DesdinovaPremium
join:2003-01-26
Gaithersburg, MD | reply to Linklist
Re: $1500? "paying for dial tones, surcharges, fees, taxes and phone books"
Hmmm. How much for a dial tone? What does that involve? What surcharges and who's charging them? Is the phone company billing itself for these? Same questions for the "fees". What fees? To whom? For how much? Same for the taxes. What taxes? How much? State? Federal? Local? One phone book a year is probably pretty inexpensive, even if they occasionally get stolen (which I suspect is not the case).
Based on the long history of fraud and abusive billing practices on the part of the telco industry, I confess to being overly suspicious of any claim that they make. $1469 is a pretty specific amount which suggests that someone has done the math on a per cost basis. It seems to me that they'd have a bit more credibility for their case if they'd release the actual numbers and sources. But as it stands right now, in my eyes, their vagueness undermines their claim.
I won't even get into how we have only their word that it was only $3.35 in revenue. Once again, considering their deceptive history, it could be earning a lot more than that and they're misreporting the numbers to support their position (but there's no direct evidence for that and it's only speculation). |
|
 LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | said by Desdinova: Once again, considering their deceptive history, it could be earning a lot more than that and they're misreporting the numbers to support their position (but there's no direct evidence for that and it's only speculation).
And what makes you think K & M Telephone Company has a history of being deceptive? This isn't Verizon or AT&T here. |
|
openbox9Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2 | reply to Desdinova
said by Desdinova:I won't even get into how we have only their word that it was only $3.35 in revenue. You can always ask K&M to look at their audited books if you'd like. |
|
| reply to Linklist
said by Linklist:said by Desdinova: Once again, considering their deceptive history, it could be earning a lot more than that and they're misreporting the numbers to support their position (but there's no direct evidence for that and it's only speculation).
And what makes you think K & M Telephone Company has a history of being deceptive? This isn't Verizon or AT&T here. Now, now. Karl has an axe to grind and your messing it up. He linked his own op-ed as his supporting article to show his statement as fact. |
|
BiggA
join:2005-11-23
EARTH | LOL. That and who cares? Considering people made 13 phone calls all year, I don't think anyone cares about it. |
|
DesdinovaPremium
join:2003-01-26
Gaithersburg, MD | reply to Linklist
Re: $1500? Sorry, I should have been clearer. I was referring to the overall perceptions of the telco industry (in what I perceive to be most folks' opinion) and not K & M Telephone Company specifically. I have no specific reason to accuse them; it's simply a kneejerk reaction to all representatives of the telco industry. Kinda like how the majority of people get nervous when they see a cop in their rear view mirror; you'll go into a defensive mode (check speed, maybe do a quick mental inventory of how they've been driving over the past few miles to think if they might have done anything to attract their attention).
But I still think their position would be more sympathetic if they could have tossed in those numbers when they mentioned the categories of cost. |
|
|
|
DesdinovaPremium
join:2003-01-26
Gaithersburg, MD | reply to openbox9
True. But that defeats the fun of being paranoid and seeing conspiracies everywhere.  |
|
