On Sun, 2009-08-16 at 19:54 -0400, Alex Balashov wrote: > Trunking customers cherry-picking expensive rate centers from a plan > offered them retail as blended is a big problem, though. >
sorta that is what Audiotext v AT&T was about, granted it was actual arbitrage, the FCC said that if you want a ratio you have to actually put that into a contract or tariff. AT&T did not put a ratio on traffic to the UK, and audiotext only called 7xx PNS numbers for profit. AT&T got upset because they were losing money since Audiotext did not follow some ratio they said in court documents they expected but never made as part of the deal. This type of cherry picking is what caused some flat rate providers to tank a couple years ago. People would get every deck rate they could and one or more flat rate providers. Anything less than the flat rate would go decked anything more would obviously go out the flat rate provider, which means that its likely the flat rate provider lost money on every call. Most of them wanted or expected some ratio but never actually said it to the customers. Even settlements between large telcos can have similar situations. MCI and Deutche Telecom have a deal (or had at least) where instead of cash they would swap minute for minute. MCI got kinda upset when they terminated gobs of minutes to DT who then sold really cheap US termination and only high cost went over that. MCI ended up losing a lot of money given the cost difference of the minutes. They shut it off for at least a while, but that is what happens when you dont have ratio requirements. -- Trixter http://www.0xdecafbad.com Bret McDanel pgp key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x8AE5C721 _______________________________________________ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- AstriCon 2009 - October 13 - 15 Phoenix, Arizona Register Now: http://www.astricon.net asterisk-biz mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
