I was set on QUUest or UUQwest for the new name, too.
Verizon wins the battle for MCI, pays < 7B.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1802&e=2&u=/washpost/2005021
4/ts_washpost/a22085_2005feb13
I was set on QUUest or UUQwest for the new name, too.
What, don't you like UUVeriNET even better? 
Verizon wins the battle for MCI, pays < 7B.
I'm not financier, but this price seems rather low considering how large
Worldcom is/used to be and that it includes all former UUNET, MCI, MFS,
WCOM, etc. BTW - did this include Digex as well?
But does anyone really know how big WorldCon is/was? First thing Verizon
will have to do is fire the entire billing department and replace them
with people/systems that can generate correct bills and send them to the
correct customers.
uhm, thats the '70 billing departments' ... or so said the SEC's info
about how many billing systems were 'integrated' during the
bernie-dynastic-times.
I remember reading in IT Week or Infoweek or some other trade rag that they had over 2400 software packages used for billing and provisioning and they were going to reduce that down to 1500 within 10 years! We have never gotten a correct bill from MCI - ever! In over 10 years of dealing with them and their divisions - MFS, UU, WCom, etc. After C&W took over MCI's network in the mid 90's, their billing department took a couple of months to grasp the enormity of the problem. Once they did, they made changes and the C&W bills were always right after that. 
That is an enormous project...
-Robert
Tellurian Networks - The Ultimate Internet Connection
http://www.tellurian.com | 888-TELLURIAN | 973-300-9211
"Well done is better than well said." - Benjamin Franklin
But does anyone really know how big WorldCon is/was? First thing Verizon
will have to do is fire the entire billing department and replace them
with people/systems that can generate correct bills and send them to the
correct customers.
<dripping with sarcasm>
Thats right! I forgot that Verizon was capable of billing correctly!
</dripping with sarcasm>
Alex Rubenstein wrote:
> But does anyone really know how big WorldCon is/was? First thing
> Verizon will have to do is fire the entire billing department
> and replace them with people/systems that can generate correct
> bills and send them to the correct customers.<dripping with sarcasm>
Thats right! I forgot that Verizon was capable of billing
correctly!</dripping with sarcasm>
So the real question is do we scream bloody murder about the current
incorrect MCI billing before or after Verizon screws it up? Let's see
- MCI already fired all the customer service people....
Mark
Jon Lewis wrote:
But does anyone really know how big WorldCon is/was? First thing Verizon
will have to do is fire the entire billing department and replace them
with people/systems that can generate correct bills and send them to the
correct customers.
You've got to be kidding me! Fear the day this happens. It took Verizon 15 MONTHS to fix a billing dispute we've had from just ONE DS3 circuit. In that time they've accidently interupted service twice (for hours at a time) while they attempt to "fix the billing issue". MCI's billing is like a vacation compared to all the billing problems we've had with Verizon.
some of customer service is still here... we didn't all get sent overseas
yet.
Christopher L. Morrow wrote:
I was mostly joking 
I do know that the billing department(s) have had
their 'issues' (large and small) over the years ;(
<chuckle> Well, by one metric, they're #1:
Rank ISP Number of currently-listed spam issues
--- --- --------------------------------------
1 mci.com 193
2 kornet.net 164
3 sbc.com 119
4 comcast.net 100
5 xo.com 78
6 above.net 75
7 crc.net.cn 68
8 verizon.net 67
9 level3.net 64
10 interbusiness.it 56
(from the Spamhaus top ten list (http://www.spamhaus.org/statistics.lasso))
Combining entries 1 and 8 puts them even further out in front.
---Rsk
we aim to please? or was there some hidden meaning to your email/troll?
1. I didn't realize that accurately reporting the facts was now considered
a "troll". Fascinating.
2. Nope, there's no hidden meaning -- unless you're someone with the
authority, integrity and courage to pull the plug on those 193 spam
operations. By close-of-business today would be just fine, thanks.
Those of us absorbing the operational costs of dealing with the abuse
they're cranking out would really appreciate it.
3. If that made you uncomfortable, you probably don't want to read this:
Should MCI Be Profiting From Knowingly Hosting Spam Gangs?
http://www.spamhaus.org/news.lasso?article=158
---Rsk