Analysis of Chair Martin
10 12 2008All..
This link shows that the FCC Chair has done no wrong, and the writer offers a realistic perspective of this sticky issue.
Article basically said Chair Martin has not violated any rules other than "bad manners" and dysfunctional management of the FCC. Further the article says that the committee as well as other congressmen hope that the report will serve as a notice to the new Chair and the need to change ways to manage the FCC.
eyes open & thumbs up,
Ed
PS: My crystal ball tells me that whoever the new FCC Chair will be, there will be possibly some significant changes for TRS and how they are subsidized. I just hope the situation will not go from one extreme to the other exteme. What is needed is check and balance procedure for determining VRS rates.
From the link: “Martin failed to set reasonable rates and, as a result, deaf viewers were overcharged more than $100 million a year.”
Charged who? Wasn’t it the telephone customer who ultimately paid for the TRS and related services? And who ultimately ended up with the money…the relay providers? The question we should be asking is: what are they doing with the extra money?
Dianrez, they’re probably off having massages at taxpayers’ expenses, like HOVRS was found to have done in another report done by KMPG (KPMG?).
There were a couple errors in the artile where the reporter still misunderstands what VRS really is and keeps referring the telecommunications relay services, “a feature for deaf television viewers”. The reporter went further to state that “deaf viewers were overcharged more than $100 million a year”. I sincerely hope someone corrects the reporter!
Let me say I am no big fan of Sorenson, but do appreciate their development of the VP which gave us the Video Relay Service and 1-1 video chats. Sorenson comes to the homes to provide the VP, set it up and come back if the VP is not functioning. FREE!! Sorenson gets less income per minute than some other VRS vendors because of Sorenson’s higher total minutes, even though most other vendors provides no free equipment and service like Sorenson. Fair??? I think not.
The FCC should investigate and audit ALL VRS vendors since it is common knowlege and a proven fact that several of the vendors pad their billable minutes by requiring their sub-contractors to attend countless VRS conference calls. thus jacking their invoices much, much higher than it would be if the VRS vendors only billed for legitimate Relay calls. Don’t forget the Affinity programs where CSDVRS (and some others) pays organizations for “growing” VRS minutes for them–in other words–artificially increase minutes that are billed to NECA. Those organizations can get from a few dollars to several THOUSAND per month.
If Sorenson is to be spanked, be fair and line the other guilty vendors up, as well.
Dianrez and Steve,
The article made a few mistakes. Deaf viewers were overcharged, writer meant ratepayers (telephone companies collect from the ratepayers and so the one who really paid into the Interstate TRS Fund that reimburses VRS providers). A few other mistakes as well…
Tut tut – writer should have done better job of researching and homework.
eyes open & thumbs up,
Ed
Play Fair,
Yeah, NASRA had submitted request of clarification on some of the marketing practices of VRS providers. Now the FCC folks need respond to the NASRA’s request and to do a thorough analysis of the whole shebang and provide guidance for the VRS providers as to what is legal and what is not legal.
Ed
Ed-
is there not a new order from FCC just recently? i have not see anything from you on this.
Ed is there information on the overcharges and what they were and such. I keep hearing about overcharges but don’t see any data to back that up…
Maybe you can point me in the right direction.
Thanks
Also I wonder how moving VRS back to the states would affect consumers. We all know the state looks to pay the lowest bidder and well we all know how that ends up. Also one would be dealing with 50 states and all having different rules. I think for consumers this might get frustrating as one state does this and another state does that. I for one think sending this back to the states will be a bad thing .The emphasis will be on cheapest bidder for services. In my experience that is never a plus for consumers. I know using tty relay that back in the early 90s was not bad then the rate cuts came and then there was less training and then less pay for operators and it all equated to less service.
If the feds paid 4.00 a minute there would be no incentive for someone to come up with better VP’s or software because there would be no money in it. Then to save money the VRS compays would hire the cheapest interpreters and provide less training and cut costs that in the end would affect consumers more than anything. I sometimes feel like people are begging for a nail though the foot even though they don’t know it. Basically I see some deaf people calling for lower rates for VRS companys and sending the whole thing back to the states but that means less quality for the consumer and to me that’s akin to driving a BMW now and begging to be put into a pinto. Maybe I am looking at this wrong Ed….Enlighten me if you can how lower rates and sending VRS back to the states would be better for deaf consumers.
Thanks again….
Anonymous,
Yes there is a new order. I’ve been away and just got in…
I will do a vlog on this..may require several vlogs as this has LOTS of info and little hard to “read between lines”.
Ed
Ed,
I do not advocate VRS going to states myself. I’m just saying that this is inevitable unless we let the FCC know. Remember that the Interstate TRS Fund is supposed to pay ONLY for interstate calls and about 50% of toll free calls. This Interstate TRS Fund paying for VRS and IP is temporary.
Are there alternatives; I believe so yes, but that will require a looongggg answer which I hope to do a vlog in the very near future.
Ed
Ed,
On the overcharge of VRS. Unfortunately, we do not have access to the proprietary data of the cost of VRS. FCC did mention something about $4.00 per min as being the right rate. I do know that not all VRS providers have same break-even rate, so it makes it difficult for the FCC to come up with a fair rate; it is reason why the FCC has provided “tiered” rates; the one that has highest call volume gets paid lower rate, and the ones that have lowest call volume gets paid higher. Is this fair? I can’t say without opening all of providers books and we’re not likely to be able to do that.
Ed
Now I understand. I looked some stuff up and it seems that in their opinion VRS providers profits are overcharges… Gee if that were the case can we open the books up of all those defense contractors that contract with the feds and consider their profits overcharges. I think this is much ado about nothing in the end.
Ed,
Could be.
Remember that for past 8 years, partisan party has pretty much controlled the contracts. They support the concept that business solves the problem, not gov’t. Now with the different partisan party which believes government control is essential, will these contracts be scrutinized much more and then they yell too much profit or CEOs getting too much money?
Public funds are tough to handle! Being in government myself for 18 years, I know that it is Legislators that really control the funds going to contractors so if the lobbysts were successful with the legislators, then likely the contractors would get obsecene profits. Then maybe not.
We’ll see how this all works out….and as I’ve said several times already, year 2009 is gonna be interesting and maybe bit chaotic.
Cheers….
Ed