Talk:Embarq
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of Companies WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of companies. If you would like to participate please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance rating assessment scale. | |
Contents |
[edit] History
A more complete corporate history would be useful - such as the antecedent to Sprint's local business. Was it a regional bell or CLEC?
--It wasn't a CLEC...it was an ILEC in it's own areas. Different independent LECs were purchased and added to the Sprint family. Jadenus 18:13, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
A slight nit. Most of the LEC purchases occurred while the company was Unitied Utilities and United Telecom. This predates the merger of GTE Sprint and US Telecom (to form US Sprint). The only one that I'm aware of that was actually purchased by Sprint was Centel. Jayscore 14:26, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Reverted advertising commentary
I removed the following section from the article since it is uncited and opinion based. Will need more than just an example of the ad; a cite supporting "has become known" and "widely seen". "Very obnoxious" is simply an opinion and not very encylopedic. I'm afraid that a clean up of the text just leaves an example of non-notable advertising. Kuru talk 11:59, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
- ==Advertising==
- Embarq has become known for using a very obnoxious method of online advertising, in :which banner ads make loud dial tone sounds. This advertisment is widely seen on :[http://www.monster.com Monster].
[edit] Criticism of billing practices
Embarq engages in third-party billing that (knowingly or not) aids Internet fraud (enter your phone number and address for a free sample ...get billed $15 a month on your phone bill for "e-mail services"). Is this common to other phone companies? I'm not trying to malign the company unjustly; it's just something that happened to me personally, and I was surprised that there's no criticism of it in this article. --Tysto 15:39, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
-
- This is a misconception for which many communications companies are often accused. EMBARQ is required, by law, to allow third-party billers to bill for "communications services" tied to the phone line which EMBARQ provides as a carrier of last resort. There is nothing EMBARQ can do to prevent a third-party biller from adding fradulant charges to a customers bill. This state is not unique to EMBARQ, but is a plague on all regulated communications companies. See the phone fraud wiki article for good information. I *think* that this is enabled by a provision in the Telecommunications Act of 1996, but need a 'fact check' on that.---P Todd 03:33, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Sprint Long Distance Reseller?
The article states "Embarq acts as a reseller for Sprint Long Distance services." I'm not sure this is accurate. Intra-LATA Embarq provides it's own long distance circuits, just like any other LEC. Is this saying that Embarq has an exclusive contract with Sprint for Inter-LATA circuits? I'd like to see a source for this. Jayscore 18:52, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
- The relationship is accurate per Reuters, "Following the spin-off, Embarq offers long distance voice and data services through a wholesale arrangement with Sprint Nextel. Long distance voice calling services are priced either based on usage or pursuant to flat-rate calling plans. These services include traditional switched long distance, toll free calling, international, calling card and operator services. It also offers some long distance voice and data services to large business customers as an agent of Sprint Nextel."--P Todd 15:17, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
