[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I was talking about Robert Bonomi's
> claims that Bell System did just what the law required of them, and
> not much else, unless it worked to their advantage. PAT]
Well, isn't that how all businesses work? Geez, they're not a charity or a non-profit.
Mr. B.'s writing seemed very indignant when he said the Trimline and Princess phones were only used to make extra profit. Again, isn't that what businesses do? If the customers didn't like the premium sets, they wouldn't have rented them. Yet they did. Obviously it was a win-win -- the customers got something they wanted (and were willing to pay for), and the company made money. What is so wrong with that?
Anyway, as far as the claim they merely followed the law, I believe they spent quite a bit of money designing both the 300 and 500 telephone sets. The 500 G handset -- still in use today fifty years later -- was carefully researched to be as comfortable and fit as many people as possible. As a monopoly, the phone company did NOT have to go to that much trouble. Further, they had a renown industrial designer, Henry Dreyfus, design the set itself. This effort was not cheap, and certainly not required by law or service.
As to the claims of not being able to support BBS's demands for new lines, I believe that occured well after Divesture, so it was not a Bell System problem (assuming it was as widespread as claimed).