Landline Phone Fees

General discussions and other topics.
7 posts Page 1 of 1
by roch00 » Wed Aug 16, 2017 12:32 pm
I was wondering if someone at Sonic could direct me to whomever is the best person to voice my concern to regarding my landline bill for the Federal Subscriber Line fee?

Federal Subscriber Line: Why is Sonic charging $6.50 for Federal Subscriber Line? I thought Sonic wants to help customers lower phone/internet costs. It looks like this fee is enacted by Sonic and Sonic has control over the fee amount. Why can’t Sonic lower this fee as it’s outrageous? For those that ask, you could give us a monthly credit to cover this outrageous fee. The maximum a company is allowed to charge is $6.50 and that is what Sonic is charging….not really cool in my eyes. Even AT&T didn’t charge the maximum…their fee was $4.47.


According to FCC: The Subscriber Line Charge is a fee that you pay to your local phone company that connects you to the telephone network. Local telephone companies recover some of the costs of telephone lines connected to your home or business through this monthly charge on your local telephone bill.. It is not a tax or a fee charged by the government. The money received from the subscriber line charge goes directly to local telephone companies.
by dane » Wed Aug 16, 2017 3:02 pm
Here is the short description: "The Subscriber Line Charge is a fee paid to the local phone company that connects you to the telephone network. Local telephone companies recover some of the costs of telephone lines connected to homes or businesses through this monthly charge on your local telephone bill."

Clearly this is a cost item that is below the line, similar to other carriers. We could shift these costs above the line, but the financial outcome would be the same for members. There isn't a silver bullet that simply lowers the cost of building network, interconnection, and providing service.
Dane Jasper
CEO
Sonic
by roch00 » Fri Aug 25, 2017 12:16 pm
Thanks Dane for the response but I am still fuzzy. Why did AT&T charge less for this item and Sonic charges more? Why can't Sonic charge what AT&T charges?
by dane » Fri Aug 25, 2017 12:20 pm
roch00 wrote:
Thanks Dane for the response but I am still fuzzy. Why did AT&T charge less for this item and Sonic charges more? Why can't Sonic charge what AT&T charges?


It is cost-based, so I'd assume that AT&T's costs are lower, maybe due to scale..?
Dane Jasper
CEO
Sonic
by roch00 » Sat Sep 23, 2017 12:47 pm
I understand you saying it is cost based but this fee is totally in Sonic's hand. There is no regulator demanding this fee. Sonic can lower the fee if they choose. Why isn't Sonic re-accessing?
by Irenesambrano80 » Wed Jan 29, 2020 7:24 am
roch00 wrote:
I was wondering if someone at Sonic could direct me to whomever is the best person to voice my concern to regarding my landline bill for the Federal Subscriber Line fee?

Federal Subscriber Line: Why is Sonic charging $6.50 for Federal Subscriber Line? I thought Sonic wants to help customers lower phone/internet costs. It looks like this fee is enacted by Sonic and Sonic has control over the fee amount. Why can’t Sonic lower this fee as it’s outrageous? For those that ask, you could give us a monthly credit to cover this outrageous fee. The maximum a company is allowed to charge is $6.50 and that is what Sonic is charging….not really cool in my eyes. Even AT&T didn’t charge the maximum…their fee was $4.47.


According to FCC: The Subscriber Line Charge is a fee that you pay to your local phone company that connects you to the telephone network. Local telephone companies recover some of the costs of telephone lines connected to your home or business through this monthly charge on your local telephone bill.. It is not a tax or a fee charged by the government. The money received from the subscriber line charge goes directly to local telephone companies.
by brendanduong » Mon Feb 17, 2020 2:34 am
dane wrote:
Clearly this is a cost item that is below the line, similar to other carriers. We could shift these costs above the line, but the financial outcome would be the same for members.


It would not be the same, as being above the line is more transparent to new customers. The airline industry has had this forced upon them for ages via the Full-Fare Advertising Rule: https://www.travelersunited.org/full-fa ... -airlines/
7 posts Page 1 of 1

Who is online

In total there are 9 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 9 guests (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 700 on Thu Jun 18, 2020 12:00 pm

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests