home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!stanford.edu!rutgers!micro-heart-of-gold.mit.edu!xn.ll.mit.edu!olsen
- From: olsen@xn.ll.mit.edu
- Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
- Subject: Re: Modem tax back
- Message-ID: <1992Jul27.211150.9320@xn.ll.mit.edu>
- Date: 27 Jul 92 21:11:50 GMT
- References: <1992Jul23.055119.24660@ssc.wa.com> <1992Jul23.141319.7896@xn.ll.mit.edu> <2527@uswnvg.uswnvg.com>
- Organization: MIT Lincoln Laboratory, Lexington, MA
- Lines: 33
-
-
- scott@nv10.uswnvg.com (Scott Eckelman) writes:
-
- >But why should a customer who only uses the phone 10 minutes a day
- >subsidize other customers who are using their modem 2 hours a night?
-
- Question: If I use my modem two hours a night, how much does it cost
- the phone company?
-
- Answer: Nothing. Zero. Zip. Zilch. Nada. A big, fat goose egg.
-
- This is because off-peak calling has no impact on the phone company's
- requirement for switching equipment. Their costs are exactly the same
- whether I make the nightly two-hour modem call or not.
-
- In fact, if the ten-minute caller makes his calls during the peak
- usage times, his calls _do_ increase the telco's expenses, and it's
- the _modem_ caller who's subsidizing the _voice_ caller!
-
- >The answer, in my opinion, is to do away with flat-rate pricing, and
- >go to a strictly usage-based one.
-
- The real reason that some local telephone companies are pushing
- measured service is that measured service makes it much easier to
- overcharge the callers (like our hypothetical modem caller), and
- generate monopoly profits. These profits can then be siphoned off to
- the telco's unregulated subsidiaries, fooling the regulators and
- leaving the public holding the bag.
-
- Unfortunately, the FCC has already imposed measured-only service for
- the local portion of long-distance voice calls. The 'modem tax' seeks
- to extend this to modem callers. It's wrong for voice, and it's wrong
- for modems too.
-