4 ms·
Right, so it's proportionally allocated to providers based on their service to those challenging customers. I'm not sure what's being overlooked.
by FireBeyond 2y ago
Right, so it's proportionally allocated to providers based on their service to those challenging customers. I'm not sure what's being overlooked.
- rayiner 2y agoOP called the USF fee on his AT&T bill “compensation” to AT&T for maintaining landlines. That overlooks that the vast majority of that money is redistributed from AT&T and its customers to other carriers serving a small population of very high cost customers.
- saghm 2y agoThe USF isn't a final destination for money though; it's spent on those small population customers in proportion to the carriers that serve them. You seem to be arguing that because 100% of the money doesn't go to AT&T, paying that fee somehow isn't relevant to the discussion of AT&T serving those remote customers, but the amount they get is literally determined by how many of those customers they serve. By the same logic, other carriers collect the same fee from their customers that could get funneled to AT&T! I'm not sure if you're just trying to argue semantics about the fact that only part of the fee goes to AT&T or if you misunderstand how the USF actually works, but AT&T isn't disadvantaged at all compared to other carriers by this fee; they're all on the same playing field in terms of having to collect the fee and then only getting it back in proportion to the costs of serving the customers that the article discusses.