Results 16 to 30 of 30
- 06-19-2008, 10:48 AM #16HorryGuest
Re: Bad news for mobile users
On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 01:57:31 +1000, Graeme Willox wrote:
> Horry wrote:
>> On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 09:44:58 +1000, Graeme Willox wrote:
>>
>>> Sunny wrote:
>>>> "Polly the Parrot" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>> | In the European Union, they are considering allowing mobile network
>>>> | operators charging punters for receiving calls.
>>>> |
>>>> | If this happens, how long before they try it in Oz?
>>>>
>>>> not long, Singapore has had it for years.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> We had it here years ago.
>>
>> On the lower value Flexiplans on the Telstra AMPS network. FP 20, from
>> memory.
>>
>>
>
> I think you're right.
It was a long time ago. Early 90s at the latest. Possibly even 1989.
› See More: Bad news for mobile users
- 06-19-2008, 07:31 PM #17MichaelGuest
Re: Bad news for mobile users
"Sunny" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Polly the Parrot" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> | In the European Union, they are considering allowing mobile network
> | operators charging punters for receiving calls.
> |
> | If this happens, how long before they try it in Oz?
>
> not long, Singapore has had it for years.
never
>
>
- 06-19-2008, 07:31 PM #18MichaelGuest
Re: Bad news for mobile users
"Horry" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news[email protected]...
> On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 09:44:58 +1000, Graeme Willox wrote:
>
>> Sunny wrote:
>>> "Polly the Parrot" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>> | In the European Union, they are considering allowing mobile network
>>> | operators charging punters for receiving calls.
>>> |
>>> | If this happens, how long before they try it in Oz?
>>>
>>> not long, Singapore has had it for years.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> We had it here years ago.
>
> On the lower value Flexiplans on the Telstra AMPS network. FP 20, from
> memory.
No, just FP 10.
And the first time it occurred, it took call rating about 48 hours to
process 24 hours worth of calls!
- 06-19-2008, 07:32 PM #19MichaelGuest
Re: Bad news for mobile users
"Polly the Parrot" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 16:22:41 +1000 "Rod Speed"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> > Do try and keep up!
>>
>> You couldnt even manage to grasp that the telecoms commissioner
>> doesnt get to set EU policy.
>
> Usual Roddles bluster when proved wrong.
exactly
>
> Yawn.
- 06-19-2008, 07:32 PM #20MichaelGuest
Re: Bad news for mobile users
"Snapper" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Polly the Parrot wrote...
>
>> In the European Union, they are considering allowing mobile network
>> operators charging punters for receiving calls.
>
> Some countries in Europe have had that for landline calls since year dot.
> Not
> surprised that they'd try it on the mobile community.
>
>> If this happens, how long before they try it in Oz?
>
> All they need is for one greedy operator to try it on, then the others
> will rush
> in, en masse, in the name of "competition".
Its too expensive to implement, IT-wise
- 06-19-2008, 07:33 PM #21MichaelGuest
Re: Bad news for mobile users
"Will Kemp" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Snapper wrote:
>> Will Kemp wrote...
>>
>>> Nah, they wouldn't dare. They know it would only lose them money.
>>
>> Well, in the US, the home of the Consumer is King, they have a similar
>> thing. If
>> you receive a call you don't pay for the call per se, but rather the
>> airtime.
>> So, both parties are getting slugged. And the phone companies are getting
>> away
>> with it.
>>
>> If it was introduced, a few people would whinge about it. But then they'd
>> sigh,
>> go "oh well, that's life" and continue to enjoy the BOHICA Effect.
>
> No, it wouldn't work like that. One dumb telco would probably try it
> (guess who) and the rest would just ignore it, so the telco charging for
> incoming calls would lose customers. Unlike many industries in Aus,
> telecoms doesn't seem to operate as a cartel - mainly due to telstra's
> greed and stupidity, i suppose.
And still has 45% of the market, 15 years after GSM was introduced.
the proof is in the pudding
more people want telstra than anyone else
- 06-19-2008, 08:33 PM #22Rod SpeedGuest
Re: Bad news for mobile users
Michael <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Snapper" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Polly the Parrot wrote...
>>
>>> In the European Union, they are considering allowing mobile network
>>> operators charging punters for receiving calls.
>>
>> Some countries in Europe have had that for landline calls since year
>> dot. Not
>> surprised that they'd try it on the mobile community.
>>
>>> If this happens, how long before they try it in Oz?
>>
>> All they need is for one greedy operator to try it on, then the
>> others will rush
>> in, en masse, in the name of "competition".
>
> Its too expensive to implement, IT-wise
As if you'd have a ****ing clue about how much it would cost IT wise.
- 06-21-2008, 09:18 PM #23MichaelGuest
Re: Bad news for mobile users
>>> No, it wouldn't work like that. One dumb telco would probably try it
>>> (guess who) and the rest would just ignore it, so the telco charging
>>> for incoming calls would lose customers. Unlike many industries in
>>> Aus, telecoms doesn't seem to operate as a cartel - mainly due to
>>> telstra's greed and stupidity, i suppose.
>
>> And still has 45% of the market, 15 years after GSM was introduced.
>
> Easy to claim, hell of a lot harder to actually substantiate that claim.
Easily done, annual reports, off you go
- 06-21-2008, 09:19 PM #24MichaelGuest
Re: Bad news for mobile users
"Rod Speed" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Michael <[email protected]> wrote:
>> "Snapper" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> Polly the Parrot wrote...
>>>
>>>> In the European Union, they are considering allowing mobile network
>>>> operators charging punters for receiving calls.
>>>
>>> Some countries in Europe have had that for landline calls since year
>>> dot. Not
>>> surprised that they'd try it on the mobile community.
>>>
>>>> If this happens, how long before they try it in Oz?
>>>
>>> All they need is for one greedy operator to try it on, then the
>>> others will rush
>>> in, en masse, in the name of "competition".
>>
>> Its too expensive to implement, IT-wise
>
> As if you'd have a ****ing clue about how much it would cost IT wise.
You'd be surprised.
>
>
- 06-21-2008, 09:19 PM #25MichaelGuest
Re: Bad news for mobile users
"Will Kemp" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Michael wrote:
>> "Will Kemp" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> Snapper wrote:
>>>> Will Kemp wrote...
>>>>
>>>>> Nah, they wouldn't dare. They know it would only lose them money.
>>>> Well, in the US, the home of the Consumer is King, they have a similar
>>>> thing. If
>>>> you receive a call you don't pay for the call per se, but rather the
>>>> airtime.
>>>> So, both parties are getting slugged. And the phone companies are
>>>> getting away
>>>> with it.
>>>>
>>>> If it was introduced, a few people would whinge about it. But then
>>>> they'd sigh,
>>>> go "oh well, that's life" and continue to enjoy the BOHICA Effect.
>>> No, it wouldn't work like that. One dumb telco would probably try it
>>> (guess who) and the rest would just ignore it, so the telco charging for
>>> incoming calls would lose customers. Unlike many industries in Aus,
>>> telecoms doesn't seem to operate as a cartel - mainly due to telstra's
>>> greed and stupidity, i suppose.
>>
>> And still has 45% of the market, 15 years after GSM was introduced.
>>
>> the proof is in the pudding
>>
>> more people want telstra than anyone else
>
> Nobody actually *wants* Telstra. Some people are stuck with it because
> there's no choice. Some people don't even know there *is* a choice. Only a
> fool could actually want *telstra*.
The $$$ that Telstra receives from its customers do not have emotions
attached.
- 06-21-2008, 09:37 PM #26Rod SpeedGuest
Re: Bad news for mobile users
Michael <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> No, it wouldn't work like that. One dumb telco would probably try
>>>> it (guess who) and the rest would just ignore it, so the telco
>>>> charging for incoming calls would lose customers. Unlike many
>>>> industries in Aus, telecoms doesn't seem to operate as a cartel -
>>>> mainly due to telstra's greed and stupidity, i suppose.
>>> And still has 45% of the market, 15 years after GSM was introduced.
>> Easy to claim, hell of a lot harder to actually substantiate that claim.
> Easily done,
Nope.
> annual reports,
Just because Telstra CLAIMS that there, doesnt qualify as
substantiation, you stupid pig ignorant dunny cleaning ****wit child.
> off you go
You went off LONG ago, you stupid pig ignorant dunny cleaning ****wit child.
We can tell by the smell.
- 06-21-2008, 09:38 PM #27Rod SpeedGuest
Re: Bad news for mobile users
Michael <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Will Kemp" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Michael wrote:
>>> "Will Kemp" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>> Snapper wrote:
>>>>> Will Kemp wrote...
>>>>>
>>>>>> Nah, they wouldn't dare. They know it would only lose them money.
>>>>> Well, in the US, the home of the Consumer is King, they have a
>>>>> similar thing. If
>>>>> you receive a call you don't pay for the call per se, but rather
>>>>> the airtime.
>>>>> So, both parties are getting slugged. And the phone companies are
>>>>> getting away
>>>>> with it.
>>>>>
>>>>> If it was introduced, a few people would whinge about it. But then
>>>>> they'd sigh,
>>>>> go "oh well, that's life" and continue to enjoy the BOHICA Effect.
>>>> No, it wouldn't work like that. One dumb telco would probably try
>>>> it (guess who) and the rest would just ignore it, so the telco
>>>> charging for incoming calls would lose customers. Unlike many
>>>> industries in Aus, telecoms doesn't seem to operate as a cartel -
>>>> mainly due to telstra's greed and stupidity, i suppose.
>>>
>>> And still has 45% of the market, 15 years after GSM was introduced.
>>>
>>> the proof is in the pudding
>>>
>>> more people want telstra than anyone else
>>
>> Nobody actually *wants* Telstra. Some people are stuck with it
>> because there's no choice. Some people don't even know there *is* a
>> choice. Only a fool could actually want *telstra*.
> The $$$ that Telstra receives from its customers do not have emotions attached.
Anyone can BUY market share, you stupid pig ignorant dunny cleaning ****wit child.
- 06-21-2008, 09:39 PM #28Rod SpeedGuest
Re: Bad news for mobile users
Michael <[email protected]> wrote
> Rod Speed <[email protected]> wrote
>> Michael <[email protected]> wrote
>>> Snapper <[email protected]> wrote
>>>> Polly the Parrot wrote
>>>>> In the European Union, they are considering allowing mobile
>>>>> network operators charging punters for receiving calls.
>>>> Some countries in Europe have had that for landline calls since
>>>> year dot. Not surprised that they'd try it on the mobile community.
>>>>> If this happens, how long before they try it in Oz?
>>>> All they need is for one greedy operator to try it on, then the
>>>> others will rush in, en masse, in the name of "competition".
>>> Its too expensive to implement, IT-wise
>> As if you'd have a ****ing clue about how much it would cost IT wise.
> You'd be surprised.
Nope, I know you dont have a ****ing clue what that would cost IT wise.
- 07-20-2008, 04:36 PM #29MichaelGuest
Re: Bad news for mobile users
>>>>> No, it wouldn't work like that. One dumb telco would probably try
>>>>> it (guess who) and the rest would just ignore it, so the telco
>>>>> charging for incoming calls would lose customers. Unlike many
>>>>> industries in Aus, telecoms doesn't seem to operate as a cartel -
>>>>> mainly due to telstra's greed and stupidity, i suppose.
>
>>>> And still has 45% of the market, 15 years after GSM was introduced.
>
>>> Easy to claim, hell of a lot harder to actually substantiate that claim.
>
>> Easily done,
>
> Nope.
>
>> annual reports,
>
> Just because Telstra CLAIMS that there, doesnt qualify as
> substantiation, you stupid pig ignorant dunny cleaning ****wit child.
ACMA would be all over them if they lied, you moron
- 07-20-2008, 06:10 PM #30Rod SpeedGuest
Re: Bad news for mobile users
Michael <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>> No, it wouldn't work like that. One dumb telco would probably try
>>>>>> it (guess who) and the rest would just ignore it, so the telco
>>>>>> charging for incoming calls would lose customers. Unlike many
>>>>>> industries in Aus, telecoms doesn't seem to operate as a cartel -
>>>>>> mainly due to telstra's greed and stupidity, i suppose.
>>>>> And still has 45% of the market, 15 years after GSM was introduced.
>>>> Easy to claim, hell of a lot harder to actually substantiate that claim.
>>> Easily done,
>> Nope.
>>> annual reports,
>> Just because Telstra CLAIMS that there, doesnt qualify as
>> substantiation, you stupid pig ignorant dunny cleaning ****wit child.
> ACMA would be all over them if they lied
Only in your pathetic little drug crazed fantasyland, you stupid
pig ignorant drug crazed illiterate dunny cleaning ****wit child.
The ACCC gets no say what so ever on that sort of claim, you stupid
pig ignorant drug crazed illiterate dunny cleaning ****wit child.
Similar Threads
- Nokia
- Nextel
- alt.cellular.verizon
- alt.cellular.verizon
- alt.cellular.verizon
writing essentials
in Chit Chat