CompuServe Thread

My response is: 1. By adding a $5/hr/user access fee to simply connect to a network, the FCC is for all practical purposes, eliminating the vast majority of private users from these services (such as CIS). $6/hr access, suddenly becomes $11/hr access and $12/hr access suddenly becomes $17/hr access…with the users paying the fees. Considering the baud rates and hourly rates…it would just be way too much for most private users (non-corporate users). 2. The FCC only imposes a $1/month access fee for residential access to the long distance networks, and that fee will rise to about $5/month…why should access to network services cost $5/hr when long distance is only $5/month…a difference of 720 times the rate or a 72,000% increase for essentially the same service (the ability to connect with a distant location). 3. Deregulation and the break-up of AT&T was supposed to make services more competitive, not eliminate them. 4. Corporate services such as VISA use nationwide networks for such things as credit verification/stolen card checks. Since by it's very nature, it must be a 24hr a day operation, imposing a $5/hr connect fee would increase their costs per line by $3,600/month or $43,000/year and that cost would be passed on to the consumer. I suspect they have at least 1,000 lines around the US, thus for that one service alone, would cost the consumer 43 Million dollars a year. 5. The present system works! Why mess with it? It doesn't cost the local BOC's 1 cent extra to provide hook up to a network once it's installed. Charge for the installation…but once installed, leave it alone! 6. Etc.

My response is: 1. By adding a $5/hr/user access fee to simply connect to a network, the FCC is for all practical purposes, eliminating the vast majority of private users from these services (such as CIS). $6/hr access, suddenly becomes $11/hr access and $12/hr access suddenly becomes $17/hr access…with the users paying the fees. Considering the baud rates and hourly rates…it would just be way too much for most private users (non-corporate users). 2. The FCC only imposes a $1/month access fee for residential access to the long distance networks, and that fee will rise to about $5/month…why should access to network services cost $5/hr when long distance is only $5/month…a difference of 720 times the rate or a 72,000% increase for essentially the same service (the ability to connect with a distant location). 3. Deregulation and the break-up of AT&T was supposed to make services more competitive, not eliminate them. 4. Corporate services such as VISA use nationwide networks for such things as credit verification/stolen card checks. Since by it's very nature, it must be a 24hr a day operation, imposing a $5/hr connect fee would increase their costs per line by $3,600/month or $43,000/year and that cost would be passed on to the consumer. I suspect they have at least 1,000 lines around the US, thus for that one service alone, would cost the consumer 43 Million dollars a year. 5. The present system works! Why mess with it? It doesn't cost the local BOC's 1 cent extra to provide hook up to a network once it's installed. Charge for the installation…but once installed, leave it alone! 6. Etc.

Thanks for the info. After reading your reply I went to BPForum, joined it, and read FCC732.NOT and FILE.HLP, both in DL9. I think *everyone* here ought to head over to BPForum and read these files. The FCC notice makes it appear as if some sort of surcharge has been in the works all along. Is this really the case, or is the new FCC chairman just trying to cover his predecessor's tracks? In any case, the FCC seems totally oblivious to the fact that any surcharges will, as a matter of course, be passed on to us Average Joes and Janes. "The potential financial impact on enhanced service providers [CIS, GEnie, TeleNet, etc.] of eliminating their exemption [from surchages] is substantially smaller than it was at the time the exemption was granted. In particular, the FCC noted that the carrier common line charge has decreased dramatically with the introduction of subscriber line charges." Sounds pretty ominous to me. CIS is gonna be a mighty lonely place to hang-out on if this goes thru. Not that I'd be around to see it…. This is a _GOOD_ thing we've got going here! We've gotta save it! Yours truly, David K.

Thanks for the info. After reading your reply I went to BPForum, joined it, and read FCC732.NOT and FILE.HLP, both in DL9. I think *everyone* here ought to head over to BPForum and read these files. The FCC notice makes it appear as if some sort of surcharge has been in the works all along. Is this really the case, or is the new FCC chairman just trying to cover his predecessor's tracks? In any case, the FCC seems totally oblivious to the fact that any surcharges will, as a matter of course, be passed on to us Average Joes and Janes. "The potential financial impact on enhanced service providers [CIS, GEnie, TeleNet, etc.] of eliminating their exemption [from surchages] is substantially smaller than it was at the time the exemption was granted. In particular, the FCC noted that the carrier common line charge has decreased dramatically with the introduction of subscriber line charges." Sounds pretty ominous to me. CIS is gonna be a mighty lonely place to hang-out on if this goes thru. Not that I'd be around to see it…. This is a _GOOD_ thing we've got going here! We've gotta save it! Yours truly, David K.