[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <de37a2e0.0306240738.4939ecf3@posting.google.com > on 24 Jun 2003 08:38:33
-0700, elecconnec@aol.com (Todd Allcock) wrote:

>momcat1@hotmail.comNOSPAM (momcat1 *) wrote in message news:<vff1s8augj3c41@corp.supernews.com>...
>> We do not have number portability for our landline in our area, even
>> though that as well as choice of provider was promised and made legal
>> several years ago. I don't think we should have to pay for wireless
>> number portability either. That's a cost the providers should bear as a
>> cost of doing business. You play, you pay.
>
>Lemme guess- you didn't major in business, did you?

Start off with a superior attitude and an insulting innuendo -- how nice.

>Any expense a business incurs will be paid for by the customers of
>that business through the prices the business charges for goods
>and/or services. The difference between the phone company
>line-listing certain fees and charges on your bill simply allows you to
>see what that particular tax, fee or surcharge represents in cost.

True, albeit simplistic.

>For example, if you want the phone company to "bear the cost" of
>NP, they could- instead of sending you a bill listing their $20/month
>service fee and a $1/month charge for NP, they could "bear the
>cost" and raise the service fee to $21.

Or they could get more efficient, and find ways to minimize and/or offset the
cost. A monopoly has no incentive to do that, which is why you tend to see
such things on your bill as an increase in price. The beauty of a competitive
market is that suppliers have a strong incentive to do that, which is why
prices tend to go down as the level of competition increases.

>Would that make you feel
>better, "knowing" you weren't paying for WNP?

What makes me feel better is increased competition.

>Every cost your
>carrier incurs- rent, utilities, employee payroll, printing 4-color
>glossy brochures with wildly inaccurate maps, stupid TV
>commercials that film students can't even understand, etc.
>all ultimately cost US on our bills. WE "bear" the expenses- all of
>them!

True, albeit simplistic.

>So, when it comes to NP, or any other "service" you want to
>force companies or industries to implement, remember the old
>saying- be careful what you wish for... you might get it!

WNP really isn't a "service" -- it's removal of a barrier to competition.

The notion that your phone number belongs to a carrier rather than to you is a
throwback to days when that was the only practical way to do it. Technology
has now come more than far enough to make personal numbers practical. It's a
change that's long overdue.

--
Best regards,
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/> HELP PAGES FOR
CINGULAR GSM + ERICSSON PHONES: <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>