Advice for calling US Mobile Phone?

Osmo R <[email protected]> wrote:
> If the U.S. system is so much better why do so few people have mobiles
> in the U.S. and why do you still use pagers (here pagers have been
> discontinued years ago)

I do not know anyone in the US who has a pager or does not have a mobile
phone. I think you are going on old information.

miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos from 36 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu
Latest photos: Queens Day in Amsterdam; the Grand Canyon; Amman, Jordan

---

› See More: Advice for calling US Mobile Phone?

Osmo R <[email protected]> wrote:
> When you call to a mobile do you understand that the receiver pays and
> do not speak for too long? Or do you not care at all what your calls
> cost to others. I personally think the caller pays is fair as the caller
> then knows to speak briefly enough.

What does this mean? In both the US and Europe either party is free to hang
up the phone when they are tired of the conversation. What is the relevance
of who placed the call?

miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos from 36 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu
Latest photos: Queens Day in Amsterdam; the Grand Canyon; Amman, Jordan

Osmo R <[email protected]> wrote:
> John R. Levine wrote:
>> We're talking about the real price, counting inbound as well as
>> outbound calls and line rental. Looking at the price difference for
>> me to call a Finnish landline and a Finnish mobile, it looks like
>> callers are charged about 15 cpm for calls to mobiles.
>
> No they are charged 6.9-8.9 cents a minute. Finnish callers use mobiles
> to call mobiles. If one wantrs to call from a land line then typical
> cost is about 17 cents a minute on evenings and wekends and about 27
> cents on day time. In addition there is about 10 cents a call.
>
>>> With 1000 minutes it is as low as 3,58 cents a minute.
>>
>> Whoopee. I pay $30/mo for a bundle of 3750 minutes. That's 0.8 cpm
>> if I used them all.
>
> If you use when all. Do you?

Doesn't matter - he's ahead of you way before 3750 minutes.

At "6.9-8.9" (which I'll just call 7.9), he's paying less than you after as
little as than 10 minutes of calling per day. With each additional minute of
calling he pays less and less than you do.

miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos from 36 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu
Latest photos: Queens Day in Amsterdam; the Grand Canyon; Amman, Jordan

"Joseph" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sun, 29 May 2005 11:32:13 +0100, "Andy Pandy"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >e) I'm not spending large amounts of time with an RF transmitter a few cm
from
> >my brian.
>
> Why do you want to stay away from Brian anyway?

He smells.

--
Andy

"chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn and prestwich tesco"
<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:1gxc3wg.vfwyge1723tkN%[email protected]...
> So far, the riiing SIM has worked fine for me. Especially, as a lot of
> my trips involve a short time in different countries, it's ideal for me-
> and frankly, it isn't going to cost much more (if at all) for most
> people to call me on a Lichtenstein mobile number than a UK one!

Providing they use a call-through, eg telediscount or telestunt. Otherwise it'll
likely cost them a fortune (IIRC BT charge about 50ppm and TalkTalk about
40ppm).

1899 don't have rates for Lichenstein on their web site.

--
Andy

"Osmo R" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> > The broadband connection goes down the physical landline wire. If I
> > didn't have the landline I couldn't have broadband (cable is an
> > option for some people here but not all streets have cable - mine
> > doesn't).
>
> Sure the connection goes throuhg the physical wire but that's not same
> as having a land line. I have ADSL for which I pay its fee. I do not pay
> anything for any land line as I do no have one.

They both go down the same wire. You get one with other, here in the UK.

> >> The rest of here does not apply here or at least I have no need for
> >> it. Neither does many other people.
> >
> >
> > Well, if you have no need to make phone calls for much cheaper rates
> > than you are paying, why join in this thread?
>
> I do not get your point?

My point is that you wonder why people have landlines when you can make calls
for 6.9c per minute on your mobile.

I make the vast majority of my phone calls for much cheaper rates than 6.9c per
minute (even when you factor in the monthly line rental), by virtue of having a
landline and my contacts having landlines.

--
Andy

Andy Pandy <[email protected]> wrote:

> "chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn and prestwich tesco"
> <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:1gxc3wg.vfwyge1723tkN%[email protected]...
> > So far, the riiing SIM has worked fine for me. Especially, as a lot of
> > my trips involve a short time in different countries, it's ideal for me-
> > and frankly, it isn't going to cost much more (if at all) for most
> > people to call me on a Lichtenstein mobile number than a UK one!
>
> Providing they use a call-through, eg telediscount or telestunt. Otherwise
> it'll likely cost them a fortune (IIRC BT charge about 50ppm and TalkTalk
> about 40ppm).

BT's website says 18ppm during the week, 16ppm weekend to _landlines_. I
can't find what the mobile surcharge would be, but oddly, the only call
I made from the landline was charged 16ppm last weekend. I'll try a
weekday call and see what the per minute charge is. I'd read elsewhere
that 18ppm was the BT charge, so maybe it's the same, at the moment.

> 1899 don't have rates for Lichenstein on their web site.

Yes- they don't actually place calls there- nor do 18866 yet.

--
David Horne- www.davidhorne.net
usenet (at) davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk

"chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn and prestwich tesco"
<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:1gxca3t.5fsoju1u9z6o0N%[email protected]...
> > > So far, the riiing SIM has worked fine for me. Especially, as a lot of
> > > my trips involve a short time in different countries, it's ideal for me-
> > > and frankly, it isn't going to cost much more (if at all) for most
> > > people to call me on a Lichtenstein mobile number than a UK one!
> >
> > Providing they use a call-through, eg telediscount or telestunt. Otherwise
> > it'll likely cost them a fortune (IIRC BT charge about 50ppm and TalkTalk
> > about 40ppm).
>
> BT's website says 18ppm during the week, 16ppm weekend to _landlines_. I
> can't find what the mobile surcharge would be,

http://www.serviceview.bt.com/list/c....boo/31853.htm

gives landline rates as you quote.

Further down is:

Table 4 - International Direct Dialled (IDD) PPM Prices to Mobile Telephones
Operative Date:01.08.2000


IDD calls to some mobile telephones will be charged at 21.27 pence (ex VAT)/25
pence (inc VAT) per minute more than the equivalent IDD calls to fixed
telephones. Full details of the destinations and number ranges to which this
applies are shown in Section 2 Part 16

which points at:

http://www.serviceview.bt.com/list/c....boo/16361.htm

which show codes (423) 76/77/78/79 are subject to this surcharge (so that would
be cheaper than I quoted, 41-43ppm).

> but oddly, the only call
> I made from the landline was charged 16ppm last weekend. I'll try a
> weekday call and see what the per minute charge is. I'd read elsewhere
> that 18ppm was the BT charge, so maybe it's the same, at the moment.

I guess if the number of your SIM doesn't start as above, then you'll pay the
landline rate, although this would seem odd, I thought the numbers in that list
included all mobiles (except for countries like US and Canada where the receiver
pays).

--
Andy

Miguel Cruz wrote:
> Osmo R <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> It costs same here to call any phone: land line or mobile.
>> (remember what is the norm here).
>
>
> I find this surprising if true. It costs me USD0.028/minute to call a
> Finnish landline and USD0.181/minute to call a Finnish mobile -
> that's 6 times more expensive.

Completely different rules apply in international calls. Basically one
needs to pay the down link in full and more.

> Either Finnish mobile providers are subsidizing calls between each
> other's networks, or they are colluding and providing lower prices
> for inter-network termination than they provide to other operators,
> or I have misunderstood your claim, or your claim is incorrect.

The operators provide calls to other networks at prices well below cost
hoping to make it up in intra-network calls, calls to landlines and
received calls. The reason is that the demand for same price on all
destinations is very high because of number portability. (There is a
toll free number to check the operator but it still is a hassle.)
Another way to make money for them is also so called corporate numbers.
Calling them with a mobile costs about 30 cents a minute this is divided
between the mobile operator and the corporate number operator. In last
Summer I had problems with my cable modem and TV-reception. I had to
make several calls to the cable operator (which for some reason had
chosen a national corporate number). The total bill for the calls was 15
euros. I asked them why they had such number and incorrect information
on the costs in their web-page. The manager responding did not even know
the price and it was found out that even the telephone operator keeping
the number had incorrect information. I advised them to use a normal
number instead and six months later they switched to one. Had it been
normal number back then I would have paid less than half of it and even
that would have been covered by free airtime I had left.

The termination fees currently vary between 6.8 and 10 cents a minute.
They are considered generally way too high when same operators sell
intra-network calls as low as 2-4 cents a minute and calls to any
operator at 6.9-8.9 cents a minute. (Note the latter include 22 % VAT
while the termination fees do not.). And of course it is the one that
sells the intra-network calls at 2 cents that requests 10 cents from
calls coming from other networks.

Osmo

Andy Pandy wrote:
> "Osmo R" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...

>> Sure the connection goes throuhg the physical wire but that's not
>> same as having a land line. I have ADSL for which I pay its fee. I
>> do not pay anything for any land line as I do no have one.
>
>
> They both go down the same wire. You get one with other, here in the
> UK.

Fortunately it is not so here.

> My point is that you wonder why people have landlines when you can
> make calls for 6.9c per minute on your mobile.
>
> I make the vast majority of my phone calls for much cheaper rates
> than 6.9c per minute (even when you factor in the monthly line
> rental), by virtue of having a landline and my contacts having
> landlines.

You then make plenty of calls. Basically one needs to make many long
calls for landline to be cheaper here. That 6.9 was just an example.
There are other cheap deals. Especially the package deals are cheap
compared to landlines. 500 minutes at 17.80 on mobile compared to 12.45
euros a month base fee on a landline.

Osmo

"Osmo R" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news[email protected]...
> > My point is that you wonder why people have landlines when you can
> > make calls for 6.9c per minute on your mobile.
> >
> > I make the vast majority of my phone calls for much cheaper rates
> > than 6.9c per minute (even when you factor in the monthly line
> > rental), by virtue of having a landline and my contacts having
> > landlines.
>
> You then make plenty of calls.

Not really. Usually about 600 mins a month.

> Basically one needs to make many long
> calls for landline to be cheaper here. That 6.9 was just an example.
> There are other cheap deals. Especially the package deals are cheap
> compared to landlines. 500 minutes at 17.80 on mobile compared to 12.45
> euros a month base fee on a landline.

The other point, here in the UK, is that if you don't have a landline then you
are forcing most of your callers to pay much much more to call you, typically 10
times the cost. You may have reasonable mobile termination rates in Finland, we
don't here. As I wrote earlier, a friend of mine saw his bill sky rocket when
his wife's best friend decided to ditch her landline - their monthly bill which
was usually a few pounds went up to over £50.

--
Andy

Miguel Cruz wrote:
> Osmo R <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Miguel Cruz wrote:
>>
>>> So they can make unlimited free calls to mobiles and landlines?
>>
>> Here one could not make then with a land line and I doubt they can
>> do it in the U.S. either if one considers the base fee also.
>
>
> You mean the line rental? Well, of course. No other fees though.
>
>
>> Average land line user makes 100 five minute local calls a month.
>> This costs about 30 euros a month.
>
>
> In the US I was paying about US$25/month (19 euro) for unlimited
> calls to local landlines and mobiles. As you can imagine, calling
> patterns in that environment are quite different - people stay on the
> phone for hours.

Well one can hope the other party does not have a mobile.

>
> I think we can assume from this that people would prefer to spend
> more time on the phone and find more value in doing so, but in the
> high-cost European telecoms market they cannot afford to.

I doubt that. If they wanted to stay much longer on phone they'd get
land lines.

>> When one can get a 500 minute package at 17.80 it makes little
>> sense to use the land line. A significant reason for not getting
>> the land line is the opening cost of about 100 euros and the
>> additional costs and trouble when moving.
>
>
> That startup cost is insanely high as well. 100 euros??

Yes, that's an example of what lack of competition causes. Probably
they want to keep on with the existing customers by giving a message
that there is no return.

In most cases landline just just a hassle. There is additional phone
number. One needs to have an answering machine or service for it, the
phones have poor phone directories etc. It is much simpler just to have
one phone even though it might in some cases cost more.

> So basically we have a situation where the mobile in Finland is
> somewhat the lesser of two evils.

Well in some sense it is true. If all your friends get mobile phones you
need to get one too. This has in some cases been reduced very lately
when the calls to mobile phones were opened to competition. A ten minute
call from land line to mobile on day time used to cost up to about 2,80.
Now one can get it at 1,58. Still when one can get it at 69 cents from a
mobile it is cheaper. (A 10 minute local call is around 20 cents) The
worst, however, is pay phone to mobile. That can cost about 85 cents a
minute or about 60 cent a minute premium over a local call. It is more
than what phone booth to landline and landline to mobile cost added
together. IMO when direct call costs more than indirect then there is a
ripoff. Well the same run mobile phones and the phone booths.

Osmo

Miguel Cruz wrote:
>
> Osmo R <[email protected]> wrote:
> > If the U.S. system is so much better why do so few people have mobiles
> > in the U.S. and why do you still use pagers (here pagers have been
> > discontinued years ago)
>
> I do not know anyone in the US who has a pager or does not have a mobile
> phone. I think you are going on old information.
>
I know one or two people in the US who still have pagers - but they also
use mobiles.

Joseph wrote:
> On Sun, 29 May 2005 17:02:32 +0300, Osmo R <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>Jerome Zelinske wrote:
>>
>>>Most children do not have mobile phones.
>>
>>In Finland they do!
>
>
> You really do need to learn that every place you encounter they will
> not always "do things like they do in Finland." Not only is this true
> in North America believe it or not that applies to Europe as well!
> Folks in the UK and Ireland drive on the left and they evidently cope
> quite well considering that nowhere else in Europe is this the case.

The issue here was not driving on the left or right side. The issue was
mobile phones. I consider it advanced that kids do have mobile phones.
Of course one can argue the merits of mobile phones on kids or in
general. However, if one proposes that system X is better than we have
then the it is strange to use arguments like that most kids do not have
mobile phones.

Osmo

Joseph wrote:

> Your reading comprehension is sorely lacking. Did you not see "the
> receiver pays and I will have a conversation as long as both parties
> are willing." That implies that the party who is paying for the call
> is not as you say "babbling" but is having a conversation for as long
> as is mutually agreed by both parties. You really do need to pay
> attention!

The other party might be too polite to interrupt you.

Osmo