Lat Den 13/8L * ThE! fAnicauver Suni - ns © 89 dlrange thal a company in the Communications business Should be so quiet about LMS. What's the matter, B.C. Tel? Nat ‘too eager to let consumers ja on ‘your plans to institute Local Mea. sured Service? Your 1984 capital expenuitures —, ory nn Plan included $19.9 million for the pro- Posed Imple- mentation of LMS In 1986-88, and you now have approval a ‘to spend 83 mil- = ‘Hon aver the aext five years NICOLE te test-market . PARTON LMS by 1991. ’ Ontario. ‘based Bell Canada has already {Spent $2.6 million this year to re. Séarch LMS, and will spend 2 fur. ther $5.3 million in 1987, We are not ‘talking popcorn and peanuts here. ‘LMS is steak, potatoes and gravy to both these telephone companies. There could be a little, uh, PR problem once the public catches on. ling consumers on a pay phone .in every home is not exactly like ‘selling them on a chicken in every, ‘po ‘Because that’s what LMS will be ‘= an enormous money machine for ‘B.C, Tel, and an enormous cost for consumers. B.C. Tel is qnietly working toward a plan that will see ‘telephone subscribers pay for ‘every local call they make, though the bitter pill could Well be swee- ‘tened with the promise of a few “‘free”’ calls a month. Moreover, other telephone companies in Can. ada (led by Bell) want to do the Tad - Same thing. And unless consumers -across the country wake up and ‘Speak up, this willbe a fait accom ” Pu. . B.C. Tel provoses to charge for ‘every local call you place. Those ‘charges would vary with four fac- tors: the number of calls you make, the distance you cai] (the local net. work could be divided inte “calling zenes”’), the duration of each call, and the time of day you call. All lecal calls wil] be “meg. sured” and charged accordingly — they will cost you a bundle if you're the parent of teenagers. if you're a small business. a rea} estate or travel agent, a charitable organiza. tiou that solicits by phone. B.C. Tel data say 60 ber cent of local tele. phone users will save money under : the system, but 49 Per cent will pay more heavily. Now imagine trying to reconcile your moathly telephone bill, given the implementation of LMS, Pri. vately owned telephone companies across Canada are already balking at the idea of Providing fully de. tailed bills. because to do so fs ey. w Another problem With full item- ization 8 every bill: invasion of Privacy. You may not Want other household members to know you call this or that number se often and for so long. The other option — non- disclosure — means YOU go round in circles trying is cheek your bill, The ultimate aad hiosé gignifi- cant beneficiary of LMS is the util- ity company that provides it. Canadiaas spend more hours talking on the phone than anyone else in the world. That’s a fact B.C, Tel’s Roger Varley readily admits. Tel’s talk of “savings” for 66 per Cent of subscribers is based on 2 factor called “repression” — the al- ready proven tendency for eonsum- ers suddenly slapped with L31S to curtail their telephone usage, When every call costs money, you make fewer calls, ; But “repression” isn’t perma- nent. B.C. Tel data suggest that after initial repression takes place, telephone usage will rebound by Seven per Cent a year, so that ig 10 years’ time, the effect of repression Ulbe gene. - ae The result: automatic telephone ihereases with rising telephone use, and absolutely no need for reguig- tory rate hearings or. bothersome rate intervenors such as the Con- sumers' Association of Canada. . CAC (B.C.) co-president Ada Brown says of LMS: “We oppose it,” There have been s:me surveys done in the U.S. about it. Consum- ers in Dlinois were really frustrated at having to consider the cost of every call. It’s an infringement on our Canadian way of life. We've had a wonderful telephone system to this point, and we don't want to give that up.” Telephone companies are Saying we may have to, or face increasing tates for local calls. This week’s an- nhouncement that telephone com- panies across Canada want to ent long distance rates by $65 million is a Clear signa! the phone companies plan to put the Squeeze on cousum- ers. .. How? Long distance rates Subsi- dize the telephone companies’ eost of providing local service. The Phone companies want to lower long distance rates because of fa. creasing competition from other Providers of that service, and also because consumers may now buy ‘their phones from private sources rather than rent all phones from Tel. The lost revenue means local rates must rise. The least percepti- ble way of sneaking those increases ‘hrough is by LMS. Ue. Think of LMS as 4 giant wheel of fortune for telephone companies. While van gat thashaft ... en