[Asterisk-Users] Bill seconds

Sun Jun 19 19:37:39 MST 2005

> I showed you that your link to a mob called "cucumber" was not helpful to
> you or anyone else. Their pricing is fure fiction as far as .au telco
> pricing is concerned.

Really pure fiction? Mob? let see:
http://www.tel3advantage.com/rates.aspx?AgentNumber=036333&CID=124
$.03 to regulare, and $.17 to mobile (more than 5 times as much)

http://www.packet8.net/about/international.asp
again $.03 to regular, and $.23 cents to mobile more than 7 times as much

http://www.broadvoice.com/rateplans_international_li.html
$.02 to regular, and $.18 to mobile 9 times as much

http://www.voicepulse.com/plans/InternationalRates.aspx
$.06 to regular and $.26 to mobile, that makes more than 4 times as much.

anyhow to show you that cucumber is not the most expensive one:
http://www22.verizon.com/ForYourHome/sas/sas_con_LongDescription.aspx
$1.30 to australia
here is one thats even better:
http://www22.verizon.com/ForYourHome/sas/sas_basicinternationalcallingcardrates.aspx

Here is another Verizon rate:
http://www22.verizon.com/ForYourhome/voip/CallingRates.aspx
Don't ask me why the difference, but I promise you they don't even know.

> 
> > I already included the link where it showed
> > it costs more to call a cell phone. As for the the 10 times
> > figure I made a mistake (since I was still under the
> > impression that it costs only $.039 to call australia
> > landline) and make it 4+ times as much (7 cents to landline
> > and 30 to cell, that makes; 30/7=4+2/7 times as much as to a
> > landline).
> 
> That's what happens when you pull figures out of the air. <chuckle>

Really out of the air? the interesting part here is that you know
better than me that a huge chunk of your monthly phone bill (not your
cell phone) goes towards phone calls made to mobile phones, which is
something that in the states doesn't exist, and still you argue that
it doesn't cost you, and you divert this argument about what some
company charges to Australia. In an avarage month every American can
tell you EXACTLY how much they are GOING to pay for their cellphone
that month, and in most cases it is not a lot based on the minutes
used. However in places like Australia that you pay for your cell
phone when calling from your home phone, there is no way of telling
how much it is costing you since it costs you sometimes as much as 9
times as much to call a cell phone.

> 
> >
> > > for the 5 mobiles that I own, (my family members) the calls between
> > > them and my land lines are free.
> > >
> >
> > You already mentioned that (see below) that is NOT the argument.
> >
> 

Because basic math teaches us that 2 negatives cancel each other, and
I told you that the same is available in the states, so this argument
is negated with the exact same argument that I have, and that is that
I don't have to pay to ANY customer that is in the same network that I
am (currently SprintPCS) nor does he pay for the incoming. So far all
you have is only 5, and in the states I get about 30 Million phone
numbers that I can call for free UNLIMITED (besides for nights and
weekends that are completely free), so if you want this is another one
for me.

> 
> > > Again, as the originator of the call I get to choose the
> > amount I spend.
> > >
> > > > Don't
> > > > you see how they succeeded in making you believe that your cell
> > > > phone is cheaper? I told you that none Amercians might not
> > > > understand this. :)
> > >
> > > Yeah, I see how _some_ americans don't get it.....
> > >
> > > >
> > > > > when I don't originate the call, however in .us if you get
> > > > called, you
> > > > > pay, that can easily cost you a heap of money that you can only
> > > > > control by switching the phone off, and where is the
> > point in that?
> > > >
> > > > Really?? cost you a heap of money? only by swithcing the
> > phone off?
> > > > what ever happened to not picking up?
> > >
> > > Ok, there is that, so long as you take time to determine
> > whether you
> > > recognise the number etc.... It does however make rec'ving calls on
> > > the Cell phone much less attractive.
> >
> > I totaly agree that it makes it unattractive, but in no way
> > does't it make the person calling me hesitate, so I can realy
> > keep in touch.
> 
> And so your spending level is dictated to you buy people that want to call
> you, at the whim of another (so to speak)

Not really, but lets say that yes, the bottom line is that compare the
same amount of minutes from your cell phone and landline with an
american, and whoops you overpaid. All because of the call you make to
cell phones.

> 
> >
> > >
> > > > what about unlimited
> > > > nights and weekends completely free that most providers give you
> > > > here. What about the fact that even when you do pay for
> > the incoming
> > > > it costs around
> > > > $.05 a minute?
> > >
> > > How about just not having to pay for incoming calls at all, that
> > > sounds much better. It makes being in touch easier and cheaper.
> >
> > Maybe, it makes it easier for the receiver but not for the
> > one making the call.
> 
> And it is the one that _chooses_ to make the call that make the decision to
> spend the money. Who's money should they be able to choose to spend? Quite
> frankly someone else being able to spend my money at their whim scares the
> willies out of me.

You keep missing the point here, you are right when keeping in touch
is a choice, but take a simple example from lets say a painter. In the
states he keeps open a landline phone, and since he is not at his desk
during the day (he is painting now by some customer), he has to run an
answering machine that takes the calls. Why? because he does not want
to advertise the cell phone number since it costs him money the
incoming. However in australia the cell providers succeeded in making
sure that the oposite happens, now the painter gets a cell phone
instead of a landline (it's cheaper for him, since if he doesn't make
outgoing calls he deosn't pay anything, unlike landlines), you want
that painter, you have got no choice but to call his cell phone, and
here it is that they took the choice from you. Look around and you
will see how much for daily stuff like delivery guys, painters,
contractors, and all the other types of day workers you can't reach on
landlines because they simply don't have one for business, you HAVE to
call them on their moblies.

> 
> > So this part is again debateable, and
> > not what the argument is about. But if you add up the cents
> > and dollars it is cheaper to use cell phones in the states -
> > where incoming costs sometimes as little as making a LD
> > domestic call for the owner of the cell phone - than it is in
> > Australia, or all the other countries that they charge as
> > much as 4+ times to call the cell network.
> 
> So the caller is more likely to (a) not waste my time, (b) not waste my
> money, (c) Get on with what they wanted to tell me, etc.....

That would imply that people that pay for outgoing would not (a) waste
my time, (b) waste my money, (c) get on with what they wanted to tell
me, etc...
So how come I (and I believe you can say the same) do have people
calling me from their home where they have to pay at least the long
distance part (I'm not talking about people for whom to call my cell
phone is local) that (a) do waste my time, (b) waste my moeny, (c)
just keep beating around the bush untill the get on to what they
wanted to tell me, etc......

> 
> >
> > >
> > > > I think I said enough.
> > >
> > > <chuckle> how does one respond to that?
> > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > So if I rec'v 500 calls a week on my cell phone, it still
> > > > costs me nothing.
> > > >
> > > > Wrong, because your provider succeeded in convincing your
> > freind to
> > > > make the same calculation, so when you have to call your
> > friend you
> > > > then pay 10 times as much than to a regular phone.
> > >
> > > Pure and unadulterated crapola, did you know that when people pluck
> > > numbers out of the air like that it belittles their entire point?
> >
> > Can you explain why you can't argue this in english? or is it
> > that you see that I am right? Now the only thing that I made
> > a mistake about is the 10 times it should be 4+ times.
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > > And in some cases if I have the Cell and the Landline from the
> > > > > same telco (in .au), calls between them are free too, regardless
> > > > of where I
> > > > > happen to be in australia at the time.
> > > >
> > > > So this we will take out of the argument since most American
> > > > providers don't charge in network either.
> > >
> > > They do for out of zone calls, however with the telco I am
> > using and
> > > the account arrangements I have, it doesn't matter where the cell
> > > phone is, even 4000km away is still a free call to my home
> > land line.
> >
> > Really? I have a cell phone here in the states since January
> > 1998, I have had cell phones with: Verizon, SprintPCS, AT&T,
> > Cingular, and Nextel. None of them ever had so called out of
> > zones, as long as I was anywhere on their network (CA to NY,
> > to FL to WA, and all of the lower
> > 48) had the same rate. In my family we currently have more
> > than 10 cell phones, none pay any extra based on where they are.
> >
> 
> Very good, it seems that some sanity may begin to gain a foothold there, all
> they need to do now is to change the parasitic cost shifted charging model,
> and they will be on the right track.

English please?

> 
> >
> > Here show me how many plans have what you describe:
> > http://www.sprintpcs.com/
> > http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/index.jsp
> > http://www.nextel.com/
> > http://www.cingular.com/indexc
> > http://www.t-mobile.com/
> >
> > > > > Oh, and cucumber seem to be doing you no favours either....
> > > > >
> > > > > I can place a call to the US using my Cell phone for
> > 1-2c/minute,
> > > > > <shrug> Caviat Emptor?
> > > >
> > > > Actualy you are right about this one, didn't realize they changed
> > > > the rates to au, it used to be $.039 a minute. Thanks for
> > pointing
> > > > this out. In any case I know that Australia has now very
> > good rates
> > > > to call UK and the states, but that is only as far as LD goes.
> > >
> > > I have VoIP for calls to the .us and .uk I also can route
> > my call via
> > > my home * box and then over VoIP to many other places to make the
> > > calls
> > > *<free>* so with a call to .us for instance, I can use my
> > cell to call
> > > one of my home land lines *<free>* and then via * connect to the us
> > > using one of the IP Telcos *<1c/min>* , or to my office in
> > Houston to
> > > the * box there
> > > *<free>*
> >
> > Well, this has nothing to do with the rates of cell phones, I
> > think you agree on this one.
> >
> > >
> > > Further: In the .US there is a groundswell of people that are angry
> > > with telemarketers calling them on their cell phones, Why
> > is this? A:
> > > because the cost of the call is shifted to the called
> > party, just like
> > > spam. The .au model of "caller pays" has pretty much ensured that
> > > telemarketers wont be a problem on _my_ cell phone.
> > >
> >
> > Again I don't see that makes the cost of cell phones more
> > expensive in any way.
> >
> > BTW, to call UK landline it's $.029 and UK Cell $.30.
> > Source:
> > http://www.cucumber.com/fullinternational29.htm#u
> > Most providers aren't as cheap to regular UK that it comes
> > out to 10 times as much, but this might tell you where I got
> > the idea from.
>