Re: [PEN-L:438] Re: The effects of telecom de-regulation

[Michael I. Lichter]

At 9:27 AM 9/14/95, jtreacy wrote:
>Treacy: It would seem that the problems mentioned below do not stem from
>de-regulation but from profit maximizing behavior in the wrong
>context.  In Ohio we are allowing competition for local service
>providers--Ameritech and Cincinnati Bell--- such as Time Warner
>Cable Company.  Under these conditions if you don't like your local
>service switch to another.

Local telephone service is supposed to become competitive out here
relatively soon, and there is talk about electric power also becoming
competitive in the near future.  I get the sense that competition among
utilities providers is being decided on a state by state basis.  Is that
correct?  In any case, it seems likely to me that while service in urban
areas will be enhanced or at least become cheaper, service in rural and
hard to reach areas where competition is uneconomical will become spottier
and more expensive, following the pattern of the airlines deregulation.
(Or am I just ignorant, and rural and hard to reach areas are already
getting spotty service and high prices?)

Michael

--
Michael Lichter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
UCLA Department of Sociology

[PEN-L:438] Re: The effects of telecom de-regulation

[jtreacy]

Treacy: It would seem that the problems mentioned below do not stem from 
de-regulation but from profit maximizing behavior in the wrong 
context.  In Ohio we are allowing competition for local service 
providers--Ameritech and Cincinnati Bell--- such as Time Warner 
Cable Company.  Under these conditions if you don't like your local 
service switch to another.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] COPYRIGHTED 
On Wed, 13 Sep 1995, D Shniad wrote:

> SERVICE SUFFERS AS RBOCS RETOOL FOR
> DEREGULATION
> 
>Carriers are cutting staffs and re-
> engineering service operations to maximize
> profits as they foresee de-regulation and the
> onset of local loop competition.  Network
> managers recommend that service subscribers
> watch for service problems and try to have
> them  addressed early.
>
>Regulatory commissions fault US West's
> service throughout the regional Bell
> Operating  Company's 14-state service area.
> US West must  now meet a newly set standard
> of service in  Arizona or face fines of up to
> $5,000 per  incident.  Two weeks ago the
> company was fined  $424,000 in Colorado for
> service quality  violations.  US West had
> downsized too much.   As it turned out, the
> company says, line  growth was 500,000 more
> than projected and bad  weather worsened the
> problem.  Other Bells,  including Nynex, have
> had troubles.  Nynex and  New York State last
> week agreed to a regulatory  scheme that
> requires New York Telephone Co. to  refund
> users' money should service standards not  be
> met.
>
>Analyst Robert Rosenberg says, "The phone
> companies are weakened by loss of morale and
> productivity of workers uncertain about their
> futures."
>
>The Iowa Telecommunications User Group
> received so many complaints last summer that
> it  demanded a second meeting -- after it had
> had  its annual meeting -- with US West.  The
> complaints included missing appointments for
> service and installation and new orders
> incorrectly provisioned.
> 
>--Network World
>   08/07/95
>