OT - Cellphone billing

[James Knott]

Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 10:50:05AM -0500, James Knott wrote:
>   
>> Do cell phone companies charge for call display?  I don't recall seeing 
>> that on my Rogers bill.
>>     
>
> Bell certainly does on many plans.
>
>   
>> Voice mail is a bit different, in that it requires something to record 
>> the messages on, whereas call display is simply passing on call info and 
>> all modern equipment supports it.  I don't have voice mail, as I've 
>> configured my service to phone home, should I not answer a cell call.
>>     
>
> It does require equipment, but I think the cost in europe (where it seems
> to be that as long as you spend at least $10 per year on talk time, they
> will provide voice mail, call display and a phone number) is much more
> realistic and actually reflects the true cost.
>   

Any system that supports Signaling System 7 supports that.  It's part of 
the call set up info, though name display requires accessing a 
database.  SS7 has been in use for many years and any equipment that 
doesn't support it is so old as to be obsolete.
>   
>> One thing you're forgetting is that companies are in business to make 
>> money.  This means they set the rates for whatever they think will give 
>> them the best profit.  If the customers don't like the price they may 
>> not take the service or might switch providers.
>>     
>
> I just think there ought to be actual competition.  Right now it seems
> Bell, Rogers and Telus are perfectly happy to all charge the same insane
> prices for service.  None of them want to start a price war and actually
> compete.
>
>   
>> Don't forget, some rates, at least for Bell land line are determined by 
>> tariff.  One thing I find incredible is that touch tone is still a 
>> separate charge for many people, even though it's now basic service.  I 
>> suspect this may be, at least partially, due to those poverty activists, 
>> who insist that pulse lines be available to low income people at a lower 
>> rate, even though there's no money to be saved in providing a pulse dial 
>> service and pulse dial only phones are getting scare.
>>     
>
> You can't order a new Bell line without touchtone, but anyone with an
> old line without touchtone doesn't pay it.  Its stupid, given these days
> the old pulse dialing system is probably more expensive to support in
> the equipment than touch tone is and the touch tone equipment was paid
> for and probably retired multiple times over long ago.
>
>   

On my bill, it's $2.80/month.  As I mentioned in another message, 
poverty activists demanded a cheaper pulse line, regardless of any costs 
involved.  Also, IIRC, touch tones are not a tariffed item, so it's 
easier for Bell to change the price.  It's long past the time the CRTC 
should have rolled touch tone dialing into basic service.


-- 
Use OpenOffice.org <http://www.openoffice.org>
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists