Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Qwest Communications (Q) (formerly QWST) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MangoBoy who wrote (1240)	5/13/1998 5:15:00 PM
From: Rashe W. Stephens III	Respond to of 6846

I think the CLECs are contending that U S West has a monopoly and that they haven't met the 14 point checklist. Any opening of US West's market under 271 not only helps LD players, but also CLECs.

To: MangoBoy who wrote (1240)	5/13/1998 7:05:00 PM
From: MangoBoy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6846

[AT&T, MCI, 4 Others Sue U S West for Violating Portions of the Telecom Act] Alliance With Qwest Violates Both Long Distance Restriction and Prohibition Against Favoring One Long Distance Carrier Over Another WASHINGTON, May 13 /PRNewswire/ -- AT&T, MCI and four other parties filed suit today in federal district court in Seattle to stop U S West's marketing alliance with Qwest, charging that it violates the Telecom Act's restriction against a local telephone company providing long distance service while its monopoly remains intact. The suit says U S West's so-called "Buyer's Advantage" program also violates federal regulation prohibiting a Bell company from discriminating in favor of one long distance carrier over another. Joining AT&T and MCI are the Association for Local Telecommunications Services, McLeodUSA Telecommunications, ICG Communications and GST Telecom. Last week, U S West announced it will market Qwest's long distance service to U S West's monopoly local phone customers as part of a package with local phone service. In return, Qwest will make an undisclosed payment to U S West for each customer it signs up for the package of local and long distance service. If the U S West-Qwest alliance is permitted to proceed, it will cause "substantial and irreparable harm to long distance carriers (like AT&T and MCI), other carriers seeking to enter the local market (like ICG, GST and McLeod), and to the public interest as defined in the 1996 Act," the suit says. "There isn't any question this type of marketing arrangement was prohibited by the divestiture decree, and Congress wrote the same prohibition into the Telecom Act," said Mark Rosenblum, AT&T vice president - law and public policy. "U S West is just engaging in more legal sleight-of-hand to end run the prohibition against Bell companies providing long distance before they open their local markets to competition." "U S West and Qwest are attempting to make a mockery out of the Telecom Act," said Jonathan Sallet, MCI chief policy counsel. "Section 271 of the Act is very clear; no RBOC may 'provide' in-region long distance service until it has complied with all requirements of Section 271, including the 'Competitive Checklist,' and that consumers can really exercise choice." Qwest has projected it could obtain up to $200 million in annual revenue in the first year of this arrangement and that up to 35 percent of customers in U S West's region will likely purchase this package. This will result "not from any innovative new service, technological breakthrough, or superior efficiency on Qwest's part, but merely from the local monopolist's endorsement of its long distance services and its preferential access to the distribution channels and services of the local monopoly in that region," the suit says. U S West has defended its alliance, the suit says, by essentially arguing it is not really "providing" long distance service because it's not operating the facilities but is merely marketing another's service -- an argument that's been rejected in previous court rulings, the suit says. U S West also defends itself against the notion that it is illegally favoring Qwest by saying its arrangement is open to other long distance carriers, an argument the suit calls "a transparent sham." U S West "cannot recommend to its customers multiple participating carriers simultaneously." "All long distance carriers remain captives of the Bell companies, paying exorbitant access fees to originate and terminate calls," said Rosenblum. "Deals like this make it impossible to assure that all long distance carriers and their customers are being treated fairly by these monopolies."

To: MangoBoy who wrote (1240)	5/13/1998 7:08:00 PM
From: MangoBoy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6846

[U S WEST and Qwest Say AT&T, MCI Lawsuit Not Only Seeks to Block Competition, But Will also Hurt Thousands of Customers] More Than 40,000 Customers Have Signed Up for U S WEST Buyer's Advantage Program Which Offers Local Service from U S WEST and Option of Long Distance from Qwest DENVER, May 13 /PRNewswire/ -- U S WEST Communications and Qwest Communications today accused AT&T, MCI and several other telecommunications companies of attempting to stifle greater consumer choice in filing a lawsuit against U S WEST's Buyer's Advantage program. "The big long-distance companies are clearly more interested in protecting their turf than looking out for the interests of customers," said Solomon D. Trujillo, president and CEO of U S WEST Communications. "As of today, more than 40,000 customers have signed up for this program, because they want greater convenience and choice. By filing this suit, AT&T, MCI, and others are thumbing their nose at those consumers." "Our new program meets both the spirit and letter of the Telecommunications Act. Contrary to what AT&T and MCI would have people believe, the Act wasn't intended to deny customers new choices and services, especially from an aggressive new provider like Qwest," said Trujillo. "Qwest and U S WEST have come together to provide value and choice for customers," said Joseph P. Nacchio, president and CEO of Qwest Communications. "It's sad, but not surprising, that the major carriers are acting in lockstep to block the intent of the Telecom Act to stimulate competition. AT&T and MCI's average revenue per minute is 40% higher than the Qwest long distance offer. The facts speak volumes." Addressing legal issues raised by the lawsuit, Lloyd Cutler, senior partner at the prestigious Washington D.C. law firm of Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering, and former White House counsel for Presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, states, "Buyer's Advantage complies with all applicable laws, is pro-competitive and is good for consumers."