AT&T To Decommission Pay Phones

oahazmatt writes "According to MarketWatch, AT&T said that its pay phones will be phased out over the next year. A company spokeswoman declined to say how much revenue its pay-phone business generated, but the number is small and declining. 'The first public pay-telephone station was set up in 1878, just two years after Alexander Graham Bell invented the talking device. The first coin-operated pay phone was installed in Hartford, Conn., in 1889. For decades after the pay phone's invention, many Americans relied on them because of the expense and difficulty in obtaining reliable home service. Only after World War II did the telephone become a household necessity.'"

Just great!

[$RANDOMLUSER (804576)]

Now where is Superman supposed to change?

Worse yet how will car run down trapped victims

[gmezero (4448)]

Sigh... yet another classic movie cliche goes the way of the DoDo.

Nine ways to handwave lack of cell phones

[tepples (727027)]

then again, there will be a similar problem when horror movies eventually acknowledge that most people have cell phones. most of the classic horror movies work around the premise that you can't just call somebody and the cast has to continually walk into some sort of trap.

Even after Verizon starts advertising its network in the commercials preceding the film, there are plenty of handwaves that screenwriters can still use to move an idiot plot [wikipedia.org] forward:

• Out of minutes on a prepaid phone
• Parent confiscated cell phone for overage on a 24-month-plan phone
• Setting the movie in plain people country [wikipedia.org]
• Rural area with "no conexión" as they used to say in commercials for La Quinta Inn
• Cell phone jammer [methodshop.com]
• Foreigners with a GSM phone in a CDMA country or vice versa
• Cell phone confiscated by movie theater personnel after someone forgot to turn it off and it rang
• Cell phone confiscated by movie theater personnel for fear of using it as a camcorder
• People turned into zombies after being hypnotized by their cell phones [wikipedia.org]

Didn't you see the movie?

[Tetsujin (103070)]

Now where is Superman supposed to change?

Superman has been dealing with this problem since 1978 at least... Remember? He tried to change at the payphone, but found that it didn't have a full booth around it... So he came up with other places to change, like in the revolving door, and in mid-air after jumping out the window, etc...

two words...

[Cryacin (657549)]

Now where is Superman supposed to change?

Stripper pants

Re:Just great!

[phobos13013 (813040)]

And where exactly do I ask you is Tony Soprano supposed to call in his hits from now? He cant use his freaking cell phone... fongu!

No longer required..

[in2mind (988476)]

..Because there are cellphone everywhere? But if you find yourself without cellphone in a situation,would some stranger lend you his for a call you want to make?

Oh its about profit...ok..

Re:No longer required..

[Abcd1234 (188840)]

And what about those who either choose not to have a cellphone, or can't afford one? Not everyone is willing to dedicate themselves to multi-year plans, or spend a not-insignificant number of dollars on a handset so they can pay (exhorbitantly) as they go.

Re:No longer required..

[Average (648)]

In the US, at least, a new handset for prepaid (Tracfone) goes for $15 plus sales tax. You can get a year's worth of operation for $80 (if you buy a $20 card quarterly) or $100 (for more minutes than that). Minutes that you use are much cheaper than the 50 cents + long distance for a payphone call.

Plus, any cellphone can call 911, activated or not. Lots of working ones for $3.99 with a charger at my local Goodwill.

Not saying it's a good deal, or that I can't understand not wanting to bother with one. But, they aren't that expensive in this country.

Canada on the other hand doesn't have anything nearly as affordable as Tracfone (or I would get one for use when I'm traveling there).

Re:No longer required..

[Jhon (241832)]

The pay as you go phones are for people who are either A) poor (obviously because they can't manage finances since they bought this) or B) buy into the whole "it's cheaper cuz you pay for the minutes up front".

Or C) They are GOOD with their finances and are willing to pay $.25 per minute for 50 or so minutes per month they *WILL* use rather than pay $40+ per month or more for minutes they will *NEVER* use.

I fell in to this catagory through 2005. ATT had a deal where I spent $25, got a cell phone with $15 of minutes on it ($.10 per minute) -- and got 20 minutes per month for free every month for 1 year. The entire plan cost me $50 over a year (I needed to buy one $25 phone card when I ran low on minutes one month).

Other than for work, I can't see how ANYONE can spend more than 100 (hell, even 400) minutes on a cell phone per month. Even now, I RARELY go over 200 minutes per month.

Re:No longer required..

[michrech (468134)]

Give me a break. You can (at least in the area of the US in which I reside) walk into virtually any store and walk out with a contractless cell phone, quite cheaply. It shouldn't matter *too* much if the per-minute charges are somewhat high as, if your "example" would be correct, they don't want it in the first place, there-by meaning they'd hardly be using it as it is.

Hell, just looking at AT&T's web site (side note: MAN I hate this company -- if they do purchase DishNetwork, I'm switching to DirecTV...), you can get a damned "goPhone" for a whopping $10(!) and there are two access plans. Either an access plan that is $1 per day (you ONLY get charged the "access fee" of $1 on a day that you actually make a call) + 10 cents per minute, OR, a fee where the minutes are 25 cents.

By MY calculations, that does not qualify as "not-insignificant number of dollars on a handset", nor does it qualify for "they can pay (exorbitantly) as they go."

Next time, you might actually, ohh, I dunno, try backing up your statements with some facts? Wait.. I forgot. This is slashdot.

Just because you hate the cell phone companies (the only thing I can assume from your attitude) doesn't mean that they are out to lock you into multi-year expensive plans in an effort to not provide you adequate service and empty your wallet. It just means you haven't done your homework. Hell, it took me 2 minutes to find AT&T's rates. I'm sure other carriers have pricing similar (T-Mobile probably being one of the better carriers).

I'm really not trying to bait you into a flamewar, nor am I trying to be a troll. There are plenty of reasons to hate the telephone companies, so why make up more?

And what about those who either choose not to have a cellphone, or can't afford one? Not everyone is willing to dedicate themselves to multi-year plans, or spend a not-insignificant number of dollars on a handset so they can pay (exhorbitantly) as they go.

Or those...

[gillbates (106458)]

Who choose not to have a cellphone because they:

1. Don't like the ability of the government to track their whereabouts, or
2. Don't want to enable the government to surrepititiously monitor their conversations, even when they're not talking on the phone.
3. Don't feel like being part of the my-employer/wife/etc-has-me-on-a-leash culture.

I only reluctantly got a cellphone a few years ago. AFAIC, they're as close to a travesty as one can get; they've got more computing power than a PC did a decade ago, but are

Re:

[ajs (35943)]

And what about those who either choose not to have a cellphone, or can't afford one?

What about them?

I don't mean to sound harsh, but honestly this is just not one of the phone company's concerns. They're a business, not the corner phone maintenance division of your city government. If you want a phone on every corner, lobby your local government to put one there, and be ready to pay for it with your taxes. Public phones just don't make enough money to cover their costs anymore.

Re:

[gauauu (649169)]

And what about those who either choose not to have a cellphone, or can't afford one? Not everyone is willing to dedicate themselves to multi-year plans, or spend a not-insignificant number of dollars on a handset so they can pay (exhorbitantly) as they go.

The answer is: sorry, tough luck. AT&T has no duty to you to provide these pay phones for you. If they stop being profitable, they stop existing. They don't care about whether you are willing to dedicate yourself to a multi-year plan.

I'm not saying

Re:No longer required..

[leoxx (992)]

Don't be absurd. Cell phones as a necessity is only true in countries where there is little to no telecommunications infrastructure. In north america one can easily get by without a cell phone, and I do so every single day.

Re:No longer required..

[CRCulver (715279)]

In Finland there is an excellent telecommunications infrastructure, and yet mobile phones are necessities. For example, some new apartment blocks lack doorbells, since when you reach the outside door it is expected that you can phone your acquaintance to let him know you are waiting to enter. Payphones were generally phased out years ago, with only a handful left in the very centre of Helsinki for tourists. Then there is the whole social issue, sometimes people just don't want to deal with you if you don't have a mobile.

Re:

[MobileTatsu-NJG (946591)]

"Don't be absurd. Cell phones as a necessity is only true in countries where there is little to no telecommunications infrastructure. In north america one can easily get by without a cell phone, and I do so every single day."

I like how you guys are dumb enough to argue this with two different definitions of 'necessity'.

Re:No longer required..

[smooth wombat (796938)]

Cell Phones have become a necessity, like it or not.

No, they haven't. Folks like Verizon/Cingular/whomever have spent millions convincing people that cell phones are a necessity when in reality they are not. As the poster above you intimated, there are those who get along quite well without a cell phone and for whom one is not remotely necessary.

The vast majority of people who think they need a cell phone are the same ones I hear in a grocery store or mall having the following conversation:

"Uh huh. Yeah. We saw that. I told her not to do it but she don't lis'n. Uh huh. Yeaahhh. I like dat. Oops! Sorry, didn't see you there. Just ran into something because I'm talking to you. Heh heh."

There are very, very, VERY few people who specifically need a cell phone. Those that think they need one would be very surprised to find out how few "necessity" calls they make in a week if they would keep track of their calls.

You don't understand the word 'need'.

[FatSean (18753)]

Most Americans don't, which is why they carry so much debt and the economy is shitting the bed.

Re:No longer required..

[LighterShadeOfBlack (1011407)]

Oh its about profit...ok..

Well... yes, yes it is. AT&T are a business, profit is their general goal.

Even if someone won't lend you a cellphone in case you run off with it, just go into a building and ask if you can use their landline. Most people are pretty reasonable. OK... some people are pretty reasonable. But even if you had to try two or three places it's hardly a big deal for this life-and-death call you just have to make, right?

That is, unless you find yourself alone without a cellphone in the middle of nowhere. But then again there probably wouldn't be a pay phone there anyway.

Re:No longer required..

[in2mind (988476)]

Even if someone won't lend you a cellphone in case you run off with it, just go into a building and ask if you can use their landline.

Its not about running away with their phone..Its about a call to a person about whom the owner has no idea & in case any trouble,the phone owner will be the first to face it.

just go into a building and ask if you can use their landline. Most people are pretty reasonable. OK... some people are pretty reasonable. But even if you had to try two or three places it's hardly a big deal for this life-and-death call you just have to make, right?

Thats when assuming there are always buildings around you, open & welcoming you at Night anywhere!

farewell, anonymity

[by Anonymous Coward]

Oh look, a violent crime. Better go to the nearest payphone and report it so I don't get roped in to the case just 'cos I'm concerned about someone being beaten to a pulp.

Oh, no payphone.

Re:farewell, anonymity

[vhold (175219)]

This was my first thought as well. Case in point: A friend of mine used a pay phone to report a car being broken into, and when they asked for his name he just said "Nope" and hung up. The cops arrived shortly thereafter and caught the thief in the act. He would not have made that call on his phone.

+1 GP

[brunes69 (86786)]

Every year that passes it gets more and more difficult to communicate without being monitored.

Re:

[hobo sapiens (893427)]

What, you think it's impossible for "them" to put cameras up near pay phones? In other words, if someone wants to monitor you, it's already a done deal. Don't kid yourself into thinking that someone cannot find out who used a payphone to make a certain call. With enough resources (and I'd bet AT&T and the NSA have it) you cannot be anonymous. Do you really think those payphones at airports aren't monitored closely?

I dunno, I think getting rid of payphones isn't so bad. If there's a market for them,

Re:

[Bill_the_Engineer (772575)]

What, you think it's impossible for "them" to put cameras up near pay phones? In other words, if someone wants to monitor you, it's already a done deal. Don't kid yourself into thinking that someone cannot find out who used a payphone to make a certain call. With enough resources (and I'd bet AT&T and the NSA have it) you cannot be anonymous. Do you really think those payphones at airports aren't monitored closely?

The real question:

Is my using a pay phone really worth the time and expense for At&T

Re:

[jayveekay (735967)]

So you see someone getting violently attacked. If your number one concern is to help the victim ASAP, then I would think that given the choice between A) whipping out your cellphone and dialing 911 to summon help, or B) looking for a payphone, running to it, (possibly asking whoever is using phone to hang up for an emergency), and dialing 911, I would think that you would choose option A.

Why would you be concerned about possibly getting "roped into the case" when someone's life is in jeopardy?

Re:farewell, anonymity

[MBGMorden (803437)]

If you're that concerned, carry a random cell phone with no service activated. By national law, cell carriers have to accept incoming 911 calls even from phones with no active service plan.

Re:

[Kizzle (555439)]

Actually there are tons of third party pay phone providers out there. They're called cocots. They're easy to spot because they have odd business names on them and not Verizon/ATT/Sprint/ect.

So while ATT may be pulling out their pay phones, others will still exist.

not a surprise

[networkBoy (774728)]

Death of an era, really.
As TFA says though, almost anyone and everyone has a wireless handset. I recent switched to a PP cell myself.
That's the real key... Pay phones were anonymous, with Pre-paid you can pay cas for the phone ans sim, using bogus info where needed. You can still be invisible.
-nB

Hang on...

[greyworld (802114)]

Bell did not invent the telephone. It was Antonio Meucci!

Re:

[the_humeister (922869)]

Riiight... and next you're going to tell me that Christopher Columbus wasn't the first person to discover the Americas, that there's a NEW Mexico, that there's no Santa Claus...

Re:

[sm62704 (957197)]

The history of the invention of the telephone is a confusing claim and counterclaim, further worsened by the lawsuits which hoped to resolve the patent claims of individuals. It is important to note that there is no one "inventor of the telephone", though Alexander Graham Bell is often credited as such, and the Italian Antonio Meucci was recognized by US Congress on 11th June 2002 for his contributions to inventing a telephone. The modern telephone is the result of work done by many people, all worthy of re

That's how I switched

[NetDanzr (619387)]

When I moved to Atlanta in summer of 2004, it was the lack of pay phones in Midtown that finally made me purchase a cell phone. Had there been easily accessible pay phones in the city, I would most likely still rely on them. I wonder whether we'll see a significant increase in cell phone subscription now, or whether there aren't enough crazy luddites like me left anymore.

wireless access points any one?

[by Anonymous Coward]

keep the phone add dsl to the line and a wifi connection - good to go.

Took them long enough.

[cyberworm (710231)]

It's about phreaking time.

turning over to independent operators, that is.

[mgoren (73073)]

At least according to AT&T, the phones aren't just going to disappear. What the article says is that AT&T is getting out of the pay phone business, turning some or all of their phones over to independent operators.

Re:turning over to independent operators, that is.

[MyNymWasTaken (879908)]

What are you doing actually reading, and comprehending, the article?

This. Is. Slashdot!

I hope BT doesn't follow suit

[MSBob (307239)]

The British Telecom phone booths look really nice not to mention all the handy hooker ads inside :-)

Re:I hope BT doesn't follow suit

[rwyoder (759998)]

The British Telecom phone booths look really nice not to mention all the handy hooker ads inside :-

Not to mention the problems it would create for Doctor Who.

Re:I hope BT doesn't follow suit

[Joe Jay Bee (1151309)]

This is pedantry 2 DA MAX, but Dr Who uses a police box (which have already been phased out) not a phone box.

Profit != Bad

[p0tat03 (985078)]

People are treating ATT like the scum of the Earth here, which they may be in their mobile business, but I can't see why expecting to break even is such an evil goal.

Pay phones here in Canada are up to $1 a call now, ridiculous, when it was a quarter merely a few years before. The downturn in usage means increased cost per call for the few people that still use them, which drives a cycle that forces everyone to get some sort of cell phone.

Both my brother (an academic) and my mother have pay-as-you-go plans, which cost them about $120 a year. That's really not too bad, considering they're light users. They enjoy the convenience of a cell phone, and also the security from being able to call emergency services wherever they may be, as opposed to having to locate the nearest (dwindling number) payphones.

I simply do not see pay phones as having any further use to our society. They were important pieces of technology from a bygone era, that's all.

Presumably

[Colin Smith (2679)]

One could buy all the payphones, stick a wireless access point in them and an ADSL port on the other end of the line.

Hmmmm... With the dollar going off the cliff I might just be able to afford it.
 

Interesting

[WhiteWolf666 (145211)]

AT&T continues to maintain it's Telephone Lease Program, but no longer maintains pay phones.

How absurd. Did I mention I hate those bastards? I decided to give them a try, especially given their "30-day money back guarantee". I'd heard they had improved, they were a new company, my slashdot posting history aside. I found out two days later that I would be getting the same, standard 6/768 DSL they give everyone, not some new 8meg/2meg package the sales rep sold me on.

Cancelled immediately. AT&T issued a bill for $100. Settled for $50. For 3 days of service, even with a "money back guarantee".

So much for giving them a second chance. I'll never, ever, ever, ever do business with AT&T again. For any reason. To the end of my days. Those bastards will never, ever change.

As goes AT&T so goes the world...

[jpellino (202698)]

What's 2600 supposed to put on their back cover now?

Re:

[Archangel Michael (180766)]

My dog has two cell phones, thank you very much.

Re:Bound to happen

[sm62704 (957197)]

My 76 year old dad has neither a cell phone nor a computer, and he likes it that way!

I'm reminded of my mother's dad, who still used the outhouse even after my Uncle installed plumbing and a bathroom. "I lived [n] years without [plumbing/cell phones] and I don't need one now!

I can just see when I hit 90. "Damn it, I lived 90 years without a matter replicator or a transporter and I don't need one now!"

-mcgrew

Re:

[michrech (468134)]

If you have a land line at home and access to the telephone at work, then you really can get by without a cell phone. But then, say, when you are out on the road and you need to change plans with friends, you find that you need one. It used to be that you could use a pay phone on such an occasion. I don't think having land lines at work and home and occasionally using a pay phone means that you are poor.

That's what "pay as you go" phones are for.

Re:

[BoberFett (127537)]

I use a pay as you go phone from TMobile. After years of paying $50/mo or more to Verizon I smacked myself in the head for being such a dolt. I reviewed my bills and found that I use less than 100 minutes a month. I fill my phone with the highest cost card ($100) which gives me 1000 minutes that last a year. At $0.10/mi, I spend ~$10/mo. for a cell phone. For light users pay as you go makes sense.

Re:Just putting in my 2 cents worth

[omeomi (675045)]

I remember when you just had to push some buttons on a little box that you bought from that guy who always wore a trench coat, and the calls were free ;-)