FCC threatens to destroy VRS by mismanagement

pandaatv36 said:
Dennis,
I do see your point on the profitability, however ALL business that provides service are expected to see some ROI in their books for the future developments to keep their customers happy. All VRS that are both non-certified and certified by FCC are "FOR PROFIT” Can you name one VRS that declares as non-profit business? Before you fire your memory synapses... there is none ;)
I will agree with ASLROCKS58 on your opinion which is clearly biased.... Just because that Sorenson is greedy... have you noticed that Sorenson have contributed greatly into the interpreting programs sponsoring wide range of events that promote interpreting. What the heck that we already have expressed our concerns of lack of interpreters available... I'm more concern of "highly qualified" status than the numbers because the higher the interpreter is qualified; she or he is able to empower the communication to the Deaf consumers. I have my experience having so-so and awesome interpreters... I get better results with awesome interpreters.
I do believe the VRS are trying to push the level of skills that interpreters should have... and there is none better than Sorenson, the quality they believe in should be raising the bar above by providing all necessary support to the workshops, interpreter events, VRSII, and many more, to develop more future interpreters. I have seen some so-so interpreters became very good interpreters through those resources, because I have been there and done that.
Technology changes... demand and supply rise or fall, rendition is a must and how do we do that... it requires funds to maintain that’s where ROI comes in. cutting 45% in rate will not help at all.
Dennis, again if you wish to bash Sorenson, feel free to do so and without any source and your bashing is easily a moot, why can't you go ahead bash ZVRS for trying to fool the consumers switching to their services by confusing them with porting, or bash on Purple for using lots of minutes running conference calls. Everyone have its own flaws especially you Dennis. I rest my case.
Click to expand...

VRS is not an interpreter training program. It is an accessibility right to use the telephone. The FCC has stated that "TRS providers are responsible for requiring that VRS CAs are qualified interpreters. A “qualified interpreter” is able to interpret effectively, accurately, and impartially, both receptively and expressively, using any necessary specialized vocabulary. "

In any case, many VRS providers provide interpreting training programs. To me, that's a cost of trying to be better than my competition - if I can brag I have the best interpreters, then more deaf people will use my services. But you know what? I could spend bazillions of dollars training interpreters and it doesn't mean that they're good interpreters. THAT is what the FCC is trying to avoid - gold-diggin'.

Let the interpreter training programs out there train the interpreters. Let the VRS businesses hire them to provide the services to the deaf people who need 'em to make phone calls. That's all. VRS businesses wanna invest in their interpreters, to make their businesses more attractive to customers? Let 'em spend their own money.

I've always thought Sorenson should open their own school for VRS interpreting. Why haven't they done so? Because the money they're getting from VRS is just so darn good!
 
Dennis said:
The FCC outlined that 11.25% return on investment is enough profit. That's why they took the costs of VRS for the past year, extrapolated it out for future growth projections, then added 11.25% on top of that. That's "ENOUGH PROFIT" for a GOVERNMENT SUBSIDIZED service.

If you were paying for your VRS service, then the VRS companies can make as much profit as they'd like. That's private enterprise.

VRS is not a charity. VRS is not a pay-for service. It is a GOVERNMENT SUPPORTED service. Thus the companies get the "GOVERNMENT APPROVED" profit margin.
Click to expand...

I agree with this poster.

Sorenson's CEO Pat Nola lives in 1.7 million dollar house overlooking Salt Lake City (was 2.1 million in 2008). Do any of you know that? If Sorenson pleads poverty, they can start with his compensation package but then it is a private held company.
 
Twistedinwind said:
I agree with this poster.

Sorenson's CEO Pat Nola lives in 1.7 million dollar house overlooking Salt Lake City (was 2.1 million in 2008). Do any of you know that? If Sorenson pleads poverty, they can start with his compensation package but then it is a private held company.
Click to expand...

It ain't cool to begrudge what someone paid for their house. That's just tacky bickering.....
 
the Salt Lake City isn't affordable to live on living...

Even that apartment one bedroom range start 1,000 dollar or more...

Most of those people have 2 jobs while partner have one job...

The house price is out range when I visit that place and look nice and lovely home but the range that reject my seat to sky and escape that place.

The range start 250,000 for 1,200 sq ft... image that??? if that 2,000 sq ft for 3 bed room that would be 300 to 400,000...

It almost like Californian style...
 
Dennis,

Well said... lets open the dialog about that. I never mentioned anything about VRS as an interpreting training program. VRS promote that kind of experience enchantments.

All company provides training programs to all employees so they can perform optimal effectiveness. Customer service, be aware of all FCC rules, Company policies, using of equipment, reporting any issues/concerns/fraud are part of their training programs and they do cost $$$ ;) and it is still ongoing FCC rules do change time by time, even new equipment comes in production all the interpreters need to be prepare. Once FCC mandates new policy in VRS... all have to be trained in timely fashion to meet the expectation of FCC.

Unfortunately most of the interpreter training program doesn't provide a curriculum on how to interpret in a VRS setting because working in VRS environment is in much different aspect in comparison to doing in community environment, and in this situation new job opportunities expanded into new kind of training that will prepare them from 3D model to 2D model and re-learn how to interpret without both persons being physically present at the same location. It’s a new ball game there... Have you ever ask one of the interpreters who work for VRS and ask what are the experience differ in both areas. I already know the answer, however it’s for you to expand your understanding the difference... along with more of ethical dilemmas that they face daily under the different aspect of ruling under FCC and RID/NAD CPC.

All what it boils down to... to maintain the integrity of the interpreting is through training. Trainings are not free. FCC want to pay the basic operations of VRS… that’s why I am concerned with the rates where they don’t explore the other necessities to maintain the expectations of functional equivalence. This is where domino effect will start.

Happy Bash Hunting!
 
Twistedinwind,

Who cares how much the house that Pat Nola lives... I can live in that house if I want to.... I'll make sure that my spouse, my immediate families members, cash in my savings bonds, scalp some concert/game tickets and buy that 1.7 mil house and all live in. *shrug* what a lame bashing and that name matches you perfectly ;) wind of changes, be more positive tho.

Sayonara!
 
Dennis said:
VRS is not an interpreter training program. It is an accessibility right to use the telephone. The FCC has stated that "TRS providers are responsible for requiring that VRS CAs are qualified interpreters. A “qualified interpreter” is able to interpret effectively, accurately, and impartially, both receptively and expressively, using any necessary specialized vocabulary. "

In any case, many VRS providers provide interpreting training programs. To me, that's a cost of trying to be better than my competition - if I can brag I have the best interpreters, then more deaf people will use my services. But you know what? I could spend bazillions of dollars training interpreters and it doesn't mean that they're good interpreters. THAT is what the FCC is trying to avoid - gold-diggin'.

Let the interpreter training programs out there train the interpreters. Let the VRS businesses hire them to provide the services to the deaf people who need 'em to make phone calls. That's all. VRS businesses wanna invest in their interpreters, to make their businesses more attractive to customers? Let 'em spend their own money.

I've always thought Sorenson should open their own school for VRS interpreting. Why haven't they done so? Because the money they're getting from VRS is just so darn good!
Click to expand...

you mean like this one? VRSII That would be awesome!
 
zerodog said:
the Salt Lake City isn't affordable to live on living...

Even that apartment one bedroom range start 1,000 dollar or more...
Click to expand...

I don't think so.

Check apartment.com to look up on Salt Lake City, there is nice apartment for much as $600 for one-bedroom. sheesh
 
Housing in SLC is very expensive! Water bills is expensive too. I did research, and I don't think I ever want to move down to SLC.

That 600 dollars a month is likely to be in not so good neighborhood.

PowerON said:
I don't think so.

Check apartment.com to look up on Salt Lake City, there is nice apartment for much as $600 for one-bedroom. sheesh
Click to expand...
 
aslrocks58 said:
you mean like this one? VRSII That would be awesome!
Click to expand...

You're absolutely right. I said "VRS interpreting" when I meant to say "interpreter certification." I still think Sorenson needs to make it into a school and cert program, where they make money off of people wanting to graduate with an interpreting degree, like ITT or University of Phoenix. But you've got to start somewhere, right?
 
diehardbiker said:
Housing in SLC is very expensive! Water bills is expensive too. I did research, and I don't think I ever want to move down to SLC.

That 600 dollars a month is likely to be in not so good neighborhood.
Click to expand...

I didn't research, I was there where some my friends live there. :aw:
 
LOL, didn't think of this. LOL, Water bill in SLC is 3 to 5 times higher than here, and they have two separate water bill, one is for drinkable water and other is for landscaping which is not drinkable. It is their way to save cost on water. We don't have like that up here and we get water from either Lakes up in the mountain or from Lake Ontario... plenty of water.

DHB

radioman said:
dirty water ? EEEEWWWWW!!!!:laugh2: I know you meant dirt cheap!!
Click to expand...
 
SouthFella said:
It is Sorenson pulling this biggest scare tactics. Since Sorenson have more to lose than all the other VRS companies combined. Don't forget, Sorenson have about 85 % of the market.

So, it is not the FCC pulling the scare tactic. It is FCC trying to level the playing field and save taxpayer's money.

So with that said, deafmedicalpoet think more carefully before firing off comments.
Click to expand...

The Executive Director of IdahoCDHH explains how the FCC VRS rate proposal would lower the quality of VRS in this video.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3raDJI25Tg]YouTube - Basic Summary of FCC VRS Rate Cut[/ame]
 
pandaatv36 said:
Twistedinwind,

Who cares how much the house that Pat Nola lives... I can live in that house if I want to.... I'll make sure that my spouse, my immediate families members, cash in my savings bonds, scalp some concert/game tickets and buy that 1.7 mil house and all live in. *shrug* what a lame bashing and that name matches you perfectly ;) wind of changes, be more positive tho.

Sayonara!
Click to expand...

Bottom line is that Sorenson is saying that they cannot afford on what the government is considering. They publically stated that they basically would be forced to cut back on services among other things that may (or may not) impact our quality of communication if we contiune to use SVRS. So, that is why it is not tacky to check out who is the person really is when that person is on soap box and trying to scare us. You have to question everyone's motives sometimes especially when they are asking for our help to protest FCC rule consideration. It is important when it comes to our dollars that they naturally want to feed on and contiune to live their current lifestyles. Typically, what the house worth is roughly an indicator of what a person earns and the lifestyle of that household.

Salt Lake may be expensive relatively speaking but SVRS always has an option just like any other buisness have which is MOVE to cheaper city. That 1.7 million dollar house is way overkill for a small company CEO even in SLC. Heck, look at Warren Buffet - still lives in Omaha, Neb on a house he bought many decades ago - not even a million dollar house.WikiAnswers - Where does Warren Buffett live

Take a look at late Sam Walton (Walmart founder). He drove in a beat up pick up truck and lived in a modest home until his death. Lessons on Humility from the Life of Sam Walton at Clever Dude Personal Finance and Money

Is it tacky to say what the public figure's worth? - not in my opinion because it is even more tacky to plead assistance publicly while still living in a very upscale house (whopping 496.5% higher than median price of 285K) and enjoying 85% market share in VRS provider.

I do not know if it is accurate that interpreters and installers are contract employees? If they are in fact considered contract employees, then SVRS has relatively lower labor cost other than administrative costs because contract employees arent entitiled to same benefit as full fleged employees.

Their hardware product development is minimal (Dlink develops their camera and Sorenson uses that product and makes software as we see it). So, where is the beef in their "cost" of providing services to us? I'd like to see it but you know what... they are private held company and not subject to financial disclosure to public.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top