Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request From: John Higdon Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: GTE vs. Pac*Bell Message-ID: <2397@accuvax.nwu.edu> Date: 25 Dec 89 07:19:20 GMT Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Lines: 23 Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 9, Issue 592, message 4 of 8 In article <2362@accuvax.nwu.edu> jmi@devsim.mdcbbs.com, , (JM Ivler) writes: >X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 9, Issue 588, message 4 of 9 >Correction. As a resident of that area, I pay my bills to Pactel *not* >GTE. I have refused to live in GTE service areas since I got out here >(over 11 years ago). Westminster may have lots of problems (like half >the store signs are *not* in english), but phone service is not one of >them. Sorry, I could have sworn that Westminster was GTE. Not being a resident of southern California, my information comes from a variety of sources. This particular association of GTE with an area came from some conversations a couple of years ago with people concerning 976. As a result of these conversations I got the impression that should GTE ever provide generally available (no pun intended) 976 service in 714 that the call would be billed as a call to Westminster (as 213 is billed as Los Angeles, 415--San Francisco, 619--San Diego, etc. The natural assumption was that Westminster would be a GTE area. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !