SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : The New Qualcomm - a S&P500 company
QCOM 170.90-1.3%Nov 7 9:30 AM EST
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Drew Williams who wrote (7865)3/23/2000 4:53:00 PM
From: gdichaz  Read Replies (2) of 13582
 
Drew: Yes, the US has had a fine working wireline system. The reason caller pays is not permitted by the FCC is that the "big boys" who have provided that fine wireline system fear wireless.

And wire has caller pays now. Denying that to wireless gives wire an advantage.

And the FCC "listens" to the wireline operators - the old guard - not individual consumers.

Let's just take a simple point. Please explain to me how caller pays hurts the ordinary individual (non business) comsumer.

Have you actually talked to any of your non business neighbors on this? Curious?

If ATM fees raise emotions, think about the emotional baggage which goes with forcing people to pay for calls which they do not want. Why should they?

Let the advertizer or boiler shop sales organization pay, not the poor guy who gets the unwanted call.

Is this a difficult concept on fairness principles?

It is brute, raw power that prevents caller pays, not consumer wishes.

So what does the FCC do, go with the powers that be, or the consumer? Your call.

Again, this is complex but the basic point seem very simple.

Why should you or I pay for a call we do not want?

Best.

Chaz

PS And not only is this a basic fairness issue, it also makes a difference, however small, against wireless vs the status quo (where caller pays now) wireline.

Isn't sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander?

If caller pays is good for wire, why not for wireless?

PPS I feel strongly about this because it is just another way wireless is descriminated against in the regulation process. And it is on margin another factor slowing the nation wide wireless roll out vs wireline - just IMO.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News