Next G covers all CDMA areas: Telstra

>> > I like to see results by an independent tester before I'm convinced of
>> > the network coverage.
>>
>> then conduct your own independant testing
>
> I'm happy to have my taxes pay for independent scientific testing.
> There's no detail on how and where the testing was done.

Then ask your local MP for some independant testing

>> > At this stage it looks like Jan 28 is still the cut-off date.
>>
>> yes...in spite of what Rod tries to make us believe.
>>
>> > Switch over to GSM/NextG or else you lose your CDMA number. Once its
>> > gone, it's gone.
>
> Now you know Michael.
> Unless new protocols are put in place to accomodate those who didn't
> bother to migrate to NextG/GSM before the CDMA network is closed
> down( going by Rod's posts, that may very well happen if they heed his
> advice), they will have a hard time migrating or porting (unless the
> service is active). Exceptions being of course MSNs not using any CDMA
> prefixes - there's a slim chance they'll get out of gaol.

Nope.

When CDMA closes - all CDMA numbers will be disconnected - regardless of
prefix. Standard behaviour. If an MNP event is pending or in progress, they
wont be disconnected

Once it has been disconnected, Telstra are under no obligation to reconnect.

---

› See More: Next G covers all CDMA areas: Telstra

"Paul Day" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 22:52:25 Michael may have written:
>> > I like to see results by an independent tester before I'm convinced of
>> > the network coverage.
>>
>> then conduct your own independant testing
>
> I did: Exhaustive peer-reviewed double-blind trials using my old Nokia
> CDMA and my new Nokia NextG in the the areas I care about here in
> Victoria. CDMA won.

LOL.

Michael <[email protected]> wrote
> Rod Speed <[email protected]> wrote
>> Allan Parkington <[email protected]> wrote
>>> Kwyjibo <[email protected]> wrote

>>>> Wrong. It stays on UNTIL the govt says it's okay to switch it off.

>>> No, it goes off unless the govt says so.

>> Read the license conditions, ****wit child.

> Says that the Govt MAY step in.

No it doesnt.

> MAY.

On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 21:08:01 GMT, "Michael" <[email protected]> wrote:

>>>> CDMA numbers they treat as THEIR property. When I requested (through
>>>> Optarse)
>>>
>>>Thats because they are assigned to Telstra by ACMA.
>>>
>>>Not a Telstra decision
>>>
>>>> the currently_not_in_use CDMA number with the same last 6 digits as my
>>>> GSM
>>>> service, Telst$ra advised Optarse that I could have it for a fee of $75.
>>>> So I
>>>> tossed that idea and went with a random number instead.
>>>
>>>Telstra did no such thing.
>>
>> Farking did. You weren't there, Mikey - I was. But thanks for your usual
>> crapola.
>
>You were at an OPTUS dealership trying to connect a TELSTRA CDMA number to
>Optus, yet Telstra was there as well?

Obviously Telstra weren't "there". Even Roddles would work that out.


>More like the phone monkey in the OPTUS store was talking to the Optus MAC
>(mobiles activation centre), who gave you some bull**** about $75 just to
>shut you up

Izzat right?

>>>Any wholesaler of CDMA can request a particular number through the
>>>wholesale
>>>activation system LOLM.
>>>
>>>What Telstra charges to the wholesaler is not the customers business.
>>
>> It is if the wholesaler is then passing that cost on to the customer.
>
>Thats your problem with Optus. Not a telstra issue.

It is a Telstra issue when they impose a charge to release a Telstra number.

>>> It was very unprofessional for Optus to try to claim Telstra charge them
>>> $75.
>>
>> No, it was truthful. Explain how that is unprofessional. Just because it
>> blew
>> the lid off another one of Tel$tra's gouging operations?
>
>It wasn't truthful.

It was.

>If your number was not premium then T dont charge O.

They do as soon as they sniff an opportunity to gouge.

"customers wants 042n-abcdef" equates to "special to this customer" aka gouge
time.

>>>I don't believe any such fee applies at all, except to premium numbers
>>
>> Believe what you like. It was far from a premium number - very ordinary.
>> As it
>> turned out, the random CDMA number was "better" anyway.
>
>So why would anyone try and charge you $75???

because they figured it was "special" to the customer.

>>>> Later enquiry for that requested number found it was listed as
>>>> "reserved" -
>>>> Tel$tra had indeed locked it up. Still available if I wanted to pay
>>>> their
>>>> fee
>>>> of course.
>>>
>>>Nope.
>>
>> Yep.
>>
>>>Its either available, or the range has never been allocated to active
>>>service, reserved by another customer, active, in quarantine or held (by a
>>>dealer to activate within 3 days).
>>>
>>>Your number sounds like its never been allocated to active service.
>>
>> Certainly hadn't at that stage. Haven't bothered to check since.
>>
>>>For example, ask Telstra for any number in the range 0429 58%. Theyve
>>>never
>>>been released for circulation - so you will never get it.
>>
>> Academic and irrelevant. I asked for either of 0427/0428- abcdef where
>> abcdef
>> were the last 6 of my GSM. 0428 was in use, 0427 was available (at a
>> price).
>
>See above. You are just squirming now.

Nope, you're just blowing it out of your arse, as usual.

Michael <[email protected]> wrote:

>>>>> No government should be telling a private business that it has to
>>>>> maintain a service (i.e CDMA) that it no longer wishes to maintain.

>>>> Wrong when its a monopoly that the govt has partially funded.

>>> 30 or so bases out of 1500(?) is nothing.

>> You get no say what so ever on that or anything else at all, ever.

>> You're just some stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child that
>> has never ever had a ****ing clue about anything at all, ever.

>>> And they werent "govt funded" per se,

>> Bare faced pig ignorant lie.

>>> they were Govt projects that the Govt tendered,

>> Bare faced pig ignorant lie.

>>> on a basis that the Govt pays the capital cost and Telstra the ongoings.

>>> Which gave unviable country towns real mobile coverage for the first time.

>>> A win-win scenario

>> Irrelevant to that stupid claim at the top.

> Nope.

Yep.

> Govt funded suggests that the Govt bankrolled the whole thing,

Nope. I said very explicitly that it was partially govt
funded, you stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child.

> which they didnt

Pity no one ever said they did, you stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child.

> Without Telstra paying the ongoings and getting the ongoing revenue, these sites would not be viable.

Irrelevant to who paid for it.

> Indeed the tenders

There were no tenders.

> were for areas that had no or little coverage AND
> NO PLANS FOR ANY CARRIER TO IMPROVE

Irrelevant to who paid for it and so who gets to say when it can be turned off.

>>>> If telstra didnt like that, it shouldnt have accepted any govt funding.

>>> It wasnt up to them

>> Corse it was.

>>> They tendered and the Govt gets to decide.

> They were all tendered

No they werent.

> indeed Telstra lost one to Voda

Different system entirely.

>>>>> Telstra is a private business and has the right to decide to stop offering services just like any other private
>>>>> business.

>>>> Any other private business cant necessarily do that unless they
>>>> are prepared to offer a full refund to those who they didnt inform
>>>> that they were only going to be providing that particular service
>>>> until it suited them to shaft their customers by turning it off.

> Crap ****, again.

Your sig is supposed to be at the bottom, with a --- in front of it.

>>> I walk into Coles and they no longer sell the bread I like. I dont have any right to complain.

>> Corse you do, you stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child.

> I get to complain but I have no rights or remedies

Different matter entirely to what is being discussed,
you stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child.

>>> If I was under a contract to buy my bread there, they would release
>>> me from it. just like telstra is doing, voluntarily, in the sense that they will waive your ETC now, even though the
>>> network isnt ending today

>> Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you
>> have never ever had even the remotest concept of the most
>> basic consumer law, you stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child.

> Disprove me then Roddles

Have a look at the TPA some time, you stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child.

>>>>> a retail store should be free to stop carrying any item that it
>>>>> currently carries. And, like those other businesses, a mobile
>>>>> phone provider should be free to stop supporting any networks,
>>>>> protocols, technologies, phones or services that they choose to
>>>>> stop supporting.

>>>> Not if they didnt make it clear to the suckers they flogged that
>>>> network to that it could be turned off at any time on a whim and
>>>> the customers

>>> I dont think ~2 years lead time is a whim.

>>> When you buy a phone on contract you buy it on the basis that the
>>> network must exist ONLY FOR THE LENGTH of the contract.

>> Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you
>> have never ever had even the remotest concept of the most
>> basic consumer law, you stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child.

> Disprove me then Roddles.

Have a look at the TPA some time, you stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child.

> Cite some passages.

Go and **** yourself, again.

>>> Thats what will happen with CDMA closure. There is no implied "network lifespan"

>>>>> If a private business does not provide services that consumers
>>>>> want, someone else will step in and provide it as long as the
>>>>> demand is there. e.g. if a shop stops selling eggs, someone else
>>>>> will step in and start selling eggs if the market wants eggs.

>>>> Then there's the real world where the govt chose to hand
>>>> great piles of money to telstra to put in cdma bases where

>>> It was a fart in the bath

You are a fart in the bath.

Michael <[email protected]> wrote
> thegoons <[email protected]> wrote
>> Michael <[email protected]> wrote
>>> Jonathan Wilson <[email protected]> wrote

>>>> No government should be telling a private business that it has to
>>>> maintain a service (i.e CDMA) that it no longer wishes to maintain.
>>>> Telstra is a private business and has the right to decide to stop
>>>> offering services just like any other private business.

>>> Agreed

>>>> The government should butt out and let the marketplace sort itself out.

>>> Agreed

>>>> if the market wants eggs. If an airline stops flying to a given
>>>> airport, another airline will come in and fly to that airport if
>>>> the market wants to fly to that airport. And if Telstra stops
>>>> providing cellphone service to a given location, another carrier
>>>> will step in and provide that service if the market wants cell
>>>> service in that location.

>>> Agreed

>> Pity that the Government is still the major shareholder and that Telstra must follow ACMA directives/licence
>> conditions

> Sorry love. Its 100% privatised.

Irrelevant to the fact that the govt is the major shareholder and whether telstra,
just like every other telco, gets to comply with the law and the license conditions.

> And a chunk being in the future fund DOESNT make it "Govt owned"

It does however mean that the govt is by far the largest
shareholder, you stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child.

> Try getting a FOI request out of Telstra - they refuse because they are no longer under that legislation as they are
> not Govt owned.

Irrelevant to the fact that the govt is the major shareholder and whether telstra,
just like every other telco, gets to comply with the law and the license conditions.

Michael <[email protected]> wrote
> Rod Speed <[email protected]> wrote
>> Michael <[email protected]> wrote

>>>>> The CDMA network will stop working on January 28.

>>>> Bare faced lie.

> We'll see.

We've seen. See the license conditions.

> Still full steam ahead for Jan 28.

There is no steam, you stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child.

>>>>> Telstra spokesman Geoff Booth says people still using the old network should buy their new handsets and other
>>>>> equipment as soon as they can.

>>>> What the **** is the point of not waiting till Jan ?

>>> Because the last offer may not be the best offer.

>> And it may be the best offer too, you stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child.

> Thats what "may not be" means, Roddles.

And thats what "it may be the best offer" means
too, you stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child.

> The $100 credit offer that was on ALL handsets, notice its only on TWO handsets now?

Says nothing all about what they may offer in
the future, you stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child.

> What does that tell you?

That you have never ever had a ****ing clue about anything at all, ever.

>>> Beat the rush.

>> Changing early in Jan will do that fine, you stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child.

> Ahhhh ;-)

> Now its not "last minute" but you are advocating for early Jan ;-)

No I aint. Just rubbing your stupid nose in the fact that you dont have to
change now to beat the rush, you stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child.

> changing your position ;-)

Only in your pathetic little drug crazed fantasyland,
you stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child.

>>> Check the coverage maps

>> Anyone can put any lie they like on a coverage map, you stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child.

> conspiracy theory

Fact.

Michael <[email protected]> wrote

>>>>>> No need to do that for months, makes more sense to wait until we see what happens on that date.

>>>>>>> Once its gone, it's gone.

>>>>>> Wrong, the number doesnt evaporate when the cdma system is turned off.

>>>>> No, but Tel$ra - being the bastards they are - will lock it up to penalise you.

>>>> The TIO wont let them do that, and telstra doesnt get any say what so ever on MNP rules.

>>> Not exactly.

>> Yep, exactly.

>>> Numbers are allocated to Telstra by ACMA, who allocate them to end users.

>> Irrelevant to what is being discussed, whether they vanish when the cdma system is turned off.

> They dont vanish, they stay allocated to Telstra.

No they dont, they stay with the owner of that number even when the
cdma system is turned off, you stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child.

> And Telstra does not have to reconnect you to CDMA as the network is closed.

Telstra does have to allow you to MNP that number, you stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child.

> If you have a port in process at deactivation time, the system cannot deactivate you. Until the port expires in 28/30
> days

The TIO wont let them do that, and telstra doesnt get any say what so ever on MNP rules.

>>> On 28/1/8 network it switched off, AND ALL REMAINING CUSTOMERS DEACTIVATED SHORTLY AFTER

>> Irrelevant to what is being discussed, whether they vanish when the cdma system is turned off.

>> Of course they dont.

> see above

Completely useless, as always with your mindless pig ignorant ****.

There's a reason you only get to clean the dunnys.

>>> Telstra will not reconnect those customers, as the network no longer exists.

>> Irrelevant to what is being discussed, whether the NUMBERS vanish when the cdma system is turned off.

> It IS relevant.

Nope.

> You CANNOT port a number unless it is active.

Bare faced pig ignorant lie when the only reason its
not active is because the network has been turned off.

> If your number was active on Telstra and then Telstra deactive it - you CANNOT port unless Telstra agree to reconnect
> it for you.

Telstra gets no say what so ever on MNP, you stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child.

> If there is no physical network Telstra could well be unable to connect you again

If they are actually stupid enough to deactiveate you, they
get to fix that ****up, you stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child.

> - they arent offering you a service so how can they reconnect you?

By reversing the deactivation they were actually stupid
enough to do, you stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child.

And they wont actually be that stupid anyway, you stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child.

>>> You need an ACTIVE number to do a port, and your number will not be active.

>> Irrelevant to what is being discussed, whether the NUMBERS vanish when the cdma system is turned off.

> see above f*stick

Completely useless, as always with your mindless pig ignorant ****.

There's a reason you only get to clean the dunnys.

>> Of course they dont.

>> Like I said, telstra gets no say what so ever on the detail of MNP, you stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child.

> Telstra can only follow the MNP rules,

There is nothing in the MNP rules that say that the number must be deactivated
when the cdma system is turned off, you stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child.

> which Ive set out above

Like hell you ever did. You just pig ignorantly lied about what they say.

"Michael" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Kwyjibo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> "Michael" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news%[email protected]...
>>>>> The CDMA network will stop working on January 28.
>>>>>
>>>> Nope, it will stop working when the government tells them they can do
>>>> that.
>>>
>>> It gets turned off on 28/1/8 UNLESS the Govt directly orders them not
>>> to.
>>>
>>
>> Wrong. It stays on UNTIL the govt says it's okay to switch it off.
>
> Nope - show me any order from the Govt to the contrary.

http://www.fedlaw.gov.au/ComLaw/Legi...25735900159FE3

>
> The correct statement is - it gets turned off 28/1/8 UNLESS the Govt
> directly orders them not to.
>

No, your statement is totally WRONG. The correct statement is as follows
(and which indicates that the government sets the closure timing, not
Telstra):
http://www.fedlaw.gov.au/ComLaw/Legi...25735900159FE3

> If the Govt had ordered them already, you would see it splashed all over
> NWAT
>>

It's here:
http://www.fedlaw.gov.au/ComLaw/Legi...25735900159FE3

>> --
>> Kwyj.
>>
>
>



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"Michael" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "thegoons" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> "Jonathan Wilson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> No government should be telling a private business that it has to
>>> maintain a service (i.e CDMA) that it no longer wishes to maintain.
>>> Telstra is a private business and has the right to decide to stop
>>> offering services just like any other private business.
>>
>> Wrong answer. As a telco, Telstra needs to hold a carrier licence, and
>> the Commonwealth can add conditions or requirements that the licence
>> holders needs to meet.
>
> No one is claiming the Govt is acting illegally, just claiming they should
> **** off and keep their sticky fingers out

Pity about:
http://www.fedlaw.gov.au/ComLaw/Legi...25735900159FE3

>
>>> Any private business should be free to stop offering any product or
>>> service without government interference. For example, an airline should
>>> be free to discontinue any routes that it decides to discontinue, a
>>> retail store should be free to stop carrying any item that it currently
>>> carries. And, like those other businesses, a mobile phone provider
>>> should be free to stop supporting any networks, protocols, technologies,
>>> phones or services that they choose to stop supporting.
>>
>> That would be fine, however Telstra is an ex-government monopoly that
>> would stomp on all competition otherwise.
>
> crap

pity about:
http://www.fedlaw.gov.au/ComLaw/Legi...25735900159FE3

>
>>> The only time the government should step in is if a company is abusing
>>> its power to ensure that services are not provided to people that want
>>> said
>>
>> Telstra has along history of abusing power; th TIO figures are plain
>> enought to demonstrate this.
>
> crap. on a per SIO basis, Telstra's figures are great.
>
>
>



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"Michael" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "thegoons" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> "Michael" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:U%[email protected]...
>>>
>>> "Jonathan Wilson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>> No government should be telling a private business that it has to
>>>> maintain a service (i.e CDMA) that it no longer wishes to maintain.
>>>> Telstra is a private business and has the right to decide to stop
>>>> offering services just like any other private business.
>>>
>>> Agreed
>>>
>>>> The government should butt out and let the marketplace sort itself out.
>>>> If
>>>
>>> Agreed
>>>
>>>> if the market wants eggs. If an airline stops flying to a given
>>>> airport, another airline will come in and fly to that airport if the
>>>> market wants to fly to that airport. And if Telstra stops providing
>>>> cellphone service to a given location, another carrier will step in and
>>>> provide that service if the market wants cell service in that location.
>>>
>>> Agreed

>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Pity that the Government is still the major shareholder and that Telstra
>> must follow ACMA directives/licence conditions
>
> Sorry love. Its 100% privatised. And a chunk being in the future fund
> DOESNT make it "Govt owned"

I didn't say it was government owned, ****wit. I said "Pity that the
Government is still the major shareholder". Or are you illiterate?

>
> Try getting a FOI request out of Telstra - they refuse because they are no
> longer under that legislation as they are not Govt owned.
>>
Wrong again as always. Pity that they must comply where the records were
maintained/kept when the organisation was a Federal entity.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
>>
>
>



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"Michael" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Rod Speed" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Michael <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>>> The CDMA network will stop working on January 28.

Not according to:
http://www.fedlaw.gov.au:80/ComLaw/L...25735900159FE3

>>
>>>> Bare faced lie.
>
> We'll see. Still full steam ahead for Jan 28.
>
Nope:
http://www.fedlaw.gov.au:80/ComLaw/L...25735900159FE3

>>>>> Telstra spokesman Geoff Booth says people still using the old network
>>>>> should buy their new handsets and other equipment as soon as they can.
>>
>>>> What the **** is the point of not waiting till Jan ?
>>
>>> Because the last offer may not be the best offer.
>>
>> And it may be the best offer too, you stupid dunny cleaning ****wit
>> child.
>
> Thats what "may not be" means, Roddles.
>
> The $100 credit offer that was on ALL handsets, notice its only on TWO
> handsets now?
>
> What does that tell you?
>
http://www.fedlaw.gov.au:80/ComLaw/L...25735900159FE3


>>> Beat the rush.
>>
>> Changing early in Jan will do that fine, you stupid dunny cleaning
>> ****wit child.
>
> Ahhhh ;-)
>
> Now its not "last minute" but you are advocating for early Jan ;-)
>
> changing your position ;-)
>
>>> Check the coverage maps
>>
>> Anyone can put any lie they like on a coverage map, you stupid dunny
>> cleaning ****wit child.
>
> conspiracy theory>
>>
>>
>
>



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"Rod Speed" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Michael <[email protected]> wrote
>> Rod Speed <[email protected]> wrote
>>> Michael <[email protected]> wrote
>
>>>>>> The CDMA network will stop working on January 28.
>
>>>>> Bare faced lie.
>
>> We'll see.
>
> We've seen. See the license conditions.

the licence conditions give some power. that power has not been excercised
and may or may not be excercised

>> Still full steam ahead for Jan 28.
>
> There is no steam, you stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child.

there is a hell of a lot of activity happening, roddles

>>>> Beat the rush.
>
>>> Changing early in Jan will do that fine, you stupid dunny cleaning
>>> ****wit child.
>
>> Ahhhh ;-)
>
>> Now its not "last minute" but you are advocating for early Jan ;-)
>
> No I aint. Just rubbing your stupid nose in the fact that you dont have to
> change now to beat the rush, you stupid dunny cleaning ****wit child.

hehe, changing your position

>>> Anyone can put any lie they like on a coverage map, you stupid dunny
>>> cleaning ****wit child.
>
>> conspiracy theory
>
> Fact.

LOL
>
>

"thegoons" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Michael" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> "Rod Speed" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> Michael <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> The CDMA network will stop working on January 28.
>
> Not according to:
> http://www.fedlaw.gov.au:80/ComLaw/L...25735900159FE3

Looks like you are right, goons. And you were the only one who could pull
out facts.

Thank you

>>If your number was not premium then T dont charge O.
>
> They do as soon as they sniff an opportunity to gouge.
>
> "customers wants 042n-abcdef" equates to "special to this customer" aka
> gouge
> time.

Sorry, nothing in the billing system can even let them charge a fee on a
non-premium number

>>So why would anyone try and charge you $75???
>
> because they figured it was "special" to the customer.

conspiracy theory

>>>>> Later enquiry for that requested number found it was listed as
>>>>> "reserved" -
>>>>> Tel$tra had indeed locked it up. Still available if I wanted to pay
>>>>> their
>>>>> fee
>>>>> of course.
>>>>
>>>>Nope.
>>>
>>> Yep.
>>>
>>>>Its either available, or the range has never been allocated to active
>>>>service, reserved by another customer, active, in quarantine or held (by
>>>>a
>>>>dealer to activate within 3 days).
>>>>
>>>>Your number sounds like its never been allocated to active service.
>>>
>>> Certainly hadn't at that stage. Haven't bothered to check since.
>>>
>>>>For example, ask Telstra for any number in the range 0429 58%. Theyve
>>>>never
>>>>been released for circulation - so you will never get it.
>>>
>>> Academic and irrelevant. I asked for either of 0427/0428- abcdef where
>>> abcdef
>>> were the last 6 of my GSM. 0428 was in use, 0427 was available (at a
>>> price).

Liar. the 0427 equivalent would have fallen into the scenarios above

another ignorant moronic Optus CDMA customer