Return-Path: Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.4/NSCS-1.0S) id CAA17885; Thu, 12 Dec 1996 02:23:21 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 02:23:21 -0500 (EST) From: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu (TELECOM Digest Editor) Message-Id: <199612120723.CAA17885@massis.lcs.mit.edu> To: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V16 #659 TELECOM Digest Thu, 12 Dec 96 02:23:00 EST Volume 16 : Issue 659 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Operator Toll Dialing and a 1945 Area Code Proposal (Mark J. Cuccia) UCLA Short Course: "HBT IC Technology for Comm Applications" (W. Goodin) Book Review: "The Web Server Handbook" by Palmer/Schneider (Rob Slade) GTE Long Distance in Oklahoma (Tad Cook) New Utah Area Code (Tad Cook) Interconnection in the Internet (Jesus Redondo) MFS to Offer Digital Subscriber Line Service (oldbear@arctos.com) Southwestern Bell Gets Out of Visa Card Business (B.J. Guillot) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: Post Office Box 4621 Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 847-329-0571 Fax: 847-329-0572 ** Article submission address: ptownson@massis.lcs.mit.edu Our archives are located at mirror.lcs.mit.edu. The URL is: http://mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives They can also be accessed using anonymous ftp: ftp mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives A third method is the Telecom Email Information Service: Send a note to tel-archives@mirror.lcs.mit.edu to receive a help file for using this method or write me and ask for a copy of the help file for the Telecom Archives. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************* Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 19:16:33 -0800 From: Mark J. Cuccia Subject: Operator Toll Dialing and a 1945 Area Code Proposal Early this year, I posted to the Digest an article regarding a proposed but never adopted area code plan from 1946/47. The proposed plan was similar to the actual 'finalized' plan of eighty-six original area codes from October 1947, in that states with *one* area code were given codes of the N0X format, while states with *multiple* area codes were given N1X area codes. In the 1946/47 proposal, the entire country of Canada was 'treated' as a 'single state' with multiple area codes. The never adopted proposal would have used codes of the 91X form for Canada's provinces: 912 and 913 for Ontario; 914 and 915 for Quebec; 916 for the Maritime Provinces (New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island; and maybe Newfoundland and Labrador which wasn't actually a part of Canada, politically at that time); 917 for Manitoba; 918 for Saskatchewan; 919 for Alberta; 910 for British Columbia. Also, the 1946/47 proposal (but never actually adopted) had 'consecutive blocks' of area codes for each state with multiple codes: New York State would have had 212, 213, 214, 215, 216 Michigan would have had 217, 218, 219 Illinois would have had 312, 313, 314, 315 Ohio would have had 316, 317, 318, 319 Pennsylvania would have had 412, 413, 414, 415 Wisconsin would have had 416, 417 Minnesota would have had 418, 419 California would have had 512, 513, 514 Massachusetts would have had 515, 516 Iowa would have had 517, 518, 519 Missouri would have had 612, 613 Indiana would have had 615, 616 Kansas would have had 617, 618 Texas would have had 712, 713, 714, 715 I do wonder about Kansas having been assigned (on paper, only) the codes 617 and 618. I would have thought that it would have been assigned 618 and 619. Notice that 614 has no assignment, and comes after Missouri's two codes. If 617 were to be 'skipped' over, it would be after Indiana's two codes. In the *ACTUAL* assignments of October 1947, MO and IN had two area codes each; 1948/49 saw Indiana get a third NPA (219) and 1950/51 saw Missouri get a third NPA (417). Within most (but not all) of these multi-NPA states, the block of consecutive codes were to be adjacent to one another, or 'linear' as a code set 'increased' from east to west, or from north to south, across that state. Every *other* state (as well as DC) would have had an N0X style area code, as each of these states would have had one area code. However, except for the larger cities in multi-NPA states, or more populated states using a single (N0X) NPA, the numerical assignments were *not* kept when the finalized version took effect in October 1947. (The complete chart of 'proposed' assignments with some brief description of specific intra-state geographies is included in my original submission, earlier this year). However, close to the end of World War II, in 1945 the Bell System was seriously looking into a nationwide numbering plan and developing an *automated* (operator) toll dialing/switching network. In August 1943, Philadelphia was the *very first place* to ever have a crossbar *toll* switching machine, the #4XB Toll switcher. And only a few years earlier, the first XBTandem switches were installed in the US: Detroit's "Trinity" (DTRTMIMD01T) in 10/1941; Manhattan's "Interzone" (CLLI code not known) in 10/1941; San Francisco's "Bush-0" (SNFCCA0300T) in 12/1941; Oakland #1-Cal. (OKLDCA0100T) in 1/1942. (all of these XBTandems have been replaced by now -- some began to be replaced with more modern/recent technology beginning in the late 1970's.) I also have reference to a XBTandem installed in El Monte CA (ELMNCA0116T) in 3/1940, however the reference source, the Distance Dialing Co-Ordinating Handbook, AT&T's annual 'toll/tandem switching inventory', has this in error for the annual editions through 1975. The 1976 through 1981 editions indicate this XBTandem having been installed in 2/1960. Anyhow, El Monte is in *southern* California, and in the 1940's and 50's, the Los Angeles and southern California metropolitan area was a *step-by-step* switching area, and the other areas having XBTandem in the early 1940's were *panel and #1XB* local switching areas. Multifrequency Keypulsing (MFKP) address signalling was being developed in 1940, to replace revertive pulsing in #1XB local switches, and was also applied to XBTandem and #4XBToll. Baltimore was one of the first areas to have an experiment with MFKP between its #1XB local switches in 1940. While several operator toll dialing networks had existed on a regional basis since as far back as the 'teens', they were *regional*, and were based on Step-by-Step (SxS) switching technology. Dialpulses lose their effect over longer and longer lines, and have to be 'retransmitted'. It was decided to have the main backbone of a nationwide automated network to be based on XB and MFKP technology, which could store and forward digits, as well as translate digits received. The ultimate result was to be a standardized numbering plan for operators (and later customers) to dial/key toll calls. The digits dialed would be registered, forwarded, and if needed, translated to localized 0XX/1XX routing prefixes used in any regional SxS toll dialing networks. 0XX/1XX routing codes have continued to be used for network routing/control, trunk/equipment testing, and also for operator-to-operator purposes, even in a "common control" switching (XB and later ESS/Digital) and MFKP (later CCIS#6 or SS7) signalling network environment. Some of the regional SxS (opearator) toll dialing networks which had been in existance for several decades before WW-II originated from the *non* connecting competitive independent telephone companies in many cities and metro areas in the earliest decades of this century. At that time, Bell was still providing only manual operator handled connections for local service, while many independents (particularly the competitive non-connecting ones) had been introducing local dial services based on Strowger Automatic Electric SxS technology. Around the time of WW-I, Bell began to study local Panel switching for the largest metropolitan areas, but it was to have been a *semi-automatic* service, where the calling party would still have given (quoted to) the operator the called number, and if the call was in a different local exchange, the originating operator would dial (or more pecisely, key-in) the requested number. By the early 1920's, Panel switching was being adopted by Bell for local *customer* (and operator) dialing, mostly in the larger metro areas in the USA only; Bell Canada never did have Panel switching in Quebec or Ontario). Bell did adopt SxS switching for local dialing (by both customers and operators), mostly for medium cities, smaller towns and more rural areas, throughout the USA *and* Canada. When the non-connecting competitive independents were still quite much in existance, many began to interconnect their local (Strowger) SxS dialing networks togather, over a larger region, creating regional SxS operator toll dialing networks. When the various Bells and competitive independents began to 'buy-out' each other to create a single non-competitive connected network in the 'late-teens' and early 1920's, these regional SxS operator toll networks continued, and Bell began to introduce such networks on its own, or it expanded on what had already existed from the (previously competitive and non-connecting) independents. Some of the larger regions served by SxS (operator) toll dialing networks prior to the introduction of XBTandem, #4-type XBToll, MFKP technology: Southern California (a rather large area of independent telcos); Connecticut (the "semi" BOC of Southern New England Telephone); Ohio (another "semi" BOC of Cincinnati Bell Telephone; also several independents now held by United/Sprint). Michigan; The Pacific Northwest - WA/OR/ID/BC/AB (another region where GTE has been quite dominant, including in Canada; and while Alberta's telco had been owned by the provincial government and Edmonton's telco had been owned by the city government, both AGT and Edmonton Telephones had been purchasing AE Strowger SxS equipment beginning in 'the teens'.) {Bell Telephone Magazine} and {Bell Laboratories Record} both had articles on Operator Toll Dialing in 1945: "Operator Toll Dialing -- a New Long Distance Method", {Bell Telephone Magazine} v.22 (1945) #2, pages 101-115 of v.22 (1945) authors: James J. Pilliod and Harold L. Ryan "Nationwide Dialing", {Bell Laboratories Record} v.23 (1945) October issue, pages 368-372 of v.23 (1945) authored by: F. F. Shipley (of the Switching Engineering Department) In the {Bell Telephone Magazine} arrticle, there is discussion about a uniform nationwide numbering plan, with the (continental) US being divided into sixty to seventy-five areas. Each area would be assigned a three-digit code, of the N0X and N1X format, as since there are no letters on the '0' or '1' on the dial, there are no central office names/letters corresponding to such N0X/N1X codes, but rather NNX. Thus N0X/N1X area codes would not be in conflict. In the {Bell Laboratories Record} article, the discussion mentions the (continental) US being divided into sixty numbering areas, and that N1X codes would be *tentatively* used, although there are no central office names/letters corresponding to N0X as well. Incidently, a sample of a dial is shown in the article, *with* the letter 'Z' on the '0' (zero), although the article mentions that only eight digits '2' through '9' are lettered out of the possible ten digits. The {Bell Labs Record} article did mention that two-digit area codes 'could' be possible if there would be only sixty codes - i.e. less than one-hundered (or actually eighty) possible numbering areas, but 'NX' codes would make translations between central office codes and area codes rather difficult until all digits had been received and a 'time-out' in the switching equipment. So, N1X codes would be used. Both articles include an identical map of the (continental) USA, divided into numbering areas. Canada is *NOT* indicated on this map, nor is it even mentioned in the articles. Also, there are *NO* area code *numericals* shown in each numbering region -- only boundaries. What *IS* interesting is that there were some area code regions which would have contained *more* than one state. The caption beneath the map in the {Bell Telephone Magazine} article states, "How the country might look when divided into approximately 60 areas for the nation-wide numbering plan". The following is a list of each region, as proposed in 1945, using the two-letter abbreviation for each state. The numbers preceeding the state(s) is used *ONLY* as a count, and *NOT* any 'proposal' of digits for each area or region. 01) ME 02) NH *and* VT 03) MA (all) *and* RI 04) CT 05) NY (New York City *as well as* Westchester area *and* Long Island 06) NY State (eastern) 07) NY State (central) 08) NY State (western) 09) NJ 10) PA (eastern) *and* DE 11) PA (central) 12) PA (western) 13) MD *including* DC 14) VA 15) WV 16) OH (eastern) 17) OH (southern) 18) OH (northwestern) 19) MI (southern) 20) MI (northern; panhandle) 21) IN (northern) 22) IN (southern) 23) IL (Chicago area) 24) IL (northern) 25) IL (central) 26) IL (southern) 27) WI (southeastern) 28) WI (remainder) 29) NC *and* SC 30) GA 31) FL 32) KY 33) TN 34) AL 35) MS *and* LA 36) MO (eastern) 37) MO (western) 38) KS (eastern) 39) KS (western) 40) OK 41) AR 42) TX (northeastern) 43) TX (southern) 44) TX (western) 45) MN (southeastern) 46) MN (remainder) 47) IA (eastern) 48) IA (central) 49) IA (western) 50) NE 51) SD 52) ND 53) NM *and* CO 54) AZ, UT, *and* NV 55) WY, MT, *and* ID 56) WA 57) OR 58) CA (northern) 59) CA (central) 60) CA (southern) One final note -- in the text of the {Bell Telephone Magazine} article, mention is made that some numbering areas would contain more than one state, 'such as North and South Dakota'. However, the map indicates separate area codes for North Dakota and South Dakota, while according to the map example, North Carolina and South Carolina would have 'shared' a single area code. There are also various other articles in {Bell Telephone Magazine} as well as {Bell System Technical Journal} and {Bell Laboratories Record} from the late 1940's through the early 1960's regarding Operator Toll Dialing and how it was evolving into DDD, area codes, local numbering (i.e. EXchange names and initially how 'standardized' names would be better for customer quoting and remembering in a nationwide/continentwide DDD situation, but later how ANC - All Numbering Calling was better), Crossbar switching, multifrequency keypulsing signalling, etc. Of course, much of the actual 1945 and 1946/47 area code proposal was just planning, although eventually was reformatted into the original 'finalized' 1947 assignment scheme of eighty-six area codes, which has been added on to over the decades, although these current three years (1995 through 1997), I have identified *at least fifty-eight* "POTS" (geographic - non-SAC) area codes being assigned and active! Not counting the SAC's for TWX (N10), the N00's (800 for Toll-Free and 900 for 'mass-calling'), nor the 'patch' codes for access to Mexico, only thirty-five area codes were assigned (after the original eighty-six were finalized in 1947) between 1948 and 1965. This remained relatively stable until the early 1980's. And while a handful of codes were assigned between 1982 and 1989, even the 1980's was still a relatively stable period! MARK J. CUCCIA PHONE/WRITE/WIRE/CABLE: HOME: (USA) Tel: CHestnut 1-2497 WORK: mcuccia@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu |4710 Wright Road| (+1-504-241-2497) Tel:UNiversity 5-5954(+1-504-865-5954)|New Orleans 28 |fwds on no-answr to Fax:UNiversity 5-5917(+1-504-865-5917)|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail ------------------------------ From: BGOODIN@UNEX.UCLA.EDU (William R. Goodin) Subject: UCLA Short Course: "HBT IC Technology For Comm Applications" Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 13:57:40 Organization: UCLA Extension On February 12-14, 1997, UCLA Extension will present the short course, "HBT IC Technology for Communications Applications", on the UCLA campus in Los Angeles. The instructors are Bahram Jalali, PhD, Associate Professor, Electrical Engineering Department, UCLA, and Madjid Hafizi, PhD, Senior Research Staff, Hughes Research Laboratories. This course presents an in-depth treatment of GaAs, InP, and GeSi-based Heterojunction Bipolar Transistor (HBT) technologies and their application in today's growing communication markets. HBT has emerged as a key enabling technology for wireless communications, data conversion, mixed-signal/mixed-mode applications, and high data rate fiber-optic communications. The course begins with a concise review of the physics of HBT devices and a comparison with MESFET and HEMT technologies. This comparison provides a foundation for selecting the right technology for a particular application. Technology performance characteristics such as DC, RF, noise, power amplification, linearity, intermodulation distortion, manufacturability, reliability, yield and cost issues are compared. Modeling of HBT devices for circuit simulation is presented including linear and nonlinear models and thermal modeling. Material issues are covered including epitaxial crystal growth, MBE and MOCVD materials, followed by a look at commercial vendors of epitaxial material and material qualification. Fundamentals of HBT processing including device and IC fabrication, passive components, planarization, heat sink approaches (particularly for power devices), lithography, dry etching, and yield limitations are explored, as are state-of-the-art HBT device performance and reliability issues. The important role of HBT in meeting the requirements of current wireless systems is discussed. Power amplifiers are covered in-depth including such relevant issues as efficiency, linearity, intermodulation distortion, and thermal stability. The course reviews commercially available HBT IC's for wireless markets, and covers Analog-to-Digital Converters (ADC) ranging from ultra-fast flash-type converters to high-resolution delta-sigma modulators and the architectures in between. This involves a review of ADC characteristics such as SNR, SFDR, NPR, differential and integral nonlinearity, effective number of bit, and aperture jitter, in relation to HBT device characteristics. Mixed-mode/mixed-signal applications of the technology such as multiple device integration including HBT/HEMT, HBT/RTD, HBT/PIN-PD, and HBT/MESFET mixed-device techniques are examined. The course shows how these new technologies are applied to mixed/mode systems such as digital receivers (including HEMT orMESFET low-noise amplifier, HBT downconverter and HBT ADC) or tointegrated optical receivers (including PIN photodetector, transimpedanceand AGC amplifiers). Finally, the course presents ultra-high speed applications of the technology in the emerging market of 40 Gbit/s optical communications, including high-speed digital circuits such as dividers, MUX/DEMUX, and clock/data recovery circuits. The course fee is $1195, which includes extensive course materials. These materials are for participants only, and are not for sale. For a more information and a complete course description, please contact Marcus Hennessy at: (310) 825-1047 (310) 206-2815 fax mhenness@unex.ucla.edu http://www.unex.ucla.edu/shortcourses This course may also be presented on-site at company locations. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 16:54:04 EST From: Rob Slade Subject: Book Review: "The Web Server Handbook" by Palmer/Schneider/Chenette BKWBSRHB.RVW 960910 "The Web Server Handbook", Pete Palmer/Adam Schneider/Anne Chenette, 1996, 0-13-239930-X, U$39.95/C$51.00 %A Pete Palmer %A Adam Schneider %A Anne Chenette %C One Lake St., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 %D 1996 %G 0-13-239930-X %I Prentice Hall %O U$39.95/C$51.00 +1-201-236-7139 fax: 201-236-7131 beth_hespe@prenhall.com %P 460 %T "The Web Server Handbook" There *are* three chapters in the book which give you details on how to set up a Web server for UNIX, Windows, and the Mac. These chapters are reasonably detailed and helpful. However, they only occupy about a quarter of the book, by weight. The rest of the book talks about browsing, HTML, publicity, Perl and other such topics. There are other resources which handle these areas better. copyright Robert M. Slade, 1996 BKWBSRHB.RVW 960910 Distribution permitted in TELECOM Digest and associated publications. Vancouver roberts@decus.ca | "Metabolically Institute for rslade@vcn.bc.ca | challenged" Research into slade@freenet.victoria.bc.ca | User rslade@vanisl.decus.ca | politically correct Security Canada V7K 2G6 | term for "dead" ------------------------------ Subject: GTE Long Distance in Oklahoma Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 11:14:08 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) GTE Begins Long-Distance Telephone Service in Oklahoma By Ray Tuttle, Tulsa World, Okla. Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News Dec. 11--GTE on Tuesday began offering long-distance service to Oklahomans, marketing it under the name GTE Easy Savings Plan. The Federal Telecommunications Act makes it easier for companies like GTE to deliver expanded services to customers, said Barb Bellinghausen, director of GTE long distance. "AT GTE, we promised we would be quick to market once the telecommunications bill became law. Today, we are making good on that promise." GTE, which services Broken Arrow and 26 other communities in Oklahoma, offers local telephone service to about 95,000 customers in the state. GTE is partnering with WorldCom to provide the long-distance service. "We are offering the service but it is WorldCom's pipes," Bellinghausen said. Jackson, Miss.-based WorldCom, which also operates offices in Tulsa, also offers long-distance service in Oklahoma, said spokesman Gil Broyles. "We have agreements with Ameritech, GTE and Southwestern Bell Mobile Systems. But our market emphasis is on business long distance. GTE long-distance service is available to any consumer in the state, regardless of which company provides their local telephone service. Price discounts are available once a customer has spent as little as $10, Bellinghausen said. For example, a residential customer spending a total of $10 a month on all GTE long distance services will save ten percent. GTE, which is also was offering Internet access through UUNet, is marketing its services in 26 other states where GTE offers local telephone service, with plans to offer service by the end of the month in all 50 states. Prior to the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, GTE offered local service calls within the 918 area code. Once the telephone company gained approval from the federal government, it started seeking regulatory approval from the 27 states where it has operations. ------------------------------ Subject: New Utah Area Code Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 11:39:16 PST From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook) The Salt Lake Tribune Business Briefs Column The Salt Lake Tribune Knight-Ridder/Tribune Business News Dec. 10--HEARINGS TONIGHT ON AREA CODE: The Utah Public Service Commission (PSC) holds a statewide video tele-hearing tonight on plans to add a telephone area code. The PSC estimates the available three-digit local prefixes within the 801 area code will be used up by early 1998 -- largely the result of increased use of cellular phones and pagers, and phone lines for fax machines and computer modems. Under a recommended proposal, exchanges in Davis, Weber, Salt Lake and Utah counties -- the most populated region of the state -- would retain the 801 area code, while all other areas of Utah would be assigned a new area code. Once approved, the area code could take effect next summer, and several months would be allowed to phase in use of the new area code for long distance callers. Utah residents wishing to discuss the issue with the three-member PSC can show up at one of about 20 educational sites across the state that are linked to the Utah Educational Network. Those include the College of Eastern Utah in Price, Southern Utah University in Cedar City, Utah State University in Logan and Instructional Media Services on the University of Utah campus. Several high schools and technical schools, from Brigham City to Kanab, also will have facilities for the public to respond live to the PSC. For details on the sites, call the PSC at (801) 530-6716. ------------------------------ From: Jesus Redondo Organization: DIT-UPM Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 21:11:13 +0000 Subject: Interconnection in the Internet I am wondering about how the interconnection among ISPs is provided. Telecom operators set interconnection rates that reflect the cost of the local loop (i.e. a Bell Network) used by a long distance provider to complete a call, this interconnection rates usually are expressed in terms of cents/minute of usage. The international traffic is regulated by the accounting rate regime, which many times is not related to the real cost The Internet is composed by many ISPs that interconnect their networks, each one must allow the use of his network to the others to let them reach a third party. Is there any kind of 'interconnection rates' for this service or is it only a negotiation between the parts? I would appreciate any information around this or references about forums, papers or any place where I could find it. Jesus Redondo e-mail: jr@dit.upm.es DIT-UPM ETSI Telecomunicacion Ciudad Universitaria s/n 28040 Madrid, Spain e-mail: jrv@dit.upm.es DIT-UPM phone: +341 5495700 x.366 ETSI Telecomunicaciones fax: +341 5432077 Ciudad Universitaria s/n 28040 Madrid Spain ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 10:03:39 -0500 From: The Old Bear Subject: MFS to Offer Digital Subscriber Line Service MFS TO OFFER SPEEDY INTERNET SERVICE OVER PHONE LINES MFS Communications plans to offer Digital Subscriber Line service to customers early next year, providing high-speed Internet connections over existing telephone lines. Initially, MFS's connect speeds will be equivalent to ISDN links -- about four times faster than a typical 28.8 modem -- but ultimately it plans to offer data transmission at rates 20 times faster than conventional modems. source: Wall Street Journal December 10, 1996 -----------end included text----------- Even if the RBOCs have not figured out that those subscriber loops are a treasured resource, the new entrant LECs (like MFS) seem to have a clue -- and a big one at that. By offering these enhanced services over existing local loop facilities (probably leased at cost from the RBOCs), the new entrants are going to be able to offer all kinds of attractive and creative service bundles while the RBOCs continue to dither about ISDN and nailed-up switched circuits. This is good for the consumer, but really unfortunate for the RBOCs which, knowing that local competition was on its way, have focused on how they are going to enter the "lucrative" long distance market (now being challenged by services like internet phone), rather than focus on how to exploit their existing postion in their local market. For years, Intel has prospered by offering new and innovative products and -- as soon as competitors could produce a 'me too' copy -- coming out with something new and dropping the price the existing product, thus squeezing those "me too" competitors who then have to recoup their R&D cost in a lower-margin market. Here was an example of where the RBOCs could have gotten out ahead of the curve and built a market position which would be hard to follow. Instead, ignoring the fact that the game has changed, most of the RBOCs have attempted to keep rates high for existing services and to price new services still higher. This, of course, has produced a delightful "price umbrella" which invites new competitors into a market where margins are so high as to allow lots of room for error while learning the business. I sympathize with some of the comments made by Pat concerning how some of the new entrant LECs will just buy services from the RBOC at mandated wholesale prices and resell to the consumer at a low enough mark-up to undercut existing tariffs. But the new entrants can only play that game because the RBOCs made it possible by not exploiting the potential of their own existing plant to build value-driven barriers in anticipation of the impending competition. Having spoken informally to a few people down in the ranks of my local RBOC about this, the story I have heard is that the technical people, and the lower-level marketing folks who are close to the customers, have recoginized this for years but have been unable to get any interest from senior management -- which has preferred pricing local exchange services to maximize current margins, treating traditional local loop wireline as an eventual lost cause, and seeking opportunities in all manner of information and entertainment products beyond the ken of their traditional lines of business. Cheers, The Old Bear ------------------------------ From: bjg90783@rosie.uh.edu (B.J. Guillot) Subject: Southwestern Bell Gets Out of Visa Card Business Date: 10 Dec 1996 23:21:00 CST Organization: University of Houston Got this letter in the mail from Southwestern Bell Visa Card ... Starting January 2, 1997, your account will be handled solely by Mercantile Bank of Illinois National Assocation. Because of recent events in the credit card industry, Southwestern Bell will no longer be assoicated with your current Southwestern Bell Visa card. ... you will receive a new MercRewards Visa card by March, 1997. Your account number, interest rate and most other terms of your account will remain the same and you will continue to receive up to 2% cash back on purchases. ... you will no longer be able to bill your residential and/or cellular phone bills to your Southwestern Bell account, nor will you earn the 5% phone reward on these bills. ... Please pay [your phone bill] directly. In February 1997, you will receive a check for your phone rewards accumulated on your account through the end of December, 1996. ... Southwestern Bell will give you a one-time SPECIAL PAYMENT of $20. This SPECIAL PAYMENT is in appreciation for your participation in the Southwestern Bell Visa phone rewards program. ... You may continue to use your current Southwestern Bell Visa card until your MercRewards Visa card arrives. When you receive your new card, please destroy your old Southwestern Bell Visa card. ---------------------------------------- Other comments. About two or three months ago, I got an insert in my phone bill saying I was "pre-approved" for a SWB Visa card. I called, and they took my information, gave me a $15 credit, and told me I had a $1500 credit limit. A few weeks later, I received my card, and noticed the paperwork it came with claimed the credit limit was $200 (yes, a $200 limit on a credit card!) They would not raise that limit. Anyway, it was interesting to see this letter saying that SWB is no longer in the credit card business after just two months that I've had my card. Does anyone know what "recent events in the credit card industry" refer to? Could this have anything to do with the merger of SWBT (aka SBC) and that other Bell company? Oh, and there was an additional insert in the letter that included instructions on how to set your savings or checking account for deductions. Other thing ... If the credit card account number is staying the same, what need is there to send a new card and destroy the old card? Oh, three out of four of my credit cards are from telephone companies (Southwestern Bell, AT&T, and GTE). I'm planning to get rid of the GTE card soon since they charge over 20% interest! Regards, Command line driven fax software http://www.blkbox.com/~bgfax/ B.J. Guillot ... Houston, Texas USA I don't believe in coffee ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V16 #659 ******************************