Verizon seeks 75% increase for land lines

[Newsjock]

"Inflation is under control." Ha.
http://komotv.com/stories/32323.htm

OLYMPIA - Verizon Communications is seeking a 75 percent rate hike for basic local telephone services for 850,000 customers in Washington.

The company filed the request with the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission on Friday. A decision isn't expected before next summer. An interim increase in pending, however, and a decision on that is likely to be announced in September.

In April, Verizon initiated its first rate hike request in 22 years, reporting a revenue shortfall of nearly $240 million a year in Washington. State regulators are studying the company's finances, and directed Verizon to propose a new rate structure.

The company asked that basic monthly rates rise by nearly $10 - from $13 to $22.80 for residential customers and from the current $29.70 for business customers to $39.50.

more

[aquart]

1. I favor a CEO tax.

If your company has raised its prices, the government takes 75% of the CEO's total compensation to offset the increased demand for social services.

[mitchtv]

2. I have Verizon in So Cal

abot 28/mo .how I miss Pac bell

[Syncronaut Seven]

4. They price fix in oregon

both verizon and us west charge $28 a month.

[AndyTiedye]

6. Verizon WIRELESS Rocks

Their landlines? maybe not.

Pac Bell isn't so great either, given how many of us in the Bay Area
still can't get DSL.

[teryang]

7. Verison wireless just settled a class action for fraud

...last year. They extended my spouse's contract without authorization and billed us for a number we no longer had. I wouldn't do business with them. I threatened to sue them on firm letterhead, and they continued to bill me. In my second letter, I told them I would be filing suit withing fifteen days and asking for punitive damages and they finally stopped. Then I got the class action notice from some court in California, and I opted out. I think the class members get like $10 off one month's service or some other pathetic benefit for all the trouble they've caused nationwide.

[uhhuh]

9. Cingular is currently involved in a class action fraud suit

Att was a few years ago, and there was some funny business involving Voice Stream before they changed their name to T-Mobile.

The wireless industry has been regulated in a less than strict way up until recently.

[TheWraith]

10. Verizon Wireless is okay...

They have great, kick-ass coverage, but their plans are expensive compared to T-Mobile or AT&T, and they don't offer modern conveniences like Bluetooth.

You people only pay $28 a month for a landline? Here in western New York state we pay $75 per month for two extremely poor quality landlines. Verizon, of course.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

3. Maybe that's why they keep triple billing my checking account

:eyes:

[2Design]

5. and AT and T announced they are getting out of local service...

another monopoly......

[loudsue]

8. Utilities Commissions, if they weren't already in the pockets of the big

corporations, should be asking these guys how much they've increased pay to their top 5% of management. The consumers shouldn't have to be paying these outrageously high salaries that the top tier think they're entitled to.

Maybe they wouldn't have a $240 million shortfall if they weren't paying some schmucks $100 million in pay and options every YEAR! (Much less, every LIFETIME!)

:kick:

[Hotler]

11. No matter how you say it or candy coat it,

it's all about GREED$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

[lojasmo]

12. Land lines suck

I haven't had one for 5 years. I SAVE money on long distance by using cellular phones exclusively.

[Eurobabe]

13. which is why I booted my land line in favor of VoIP!!

Over a year ago, I have saved about $1500 so far.

My telephone bill is now only $39 per month, unlimited local and long distance.

[UpInArms]

14. we knew that this would be coming

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/10/business/10PHON.html?ex=1090814400&en=8f36cc10c5e5d91d&ei=5070&ex=1087444800&?en=4e7155c0a048e491&?ei=5062&?partner=GOOGLE

In Pivotal Case, Bush Backs Off Rule That Eased Phone Line Fees

WASHINGTON, June 9 — In a move that critics say could lead to higher telephone rates, the Bush administration on Wednesday sided with the four regional Bell companies in a court case over the fees they charge their rivals for access to their networks.

The administration's decision, which could affect the phone bills of nearly 50 million customers across the country, was a significant policy reversal in a case making its way to the Supreme Court.

Justices are being asked to review an appeals court decision that struck down a set of regulations requiring the Bell companies — Verizon, SBC Communications, BellSouth and Qwest Communications — to make their networks available to rivals at heavy discounts. The appeals court decision will take effect next week unless the Supreme Court intervenes.

The solicitor general, on instructions from the White House, dropped out of the case on Wednesday after unsuccessfully trying to defend the regulations in the appeals court. The decision substantially reduces the chances that the Supreme Court will accept the appeal, particularly because the Federal Communications Commission, which had been pressured by the administration, also reversed course and said it had decided not to pursue an appeal either.

Both sides in the matter agree that if the Supreme Court does not alter the appeals decision, a central element of the landmark Telecommunications Act of 1996 will effectively be repealed. The act requires the Bell companies, which have long been criticized for holding near-monopoly positions in local markets, to make valuable pieces of their networks available at low rates to both small and large rivals, enabling them to offer cheaper service than they otherwise might.

...more...

(edited to fix post)