jdominey@bsga05.attmail.com (09/25/90)
In V10#670, Steve Elias <eli@pws.bull.com> relays a message from a
friend who works for Sprint.
----------
>I don't know what the deal is about ATT (sic) having a different 800
># for intrastate but I think it goes back to the days of band 5 wats
>type stuff.
It does indeed go back to pre-divestiture days. Apparently our
original tariffs didn't provide for the same 800 number covering in
and out-of-state, but we started fixing that several years ago with an
arrangement called Single Number Service. You still had to have
different lines for each service. Later, when we introduced our
Readyline service (800-on-a-POTS-line), we got the state Public
Utility Commissions to allow intra-state service along with it. This
year we've introduced MasterLine, which does the same thing with
dedicated lines. There are still some companies using the older
services, with separate 800 numbers.
And yes, most of our competitors had similar services available well
before AT&T did.
>Again, the ATT guy was right [I was wrong -- eli]; It's not that ATT is
>giving switching stuff away, it's giving away PBX and telephone equipment and
>services.
>1) Most important: ATT can combine long distance and equipment.
>NOBODY ELSE CAN to that extent because nobody else owned a company
>like Western Electric. For large customers looking for all in one
>vendors (ie: tariff 12) this is where it makes a huge difference and
>where the free "pops" in the equipment arena hurts (this is illegal by
>the way, but is under the table).
No wonder Mr. Elias' friend prefers to remain anonymous. This is an
*extremely* serious accusation, and if the FCC believes it, AT&T will
get slam-dunked quickly. Some people would probably go to jail.
I work in the low end of the business market, where T1's are rare, and
Tariff 12 is unimaginable. At this level, network services and
equipment have separate salesforces. We can and do coordinate our
sales efforts, but there is no way for us to create a "package deal"
of any kind. The equipment folks have some discretion in their
pricing, but it's independent of what we network people do. And our
network prices are all in the tariffs - we can't write new ones for
every $50,000/year customer.
I'm not saying that the alleged bundling can't possibly occur. There
are unscrupulous people in any large organization, AT&T included. But
it is against the law, and it is against company policy, and I have
honestly never heard even a rumour of such an arragement.
>Also, the big argument about price ceilings and floors in the FCC had to do
>with ATT lowering rates for tariff 12 type large customers to lock them in
>and subsidizing this by raising residential rates. To some extent this is
>exactly what has been done.
To what extent? Our last price hike was for WATS services - didn't
affect residental customers at all. (BTW, MCI and Sprint made raised
their WATS-type prices within a month of our announcement.)
Jack Dominey - AT&T Commercial Marketing - (800) 241-4285 - AT&TMail !jdominey
These are my opinions, and not necessarily AT&T's.