Local Service Competition 7 Years Later . . .

1. Local Service Competition 7 Years Later . . . Kathleen LaValle Jackson Walker L.L.P. 901 Main St., Suite 6000 Dallas, TX 75202 Klavalle@jw.com

2. Local Service Competition Seven Years Later . . . Challenges to Achieving Effective Local Competition Local v. Long Distance Market Entry: Stats & Sustainability Positive Indicators of Whether Local Competition is Working Threats to Local Competition: Knowing the Danger Signs If We Knew Then What We Know Now . . .

3. Challenges to Achieving Local Competition Uncertainty . . . Still More Uncertainty to Come Rigid Timetables Versus Untimed Results Interoperability: Valued Customer/ Rival Suitor Ensuring and Measuring Performance

4. Local v. Long Distance Market Entry: Texas Stats and Sustainability Competitive Local Service Provider Market Share Seven Years Later . . . .* 16 Percent – Rural and Urban Customers 13 Percent – Suburban Customers SBC Long Distance Market Share Three Months After Entry . . . 15 Percent * Texas PUC: “not clear that such competition is sustainable” 2003 Report on Scope of Competition in Telecommunications Markets

5. Positive Indicators of Whether Local Competition is Working Bell Company Out-of-Region Local Competition Innovative, Competitively-Priced Bell Retail Offerings Drop-Off in Bell Company Fines and Penalties (exceeding $2.1 billion since 1996) Incumbent Win-Back Programs Less Successful

6. Threats to Local Competition: Knowing the Danger Signs ·Tell-Tale Shifts in Rhetoric ·“Discounted” Rates v. Cost-Based Rates ·“Share our Network” v. Nondiscriminatory Access ·Forgetting About or Looking to Re-Trade the Deal

7. If We Knew Then What We Know Now . . . Structural Separation Worked to Create Robust Competition in Long Distance Problems Solved with Structural Separation of Bell Company Wholesale and Retail Sides