Xref: utzoo comp.misc:3937 alt.bbs:161
Path: utzoo!hoptoad!pacbell!ames!husc6!mit-eddie!killer!elg
From: elg@killer.DALLAS.TX.US (Eric Green)
Newsgroups: comp.misc,alt.bbs
Subject: Re: Houston bbs's vs SW Bell - more
Message-ID: <5919@killer.DALLAS.TX.US>
Date: 28 Oct 88 00:38:53 GMT
References: <3940@homxc.UUCP>
Distribution: usa
Organization: The Unix(R) Connection, Dallas, Texas
Lines: 55

in article <3940@homxc.UUCP>, halle@homxc.UUCP (J.HALLE) says:
> In article <1933@uokmax.UUCP>, russ@uokmax.UUCP (Russ "Random" Smith) writes:
>> ->     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 

> 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?  

Short answer: because they can.

Long answer: there is intense grass-roots pressure for low-cost
residential service. Such service is excused after the fact as a
"life-line" service. Low-cost residential service is subsidised by
commercial rates and by a hidden charge on each long distance call
that you make. 

> 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

Wrong. It costs the same amount of money to string a telephone line
into a business, that it does to string that same phone line into a
home. That is, the overhead for each telephone line is fixed
regardless of usage.

The overhead that DOES cost based upon usage is the cost of the
switches. The phone company does have to put in some excess capacity
to handle the extra phone calls that businesses make during the day.
But at night, when BBS's flourish, this extra capacity is mostly
unused.  Paying for something that's currently unused seems sort of,
uhm, ridiculous, to me. It's as if the city wanted to charge a fee to
panhandlers getting aluminum cans and bottles out of the ditches...


> 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?

This has happened. It's been the rule in Chicago for a couple of years
now. Consumer groups have been outraged by the results. The phone
company promised that the average phone bill would drop. Instead, it
has risen tremendously. It seems that the average person uses the
phone much more than most thought.

Didn't we just get finished with this issue when dealing with access
fees for online services?

--
Eric Lee Green    ..!{ames,decwrl,mit-eddie,osu-cis}!killer!elg
          Snail Mail P.O. Box 92191 Lafayette, LA 70509              
It's understandable that Mike Dukakis thinks he can walk on water.
He's used to walking on Boston harbor.