AT&T plans to kill pay phones - we want lower-cost pre-paid wireless plans!

AT&T announces plan to kill pay phones in 2008 To the disappointment of lower-income residents in AT&T’s 13-state pay-phone coverage area – including Texas and California – AT&T has announced that they will be shutting down their pay-phone service by the end of 2008. The pay-phone side of the business has been a money-loser for AT&T and it looks like they’ve had just about enough of this whole giving-the-less-fortunate-a-communications-outlet operation.

But, what about all those lower-income customers that rely on pay-phones to keep in touch with friends and family? Well, there’s always the pre-paid wireless option from AT&T. And, on that note, we’d love to see AT&T introduce more price-friendly pre-paid (and even post-paid) wireless plans with free or low-cost mobile phones. Everyone deserves to have access to a telephone, and even if the move makes business sense, AT&T should see that they have a civic responsibility to the American population.

How’s about it, AT&T? Cheaper pre-paid wireless rates without daily service charges would be just the thing to make up for all those dead pay-phones. You know, unless you want everyone to keep referring to you as the bid, bad corporation that screwed lower-income Americans out of telephone access.

[Via: Reuters]

About The Author

Will Park

Will hails from The City of Angels - Los Angeles, California. He spends his time playing with his numerous gadgets and looking forward to seeing what future holds for mobile technology. An avid promoter of a fully "digital" life, he promotes the widespread adoption of truly mobile, paper-less living. He dreams of the day when he can go completely digital. No more snail mail, paper receipts, bound books, notepads/spiral notebooks, credit cards, hard currency. He's a digital warrior - fighting for the converged life. He is an idealist and a realist - he has a perfect view of what the world should be but knows that the world is not perfect. Can we ever hope to see Will's dream become reality? We'll see...

Gregory

I exceedingly defend the right for AT&T to drop their pay phones. A company has should have no obligation to continue providing any service unless it has voluntary agreed to it in the form of contract.
Will Park

I would normally agree with you 110%, but this is a different situation. AT&T has a moral obligation to America. They are by no means a struggling or small (or medium, or large) company – they’re ginormous (to use a technical term), the largest telecom provider in the US.

By no means do they have a legal or business obligation to anyone, but I think they are morally obligated to provide the lower-end of the US’s socioeconomic ladder with a cheap way to keep in touch. If that means a lower-cost prepaid service with no daily service charges, then so be it.
Gregory

I base my beliefs on principles and I have difficulty in having a principle that changes around the size of the respective company. However, I do like the fact that you say they have no legal or business obligation to anyone–my moral belief (to sum quickly) is only against the use of force and fraud. Benovholence not required (yeah, I admit I am rather extreme in my views by comparison)
Will Park

I only referenced AT&T’s size to illustrate the company’s unique position to provide wide coverage of infrastructure like PayPhones while also being in the position to hold down competitors from proliferating and possibly offering better service in AT&T’s given markets.

They’ve had the privilege of providing this service with virtually no competition in their markets, and now they want to yank the plug and leave a massive hole in the telecom market (as far as the payphone market is concerned).

Had there been more competition on AT&T’s turf, their exit wouldn’t be as damaging. But then again, I believe in companies doing the right thing (being benevolent) – but that’s me
Gregory

Perhaps the increased use of cell phones after ridding the streets of functional pay phones will decrease the cost of service for all of us?
nettie

As usual, the big corporations are sticking it to the
small guy. I understand about business and how the pay phones may not generate the income that AT&T might prefer. But don’t try to scam the populace by saying that the loss the company endures by supplying the public phones is reason enough to yank them nation wide. Whatever happened to social consciousness? Money is spent daily by AT&T customers. Shouldn’t they have some say in decisions that may effect them and their fellow citizens? Everyone doesn’t own a cell phone. What happens to these guys in an emergency?
rush

No company, no matter how big or small, should be forced to subsidize a service that loses money for the company and its shareholders. It is immaterial whether the company in question is making a small profit or losing money or making money by the truckload. This is not rocket science, this is Economics 101. I am a stockholder in AT&T. If AT&T is losing money by having and servicing payphones, then they have a “moral obligation” to the stockholders to discontinue the service that is a money loser for them and their shareholders (or find a way to make said service profitable). Why should any company be forced to lose money? What if you owned a small business, and you had to foot the bill “for the good of the little guy”? You are in business to make money. Businesses are in business to make money. This is not a bad/evil thing. This is a good thing. It is the engine that drives the free market and America’s economy.