how-to block ads
|
John T
@verizon.net
| reply to sporkme
Re: We're still waiting......
Huh?
The fees were set up in order to subsidize rural service, because it costs more to serve a rural customer in a low-density area than one in a high density area. They've always been higher payments for the smaller companies in rural areas than for the big companies. They've always been so that the smaller companies could "gouge" the bigger ones, not the other way around.
Your comment makes no sense. There is no "delicious irony." There's simply that some of the rural companies hit on the idea that, thanks to conference calling and VoIP over a fiber network, they could provide services to lots of people located outside of their rural area while still getting these large fees.
It's a difficult problem, but so far the FCC seems to be getting it right. Allowing the big companies to block the network is clearly wrong, but at the same time these fees should be reexamined if the rural providers are able to use them in totally unintended manners that have nothing to do with bringing phone service to rural and poorer areas. | |
calvoiper
join:2003-03-31
Belvedere Tiburon, CA
| There is in fact delicious irony here because SBC and VZ, and their component predecessors, all lobbied hard for high and unrestricted access charges when they were just ILECs sticking it to the LD carriers.
Now, having used those high access charges to weaken ATT and MCI to the point where they could purchase them, SBC (under its acquired ATT name) and VZ ARE the LD carriers, and somebody else is sticking it to them. That is the irony of which sporkme speaks....
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies! | |
|
