Telecommunication Customer Service Worldwide

imin8r writes " Whirlpool writes that an Telstra, Australia's largest Telco (who also happens to own all wholesale access to ADSL in Australia), had rejected an ADSL user's application from a small ADSL provider, but subsequently accepted their own ADSL application from the same user. The funny thing is, the smaller ISP sells exactly the same service as Telstra as they are a Telstra reseller. Both providers use the same line, same exchange and same equipment. However, the story doesn't end there. When Telstra was approached by the aggrieved user explaining what had happened, Telstra offered him a settlement to keep quiet. When he didn't, they disconnected his already connected ADSL service. One of the arguments for Telstra's bad track record with customer service is the fact that they were previously government owned but are now partly privatised (and listed on the stock exchange). As a result they own a lot of the infrastructure which has been paid with by taxpayers money, but any new Telco players still need to use a lot of Telstra's infrastructure. I'd like to know whether full de-regulation of the telecommunication industry in the United States has benefited customer service and also what effect it has had on providing innovative services. "

Comments

Re:SO....

[arkanes]

Selling off stuff is one thing, selling off public assets, like public land or (especially) monopoly rights is altogether different.

Re:SO....

[ColaMan]

But , don't you remember?
They sold off telstra not "for the children!" , but "for the environment!"

So they got a few billion dollars for half of Telstra. Great. What happens in ten years time when than money's gone? Why, sell the other half! And then? Ooops, no more assets to sell. Telstra pretty much was the last major valuable asset the Australian Gov't had.

Once they sell them, there's no buying them back. Soon after they'll say "No, you can't have a phone in outer BumFuck, it's too far away from any regional centres of note and it's just not *cost effective* for us. Sorry. Here, try a HF radiotelephone instead."

As far as I'm concerned, certain things should be government owned simply because they provide a service to the people that is too important to worry about the cost, which is what private companies do.