; pardon my cynicism but, in my observation, Ma Bell is non- monopolistic in name only. At least in [Northern] California, the Public Utilities Commission seems to be a rubber-stamp(Yes-man, if you prefer) to the utilities; it seems every month that some new rate-raise is "allowed" by them. Since they supply our power, water, and communications they seem to have us by "the short hairs"; as a captive audience, we can't just connect to a different electric utility for example. Sort of like "I don't like your rates, PG&E[power company], I'll connect my house to Sacramento Municipal Power; pay no mind to the fact that I'm 100 miles away, in the City of Livermore, and their are no wires strung. We cannot simply "vote with our feet" like we could with, say, a grocery store. And I do consider living in a cave, gathering wood for heat, an acceptable alternative. * ... *I could go on, but I've made my point. I trust I have made mine. *J. C. Halle -- Kchula-Rrit "In challenging a kzin, a scream of rage is sufficient. You scream and you leap."