What codes do I need before I can sell my phone?

I will be receiving a free Nokia 3560 phone as part of an AT&T promotion.
As I already have a working cell phone, I don't need the free phone so I
plan on selling it on ebay. Please tell me if there are any codes I need to
get from AT&T before I can sell this phone. (Will they give me static for
asking for these codes?)

Excuse my ignorance... what is meant by "locked"? Can this brand new phone
out-of-the-box be locked? Is it possible that the phone is restricted for
use only with AT&T?

Thank you for your help.

Gary

---

› See More: What codes do I need before I can sell my phone?

In alt.cellular Gary <[email protected]> wrote:
> I will be receiving a free Nokia 3560 phone as part of an AT&T promotion.
> As I already have a working cell phone, I don't need the free phone so I
> plan on selling it on ebay. Please tell me if there are any codes I need to
> get from AT&T before I can sell this phone. (Will they give me static for
> asking for these codes?)
>
> Excuse my ignorance... what is meant by "locked"? Can this brand new phone
> out-of-the-box be locked? Is it possible that the phone is restricted for
> use only with AT&T?


Gary...

The 3560 should work on any TDMA network - I believe it is a tri-mode
phone. That means it will work on Cingular's legacy network -- like AT&T,
they are moving to GSM but most of their network is TDMA.

The following networks run TDMA...

** Most of Cingular, except for a few BellSouth markets that were GSM,
and except for the former Pacific Bell Wireless markets which were also
GSM.

** Most of the CellularONE networks, with the one notable exception of
the C1 properties owned by Western Wireless.

** US Cellular Corp... probably, anyhow. They're moving to CDMA but they
may still have their TDMA network up and running.

** Assorted smaller carriers.

Your buyer would be out of luck if he uses...

** Verizon, Sprint, Qwest/USWest, Western Wireless C1, MetroPCS, Cricket,
Northcoast PCS, or Alltel. They all use CDMA.

** Nextel, which uses a protocol based on TDMA but (as far as I know) is
incompatible.

** US Cellular, if they no longer activate TDMA phones.

** T-Mobile. T-Mobile uses GSM.

** The Cingular properties which used to be BellSouth DCS or Pacific Bell
Wireless (a couple Cingular markets in the south, and basically all
across the west coast) which have always been GSM. There was never any
Pacific Bell/Cingular TDMA coverage on the West Coast.

These are all the major US carriers. There are a few Canadian carriers, I
believe, that run TDMA too.

Now, to answer your latest question: yes. Some providers lock their phones
so that you can't reprogram them to run on another company's network. The
lock code is called the Master Subsidy Lock. You may be able to social-engineer
it out of AT&T if the phone is indeed locked. Verizon and Alltel don't lock
their phones, but most of the other carriers do.

Note that the buyer is going to be screwed if their carrier doesn't allow
them to activate phones from another carrier, and this is another policy that
some of the carriers do have. It's on the buyer to make sure that their carrier
will allow another company's phones on their network.

Anyhow, if there is an MSL, you won't be able to do over-the-air or manual
reprogramming to put basic stuff like the System ID and new telephone number
into the phone. I don't know if AT&T locks their phones, though I suspect
they do. Your best bet is to ask over in alt.cellular.attws.

Hope this helps. Feel free to quote this post verbatim when needed. :>

--
JustThe.net Internet & Multimedia Services
22674 Motnocab Road * Apple Valley, CA 92307-1950
Steve Sobol, Proprietor
888.480.4NET (4638) * 248.724.4NET * [email protected]

Steve,

Thank you VERY much for your time and your help. I appreciate it!

I take it MSL means master security lock? If it does have such a lock, what
are my options?

Also, if I were to get a GSM phone from AT&T , would that make any
difference?

Thanks again!

Gary


"Steven J Sobol" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In alt.cellular Gary <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I will be receiving a free Nokia 3560 phone as part of an AT&T
promotion.
> > As I already have a working cell phone, I don't need the free phone so I
> > plan on selling it on ebay. Please tell me if there are any codes I
need to
> > get from AT&T before I can sell this phone. (Will they give me static
for
> > asking for these codes?)
> >
> > Excuse my ignorance... what is meant by "locked"? Can this brand new
phone
> > out-of-the-box be locked? Is it possible that the phone is restricted
for
> > use only with AT&T?
>
>
> Gary...
>
> The 3560 should work on any TDMA network - I believe it is a tri-mode
> phone. That means it will work on Cingular's legacy network -- like
AT&T,
> they are moving to GSM but most of their network is TDMA.
>
> The following networks run TDMA...
>
> ** Most of Cingular, except for a few BellSouth markets that were GSM,
> and except for the former Pacific Bell Wireless markets which were
also
> GSM.
>
> ** Most of the CellularONE networks, with the one notable exception of
> the C1 properties owned by Western Wireless.
>
> ** US Cellular Corp... probably, anyhow. They're moving to CDMA but they
> may still have their TDMA network up and running.
>
> ** Assorted smaller carriers.
>
> Your buyer would be out of luck if he uses...
>
> ** Verizon, Sprint, Qwest/USWest, Western Wireless C1, MetroPCS,
Cricket,
> Northcoast PCS, or Alltel. They all use CDMA.
>
> ** Nextel, which uses a protocol based on TDMA but (as far as I know) is
> incompatible.
>
> ** US Cellular, if they no longer activate TDMA phones.
>
> ** T-Mobile. T-Mobile uses GSM.
>
> ** The Cingular properties which used to be BellSouth DCS or Pacific
Bell
> Wireless (a couple Cingular markets in the south, and basically all
> across the west coast) which have always been GSM. There was never
any
> Pacific Bell/Cingular TDMA coverage on the West Coast.
>
> These are all the major US carriers. There are a few Canadian carriers, I
> believe, that run TDMA too.
>
> Now, to answer your latest question: yes. Some providers lock their phones
> so that you can't reprogram them to run on another company's network. The
> lock code is called the Master Subsidy Lock. You may be able to
social-engineer
> it out of AT&T if the phone is indeed locked. Verizon and Alltel don't
lock
> their phones, but most of the other carriers do.
>
> Note that the buyer is going to be screwed if their carrier doesn't allow
> them to activate phones from another carrier, and this is another policy
that
> some of the carriers do have. It's on the buyer to make sure that their
carrier
> will allow another company's phones on their network.
>
> Anyhow, if there is an MSL, you won't be able to do over-the-air or manual
> reprogramming to put basic stuff like the System ID and new telephone
number
> into the phone. I don't know if AT&T locks their phones, though I suspect
> they do. Your best bet is to ask over in alt.cellular.attws.
>
> Hope this helps. Feel free to quote this post verbatim when needed. :>
>
> --
> JustThe.net Internet & Multimedia Services
> 22674 Motnocab Road * Apple Valley, CA 92307-1950
> Steve Sobol, Proprietor
> 888.480.4NET (4638) * 248.724.4NET * [email protected]

On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 18:36:22 -0500, Steven J Sobol
<[email protected]> wrote:

>The 3560 should work on any TDMA network - I believe it is a tri-mode
> phone. That means it will work on Cingular's legacy network -- like AT&T,
> they are moving to GSM but most of their network is TDMA.

If it was on the AT&T TDMA network it is SOC locked.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To send an email reply send to
GSMthemobilestandard ( yahoo.com

In alt.cellular Gary <[email protected]> wrote:
> Steve,
>
> Thank you VERY much for your time and your help. I appreciate it!
>
> I take it MSL means master security lock? If it does have such a lock, what
> are my options?

Master subsidy lock. You have to try to get the MSL from AT&T.

> Also, if I were to get a GSM phone from AT&T , would that make any
> difference?

Most likely, the only difference would be that you could use the phone on
GSM carriers instead of TDMA carriers.


> "Steven J Sobol" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> In alt.cellular Gary <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > I will be receiving a free Nokia 3560 phone as part of an AT&T
> promotion.
>> > As I already have a working cell phone, I don't need the free phone so I
>> > plan on selling it on ebay. Please tell me if there are any codes I
> need to
>> > get from AT&T before I can sell this phone. (Will they give me static
> for
>> > asking for these codes?)
>> >
>> > Excuse my ignorance... what is meant by "locked"? Can this brand new
> phone
>> > out-of-the-box be locked? Is it possible that the phone is restricted
> for
>> > use only with AT&T?
>>
>>
>> Gary...
>>
>> The 3560 should work on any TDMA network - I believe it is a tri-mode
>> phone. That means it will work on Cingular's legacy network -- like
> AT&T,
>> they are moving to GSM but most of their network is TDMA.
>>
>> The following networks run TDMA...
>>
>> ** Most of Cingular, except for a few BellSouth markets that were GSM,
>> and except for the former Pacific Bell Wireless markets which were
> also
>> GSM.
>>
>> ** Most of the CellularONE networks, with the one notable exception of
>> the C1 properties owned by Western Wireless.
>>
>> ** US Cellular Corp... probably, anyhow. They're moving to CDMA but they
>> may still have their TDMA network up and running.
>>
>> ** Assorted smaller carriers.
>>
>> Your buyer would be out of luck if he uses...
>>
>> ** Verizon, Sprint, Qwest/USWest, Western Wireless C1, MetroPCS,
> Cricket,
>> Northcoast PCS, or Alltel. They all use CDMA.
>>
>> ** Nextel, which uses a protocol based on TDMA but (as far as I know) is
>> incompatible.
>>
>> ** US Cellular, if they no longer activate TDMA phones.
>>
>> ** T-Mobile. T-Mobile uses GSM.
>>
>> ** The Cingular properties which used to be BellSouth DCS or Pacific
> Bell
>> Wireless (a couple Cingular markets in the south, and basically all
>> across the west coast) which have always been GSM. There was never
> any
>> Pacific Bell/Cingular TDMA coverage on the West Coast.
>>
>> These are all the major US carriers. There are a few Canadian carriers, I
>> believe, that run TDMA too.
>>
>> Now, to answer your latest question: yes. Some providers lock their phones
>> so that you can't reprogram them to run on another company's network. The
>> lock code is called the Master Subsidy Lock. You may be able to
> social-engineer
>> it out of AT&T if the phone is indeed locked. Verizon and Alltel don't
> lock
>> their phones, but most of the other carriers do.
>>
>> Note that the buyer is going to be screwed if their carrier doesn't allow
>> them to activate phones from another carrier, and this is another policy
> that
>> some of the carriers do have. It's on the buyer to make sure that their
> carrier
>> will allow another company's phones on their network.
>>
>> Anyhow, if there is an MSL, you won't be able to do over-the-air or manual
>> reprogramming to put basic stuff like the System ID and new telephone
> number
>> into the phone. I don't know if AT&T locks their phones, though I suspect
>> they do. Your best bet is to ask over in alt.cellular.attws.
>>
>> Hope this helps. Feel free to quote this post verbatim when needed. :>
>>
>> --
>> JustThe.net Internet & Multimedia Services
>> 22674 Motnocab Road * Apple Valley, CA 92307-1950
>> Steve Sobol, Proprietor
>> 888.480.4NET (4638) * 248.724.4NET * [email protected]
>
>

--
JustThe.net Internet & Multimedia Services
22674 Motnocab Road * Apple Valley, CA 92307-1950
Steve Sobol, Proprietor
888.480.4NET (4638) * 248.724.4NET * [email protected]

>
> The 3560 should work on any TDMA network - I believe it is a tri-mode
> phone. That means it will work on Cingular's legacy network -- like
AT&T,
> they are moving to GSM but most of their network is TDMA.
>
> The following networks run TDMA...
>
> ** Most of Cingular, except for a few BellSouth markets that were GSM,
> and except for the former Pacific Bell Wireless markets which were
also
> GSM.
>
> ** Most of the CellularONE networks, with the one notable exception of
> the C1 properties owned by Western Wireless.
>
> ** US Cellular Corp... probably, anyhow. They're moving to CDMA but they
> may still have their TDMA network up and running.
>
> ** Assorted smaller carriers.
>
> Your buyer would be out of luck if he uses...
>
> ** Verizon, Sprint, Qwest/USWest, Western Wireless C1, MetroPCS,
Cricket,
> Northcoast PCS, or Alltel. They all use CDMA.
>
> ** Nextel, which uses a protocol based on TDMA but (as far as I know) is
> incompatible.
>
> ** US Cellular, if they no longer activate TDMA phones.
>
> ** T-Mobile. T-Mobile uses GSM.
>
> ** The Cingular properties which used to be BellSouth DCS or Pacific
Bell
> Wireless (a couple Cingular markets in the south, and basically all
> across the west coast) which have always been GSM. There was never
any
> Pacific Bell/Cingular TDMA coverage on the West Coast.
>
> These are all the major US carriers. There are a few Canadian carriers, I
> believe, that run TDMA too.
>
> Now, to answer your latest question: yes. Some providers lock their phones
> so that you can't reprogram them to run on another company's network. The
> lock code is called the Master Subsidy Lock. You may be able to
social-engineer
> it out of AT&T if the phone is indeed locked. Verizon and Alltel don't
lock
> their phones, but most of the other carriers do.
>
> Note that the buyer is going to be screwed if their carrier doesn't allow
> them to activate phones from another carrier, and this is another policy
that
> some of the carriers do have. It's on the buyer to make sure that their
carrier
> will allow another company's phones on their network.
>
> Anyhow, if there is an MSL, you won't be able to do over-the-air or manual
> reprogramming to put basic stuff like the System ID and new telephone
number
> into the phone. I don't know if AT&T locks their phones, though I suspect
> they do. Your best bet is to ask over in alt.cellular.attws.
>
> Hope this helps. Feel free to quote this post verbatim when needed.


What a mess the US mobile systems are!
Should have just adopted GSM with the rest of the world in 1993, and gotten
over yourselves

What a big mess, and a laughing stock. 10 years behind the rest of the world

"Michael" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

[snip]

> What a mess the US mobile systems are!
> Should have just adopted GSM with the rest of the world in 1993, and
gotten
> over yourselves
>
> What a big mess, and a laughing stock. 10 years behind the rest of the
world

At least they have (to me anyway) the sensible system of making the mobile
user pay for the cost of the incoming call rather than humping it on the
caller as here in the UK. As an American friend said to me "if you choose to
go mobile, why should I pay extra to call you..?"

I know a lot of people here will say "why should I pay for an incoming call"
but surely it would be possible for it to be implemented as an option if the
mobile user wanted it, with a normal geographical landline number being
allocated to the mobile (sorry "cell" for you US types..!) phone..?

Ivor

"Ivor Jones" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Michael" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
> [snip]
>
> > What a mess the US mobile systems are!
> > Should have just adopted GSM with the rest of the world in 1993, and
> gotten
> > over yourselves
> >
> > What a big mess, and a laughing stock. 10 years behind the rest of the
> world
>
> At least they have (to me anyway) the sensible system of making the mobile
> user pay for the cost of the incoming call rather than humping it on the
> caller as here in the UK. As an American friend said to me "if you choose
to
> go mobile, why should I pay extra to call you..?"
>
> I know a lot of people here will say "why should I pay for an incoming
call"
> but surely it would be possible for it to be implemented as an option if
the
> mobile user wanted it, with a normal geographical landline number being
> allocated to the mobile (sorry "cell" for you US types..!) phone..?
>
> Ivor

Fair enough, but with our way at least the cost means that if someone calls
you it means they really need to talk to you, and will get their point over
quickly and hang up!

It'd be a good idea to have the option either way though.

G

In article <[email protected]>,
Ivor Jones <[email protected]> wrote:
>"Michael" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>[snip]
>> What a mess the US mobile systems are!
>> Should have just adopted GSM with the rest of the world in 1993, and
>gotten
>> over yourselves
>> What a big mess, and a laughing stock. 10 years behind the rest of the
>world
>At least they have (to me anyway) the sensible system of making the mobile
>user pay for the cost of the incoming call rather than humping it on the
>caller as here in the UK. As an American friend said to me "if you choose to
>go mobile, why should I pay extra to call you..?"
>I know a lot of people here will say "why should I pay for an incoming call"
>but surely it would be possible for it to be implemented as an option if the
>mobile user wanted it, with a normal geographical landline number being
>allocated to the mobile (sorry "cell" for you US types..!) phone..?

Europe and Australia give themselves a lot of accolades, most of
which are undeserved. It is true that having one cell standard for all of
Europe is convenient. Just buy a SIM when you get there. But the truth
is everything is more expensive in Europe. So even if you have to deal
with multi-network phones here in the US, the service is cheaper. Some
will say "all incoming calls are free", but that's utter horse**** because
SOMEONE pays for the call, just not you. I'd rather pay for all my
minutes and not put that on my friends and family. Especially since I can
get 3000 anytime minutes for 50 USD (which is equivalent to 34 British
pounds). I don't think there is anything that gives that kind of value in
Europe. And those 3000 anytime minutes are usable across a much larger
area.

Whenever the Eurosnob vs. USA wars ensue, I have to laugh because
both countries have their advantages, but in the end America is a cheaper
place to live with more space to stretch out in nicer, newer homes.
Emphasizing the mishmash of cell networks here is a humorous way for
Eurosnobs to dig on the USA. Every perceived disadvantage can be
correctly spun as an advantage. We have different incompatible networks
here, but we also have much lower prices and lots of choice. And the
different networks are tested in the marketplace and the government
doesn't dictate which one is best for us as they've done in Europe.
Broadband access (1.5 megabit) has dropped to $30 per month. Wireless
internet services are likely to bring that down even more. Wireline
telephones are about $20 (with tax included) and provide unlimited local
calling. The truth is despite our lack of a national wireless standard --
the networks are cheaper because there is competition. Competition brings
innovation. When the government dictates the standard, there is less room
for innovation -- all carriers must be compatible with the government
dictated standard. CDMA is already known to be more spectrally efficient
than GSM, so innovation does work.

RDT
--
"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the
inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries."
--- Sir Winston Churchill

""RDT"" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Europe and Australia give themselves a lot of accolades, most of
> which are undeserved.

True, but that applies to everyone. While I was in the US I read the results
of a survey that said 12% of American's think they made the Statue of
Liberty and have no idea about what the French had to do with it. I
constantly hear American documentaries on Sky going on about how the
American's invented the internet topology and protocols and have no idea
that Universities in the UK were already running the system years previous
to the dates they quote, and just how times do the US insist on reminding
the world in movies about their achievements in WWII, such as the stealing
of the Enigma machine in the film U571 (for reference the u-boat captured
with its Enigma machine was actually U110, before the US ever entered the
war. The Enigma machine was never recovered from the real U571, which served
Germany with disctinction until 1944, making it an even bigger insult to the
survivors of U571).

Still, I agree with you - but it's not just Europe and Australia that takes
the credit for things... it's everyone, American's included.

> It is true that having one cell standard for all of
> Europe is convenient. Just buy a SIM when you get there. But the truth
> is everything is more expensive in Europe. So even if you have to deal
> with multi-network phones here in the US, the service is cheaper.

Very true, but then I'd be (and am) willing to pay a LOT more for a phone
that will work anywhere I travel in the UK, rather than in a few areas with
a few providers.

> Some
> will say "all incoming calls are free", but that's utter horse**** because
> SOMEONE pays for the call, just not you. I'd rather pay for all my
> minutes and not put that on my friends and family. Especially since I can
> get 3000 anytime minutes for 50 USD (which is equivalent to 34 British
> pounds). I don't think there is anything that gives that kind of value in
> Europe. And those 3000 anytime minutes are usable across a much larger
> area.

They're free for the owner of the phone receiving the call. Yes, obviously
somebody pays for the call, but I don't want to pay for calls I receive. I
get hassled enough by wrong numbers and people phoning me up to pay for
things or companies phoning me to sort out messes that they have caused -
why should I pay for that? If I want to talk to somebody I see why I should
pay. Just like if I get on a bus I can see why I should pay the bus fair...
Are are you suggesting maybe they should be paying me for some journeys?

> Whenever the Eurosnob vs. USA wars ensue, I have to laugh because
> both countries have their advantages, but in the end America is a cheaper
> place to live with more space to stretch out in nicer, newer homes.

Newer homes? What, people in the UK can't build houses or something? I live
in a house that's only a couple of years old, and I moved into it a couple
of weeks after it was built. You can't really get much more "newer" than
that. What are you talking about? What was it Eddie Izzard said? We all live
in Castles... that's right... (and yes he was being sarcastic).

True, America has much lower population density. Whether it's "nicer" or not
is a matter of opinion. People from the UK travel to America and say it's
the nicest place they've been to, and vice versa. America wins hands down in
some areas, the UK in others.

> Emphasizing the mishmash of cell networks here is a humorous way for
> Eurosnobs to dig on the USA. Every perceived disadvantage can be
> correctly spun as an advantage. We have different incompatible networks
> here, but we also have much lower prices and lots of choice. And the
> different networks are tested in the marketplace and the government
> doesn't dictate which one is best for us as they've done in Europe.
> Broadband access (1.5 megabit) has dropped to $30 per month. Wireless
> internet services are likely to bring that down even more. Wireline
> telephones are about $20 (with tax included) and provide unlimited local
> calling. The truth is despite our lack of a national wireless standard --
> the networks are cheaper because there is competition. Competition brings
> innovation. When the government dictates the standard, there is less room
> for innovation -- all carriers must be compatible with the government
> dictated standard. CDMA is already known to be more spectrally efficient
> than GSM, so innovation does work.

All true, but then you skip over so many problems that I've simply never
experienced in the UK. When I lived in the USA I frequently had to try two
or three different phone providers before getting past the message "I'm
sorry, all our circuits are busy...". I've never once not been able to make
a call from my home in the UK due to there been insufficient "circuits". I
certainly lost my phone signal on both analogue and digital exponentially
more frequently than I ever have in the UK.

Yes, it's true the competition forces prices down, and innovation as a
result is an obviously big advantage. But then standardisation also has some
pretty big advantages too - for example, it tends to mean things work a lot
more frequently and you don't have the problems of making things that
consumers require compatibility with on loads of different protocols.

It's also true that you can cram more calls into a given frequency range on
CDMA than on GSM... but, something's gone wrong somewhere, I've never had a
network busy message in the UK... something that would happen on two thirds
of attempts to make a call in the US. So America has less people per square
mile, more spatially efficient mobile phone networks can cram in more
calls... yet has network busy problems the likes of which I've never
experiences in any other country. Maybe I was with the wrong providers... Or
maybe it's just the fact that having a national standardised system means it
tends to work more as you can pool your resources into one system.

Whenever the "Eurosnob" vs. USA wars ensue, I have to laugh because you
always get someone from somewhere saying "both countries have their
advantages" - a beautiful and accurate place to stop, but then they go on to
highlight all the advantages of one, missing out all the disadvantages, and
highlight all the disadvantages of the other place while missing out all of
the advantages and at the same time being entirely blind to see that for the
most part neither is "better" than the other - it's purely a matter of an
individual's opinion to what they prefer or which they'd rather have.

Adam

> > What a mess the US mobile systems are!
> > Should have just adopted GSM with the rest of the world in 1993, and
> gotten
> > over yourselves
> >
> > What a big mess, and a laughing stock. 10 years behind the rest of the
> world
>
> At least they have (to me anyway) the sensible system of making the mobile
> user pay for the cost of the incoming call rather than humping it on the
> caller as here in the UK. As an American friend said to me "if you choose
to
> go mobile, why should I pay extra to call you..?"

If you make a long-distance call from your landline to another landline in
the US, you pay for the cost of the call, as you know that is a long
distance call and tariffed differently.

Just about all of the rest of the world uses calling-party-pays. You know
you are calling a mobile so you pay the relevant rates.

Your statement above is indicative of a half-baked, after-the-fact attempted
defence of your moron decision not to have dedicated mobile number ranges.
Your problem, and you are reaping the problems based with your decision

"Michael" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> > > What a mess the US mobile systems are!
> > > Should have just adopted GSM with the rest of the world in 1993, and
> > gotten
> > > over yourselves
> > >
> > > What a big mess, and a laughing stock. 10 years behind the rest of the
> > world
> >
> > At least they have (to me anyway) the sensible system of making the
mobile
> > user pay for the cost of the incoming call rather than humping it on the
> > caller as here in the UK. As an American friend said to me "if you
choose
> to
> > go mobile, why should I pay extra to call you..?"
>
> If you make a long-distance call from your landline to another landline in
> the US, you pay for the cost of the call, as you know that is a long
> distance call and tariffed differently.
>
> Just about all of the rest of the world uses calling-party-pays. You know
> you are calling a mobile so you pay the relevant rates.
>
> Your statement above is indicative of a half-baked, after-the-fact
attempted
> defence of your moron decision not to have dedicated mobile number ranges.
> Your problem, and you are reaping the problems based with your decision

Who was that aimed at..? Not me I hope.. Well it doesn't really matter, and
I'd still prefer to have the *option* of the US system for my mobile use.

Ivor

On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 10:26:57 GMT, "Michael" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Just about all of the rest of the world uses calling-party-pays. You know
>you are calling a mobile so you pay the relevant rates.

Yes, and you get raped with the rates that you pay to call a mobile as
well. It's not a totally rosey picture as you'd like to paint.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To send an email reply send to
GSMthemobilestandard ( yahoo.com

> >Just about all of the rest of the world uses calling-party-pays. You know
> >you are calling a mobile so you pay the relevant rates.
>
> Yes, and you get raped with the rates that you pay to call a mobile as
> well. It's not a totally rosey picture as you'd like to paint.

Hardly. We generate as many fixed-to-mobile minutes as LD minutes for all of
Australia

So clearly we are not being raped