AES <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote in message
> In article <email@example.com>, Dean M.
> <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> I see now that your proposal is: since our communications are being
>> decoupled from the copper wire anyway (or at the very least the low
>> band part of it), we should not remove (on this point, see another
>> posting about Verizon's FiOS offering and copper) or allow it to
>> decay, but use it as dedicated conduit for "utility" services like
>> 911, alarms etc. Anything which is first location dependent and then
>> customer dependent as opposed to the other way around.
> That's a fair enough summary.
> Note that minimal basic telephone service can currently be obtained
> for something in the range of $10/month, give or take (although I
> don't know how much subsidy is in that number). Suppose the telco
> didn't have to provide the telephone service, handle the switching of
> calls, do the billing, all that stuff -- just provide and maintain a
> bare wire. Wouldn't take much in the way of services to support
> that monthly cost.
That's what SBC charges for bare minimal phone service where I am.
But then they tack on all kinds of fees and taxes and it comes to
almost twice that! Unfortunately I don't have the bill in front of me
so I can't recall how much of those fees is "legitimate"
(i.e. government forces them to charge it) and how much is what SBC
will call fees but they're not government mandated. Anyway, the point
is I cannot shed any light on the question of copper loop
maintenance/greenfield expansion costs. Anyone else?