telecom@eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) (11/04/90)
I recently became aquainted with a magazine specifically for the COCOT industry entitled "Payphone Exchange / 0+ Magazine". Published by Leo Douglas, Inc. this magazine is devoted to news and features about the private (non-telco-owned) payphone business and the alternate operator service bureaus. In my review of the October, 1990 issue, I found stories about: "The Equal Access Qaundry and the FCC" (article discusses why the owners of COCOTS should not have to provide 800/950/10xxx access for free) "Fraud and Security" (Line tapping can zap you) "Regulatory Comment: The LEC Coin Line Shutout" Other items included a Calendar, a roundtable discussion, and a feature story dealing with the difficulties encountered in trying to maintain the payphones in major transportation terminals. The 62-page October issue included numerous advertisements from vendors of COCOTS, operator service bureaus and related enterprises. Maybe they would add you to their mailing list (it seems to be free) if you write them, including your company name in your request. Payphone Exchange / 0 + Magazine Leo Douglas, Inc. 9607 Gayton Road, Suite 201 Richmond, VA 23233 The Reader Service Card & Subscription Request card in my sample issue asks for: Your name: Your company name: Address: Phone: Check one: Current subscriber. Please extend subscription _____ Passalong Reader. Please send subscription info ____ Your business description: Payohone Vender, Independent Telco, Financial/Legal, RBOC/BOC, OSP, Manufacturer, Long Distance Carrier, Government/Assoc, Interconnect, Public Tel. Co, Consultant, End User (specify), Other (specify) Are you buying or planning to purchase payphones or operator services? Software for same? When? How Many? What Type? You might find the magazine as interesting as I did. It will certainly bring you up to date on the growing COCOT industry. My thanks to Don Kimberlin for sending along the sample copy. Patrick Townson
oplinger@sol.crd.ge.com (B. S. Oplinger) (11/04/90)
Patrick, I know you are busy, but could you maybe summarize the "The Equal Access Qaundry and the FCC" (article discusses why the owners of COCOTS should not have to provide 800/950/10xxx access for free)? I think it might provide insight into why COCOTs don't do all the things required instead of just saying thinks like: they want to make money, they are greedy, etc. Just a suggestion. brian oplinger@crd.ge.com <#include standard.disclaimer> [Moderator's Note: Well in summary that article said COCOT owners resent not being paid for handling calls of that nature. They point out that (in the case of telco payphones) the originating telco does get money for handling 800/950/10xxx calls through intercompany settlements between telcos. COCOT owners feel they should get the couple cents on each call the local telco gets. Of course, COCOT owners are end-users -- not telcos -- albiet end users who resell their service. That makes the difference. The local telcos do *not* share that pittance they get for handling 800/950/10xxx traffic with their commission payphone agents; so why should they share it with the COCOT people? As Higdon pointed out, COCOT owners are bogus middlemen who are trying to resell what we always got direct from telco in the past. A lot of things get out of kilter when you insist on cutting up the pie in one more slice. PAT]