On Fri, 22 Dec 2017 15:39:08 -0600, Charles Richmond
wrote:

[snip]

Back in the bad old days, two houses on different sides of the same
freeway... a phone call from one house to the other... was a
long-distant toll call !!! That is sort of analogous to speaking
dialects !!! :-)

I always thought that that nonsense could have been solved by
using a better zone system. A call to the same zone or only one zone
away would be local; the others would be long distance. Set the zones
to allow for cities and geography.

Would this have been workable?

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

On 23/12/17 13:08, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
On Fri, 22 Dec 2017 15:39:08 -0600, Charles Richmond
wrote:

[snip]

Back in the bad old days, two houses on different sides of the same
freeway... a phone call from one house to the other... was a
long-distant toll call !!! That is sort of analogous to speaking
dialects !!! :-)

I always thought that that nonsense could have been solved by
using a better zone system. A call to the same zone or only one zone
away would be local; the others would be long distance. Set the zones
to allow for cities and geography.

Would this have been workable?

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko


I don't often use 'snail mail' in Europe (we are still in Europe) but,
as I recall, for some time it has been possible to send a letter within
the EU for the same cost as a local one. As I recall, when this was
introduced, the rationale was that the bulk of the infra structure was
in place in each country and if, for example, I paid more to post to
Germany (I'm in the UK) the UK didn't 'hand over' any of the extra I
paid to any Post Office 'on route'- in the end it all just 'balanced out'.

Logically, the same must apply for telephone calls. Obviously a 'long
distance call' uses resources but, in the round, things balance out.
There will be exceptions- areas which have low numbers of travellers
etc. but, for most cases, surely the logic applies.

A mobile call in the UK costs the same if the two 'ends' are 50m apart
or 300miles. Why not the same for landline calls?

Gene Wirchenko wrote:
On Fri, 22 Dec 2017 15:39:08 -0600, Charles Richmond
wrote:

[snip]

Back in the bad old days, two houses on different sides of the same
freeway... a phone call from one house to the other... was a
long-distant toll call !!! That is sort of analogous to speaking
dialects !!! :-)

I always thought that that nonsense could have been solved by
using a better zone system. A call to the same zone or only one zone
away would be local; the others would be long distance. Set the zones
to allow for cities and geography.

Would this have been workable?

Do many people still pay long-distance charges? For many years we've had
plans with "free" nationwide calling. For a while when kids were in school
out of state we had a WATS line so they could fall us free. I cancelled it
later because I was getting too many calls from Puerto Rico where the
callers couldn' speak English.


--
Pete

On 23/12/2017 14:47, Peter Flass wrote:
Gene Wirchenko wrote:
On Fri, 22 Dec 2017 15:39:08 -0600, Charles Richmond
wrote:

[snip]

Back in the bad old days, two houses on different sides of the same
freeway... a phone call from one house to the other... was a
long-distant toll call !!! That is sort of analogous to speaking
dialects !!! :-)

I always thought that that nonsense could have been solved by
using a better zone system. A call to the same zone or only one zone
away would be local; the others would be long distance. Set the zones
to allow for cities and geography.

Would this have been workable?

Do many people still pay long-distance charges? For many years we've had
plans with "free" nationwide calling. For a while when kids were in school
out of state we had a WATS line so they could fall us free. I cancelled it
later because I was getting too many calls from Puerto Rico where the
callers couldn' speak English.



In the UK there are various deals which include calls on landlines and
mobiles but there are local and long distance changes if you don't make
use of them, at least on landlines. The deals don't (generally) cover
international calls. 'Roaming' is now included on mobiles, at least in
the EU, although many companies off packages which include other
countries. The exact rules etc vary from company to company.

Gene Wirchenko wrote on 12/23/2017 8:08 AM:
On Fri, 22 Dec 2017 15:39:08 -0600, Charles Richmond
wrote:

[snip]

Back in the bad old days, two houses on different sides of the same
freeway... a phone call from one house to the other... was a
long-distant toll call !!! That is sort of analogous to speaking
dialects !!! :-)

I always thought that that nonsense could have been solved by
using a better zone system. A call to the same zone or only one zone
away would be local; the others would be long distance. Set the zones
to allow for cities and geography.

Would this have been workable?

The phone company has no incentive to make this work better for users.
Their profits are regulated and they have no competition. I have a place in
a very rural area and when I first bought it computers used dial up. I got
very lucky and there was a local exchange that was not quite as local as the
others so I could reach a provider. Otherwise it would have been a non-long
distance toll call. For many others on the other side of the lake it was a
toll call. It's still that way some 30 years later. TPC has no incentive
to increase the non-toll region even though it costs them nothing in
equipment which was upgraded decades ago. They just have to change their
billing.

--

Rick C

Viewed the eclipse at Wintercrest Farms,
on the centerline of totality since 1998

In article , says...

Gene Wirchenko wrote on 12/23/2017 8:08 AM:
On Fri, 22 Dec 2017 15:39:08 -0600, Charles Richmond
wrote:

[snip]



The phone company has no incentive to make this work better for users.
Their profits are regulated and they have no competition. I have a place in
a very rural area and when I first bought it computers used dial up. I got
very lucky and there was a local exchange that was not quite as local as the
others so I could reach a provider. Otherwise it would have been a non-long
distance toll call. For many others on the other side of the lake it was a
toll call. It's still that way some 30 years later. TPC has no incentive
to increase the non-toll region even though it costs them nothing in
equipment which was upgraded decades ago. They just have to change their
billing.

The phone company better get some incentive. They are probably loosing
lots due to the cell phones and now to the internet phones. Neither of
them seem to charge extra for what is usually a long distance call.
The phone bill was about $ 20 but taxes and LD connect and other fees
made it around $ 40 per month. If you add caller ID and a few other
things , it will cost even more. Most of that is 'free' with the $ 30
internet phone I am now using.

Ralph Mowery wrote on 12/23/2017 3:06 PM:
In article , says...

Gene Wirchenko wrote on 12/23/2017 8:08 AM:
On Fri, 22 Dec 2017 15:39:08 -0600, Charles Richmond
wrote:

[snip]



The phone company has no incentive to make this work better for users.
Their profits are regulated and they have no competition. I have a place in
a very rural area and when I first bought it computers used dial up. I got
very lucky and there was a local exchange that was not quite as local as the
others so I could reach a provider. Otherwise it would have been a non-long
distance toll call. For many others on the other side of the lake it was a
toll call. It's still that way some 30 years later. TPC has no incentive
to increase the non-toll region even though it costs them nothing in
equipment which was upgraded decades ago. They just have to change their
billing.

The phone company better get some incentive. They are probably loosing
lots due to the cell phones and now to the internet phones. Neither of
them seem to charge extra for what is usually a long distance call.
The phone bill was about $ 20 but taxes and LD connect and other fees
made it around $ 40 per month. If you add caller ID and a few other
things , it will cost even more. Most of that is 'free' with the $ 30
internet phone I am now using.

You seem to fail to understand how "the phone company" operates. They have
capital investment. A regulatory board allows them a certain profit based
on that capital investment. If they make too little profit they can request
rate changes of the regulatory board. TPC doesn't lose money.

--

Rick C

Viewed the eclipse at Wintercrest Farms,
on the centerline of totality since 1998

In article , rickman wrote:
You seem to fail to understand how "the phone company" operates. They have
capital investment. A regulatory board allows them a certain profit based
on that capital investment. If they make too little profit they can request
rate changes of the regulatory board. TPC doesn't lose money.

That was called rate of return regulation. In the US, only little
rural telcos still do that. Big phone companies have negotiated price
caps instead, which give them a new incentive to invest as little as
possible in the regulated network.

For the most part, mobile phone rates aren't regulated at all.

--
Regards,
John Levine, , Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly

John Levine wrote on 12/23/2017 11:15 PM:
In article , rickman wrote:
You seem to fail to understand how "the phone company" operates. They have
capital investment. A regulatory board allows them a certain profit based
on that capital investment. If they make too little profit they can request
rate changes of the regulatory board. TPC doesn't lose money.

That was called rate of return regulation. In the US, only little
rural telcos still do that. Big phone companies have negotiated price
caps instead, which give them a new incentive to invest as little as
possible in the regulated network.

For the most part, mobile phone rates aren't regulated at all.

You are confused. The cell phone companies are in a different business.
Verizon may own a public telephone company, but most of the US has public
phone companies owned by someone else. The phone companies providing
landline phone service are still regulated entities regardless of who owns
what.

--

Rick C

Viewed the eclipse at Wintercrest Farms,
on the centerline of totality since 1998

That was called rate of return regulation. In the US, only little
rural telcos still do that. Big phone companies have negotiated price
caps instead, which give them a new incentive to invest as little as
possible in the regulated network.

For the most part, mobile phone rates aren't regulated at all.

You are confused. The cell phone companies are in a different business.
Verizon may own a public telephone company, but most of the US has public
phone companies owned by someone else. The phone companies providing
landline phone service are still regulated entities regardless of who owns
what.

Yes, they're regulated, but most of them are under price caps, not
rate of return. So long as they don't exceed the price caps, the
regulators don't care what their capital investment or profit is.

--
Regards,
John Levine, , Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly