battleop
join:2005-09-28
00000
| reply to TKJunkMail
Re: No blocking; but no money either; result:services die
So let me get this right. If more calls flow from the Small Telco to the Big Telco the small telco pays for these calls.
Now if the more calls flow from the Big Telco to the Small Telco the big Telcos Bitch that it's not far and then block the calls.
Three words.
Pot, Kettle, Black. |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
| said by battleop  :So let me get this right. If more calls flow from the Small Telco to the Big Telco the small telco pays for these calls. Now if the more calls flow from the Big Telco to the Small Telco the big Telcos Bitch that it's not far and then block the calls. Three words. Pot, Kettle, Black. Three more relevant words: The Golden Rule
Those with the gold rule. Big telco doesn't pay small telco. Small telco goes broke trying to get money from big telco in court. And big telco gets rules changed at FCC. Small telco can't win.
--
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page |
|
powerhog
Stinkin' up the joint
Premium
join:2000-12-14
Owasso, OK
·AtlasOK
| This is where the so-called "socialist" plan requiring universal coverage comes into play. The small telco can not just go out of business. Someone HAS to provide service to the region and the big telcos don't want to do that (or they would have already bought small telco).
So, which is cheaper?
1) pay small telco the 100% legal connect/termination fees
2) provide telephony service to entire small telco territory
The answer is likely #1 and I think you'll see the big ILECs pay the small ILECs the fees- right up until the time the law is changed to favor the big telcos. |
|
John T
@verizon.net
| reply to TKJunkMail
Weird, because these rules have been around since the 1930s subsidizing poor and rural areas and their poor and rural telcos. How exactly is your comment true?
I don't have a strong problem with subsidizing phone service for the poor and rural. The areas need service, and if it takes a subsidy for Universal Service, then there are only so many ways to do it. I do have a problem with small telcos using this to subsidize the phone calls of people not in their poor and rural area, people who were never intended to get the subsidy, things that have nothing to do with providing Universal Service.
This isn't just about big telco versus small. It's also about well-informed consumers, largely wealthier than average (but also including tech-savvy but poor students), grabbing parts of a subsidy intended for the poor, rural, and under-connected. Using subsidies designed to achieve Universal Service and subsidizing the middle-class who are already connected is wrong, yes? |
|
powerhog
Stinkin' up the joint
Premium
join:2000-12-14
Owasso, OK
·AtlasOK
| The post(s) to which I replied said that the small telco would "go out of business" waiting for their payments from the large telcos.
I was pointing out that the small telco can not go out of business because of the universal service requirements by the government (therefore the USF). Many here at DSLR consider the universal service program and fees to be a socialist program in need of abolishment. |
|
