ekrell@hector.UUCP (Eduardo Krell) (02/12/89)
In article <20406@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU> gast@CS.UCLA.EDU () writes: >If AT&T could engage in monopolistic paractices while they were 100% >regulated, surely they would be better able to do so if they had no >regulation. Of course, you fail to mention that AT&T doesn't own any of the local Bell companies anymore, which was the basis for the "monopolistic practices" you mentioned. >Consider the present world for a moment. AT&T is now advertizing that >if you are a BIG, BUSINESS customer, they will match any other company's >prices. Excuse me, but you don't have to be a BIG BUSINESS to spend $120 a month in long distance calls. > Why do they only want to offer lower prices for BIG, BUSINESS >customers? Why should the consumer pay higher prices so big, customers >can pay less? It's called economy of scale. The more you buy, the smaller the marginal cost. It happens everywhere. When you buy groceries at a supermarket, the bigger the package the cheaper the cost per unit. If you or I, as individuals, want to buy say a Sun workstation, we'll have to pay list price. When your University or a company buys a bunch of Suns, they get a discount. How big a discount? It will depend on the volume. The more you buy, the cheaper. > The little old man > who does not even know what a modem is probably does not care that > today's lines can handle 9600 baud transmission instead of 120 baud > transmission, or whatever the exact baud rates would be. That same > man, however, is forced to pay for these improvements.] But in the long term, those improvements benefit all users. For instance, fiber optics vs copper. The capacity of fiber is orders of magnitude larger than that of copper at a fraction of a price. Higher capacity means less expeditures in expanding the network in future years and lower costs means lower prices for the customers. Eduardo Krell AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill, NJ UUCP: {att,decvax,ucbvax}!ulysses!ekrell Internet: ekrell@ulysses.att.com