Grex Coop10 Conference

Item 86: The Telephone Company Item

Entered by valerie on Sun Feb 22 04:02:28 1998:

valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Valerie Mates valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Val
valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Valerie Mates valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Val
valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Valerie Mates valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Val
valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Valerie Mates valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Val
valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Valerie Mates valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Val
valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Valerie Mates valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Val
valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Valerie Mates valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Val
valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Valerie Mates valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Val
valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Valerie Mates valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Val
valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Valerie Mates valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Val
valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Valerie Mates valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Val
valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Valerie Mates valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Val
valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Valerie Mates valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Val
valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Valerie Mates valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Val
valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Valerie Mates valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Val
valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Valerie Mates valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Val
valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Valerie Mates valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Val
valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Valerie Mates valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Val
valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Valerie Mates valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Val
valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Valerie Mates valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Val
valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Valerie Mates valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Val
valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Valerie Mates valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Val
valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Valerie Mates valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Val
valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Valerie Mates valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Val
valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Valerie Mates valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Val
valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Valerie Mates valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Val
valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Valerie Mates valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Val
valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Valerie Mates valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Val
valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Valerie Mates valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Val
valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Valerie Mates valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Val
valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Valerie Mates valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Val
valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Valerie Mates valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Val
valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Valerie Mates valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Val
valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Valerie Mates valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004 Val
valerie Jan  8 04:53:09 2004
6 responses total.

#1 of 6 by janc on Sun Feb 22 04:18:08 1998:

So if you don't make any long distance calls, you either have to pay $6 a year
per line to the phone company for the priveledge of not having a long distance
carrier, or you have to pay $9.60 a year to your long distache carrier so they
can pay the same value to your local phone company.  Seems either way you get
nothing for something.


#2 of 6 by scg on Sun Feb 22 04:27:09 1998:

Business and residential phone service have different rate structures and
different regulatory tarriffs.  That this was n a residential bill does not
mean that it applies to business lines as well  It's worth researching, but
I don't know what we'll find out.

I would guess that in the case of business accounts, if this specific charge
is what the phone companies are worried about, they wouldn't worry about it
too much.  Plenty of people don't make many long distance calls from home.
Businesses do.  On the other hand, if it's an excuse to raise rates, the phone
companies may ake it, or may worry that their competitors won't.


#3 of 6 by other on Sun Feb 22 18:17:12 1998:

i suspect that it may well be impossible in this market to get a written
statement of rate (specifically without a "subject to change without notice"
clause) from any telephone service provider local *or* long distance.

i think the chaotic nature of our telecommunications system is reflective of
a totally inadequate regulatory structure, but that's another item in another
conference.  


#4 of 6 by valerie on Tue Feb 24 07:13:49 1998:

This response has been erased.



#5 of 6 by keesan on Thu Feb 26 02:18:12 1998:

Telco (Dial and Save) does not appear to be charging me anything per month
on the new long-distance service that I put in at my house under construction
in order to avoid a 59 cents/month charge.  Not only that, as a first time
long distance service it was free, and Telco sent me a check for $4.90, so
I am $4.90 ahead.  I am happy with Telco at my other two numbers.
I mean there was not the usual $4.90 charge to switch services, not that the
long-distance service is free, it is 10 cents/minute (15 cents 9-5 weekdays,
unless you pay $3/month).  (Is it okay to put info like that here?)


#6 of 6 by scg on Thu Feb 26 06:53:45 1998:

I suppose it's ok to put it here, but if that's residential service rather
than business service, it's not particularly relevant.

Residential and business service are priced quite differently.  At this point,
although it sounds like that's changing, almost nobody is charging a monthly
service charge or a minimum bill amount on residential service.  As long as
there are major companies that aren't, it would be very hard for a company
to compete if it were charging that.  In contrast, on business lines, a $5
or $10 minimum would not be a competitive disadvantage, becuase most
businesses need to make at least that much in long distance calls every month
anyway.


There are no more items selected.

You have several choices: