Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!bellcore!texbell!vector!telecom-gateway From: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Moderator Replies: MCI vrs. AT&T Plans Message-ID: Date: 3 May 89 05:42:03 GMT Sender: news@vector.Dallas.TX.US Lines: 54 Approved: telecom-request@vector.dallas.tx.us X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@vector.dallas.tx.us X-TELECOM-Digest: volume 9, issue 155, message 7 of 7 Michael Chin, in the previous message, questions my comments last weekend regarding the new MCI Long Distance plan for residence subscribers. He asks, 'why was this posted so early?' What is 'too early' about an announcement in a press release sent out on Thursday, April 27, with a request that it be distributed over the weekend of April 28-30 for a program which takes effect on May 1? I think the timing was about right. If Mr. Chin's question is why did *I* announce it 'so early' without waiting for responses from AT&T/Sprint, I would have to ask a counter question of my own to him: Why would either of those organizations bother replying if the media did not first announce this new program? Is Mr. Chin suggesting that the [Wall Street Journal], the [New York Times], and the [Chicago Tribune] -- to just name three papers I read each day -- should print the press release but [TELECOM Digest] should not have printed it? If he thinks I should not print news releases sent to me by phone companies and others, then someone should tell his employer to not send me so much stuff! Apparently both MCI Communications Corp. and his employer think I should talk about them as often as they can convince me to do so, if the volume of printed press releases, etc is of any significance. Not to worry, Mr. Chin! I'm sure AT&T will have something for me on the subject before long! They always do..... Then Mr. Chin says if I am going to mention the AT&T Reach Out Plans, I should do so accurately and completely. Aside from the fact that there are nearly a hundred such 'plans', i.e. one for each state for intrastate purposes; one for each state for interstate purposes, with many being in common to the others, the purpose of the original message was not so much to re-hash AT&T's long distance calling plan as it was to announce a new one and highlight what I believed was the major difference in the two; namely the additional evening time available. Mr. Chin points out that by paying extra to AT&T, one can get an additional fifteen percent discount on evening calls. This is true, however MCI's new plan charges *nothing extra* for the evening hours, and gives the overnight rate -- not just 'an additional fifteen percent discount', but with long distance calls now just costing pennies per minute anyway, this is not really a major point. Likewise, by paying extra to AT&T, one gets a five percent discount on daytime calls, meaning that you pay extra to AT&T to get daytime rates roughly equal to what MCI charges during the day for nothing extra. Even that does not hold true everywhere however! Here in Illinois, our 'Reach Out Illinois' Plan includes something called 'interstate transparency', which for 85 cents per month extra technically allows interstate calling on the intrastate plan. If you have this, as I do, you *cannot* also have the five percent daytime discount at present, because of technical difficulties in billing intrastate/interstate calls and giving the five percent discount which they are not permitted to do on intrastate (within Illinois at least) calls. AT&T also allows you to pay $2 extra per month on Reach Out America and have your Calling Card/Call Me card calls billed at Reach Out rate