Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

What It Was Like, What Happened, and What It's Like Now: Developments in Telecommunications Over Recent Decades

  • Published:
Journal of Regulatory Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A survey of telecommunications over past decades. Overall prices of services have declined less rapidly since deregulation, with local rates rising, long-distance rates falling. Productivity increased strongly during period of Bell System regulated monopoly. Service quality of traditional telephone services has fallen, but many new services have been added. Innovations in customer premise equipment since deregulation far exceed those in prior years. Many major network innovations occurred during years of Bell System monopoly and network innovations have continued since. Actions by the Federal Communications Commission actions anteceded government antitrust case and are responsible for most of the changes since 1978. Most of the beneficial changes have little, if anything, to do with antitrust case and divestiture.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allocation of Frequencies in the Bands Above 890 Mc., 27 F.C.C. 359 (1959).

  • AT&T Charges and Regulations for Television Transmission Services and Facilities, 42 F.C.C. 1 (1949).

  • AT&T Tariff FCC no. 260.

  • Averch, H., and L. L. Johnson. 1962. “Behavior of the Firm Under Regulatory Constraint.” American Economic Review 52(5): 1053-1069.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blank, L., D. L. Kaserman, and J. W. Mayo. 1998. “Dominant Firm Pricing with Competitive Entry and Regulation: The Case of IntraLATA Toll.” Journal of Regulatory Economics 14(1): 35-53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Briere, D. D. 1990. Virtual Networks: A Buyer's Guide. Norwood, MA: Artech House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruce, R. R. 1984. “Entering and Exiting the Access Labyrinth: Regulatory and Judicial Background and Policy Initiatives for the Future.” In Telecommunications Access and Public Policy, edited by A. Baughcum and G. Faulhaber. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calhoun, G. 1988. Digital Cellular Radio. Norwood, MA: Artech House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carterfone, 13 F.C.C. 2d (1968).

  • Christensen, L. R. 1980. Testimony, United States v. American Telephone and Telegraph Co., Civil Action No. 74-1698 (U.S.D.C., D.C., 1974).

  • Computer Inquiry, 40 F.C.C. 2d 293 (1973).

  • Crandall, R. W., and J. A. Hausman. 2000. “Competition in U.S. Telecommunications Services: Effects of the 1996 Legislation.” In Deregulation of Network Industries: What's Next?” edited by S. Peltzman and C. Winston. AEI-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies, Washington, D.C.: AEI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Defendants' Exhibit D-17-13, United States v. American Telephone and Telegraph Co., Civil Action No 74-1698 (U.S.D.C., D.C., 1974).

  • Dodd, A. Z. 1999. The Essential Guide to Telecommunications, second edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall PTR.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eckstein, O. 1980. Testimony, United States v. American Telephone and Telegraph Co., Civil Action No. 74-1698 (U.S.D.C., D.C., 1974).

  • Flamm, K. “Technological Advance and Costs: Computers versus Communications.” In Changing the Rules: Technological Change, International Competition, and Regulation in Communications, edited by R. W. Crandall and K. Flamm. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.

  • Gort, M., and N. Sung. 1999. “Competition and Productivity Growth: The Case of the U.S. Telephone Industry.” Economic Inquiry 37(4): 678-691.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gryb, R. M. 1959. “Requirements of FM Terminal Equipment for Conducting Data Transmission Tests on Message Type Telephone Channels.” Case 38763-13, United States v. American Telephone and Telegraph Co., Civil Action No. 74-1698 (U.S.D.C., D.C., 1974)(January 20).

  • “GSM Guide & History.” 2000. LebanonCell.com. http://lebanoncell.com/gsm_guide_and_history.htm

  • Hall, R. 1993. “Long Distance: Public Benefits from Increased Competition.” Applied Economics Partners, Menlo Park, CA (October).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardman, K. 1982. “A Primer on Cellular Mobile Telephone Systems.” Federal Bar News and Journal (November).

  • Hausman, J. A. 1997. “Valuing the Effect of Regulation on New Services in Telecommunications.” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity: Microeconomics. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henck, F. W., and B. Srassburg. 1988. A Slippery Slope: The Long Road to the Breakup of AT&T. New York, NY: Greenwood Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huber, P. 1987. The Geodesic Network: Report on Competition in the Telephone Industry. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hush-A-Phone Corp., 22 F.C.C. 112 (1957).

  • Kahn, A. E., T. J. Tardiff, and D. L. Weisman. 1999. “The Telecommunications Act at Three Years: An Economic Evaluation of its Implementation by the Federal Communications Commission.” Information Economics and Policy 11(4): 319-365.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahn, A. E. 2001. Whom the Gods Would Destroy or How Not to Deregulate, First Distinguished Lecture, AEI-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies, Washington, D.C.: AEI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kendrick, J. W. 1980. Testimony, United States v. American Telephone and Telegraph Co., Civil Action No. 74-1698 (U.S.D.C., D.C., 1974).

  • Kiss, F. 1984. In Total Factor Productivity of Canadian Communications Carriers, Final Report to the Department of Communications, Ottawa, ONT.

  • Knittel, C. R. 1997. “Interstate Long Distance Rates: Switching Costs and Market Power.” Review of Industrial Organization 12(4): 519-536.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kridel, D. J., D. E. M. Sappington, and D. L. Weisman. 1996. “The Effects of Incentive Regulation in the Telecommunications Industry: A Survey.” Journal of Regulatory Economics 9(3): 269-306.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lavey, W. G. 1988. “Ending Structural Separation for Telephone Companies.” In W. Sapronov, Telecommunications and the Law: An Anthology, vol. I. Rockville, MD: Computer Science Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leiner, B. M., V. G. Cerf, D. D. Clark, R. E. Kahn, L. Kleinrock, D. C. Lynch, J. Postel, L. G. Roberts, and S. Wolff. 2000. “A Brief History of the Internet.” version 3.31, Internet Society, http://www.isoc.org/internet-history/brief.html.

  • Litton Systems, Inc., v. American Tel. & Tel. Co., No. 76 Civ. 2512 (WCC) (S.D.N.Y.).

  • MacAvoy, P. W. 1995. “Tacit Collusion Under Regulation in the Pricing of Interstate Long-Distance Telephone Services.” Journal of Economics and Management Strategy 4(2): 147-185.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacAvoy, P. W. 1998. “Testing for Competitiveness of Markets for Long Distance Telephone Services: Competition Finally?” Review of Industrial Organization 13(3): 295-319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maxwell, E. E. 1991. Comments on “Innovation and New Services,” by W. G. Bolter and J. W. McConnaughy. In After the Breakup: Assessing the New Post-AT&T Divestiture Era. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mele, A. J. 1959. A Survey of Dataphone Development Projest and Services, Case no. 38763-13, United States v. American Telephone and Telegraph Co., Civil Case No. 74-1698 (U.S.D.C., D.C., 1974) (January 19).

  • Microwave Communications, Inc., 18 F.C.C. 2d 953 (1969).

  • MCI Telecommunications Corp. v. F.C.C., 561 F. 2d 365 (1977).

  • MCI Telecommunications Corp. v. F.C.C., 580 F. 2d 590 (1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 980 (1978).

  • Nadiri, M. I., and B. Nandi. 1996. “The Changing Structure of Cost and Demand for the U.S. Telecommunications Industry.” National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper 5820 (November).

  • New York Times. 2001. (April 9) 1, 13.

  • Noll, R. G., and S. R. Smart. 1991. “Pricing of Telephone Services”. In After the Breakup: Assessing the New Post-AT&T Divestiture Era, edited by B. G. Cole. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nordhaus, W. D. 1980. Testimony, United States v. American Telephone and Telegraph Co., Civil Action No. 74-1698 (U.S.D.C., D.C., 1974).

  • Olley, G. S., and A. Pakes. 1996. “The Dynamics of Productivity in the Telecommunications Equipment Industry.” Econometrica 64(6): 1263-1297.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oum, T. H., and Y. Zhang. 1995. “Competition and Allocative Efficiency: The Case of the U.S. Telephone Industry.” Review of Economics and Statistics 77(1): 82-96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, A. 1979. “Organizational Factors in R&D and Technological Change: Market Failure Considerations.” In Perspectives on Research, Development and Technological Innovation, edited by D. Sahal. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, A. 1983. “Regulatory and Interfirm Organizational Burdens in the US Telecommunications Structure.” Columbia Journal of World Business 18(1): 46-52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, A. 1984. “The Reintegration of Telecommunications: An Interim View.” In Analyzing the Impact of Regulatory Change in Public Utilities, edited by M. Crew. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, A. 1990. “Antitrust Principles and Regulatory Needs.” Antitrust Bulletin 35(3): 631-675.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, G. L., and A. Phillips. 1985. “Borrowing from Peter to Pay Paul: More on Departures of Price from Marginal Cost.” In Antitrust and Regulation: Essays in Honor of John J. McGowen, edited by F. M. Fisher. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scourias, J. 1994. “A Brief History of GSM.” University of Waterloo, http://www.cs.tu-berlin.de/ ~ jutta/gsm/js-intro.html.

  • Specialized Common Carriers, 29 F.C.C. 2d 870 (1971).

  • Stone, A. 1989. Wrong Number, New York, NY: Basic Books, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, W. E., and L. D. Taylor. 1993. “Post-Divestiture Long-Distance Competition in the United States.” American Economic Association Papers and Proceedings 83(2): 185-190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, W. E., and J. D. Zona. 1997. “An Analysis of the State of Competition in Long-Distance Telephone Markets.” Journal of Regulatory Economics 11(3): 227-255.

    Google Scholar 

  • Telecommunications Act of 1996, Public Law No. 104-104, 100 Stat. 56 (1996)

  • Terleckyj, N. E. 1989. “Growth of the Telecommunications and Computer Industries.” In Changing the Rules: Technological Change, International Competition, and Regulation in Communications, edited by R. W. Crandall and K. Flamm. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution.

    Google Scholar 

  • Third Computer Inquiry, Report, 104 F.C.C. 2d 958 (1986).

  • United States Department of Justice. 1987. “Report and Recommendations of the United States Concerning the Line of Business Restrictions Imposed on the Bell Operating Companies by the Modification of Final Judgment.” (February 1).

  • Uri, N. D. 2001. “Productivity Change, Technical Progress, and Efficiency Improvement in Telecommunications.” Review of Industrial Organization 18(3): 283-300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Video II, 44 F.C.C. 1354 (1954).

  • Vogelsang, I., and G. Woroch. 1998, “Local Telephone Service: A Complex Dance of Technology, Regulation and Competition.” In Industry Studies, edited by L. L. Duetsch second edn, Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ware, H. 1983. “The Competitive Potential of Cellular Mobile Communications.” IEEE Communications Magazine (November).

  • Weisman, D. L., and M. A. Williams. 2001. “The Costs and Benefits of Long-Distance Entry: Regulation and Non-Price Discrimination.” Review of Industrial Organization 18(3): 275-282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, W. W., and Y. Zhou. 1997. “Costs, Productivity, and Firm Heterogeneity in Local Telephone Markets.” Journal of Regulatory Economics 11(3): 291-310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ying, J. S., and R. T. Shin. 1993. “Costly Gains to Breaking Up: LECS and the Baby Bells.” Review of Economics and Statistics 75(2) 357-361.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zajac, E. E. 1990. “Technological Winds of Creation and Destruction in Telecommunications.” In Evolving Technology and Market Structure: Studies in Schumpeterian Economics, edited by A. Heertje and M. Perlman. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zajac, E. E. 1972. “Note on 'Gold Plating' and 'Rate Base Padding'.” Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science 3(1): 311-315.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Pennsylvania, USA

    Almarin Phillips

Authors
  1. Almarin Phillips
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Phillips, A. What It Was Like, What Happened, and What It's Like Now: Developments in Telecommunications Over Recent Decades. Journal of Regulatory Economics 21, 57–78 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013626723876

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013626723876

Keywords

Search

Navigation