Results 1 to 15 of 26
- 02-21-2008, 12:58 AM #1Todd H.Guest
Just noticed an unpleasant bit on this month's statement:
"Effective 3/30/08, AT&T will charge 20 cents for text/instant messags
and 30cents for picture video messages sent or received on a pay per
use basis."
The old rate for text was 15 cents.
I'm curious is this a lower rate for picture/video though. This
almost sounds semi reasonable.
--
Todd H.
http://toddh.net/
› See More: Text messaging rates increaase by 33%
- 02-21-2008, 01:17 AM #2Todd AllcockGuest
Re: Text messaging rates increaase by 33%
At 21 Feb 2008 00:58:04 -0600 Todd H. wrote:
>
> Just noticed an unpleasant bit on this month's statement:
>
> "Effective 3/30/08, AT&T will charge 20 cents for text/instant messags
> and 30cents for picture video messages sent or received on a pay per
> use basis."
Pleasant or unpleasant depends on your POV- this rate change will likely
result in an opt-out option for contract customers.
> The old rate for text was 15 cents.
>
> I'm curious is this a lower rate for picture/video though. This
> almost sounds semi reasonable.
T-Mo did something similar last year. They went from $0.10 for SMS (text)
and $0.25 for MMS (pixture/video) to a $0.15 "unified" messaging charge for
either SMS or MMS.
While I've never been much of a texter, $0.15 hit the spot where I'll
occasionally send a pic or video via MMS rather than screw around with
cabling a phone to my PC!
- 02-21-2008, 02:31 AM #3Mike MGuest
Re: Text messaging rates increaase by 33%
Todd H. wrote:
> Just noticed an unpleasant bit on this month's statement:
>
> "Effective 3/30/08, AT&T will charge 20 cents for text/instant messags
> and 30cents for picture video messages sent or received on a pay per
> use basis."
>
>
> The old rate for text was 15 cents.
>
> I'm curious is this a lower rate for picture/video though. This
> almost sounds semi reasonable.
>
>
> --
> Todd H.
> http://toddh.net/
John Navas\
Well maybe you text too much, and your're not white...
- 02-21-2008, 06:17 AM #4John NavasGuest
Re: Text messaging rates increaase by 33%
On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 00:58:04 -0600, [email protected] (Todd H.) wrote in
<[email protected]>:
>Just noticed an unpleasant bit on this month's statement:
>
>"Effective 3/30/08, AT&T will charge 20 cents for text/instant messags
>and 30cents for picture video messages sent or received on a pay per
>use basis."
>
>The old rate for text was 15 cents.
>
>I'm curious is this a lower rate for picture/video though. This
>almost sounds semi reasonable.
Makes my old MEdia Works Unlimited package with 1500 SMS messages and
200 MMS messages look better and better.
--
Best regards,
John Navas <http:/navasgroup.com>
"Usenet is like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhea - massive,
difficult to redirect, awe inspiring, entertaining, and a source of mind
boggling amounts of excrement when you least expect it." --Gene Spafford
- 02-21-2008, 11:25 AM #5LarryGuest
Re: Text messaging rates increaase by 33%
[email protected] (Todd H.) wrote in news:[email protected]:
>
> Just noticed an unpleasant bit on this month's statement:
>
> "Effective 3/30/08, AT&T will charge 20 cents for text/instant messags
> and 30cents for picture video messages sent or received on a pay per
> use basis."
>
>
> The old rate for text was 15 cents.
>
> I'm curious is this a lower rate for picture/video though. This
> almost sounds semi reasonable.
>
>
> --
> Todd H.
> http://toddh.net/
>
Why not? It was ALREADY the highest cost data transfer on the planet. If
they'll pay $961.54/megabyte, they'll pay $1282.05 for text and I don't
know what data size to base the video calculation on. Text messages are
156 bytes.
These prices easily qualify as usury.
- 02-21-2008, 11:51 AM #6John NavasGuest
Re: Text messaging rates increaase by 33%
On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 17:25:25 +0000, Larry <[email protected]> wrote in
<[email protected]>:
>These prices easily qualify as usury.
Then don't pay them. Simple. If enough people do that, then prices
will come down. That's how a market works. And it's not "usury" in any
event, since that only applies to a high rate of interest.
--
Best regards,
John Navas <http:/navasgroup.com>
"Usenet is like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhea - massive,
difficult to redirect, awe inspiring, entertaining, and a source of mind
boggling amounts of excrement when you least expect it." --Gene Spafford
- 02-21-2008, 12:17 PM #7cliftoGuest
Re: Text messaging rates increaase by 33%
John Navas wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 17:25:25 +0000, Larry <[email protected]> wrote in
> <[email protected]>:
>
>>These prices easily qualify as usury.
>
> Then don't pay them. Simple. If enough people do that, then prices
> will come down.
Extremely unlikely. A text message costs them so little that they can make
outrageous profits if they cause a 99.99% drop in texting.
--
Obama's childhood mentor, Frank Marshall Davis, was a communist.
http://www.aim.org/aim-column/print/...munist-mentor/
- 02-21-2008, 12:24 PM #8SMSGuest
Re: Text messaging rates increaase by 33%
Todd H. wrote:
> Just noticed an unpleasant bit on this month's statement:
>
> "Effective 3/30/08, AT&T will charge 20 cents for text/instant messags
> and 30cents for picture video messages sent or received on a pay per
> use basis."
>
>
> The old rate for text was 15 cents.
Ouch. Verizon is sure to follow with a similar increase. Clearly the
carriers are going to continue to raise texting rates until they can get
enough subscribers to sign up for a monthly texting plan which greatly
increases the ARPU.
I turned off texting on our phones as I was getting too many junk text
messages. At 5¢ it was no big deal, at 15¢ it was a bigger deal.
PagePlus is as low as 3.5¢ for text messages.
- 02-21-2008, 01:23 PM #9John NavasGuest
Re: Text messaging rates increaase by 33%
On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 12:17:04 -0600, clifto <[email protected]> wrote in
<[email protected]>:
>John Navas wrote:
>> On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 17:25:25 +0000, Larry <[email protected]> wrote in
>> <[email protected]>:
>>
>>>These prices easily qualify as usury.
>>
>> Then don't pay them. Simple. If enough people do that, then prices
>> will come down.
>
>Extremely unlikely. A text message costs them so little that they can make
>outrageous profits if they cause a 99.99% drop in texting.
Only on a percentage basis. The absolute drop in margin would still be
a big negative.
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR AT&T/CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/AT&T_Wireless_FAQ>
- 02-21-2008, 02:37 PM #10cliftoGuest
Re: Text messaging rates increaase by 33%
John Navas wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 12:17:04 -0600, clifto <[email protected]> wrote in
> <[email protected]>:
>>John Navas wrote:
>>> On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 17:25:25 +0000, Larry <[email protected]> wrote in
>>> <[email protected]>:
>>>
>>>>These prices easily qualify as usury.
>>>
>>> Then don't pay them. Simple. If enough people do that, then prices
>>> will come down.
>>
>>Extremely unlikely. A text message costs them so little that they can make
>>outrageous profits if they cause a 99.99% drop in texting.
>
> Only on a percentage basis. The absolute drop in margin would still be
> a big negative.
They'd make more money charging 5 cents per text message and keeping all
their customers than losing 99% of texters. They won't do either, and
eventually people will wise up and get alpha pagers.
--
Obama's childhood mentor, Frank Marshall Davis, was a communist.
http://www.aim.org/aim-column/print/...munist-mentor/
- 02-21-2008, 02:57 PM #11John NavasGuest
Re: Text messaging rates increaase by 33%
On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 14:37:07 -0600, clifto <[email protected]> wrote in
<[email protected]>:
>John Navas wrote:
>> On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 12:17:04 -0600, clifto <[email protected]> wrote in
>> <[email protected]>:
>>>John Navas wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 17:25:25 +0000, Larry <[email protected]> wrote in
>>>> <[email protected]>:
>>>>
>>>>>These prices easily qualify as usury.
>>>>
>>>> Then don't pay them. Simple. If enough people do that, then prices
>>>> will come down.
>>>
>>>Extremely unlikely. A text message costs them so little that they can make
>>>outrageous profits if they cause a 99.99% drop in texting.
>>
>> Only on a percentage basis. The absolute drop in margin would still be
>> a big negative.
>
>They'd make more money charging 5 cents per text message and keeping all
>their customers than losing 99% of texters. They won't do either, and
>eventually people will wise up and get alpha pagers.
I don't think alpha pagers are going to come back. I suspect more
people will sign up for text packages, which I think is the ultimate
objective of the carriers.
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR AT&T/CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/AT&T_Wireless_FAQ>
- 02-21-2008, 03:45 PM #12LarryGuest
Re: Text messaging rates increaase by 33%
clifto <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:
> They'd make more money charging 5 cents per text message and keeping
all
> their customers than losing 99% of texters. They won't do either, and
> eventually people will wise up and get alpha pagers.
>
>
There's hardly any pager companies left, any more.
- 02-21-2008, 04:06 PM #13LarryGuest
Re: Text messaging rates increaase by 33%
John Navas <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
> I don't think alpha pagers are going to come back.
That's really too bad, too. The old POCSAG code coming out of 12 500
watt Quintron beasts on the same frequency had seriously more range and
better coverage than any cellular and had amazing penetration in
buildings and tunnels.
I get a kick out of hospitals with 'NO CELLULAR PHONES' signs all over to
protect patients and monitoring. Too funny. We had 4 UHF and VHF beasts
right on top of the building blasting a constant stream of high powered
RF into the buildings so all the doctors' pagers would have SOLID
coverage, even in lead-lined rooms in radiac. No heart patients knew the
difference. One of the UHF transmitters was on the 800 Mhz paging band
very close to the Sellphone band.
Those were great times. Every prostitute in town was our customers...
(c
They kept that terminal HOPPIN'!
- 02-21-2008, 05:51 PM #14SMSGuest
Re: Text messaging rates increaase by 33%
clifto wrote:
> They'd make more money charging 5 cents per text message and keeping all
> their customers than losing 99% of texters. They won't do either, and
> eventually people will wise up and get alpha pagers.
Oh, geez, yet another device to carry around.
In reality the carriers know that enough subscribers will decide to pay
for a texting package to offset the losses from those that will just
stop texting completely at the higher rates.
- 02-21-2008, 06:40 PM #15cliftoGuest
Re: Text messaging rates increaase by 33%
SMS wrote:
> clifto wrote:
>> They'd make more money charging 5 cents per text message and keeping all
>> their customers than losing 99% of texters. They won't do either, and
>> eventually people will wise up and get alpha pagers.
>
> Oh, geez, yet another device to carry around.
IIRC it's cheaper than a message plan and unlimited to boot. I used to carry
two and would again if I had much use for texting. I was disgruntled enough
at two cents per received message that I didn't use it much, and you can bet
that at twenty cents per message it's emergency-only communication for me.
--
Obama's childhood mentor, Frank Marshall Davis, was a communist.
http://www.aim.org/aim-column/print/...munist-mentor/
Similar Threads
- Rogers
- alt.cellular.attws
- T-Mobile
- alt.cellular.sprintpcs
Lifeline cell phone service
in Chit Chat