Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 22:35:14 CST
From: Jim Graham <jim@n5ial.chi.il.us>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Our Moderator and Monopolies
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 649, Message 6 of 8

Our Moderator notes:

> [Moderator's Note: Let's face it, Lauren: Between Judge Harold Greene
> who disgraced his robe and courtroom to wreck the public telephone
> network in the USA; the ripoff companies who moved in to feed on the
> remains of AT&T after he got through dismembering them

> It is to the credit of the old Bell System and a century of
> fine-tuning that the network has held together as well as it has over
> the past ten years since Greene's assault.

OK, Pat, here's the deal: we go back to a monopoly. We "advance" to
the point where, as was once the case, we had to accept a "take it or
leave it" response, since we had no other choice in the matter. As for
pricing, well, you pay the only price you get, and if that's too high,
too bad. If the responses you get when you ask for any type of
customer service are along the lines of "we will get there when we
are d*mned well ready, and you will gladly wait until then" well,
that is clearly an improvement, right?

***WRONG***

Sorry, but I simply can't support your attitude at all. Competition
is a GOOD thing, not a bad thing. As others have pointed out, if a
company has no competition, what have they got to lose? They can
charge any price, just about, and if people need that service, well,
they don't have a choice, do they?

On the other hand, if there is competition, if one company takes the
attitude that you take what they offer, and that's all you get, and
another company comes along and makes you a better deal (btw, I *DO*
include customer service, problem resolution, etc., in this), hey,
the company with the take it or leave it attitude loses. Too bad,
they should have adjusted their attitude. That's *THEIR* problem,
not mine.

I, personally, anxiously await the day when there is competition for
local dial tone. Yes, there are potential problems here. Yes, these do
have to be resolved first. But once that's said and done, think about
it ... instead of the take it or leave it attitude that you get today,
you can instead look at the alternatives and vote with your wallet.

I also (though not as seriously, since, let's face it, TV doesn't have
much to offer anyway) await the day when there is competition for
cable TV too. Prices right now are sky-high. Reason? Simple: you have
no choice if you want the service (OK, unless you can put up a
satellite dish).

Competition is a good thing. It forces companies to stay on their
toes, keep the level of service high, and the prices competitive.  If
one company can't/won't do that, and another can, so be it.  And if,
after all is said and done, the Bell companies still provide the best
service/price, hey, good for them!  But if they don't, I personally
would like to have the option of going with someone who can.

The funny thing is, what you're complaining about (quality of POTS),
is really a function of that monopoly, and not the breakup of long
distance services. After all, if the general subscriber wants dial
tone, they don't have much choice, do they?

Now, to give a perspective on this: I've avoided AT&T service for some
time, due to the "oh, you have a problem? Too bad. Three months at
least till we can bother to do something about it" attitude that I
used to see. Well, things *HAVE* changed. AT&T has (at least, in some
departments) gotten rid of this attitude, and have actually gotten me
to switch back. The reason is simple: they have a service that I
need, that the other companies don't offer: AT&T EasyReach service.

My attitudes are not anti-AT&T, not anti-Bell, but rather, they are
anti-monopoly, pro-competition.

Competition is a good thing. The results can be confusing, and can
force the consumer to do a little more research in order to get the
best deal, but hey, better that than to be *FORCED* to accept the
*ONLY* deal, take it or leave it.

As another example ... there is a computer company whose name consists
of three letters (in no particular order, those letters are I, B, and
M). This computer company took the attitude (and yes, I even got this
statement *DIRECTLY* from a SE from that company) that anytime they
did anything in the computer world, even if it went against the way
the rest of the world did things, that *THEY* were right, and the rest
of the world was wrong ... and who the h*ll did I think I was
questioning their perfection... oddly enough, this same company is
now seeing serious competition from other companies, and is gradually
being forced to either change their attitudes and show more respect
(ok, show respect, period) for their customers, or lose business to
those companies that will. Yep, sounds like a bad thing to me ... NOT!

OK, the song on the radio right now just said something about putting
out the flame ... guess I'd better do that about now.  :-)

Our Moderator clearly doesn't live in the same world as many of us do.
I suppose in a perfect world (the kind that only lasts until you wake
up), all of the anti-competition preaching might work. But that has
not been supported by *ANYTHING* that I've ever seen while awake.


Later,

jim

INTERNET:  jim@n5ial.chi.il.us  |  grahj@gagme.chi.il.us  |  j.graham@ieee.org
UUCP:  gagme!n5ial!jim@clout.chi.il.us
AMATEUR RADIO: n5ial@n9hsi (Chicago.IL.US.Earth)     73s, de n5ial/9


[Moderator's Note: You are correct. I live in a different world than
many of the readers here. I live in a dirty, very impoverished, crime-
ridden and rapidly dying inner city. Much of my life has been spent
drawing welfare from large corporations. And let's face it: we all are
receiving welfare. Some of us get it from the government or social
agencies; others of us get it from large corporations or institutions
and bureaucracies where we show up and spend much time idling every
day. I don't bite the hand that feeds me and sees to it our little one
gets new shoes when he needs them, etc. Big business has paid my rent,
clothed and fed me and my cats for many years. I've no complaints
about it at all. I have NOTHING against competition. But I have
NOTHING against legal, lawfully maintained monopolies either. I
greatly admire the men who started the big companies in the early
years of this century and only wish I were half as smart and had the
business acumen of a Rockefeller, a Morgan or a Ted Vail.  PAT]