Did Verizon Scam Pennsylvania? > Teletruth ROFLMAO

Teletruth ROFLMAO

Yeah gosh. This is a stumper.

On one hand I have the founder of Teletruth, who has 20 years experience working with the Bells....or some random guy on a message board who probably works for Verizon second level support....

I'll really have to think on this.

Oh sorry, I thought you would investigate the entire article before flaming me.
Simple minds, simple answers, yes?

quote:

---

However, Mark Cooper, a telecom expert at the Consumer Federation of America, said he doesn't believe these accounting issues have inflated the prices competitors pay for access to Bell networks. Those are determined by state regulators who "have always been more rigorous" at examining Bells' claims, he said.

---

Well one...the article is about the Pennsylvania complaint filed today, not the 5 billion in mystery infrastructure charges, though it does link to the same San Francisco article you just used to make your point....which was what exactly? Mark Cooper is right and Teletruth is wrong based on your personal experience as...err....who exactly?

If I post this quote from the same article:

quote:

---

In fact, Brian Moir, a Washington attorney who represents large users of business telecom services and reviewed the 1990s FCC audits, said he believes the Bells misrepresented far more than $5 billion, but the audits were halted before they could look as deeply as planned.

---

said by Minister:

---

You do work for Verizon...don't you?

---

reply to Voyager2K2
Another Telco shill!

Actually, this is common practice for the Bells. Go to regulators, make promises, get regulations eased or removed, or get rate increases granted, this results in big $$$$ profits, and then never deliver on the promises.

This is SOP for Telcos.
--
"When the day comes that anyone can bend our country’s laws and lawmakers to serve selfish, competitive ends, that day democratic government dies" -- Preston Tucker, 1948 (Yep, it's dead.)

reply to Voyager2K2
I'm beginning to wonder if the ILEC's don't deliberately send paid employees to this site to criticize posters and articles, dispute claims, and distribute propaganda. ('We have to sell it below cost' etc) It seems in 99% of cases the people who defend the actions of local ILEC's and Bells are affilated with, partners with, contractors of, or outright employees of the Bells.

Everyone else, why, they are the CUSTOMERS of said companies (Including the CLEC's), which explains why they have a different viewpoint...
--
"When the day comes that anyone can bend our country’s laws and lawmakers to serve selfish, competitive ends, that day democratic government dies" -- Preston Tucker, 1948 (Yep, it's dead.)

reply to Voyager2K2
Just to clear the air, Justin Beech had to contact me on behalf of Verizon back in 2000.
I posted some private VZ numbers for tech service (which I found posted somewhere else).
Justin would not remove the numbers from the board, but did say that if I didn't, Verizon would be contacting me.
I removed them. (they no longer are working BTW)

I am almost positive that Verizon would be in violation of FCC regs if they were to directly post as employees in regards to QOS of VZ or other CLECS.

I don't work for Verizon in any way shape or form, but I think they are one of the better companies to be working for.

I still stand by my "Most Moronic Replies to DSL Reports" club. Throughout the years here (I had another screen name in 1999-2001), whenever someone mentions something positive about a company or service, if another member disagreed, but had no good rebuttal, that was the knee-jerk response. Hence, the club was formed