TELECOM Digest OnLine - Sorted: Re: A Couple Points From Recent Discussions

Re: A Couple Points From Recent Discussions
22 Feb 2007 10:42:28 -0800

On Feb 21, 8:48 pm, Bill Hendley <> wrote:

> Not all Centrex systems required consoles.

Actually, you did not need anything special for the attendant's
console or even an attendant for the later Centrex generation, since
Centrex II was an automated system. You could (and I believe some
indeed did) have a plain telephone set as the general listed number,
and simply transfer calls via hookswitch flash. Actually, you didn't
need to have a general listed number at all. It depended on what
level of customer service you wished to provide. There were
organizations that were satellite offices and if you didn't know the
listed number for a particular person, you probably didn't want to
call the satellite office in the first place. IMHO, good business
requires that an attendant be available to assist callers who may have
lost a number as well as internal needs.

In old time dial PBXs, while many extensions were disabled from
dialing 9 for an outside line, I believe any extension could dial 0
for the PBX attendant. Presumably an executive could get an outside
call placed or in an emergency the attedant would connect to the
police, fire, and/or rescue.

However in modern systems, there may be no attendant at all, and
disabled phones merely give a fast busy if one attempts to dial 9 or
0. The usefulness of such phones in an emergency seems rather

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But in small towns like ours, as
> generally economically depressed as our town, and losing in
> population, jobs, etc, the city fathers look at Walmart and think
> it means a Savior has come to rescue the place.

This is a good point. For _some_ places, a Walmart is good because it
is better than the alternatives, which are nothing.

Also, from the customer's point of view, whether we like them or not,
the big chains do offer more hours, products, and lower prices.

I tried to support the independently owned drugstores in my town until
they closed. But I must admit the chain (CVS) is more convenient for
me since it is open much longer hours than the private drugstores
could be. It also has a much greater selection of sundry items than
the private stores. However, prices are the same, the CVS is not a
discount store.

What bothers me now is that the big drugstore chains are merging
together among themselves. So while we'd have a little competition
from say CVS, Thrift/Eckert, and RiteAid, the numbers are declining
due to buy outs. To me that is anti trust and should not be allowed.

Post Followup Article Use your browser's quoting feature to quote article into reply
Go to Next message: T: "Re: Party Line Dialing, was Re: Telephone Area Codes and Prefixes"
Go to Previous message: Rick Merrill: "Re: Verizon to Discontinue Analog Cell Service"
May be in reply to: Bill Hendley: "A Couple Points From Recent Discussions"
TELECOM Digest: Home Page