Unlimited for $10!

Ok, it's $10 on top of a regular cell plan, but it made for a catchy Subject
line, didn't it?

From RCR Wireless News:

(http://www.rcrnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll...2369/1002/FREE)


T-Mobile USA intros Internet calling
$10-per-month plan part of No. 4 carrier's wireline push

By Colin Gibbs

Story posted: February 21, 2008 - 1:25 pm EDT


T-Mobile USA Inc. announced a $10-a-month unlimited calling plan for its
growing fixed-line effort.

The operator launched Talk Forever Home Phone, an Internet service with
unlimited local and domestic long distance calls. The offering is available
in Dallas and Seattle to T-Mobile wireless users with single-line plans of
$40 or higher or family plans of $50 or higher.

Talk Forever subscribers will also have to buy a $50 router, and the carrier
is suggesting -- but not demanding -- that Talk Forever users purchase a $60
VTech phone at T-Mobile retail outlets.

The move follows the announcement earlier this week that T-Mobile will offer
an unlimited voice, data and text-messaging plan to wireless subscribers for
$100 month. Verizon Wireless and AT&T Mobility had begun the flurry of
activity earlier this week with unlimited plans for $100 a month... [More]

---

› See More: Unlimited for $10!

"Todd Allcock" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Ok, it's $10 on top of a regular cell plan, but it made for a catchy
> Subject line, didn't it?
>
> From RCR Wireless News:
>
> (http://www.rcrnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll...2369/1002/FREE)
>
>
> T-Mobile USA intros Internet calling
> $10-per-month plan part of No. 4 carrier's wireline push
>
> By Colin Gibbs
>
> Story posted: February 21, 2008 - 1:25 pm EDT
>
I think thats nice, but in all reality, why? If I'm at home, I use my home
phone. I have enough minutes in my plan to make calls when I'm out. Now
I'm sure this will benifit those who don't use POTS or something like
Vonage. I mean if it came down to that, I think I'd pick one of them $100
unlimited deals.

Michael N. Paris wrote:

> I think thats nice, but in all reality, why? If I'm at home, I use my
> home phone. I have enough minutes in my plan to make calls when I'm
> out. Now I'm sure this will benifit those who don't use POTS or
> something like Vonage. I mean if it came down to that, I think I'd
> pick one of them $100 unlimited deals.

Yes, that's what Verizon was counting on when they started the
"unlimited wars." The analysts went nuts and Verizon and AT&T stock
plunged as the analysts looked at current >$100 customers and figured
that the $100 unlimited pricing would mean declining revenue. In fact,
the reason Verizon did this was because they believe that they'll be
able to entice more people to drop landline service and have only a cell
phone.

I doubt that $100 unlimited is going to cause many people to drop a
$20/month landline. Why do people keep landlines?

1. 911 service, especially if you have kids
2. Reliability
3. DSL
4. "Free" local calls

Only number 4 is addressed by the unlimited wireless plans.

At 21 Feb 2008 22:08:12 -0500 Michael N. Paris wrote:
>

> I think thats nice, but in all reality, why? If I'm at home, I use my
home
> phone. I have enough minutes in my plan to make calls when I'm out.
> Now I'm sure this will benifit those who don't use POTS or something
> like Vonage. I mean if it came down to that, I think I'd pick one of
them
> $100 unlimited deals.

But that's sort of the point- why take a $100 cell plan (tied to a single
phone) when you can get by with your $40 cell plan (if, as you say, you
have enough minutes in it for when you're out) and for $10 extra, get an
interface box connected to your existing home phones, with unlimited calls
in the house, allowing you to ditch the landline.

Now you have a $50 two-phone solution with unlimited calling at home, vs. a
$100 one-phone unlimited solution (which is fine, I suppose, if you live
alone!)

At 21 Feb 2008 19:28:30 -0800 SMS wrote:
>. In fact, the reason Verizon did this was because they believe that
> they'll be able to entice more people to drop landline service and have
> only a cell phone.


Which is ironic, since Verizon and AT&T are the two largest landline
companies in the US!

> I doubt that $100 unlimited is going to cause many people to drop a
> $20/month landline. Why do people keep landlines?


A $20 landline? Where, (or when!) do you live?

I have a landline here in Denver through Qwest. Local service is $25, plus
a $6.50 fee to ostensibly cover interconnect (ironic, since all local calls
would likely be to other Qwest customers, so they're taking my money to
connect my Qwest line to OTHER Qwest lines!) So "local" service is $32
plus about $7 and change in various fees and taxes. That's a $40 landline,
without LD.

My DSL is $27 on top of that (it'd be $32 for dry DSL.)

Switching to T-Mo's Talk Forever would raise my cell bill about $12 ($10
plus $0.86 in fes plus a buck and change in tax) and save me $35 or so from
Qwest, putting me ahead about $20/month.

> 1. 911 service, especially if you have kids

E911 from VoIP with a pre-defined location is acceptable.

> 2. Reliability


I'll give you that one. My DSL service flakes out avbout once a week or two,
requring me to reboot my modem.

> 3. DSL

Thankfully there's only a $5 penalty for dry DSL here, otherwise there's
always cable. A bit more expensive, but much faster, and probably less
flakey.

> 4. "Free" local calls
>
> Only number 4 is addressed by the unlimited wireless plans.

And T-Mo's Talk Forever router, of course.

I'd probably jump all over the TF thing IF it had cellular backup- to
enhance reliability it'd be neat if it fell back to cellular if the
internet connection was unavailable. T-Mo could put warning lights and
buzzers all over it to indicate calls were no longer "free" and either
charge a reasonable per minute fee, give you a small "backup" cell-minute
bucket, or deduct the minutes from the cellphone plan theTF account was
tied to.

Internet telephony generally wins over POTS on cost- the largest barrier
to widespread acceptance is ease of use and reliability- the use of regular
home phones through the router accomplishes the former, and automatic
cellular backup would accomplish the latter.

AT&T charges me approx 12.00 a month for my landline. DSL is 34.95 a month.
I was month to month on DSL And just did a 1 yr DSL Contract and got my
landline for 6.00 a month. Then I combine my DSL, Landline, and AT&T
Wireless into one bill and they get's me another 5.00 moth off my bill.

It was going to cost me more to disconnect my landline to go with naked DSL
then to keep the landline. I hardly ever use it unless it's for local calls.

"Todd Allcock" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> At 21 Feb 2008 19:28:30 -0800 SMS wrote:
>>. In fact, the reason Verizon did this was because they believe that
>> they'll be able to entice more people to drop landline service and have
>> only a cell phone.
>
>
> Which is ironic, since Verizon and AT&T are the two largest landline
> companies in the US!
>
>> I doubt that $100 unlimited is going to cause many people to drop a
>> $20/month landline. Why do people keep landlines?
>
>
> A $20 landline? Where, (or when!) do you live?
>
> I have a landline here in Denver through Qwest. Local service is $25,
> plus
> a $6.50 fee to ostensibly cover interconnect (ironic, since all local
> calls
> would likely be to other Qwest customers, so they're taking my money to
> connect my Qwest line to OTHER Qwest lines!) So "local" service is $32
> plus about $7 and change in various fees and taxes. That's a $40
> landline,
> without LD.
>
> My DSL is $27 on top of that (it'd be $32 for dry DSL.)
>
> Switching to T-Mo's Talk Forever would raise my cell bill about $12 ($10
> plus $0.86 in fes plus a buck and change in tax) and save me $35 or so
> from
> Qwest, putting me ahead about $20/month.
>
>> 1. 911 service, especially if you have kids
>
> E911 from VoIP with a pre-defined location is acceptable.
>
>> 2. Reliability
>
>
> I'll give you that one. My DSL service flakes out avbout once a week or
> two,
> requring me to reboot my modem.
>
>> 3. DSL
>
> Thankfully there's only a $5 penalty for dry DSL here, otherwise there's
> always cable. A bit more expensive, but much faster, and probably less
> flakey.
>
>> 4. "Free" local calls
>>
>> Only number 4 is addressed by the unlimited wireless plans.
>
> And T-Mo's Talk Forever router, of course.
>
> I'd probably jump all over the TF thing IF it had cellular backup- to
> enhance reliability it'd be neat if it fell back to cellular if the
> internet connection was unavailable. T-Mo could put warning lights and
> buzzers all over it to indicate calls were no longer "free" and either
> charge a reasonable per minute fee, give you a small "backup" cell-minute
> bucket, or deduct the minutes from the cellphone plan theTF account was
> tied to.
>
> Internet telephony generally wins over POTS on cost- the largest barrier
> to widespread acceptance is ease of use and reliability- the use of
> regular
> home phones through the router accomplishes the former, and automatic
> cellular backup would accomplish the latter.
>
>

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Todd Allcock <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> > I doubt that $100 unlimited is going to cause many people to drop a
>> > $20/month landline. Why do people keep landlines?
>>
>>
>> A $20 landline? Where, (or when!) do you live?
>
> Shoot, I have one that's $26 out the door.
>
In NY Verizon POTS charges $20 just for a "line charge", then the telephone
service is additional

RBM wrote:
> "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> Todd Allcock <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>> I doubt that $100 unlimited is going to cause many people to drop a
>>>> $20/month landline. Why do people keep landlines?
>>>
>>> A $20 landline? Where, (or when!) do you live?
>> Shoot, I have one that's $26 out the door.
>>
> In NY Verizon POTS charges $20 just for a "line charge", then the telephone
> service is additional
>
>

Same here in PA. ~ $21 just for the line without a calling plan.

Todd Allcock wrote:

> A $20 landline? Where, (or when!) do you live?

Actually it's right around $17 each month. We make zero inter-LATA or
intra-LATA calls on it. We use off-peak cell minutes, mobile to mobile,
and One-Suite (at peak times). We have no extra features on the
landline. Caller ID isn't worth much around here anyway because more
than half of Californians have total blocking.

I could cut it by even more if I went to measured rate service.

When I first moved to California anyone could get Lifeline service,
which included 30 local calls. Since the local calling area was small,
most calls were not included in those 30 anyway. It was $2 per month.
Alas, they then put income requirements on Lifeline service.