1993-05-21 - Consider “Working Assets” phone service instead of AT&T

Header Data

From: Patrick Tufts <zippy@berry.cs.brandeis.edu>
To: gg@well.sf.ca.us
Message Hash: 1a0d76cc2bb4ba47b652b7cb44bfe699a219be943896c6d4b8a1fde6ac15d4dd
Message ID: <9305211418.AA10692@berry.cs.brandeis.edu>
Reply To: <199305210935.AA00447@well.sf.ca.us>
UTC Datetime: 1993-05-21 14:16:11 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 21 May 93 07:16:11 PDT

Raw message

From: Patrick Tufts <zippy@berry.cs.brandeis.edu>
Date: Fri, 21 May 93 07:16:11 PDT
To: gg@well.sf.ca.us
Subject: Consider "Working Assets" phone service instead of AT&T
In-Reply-To: <199305210935.AA00447@well.sf.ca.us>
Message-ID: <9305211418.AA10692@berry.cs.brandeis.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


   Date: Fri, 21 May 1993 02:35:20 -0700
   From: George A. Gleason <gg@well.sf.ca.us>

   [....]
   it.  So sign with Working Assets and write them a note telling them you want
   to see a phonecard-only option soon, and chances are they'll be responsive
   if they get enough of those.  Especially if they're getting them from people
   who used to have accounts with teh Big Three.
				      ^^^ ^^^^^

Isn't Working Assets just a reseller of AT+T (or is it Sprint) LD?  As
such, you're still giving business to one of "the Big Three".





Thread