I’d love to be able to point our efforts and membership toward this if we can ‘do something’. First, I need to make sure we’re in an active ‘fight’ per se.

The most recent report I have is out of North Carolina. Anyone have anything more????

Thanks!

Note:  Wow, this could blow up into a big fight.  Om Malik sent in this breaking news written by Paul K.  FCC Chairman Kevin Martin said Thursday that the commission told large telcos to stop blocking calls into numbers for the……

Last Tuesday an FCC spokesman made clear that blocking calls was forbidden, (calls are now flowing again) so it now comes down to recip comp money.

Will the local carriers be paid by ATT (et al) for monies owed and will they continued to be paid for future calls?

It seems the Iowa companies have made a pretty strong case for getting paid for calls made to, and terminating in Iowa. (Conference Calling)

The made a weaker case when calls are routed thru the Iowa companies and then sent elsewhere (ie) free international calling.

If the Iowa telcos win at the FCC, they will press for immediate payment, plus fines, plus interest, plus attorney fees. If they lose, they probably will not appeal.

If ATT (et al) lose at the FCC they have an interesting decision to make.

IF, they appeal the decision to the Federal Court —and they lose there— (likely since the Federal Courts usually defer to the govt.) ATT (et al) would be stuck paying high recip comp rates permanently.

If so, look for hundreds of the services to sprout. A true nightmare for the major carriers.

Right now neither side is ready to blink, which is dangerous for both sides.

Both sides made offers to each other to settle the issue, but they were not even in the same “state” never mind the same “ball park”

Possible Solutions:
IF, the local telcos were to accept payment ONLY for calls that terminated in Iowa, and were not routed overseas, perhaps ATT (et al) would ante up the money they owe.

But if the local telcos insists on every last dime, ATT (et al) may just sit tight and try to wait them out.

Either way, the local telcos did nothing illegal.
They read the tariff and went about their business.

ATT (et al) never, in their wildest dreams thought a few local telcos in Iowa would beat the giant carriers.

And with first quarter profits collectively over several-BILLION dollars, its hard to feel empathy for the giant telcos.
The amount of money they owe the local telcos is probably the amount of money they spend on “entertainment expenses” every year.

Perhaps the BEST solution would be for the giant carriers to point out to their customers, that in their TOS, the giant carriers CAN BLOCK calls due to excessive use. (in unlimited plans only)

When a customer exceeds 6,000 minutes per month to a certain number, the carrier can block access to the number and/or cancel the account.

Of course it is far more expensive to block individual customers than to prevent ALL customers from dialing a specific phone number.

I would bet the FCC will choose this route as an interim solution, with an eye toward examining the entire recip comp structure at a future date.

The FCC chairman has made it clear reexamining this issue is a priority.

So for the Iowa telcos, “let the good times roll, while they last!”

By the way, just from an intellectual perspective, what’s the difference between Mr. Corey setting up shop in Iowa, and Citibank setting up in South Dakota, where there are liberal usury laws? If both are following the established rules I fail to see an issue. Given a choice however between free conference calls and 32% credit card interest rates, I think I know the lesser of the two problems. I guess it’s a great time to be big, and unfortunately Free Conference Calls is not. See: (link)

Leo A. Wrobel

Soon there will be a questionnaire about planned usage during 24 hour periods and careful monitoring of each persons usage. If you violate any of the new terms that will be set forth in all signed contracts the company will have the right to revoke your plan and start you on a new plan. All without the option of opting out of their service unless you are willing to pay the inflated termination charge.

I find Mr. Cory’s argument on the origination and termination fees associated with every call a sound one. Why can’t the large Telco be happy with their 3 cents per minute? I think it is because of the unlimited monster that they created. Their law of averages has started a downward spiral and the only way they can see to fight back is to with hold legitimate money due, file frivolous lawsuits, and block legitimate calls.

To conclude the gamble by the large carriers has undoubtedly fattened their wallets. They are trying to preemptively slow the trend of deceleration of profits. They have painted themselves into a corner. It might be time for them to let go of this marketing scheme and revert to the more ancient times of flat rate minutes. As I seem to recall they didn’t have any issues in stuffing money bags at that time.

A note to the long distance carriers: Pay your bills. You should have foreseen the consequences of your rate plan. It is not the fault of the free conference services that they are willing to provide a better value then you or your conferencing partners are willing to provide. You are collecting on minutes used by your customers and rather than being an upstanding business and paying your termination carriers, chose to use inflammatory words like “illegal”,” scheme”, and “sex chat”. You took a gamble that didn’t pay off. Admit your mistake and make this right with ALL your customers.

Is this the end of the “Unlimited Rate” plans?

While it might require the large carriers (AT&T, Qwest, Sprint, and Verizon) to do more monitoring of their users, it most likely is not the end of the attractive marketing of the “Unlimited Rate” plans, but maybe it should be.
How long did the large carriers think that even the average user wouldn’t find ways to exploit the free calling times and carefully monitor their allotted minutes per month provided by their service? When calls to loved ones reach the golden hours of after 9 pm in their respective time zones it has created cross generational beings of night owls. How many times has it been said “leave me a voicemail I’ll call you back”? Then even the average user waits until the call is “free” to either dial their voicemail or return the call.
Even without the free conference market forcing the issue this rate plan was doomed to fail. Would they rather I call the 10 people I was going to have the conference with individually? My 36 minute conference call (the average length of a conference call) on my free plan turns into 360 minutes of individual calls. Even the average user would realize the benefit of making these calls in the unlimited time. Are they going to block each individual because now I am using 360 minutes total? At least with the 36 minute conference call they get the chance that another caller is on another carrier and I only use 36 minutes. I feel I am a savvy small business owner and would perform the above action of making my 10 calls in the free time vs. paying $0.22-$0.50 per minute per caller as their conferencing partners charge. If I need to make a larger call I should be able to get a reduced rate from their conferencing partner right? Wrong, if the number of callers increase there is no reduction in cost per minute. …

I forgot to add information about your comment of illegally filed tariffs. Don’t you think that if that were the issue then AT&T would have addressed it more thoroughly. As I have read in the suit they only accuse one such clec of illegaly filed tarrifs in item 72 of their suit.

Apparently you spent too much time pushing the shift key, rather than gathering facts.

I am being a little harsh I know. You do present some great arguements for both sides. I just don’t feel your statements are factual.