Reply to a followup post regarding AT&T's 500 service, 6/10/98:


In article <6lk51g$ssv@panix.com>, danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com> wrote:
>the '700' "area code" was carrier specific. calls made via mci to
>1-700-xxx-yyyy would reach a different end point than calls made via att
>to the same number.
>
>this is not a problem with '500'. HOWEVER--- many phones (especially coin
>phones and pbxs) will bloc calls to it.

Generally, any phone which is not a POTS line will not allow 1-500 access 
(to AT&T EasyReach or whatever the name of the month is). 

This is due to a IMO foolish decision by AT&T to allow ALL 1-500 numbers 
to be forwarded to international locations, thus, the calling party (or 
the billing equipment on the calling party's side) has no idea what rate 
to apply. If I were running a hotel, I wouldn't allow ATTER 500 access 
since the given 500 number dialed could be forwarded onto a number in the 
UK, and there would be no way for the switchboard/equipment on the 
hotel's end to determine the rate being charged to me. 

A better solution would be to have either a special prefix which allows 
international forwarding for customers who need it (in and of itself a 
VERY useful feature) or have ATTER 500 test the originating location for 
"coin" or whatever else to make sure it is a line that will pay for the 
call, and if not, ask the caller to enter a calling card number if the 
call is out of the US to pay for the higher rates.

Using such a method, all billing equipment would "know" that ATTER 500 
calls are $.25/peak and $.15/off-peak per minute, and just bill the 
caller for that, while the rest of the international charges if the calls 
are forwarded outside of the US will be billed to the caller's calling 
card or perhaps to the 500 number owner if a PIN code for reverse billing 
is used. 500 owners who need transparent 500 international service could 
opt to obtain a 500 number which is in a special prefix recognized by 
routing equipment so that such calls are not placed via 1+ and require 
0+, but at least this way the 500 owner is given the option: easier 
access from US phones for those who rarely forward out of the US or 
somehard harder access from the US (ie, no carphones, payphones, hotels, 
etc), but transparent access to numbers outside of the US. 

As it stands right now, most cellphones, payphones, hotels, and anything 
other than a regular telephone line don't connect to 1-500, and callers 
will have to dial 0-500 and use a calling card to pay for the call. Very 
inconvenient, and I have found that after years of trying to get people 
to use the 500 number which I have they just get fed up with (a) the high 
cost of calling it ($.25 per minute day is way too high, and of course it 
is AT&T so no 6-second billing), (b) the need to use a calling card from 
anything other than a POTS phone, (c) the annoying prompts and AT&T 
branding, and (d) that callers calling from cellphones need to dial 
0-500, which in most cases supervises right away even if no one answers 
and thus the cellphone user is billed 2 minutes or so of airtime to get a 
busy or ringing signal (I never have my 500 go to voicemail). 
Additionally, 500 numbers can not be forwarded to 800/888/877 numbers.

Overall, a good idea, but as usual for AT&T (landline), sloppy, 
ill-conceived implementation. AT&T 500 service is a nice idea but just 
not worth the trouble/cost; use something else if you need a similar 
service. 

(This post and updated SID list are also available at www.wirelessnotes.org)

Regards,

Doug