Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (
More info?)
William Brinkley wrote:
> After about a month+ with Sprint customer service, I finally found out
> why my name on the caller ID shows up blank or "Unknown Name".
>
> They have allowed their (Sprint/RBOC) contracts to expire. The
> locals do not have to show the Name ID only the number. This is
> a cost cutting measure that has caused me no end of harrasment
> from my contemporaries since they know I had worked for Sprint
> for 30 years until I was RIFed on March 8th.
>
> So much for "complete" service from Sprint. Look for more bells
> and whistles and while they let the basic caller ID service go to pot.
>
> I do not think this is a smart marketing move!
You're angry at the wrong party, Bill.
This isn't a cost cutting move on Sprint's part. In fact, Sprint (or
some other third party) actually gets INCOME whenever the RBOCs display
name information with caller ID. The RBOC must dip into a database that
has that associated name information for each number that is passed
through. And they have a choice who they can contract with: either they
can set up individual agreements with each of the wireless companies and
CLECs, or can contract with a third party database vendor like VeriSign.
Typically, VoIP providers, CLECs and smaller phone companies will go
with VeriSign, and you'll almost never see a problem there. But the big
landline companies contract individually, for reasons I'll explain below.
It would appear that ILEC in your area (I refrain from calling them
RBOCs, as few companies these days are "regional" or even fully "bell"
descendants anymore) is contracting individually with its competing
carriers, and its contract with Sprint happened to expire. Typically,
some companies (Verizon and SBC are notorious for this, Qwest less so at
least to Sprint) will allow the contract to lapse for a period of time
in order to try and strong-arm the competing carrier to lower their
rates to dip into the CID name database. Until then, all customers on
that wireless carrier must "suffer" by not having their name passed on.
As most customers do not know the nature of the beast (and the ILEC is
more than happy to deceive them about it, too), they tend to blame the
competing carrier for not passing the info along, even though the
carrier has that info readily available and the ILEC simply refuses to
pay the per-name fee (in '99 the average fee was 2 cents per name... it
may now be as little as a fraction of a cent per name accessed).
You can also bet that ILECs have more "favorable" agreements (read, dirt
cheap or even free) between themselves and wireless companies they hold
a stake in. You will NEVER see this issue crop up between Verizon
Wireless and Verizon landline phones, nor between Cingular customers and
SBC or BellSouth landlines. You'd also be surpsied at how many times
there are issues in opposing territories *simultaneously*, i.e. Cingular
phones might mysteriously stop passing CID names due to "technical
glitches" in Verizon territories at the same time that SBC or
Bellsouth-incumbent areas stop dipping into the Verizon Wireless
database while the contract renewal there is being negotiated.
Typically, "problems" with passing the CID Names of Sprint, T-Mobile,
Nextel, Alltell, the MVNOs and most mom & pop wireless outfits will
linger longer because they don't have the same scale of landline-phone
holdings (or none at all) with which to retaliate.
Some ILECs will even purposefully insert the name of the carrier in the
CID Name info rather than show the default "Name Unavailable," so that
when their customers glance at the CID and instinctively ignore the
number and see a company name instead of a familiar person's name, they
will ignore the call assuming it's a telemarketer.
If the CID name info is important to you, then I suggest you start
making phone calls to the CLEC in your area, and throw them a curveball
by demanding that they ebgin dipping into this database again. They
tend to get very surprised when they discover that a customer knows how
the system actually works. A call or letter to the PUC in your area
wouldn't hurt either.
--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram