Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!netsys!vector!telecom-gateway From: decvax!decwrl!apple!zygot!john@ucbvax.berkeley.edu (John Higdon) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Touch-tone charges going away? Message-ID: Date: 9 Jun 89 18:52:32 GMT Sender: news@vector.Dallas.TX.US Organization: ATI Wares Team Lines: 43 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 192, message 7 of 9 In article , langz@asylum.sf.ca.us (Lang Zerner) writes: > He also said that "PacBell is lobbying (some regulating body (the PUC?)) to > kill the extra charge for touch-tone". > PacBell is a business. It wouldn't try to kill the touch-tone charge unless > (a) they believe that the cost of supporting pulse dialing will soon exceed > the revenue of touch-tone charges, or (b) they have been overcome by an > irrational urge to charge for a service proportionally to its cost. The answer is (c), it is part of a package of general deregulation that Pac*Bell is trying to get past the PUC and getting flack on all sides for doing so. Pac*Bell would like to be able to set its pricing in the competitive business market without the giant hand of the PUC getting in the way. As part of the inducement, they have promised a freeze in residential rates through 1991 (or 92, I can't remember and someone threw out the newspaper), elimination of the touch-tone charge and other goodies. The opposition, in the persona of other telecom services and consumer groups are vehemantly opposed. The other service providers are afraid that Pac*Bell will have great unfair advantage in a non-regulated environment with its control of the local wire plant. Consumer groups feel that residential service should come down, not be frozen at the current level. IMHO, the business may have a point, but it's hard to get behind the consumer groups. They are steadfastly against the plant upgrading that Pac*Bell is proposing, saying that it is too costly and that rate payers shouldn't be stuck with it. Most of the consumer advocates that I have spoken with, however, seem to feel that adequate telephone service consists of a black rotary-dial wall phone in the kitchen and the fact that there is a hell of a lot of electro-mechanical equipment that needs replacing is of no concern to them. I haven't made up my mind about their proposal, yet. On the one hand, it seems logical and reasonable. And I certainly wouldn't mind some plant upgrading. On the other, I tend to distrust any proposal by the utility because I know whose interests they are really trying to serve. -- John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.uucp | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !