Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Business, general

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Business, general

Phone companies call for customer surcharge

Article Abstract:

Some US local telephone companies are asking the FCC to approve a monthly surcharge for their customers. The companies claim the fees are necessary in order to pay for the costs related to number portability services, which allow customers to keep their telephone number when they move to a rival carrier's service. Some of the carriers, including Nynex Corp, want to charge a $1 to $2 fee per phone line each month, whether or not the customer changes carriers. The long-distance companies contend the proposed fees are merely an attempt to boost revenues, and to combat the losses the local phone companies will experience when their markets are opened to competition. A company like Nynex, which has over 16 million access lines, could make almost $200 million per year from the fees. Critics claim the fees are merely a response to the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which is intended to increase competition and lower prices in the local telephone markets.

Author: Gruley, Bryan
Publisher: Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
Publication Name: The Wall Street Journal Western Edition
Subject: Business, general
ISSN: 0193-2241
Year: 1996
Telephone communications, exc. radio, Local Telephone Service, Laws, regulations and rules, Local telephone services

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Lobbying battle looms as FCC studies issue of access fees for Bell networks

Article Abstract:

The FCC is investigating the current price structure of the complex system under which long-distance telephone companies pay to access the networks of RBOCs. The RBOCs are forecasted to lose at least a portion of the $23 billion in yearly revenue they collect from long-distance companies for calls on their networks. The FCC's role in this debate is to determine just how much the RBOCs will lose, and when the long-distance companies can expect lower fees. These debates should last for at least six months, and the FCC expects to render its decision by early May 1997. The long-distance companies are lobbying for a significant fee reduction, while the RBOCs maintain that long-distance carriers are ignoring the high costs of building and servicing local networks. Two solutions that the FCC is considering include a free-market approach favored by the RBOCs, and a regulatory approach preferred by the long-distance companies.

Author: Gruley, Bryan
Publisher: Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
Publication Name: The Wall Street Journal Western Edition
Subject: Business, general
ISSN: 0193-2241
Year: 1996
Telephone Communication, Telephone Communications, Prices and rates, Telecommunications regulations, Telephone services, Long distance telephone services, Regional Bell Operating Companies, Government communications regulation, Long-distance telephone service, Investigations, Investigation

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA



Subjects list: Telecommunications services industry, Telecommunications industry, United States. Federal Communications Commission
Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: LSI to unveil chip design for building inexpensive machines to access Internet. Internet users spooked about spies' new role
  • Abstracts: These two companies want to help you step out tonight. Going on-line is still too difficult to lure a mass audience
  • Abstracts: Phone market is opening up for Europeans. A battle for the ears of Europe; Olivetti bid heralds new opportunities
  • Abstracts: Telecom concerns love rivalry fostered by new law, unless it's in their market. AT&T to acquire TCI for $37.3 bilion
  • Abstracts: National Semiconductor says results won't meet forecasts. Citing low chip prices, Intel earns less than forecast
This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.
Some parts © 2026 Advameg, Inc.