What are you currently paying for your text messaging? Is it 20 or 25 cents or are you one of the millions of users who buy a text messaging package with your phone plan for $5 or more every month? Regardless what you pay, you're over paying. Not that this comes as a surprise to many but the New York Times has divulged in great detail how bad your actually being ripped off.
Wireless carriers have a "control channel" for sending text messages, This channel is used for that task, in fact every time your cell phone communicates with the tower it uses the "control channel" regardless if you text or not. Simply, the text message is small enough that it piggy backs in the control channel if needed; there is no impact on the tower because of the message; but text messages are not just tiny; they are also free riders, tucked into what's called a control channel, space reserved for operation of the wireless network."
The reasoning of the limit length of 160 characters has nothing to do with the handset or networks capability. It revolves around the control channels extra space to allow for a text message to piggy back its way to the tower. In fact, it doesn't cost the carrier much more to send 100 million text messages versus the cost of sending 1 million text messages. Plain and simple, you're being ripped off and the carriers don't care.
When will the price gouging end? It's unclear but at least one person is looking out for the consumers. United States Senator Herb Kohl, Democrat of Wisconsin and the chairman of the Senate antitrust subcommittee have been investigating the matter but are running into brick walls with regards to receiving information from the nation's four major carriers. If that doesn't work, one of the 20 class action lawsuits may get the carriers attention.
mad
mad
Never said no cost!
Still expensive here though, you think 12p for a txt message is nearly the price of a stamp in a way...
I think the pricing scheme for call plans and text messaging is vile and should be reduced dramatically.
...Thanks to the EU
I think the pricing scheme for call plans and text messaging is vile and should be reduced dramatically.
Nearly the price of a stamp? Its 3 times less the price of a stamp.
I think the pricing scheme for call plans and text messaging is vile and should be reduced dramatically.
Nearly the price of a stamp? Its 3 times less the price of a stamp.
Woah, didnt realise how expensive stamps were these days lol! Still basically half of a 2nd class...
The utility of sending texts is obviously worth the price charged or the amount of texting would be going down.
Last edited by bdsams on 29 Dec 2008 - 16:08
ditto
Because it's a business? Why can't microsoft include the ultimate features into it's basic plan? People are willing to pay for it, and the carriers are taking advantage of that.
Im paying for capped data, they could include the Txt's as it costs them nothing to send or recieve
Its called price gouging, where all compeititors raise the rates on a prodcut (or featre) that is not warranted by the marketplace...when they work together they take away compeition....rates went from 10 cents to 20 cents in three years, very few markets desire 33% inflation with no gain in service
There's a huge difference. You are paying to take advantage of something thats already there that costs the carrier nothing extra to allow you to use it. As opposed to Ultimate where there are extra development efforts to add those additional features that cost time and money to develop.
Basically the carriers are charging you to use something that is virtually free to them
Think of it like this.... 3.3 Trillion texts @ 20 cents each = 6.6 trillion dollars ($6,600,000,000,000.00 -- Now thats a lot of Zeros!) just on text messaging alone all profit because it doesnt cost them anything to deliver them for you.
Text messaging should be free for everyone. Period!
Imposing a fee for a service/product is not directly related to the cost of offering that service/product. A business can make a large loss off of one of their main services and then make up for that profit loss by charging extra for another service, which doesn't have as high of a producer cost.
Capitalism is inherently funded through "greed". Say what you want of how it is morally wrong, but that's the system.
Now, if you're talking about price fixing between all the carriers--then yes, that would be illegal under US law.
Last edited by giga on 29 Dec 2008 - 19:34
Then don't pay for it..?
Basically the carriers are charging you to use something that is virtually free to them
Think of it like this.... 3.3 Trillion texts @ 20 cents each = 6.6 trillion dollars ($6,600,000,000,000.00 -- Now thats a lot of Zeros!) just on text messaging alone all profit because it doesnt cost them anything to deliver them for you.
Text messaging should be free for everyone. Period!
Yes, too many zero's in fact. 3.3 trillion text messages would have to cost $2.00 each to equate to 6.6 trillion dollars.
haha, that's such a great quote
I knew it cost almost nothing to send but hey, they'll make there money somehow!
I know my cousin, my sister-in-law, and others have. That's a LOT of money they're pulling in from all this...
I know my cousin, my sister-in-law, and others have. That's a LOT of money they're pulling in from all this...
MSN texts are NOT free.
They are to the person on MSN. XD
Take the computer shop and asked them how much they make from a mouse mat percentagewise?
The problem we have is we demand cheaper and cheaper services and products, we then complain when the company goes under and people lose their jobs. We cannot have it both ways.
However, I disagree with paying for something just because. That doesn't make sense at all...
I'm guessing you did not read all my post.
for my $30 at vzw, i get capped at 5 gigs, and is much slower
However, I disagree with paying for something just because. That doesn't make sense at all...
But if you do, then you implicitly accept that you will pay for something just because. I send 10 txts per year, simply because I do not accept it is worth paying for, that is how I show that I think it is a con game.
I read it. It still doesn't make sense to charge people so much money per text though. I mean, you could say more on a pay phone than you could with an actual text message. You could actually carry a conversation! With no typing required!!
Also, what about the executives who get those big cash packages and fly off while the company collapses on itself? Are they not part of the problem, working for their own self-interest instead of what's best for everyone in the company? Or is it simply the consumer demand, which the companies DON'T HAVE TO GIVE IN TO. And many don't. Otherwise, we'd all have blazing internet at little to no cost at all and so forth.
I pay for quality products and services, or whatever strikes me as a reasonable deal. I only use my cell phone when I NEED to (work and so forth), so I stick with a prepaid phone with 250+ minutes that last me for 3 months or longer. If I want to text, I simply use a free online text sender, and I'm good.
Supply and Demand is a law which shows that the change in supply inversely affects demand... aka, greater supply, same demand, lower price.
less supply, same demand, higher price. same supply, increased demand, increased price.
I suppose that having a slightly more expensive texting pricing system is ok if it subsidies other services that mobile phone users use, however if the mobile phone companies are just looking to increase their profit margins unfairly then they should be made to PAY.
The old days of supply and demand have diminished now instead of costs going down since practically everyone has a cell phone it keeps going up (WHY???) because they can...
I've ditched my cell phone years ago, now if everyone else went to say Skype at home and phone items (the hardware item forget name off hand) that you see giving FREE phone service (Not really true) but for 30 bucks a YEAR, yes folks a YEAR, is like the going rate for internet phones and services...
Skype as an example will give you a number and you can call anywhere in and out anytime with your computer for 30 bucks a YEAR. Now only if they'd use the white noise or even some new form of Wi-Fi (Skype that is) which they do use Wi-Fi now, because any internet connection will work with Skype, my point is a NATIONAL WI-FI or some form that has yet to be created for internet connectivity, then you could get a cell phone that was Skype only and there you go you'd piggy back off home networks, Wi-Fi, or any wireless networks if set up correctly...
Sooner or later someone will come up with a service that uses a satellite but works like Skype and Wi-Fi and cost only pennys a month and this would rid everyone from having to pay 40-200 a month for phone service.
Nothing will ever change until people put their feet down and say ENOUGH ALREADY... Same holds true for every other thing going on in this country and others period. Sure a few people do it but it's never enough to even make a speed bump. Wake the F*C& up people!!!
Last edited by Cellar Dweller on 29 Dec 2008 - 15:58
You can not compare Skype with a cell phone, I can not take Skype to my hometown, it seems the 24k dial-up offered there doesn't work so well for VoIP. Also Skype wouldn't have helped me to call AAA to tow my car when the transmission went out in the middle of no where.
Of course with your nation wi-fi idea, all I would need to do is lug a laptop everywhere I go. That is nearly as convenient as carrying a device weighing ounces that fits in my pocket.
Many if not most newer smartphones have wifi built in.
You missed the point, you still have a cell phone, you aren't using Skype, or if you are you are using VoIP via cell, which makes no sense to me.
You can not compare Skype with a cell phone, I can not take Skype to my hometown, it seems the 24k dial-up offered there doesn't work so well for VoIP. Also Skype wouldn't have helped me to call AAA to tow my car when the transmission went out in the middle of no where.
Of course with your nation wi-fi idea, all I would need to do is lug a laptop everywhere I go. That is nearly as convenient as carrying a device weighing ounces that fits in my pocket.
Ya, the technology is complicated. It's probably a good thing that the cell phone carriers aren't developing the technology. They buy it from people like Motorola and such.
My car has a built in cell phone and it only costs me like 18 bucks for 1500 minutes. Now have a WI-FI or similar technology that gets beamed via Satellite - XM radio as well and the use of white noise channels that is being researched and the channels being opened up by TV going to Digital etc. and BINGO you have Skype anywhere or internet and text etc. for say 30 bucks a year. That was what I was trying to get across. It just takes someone to start it up and research better technologies than the CELL period at a better cost.
In the day they had internet via Satellite and I think some companies still offer that. So your Skype phone then could be a Satellite phone per say. As I said some of the technology I'm suggesting may not even exist yet.
The fact is if EVERYONE dumped their cells the price would drop to nil for service period.
Remember gas prices and everyone going to public transportation, it made a dent???
My car has a built in cell phone and it only costs me like 18 bucks for 1500 minutes. Now have a WI-FI or similar technology that gets beamed via Satellite - XM radio as well and the use of white noise channels that is being researched and the channels being opened up by TV going to Digital etc. and BINGO you have Skype anywhere or internet and text etc. for say 30 bucks a year. That was what I was trying to get across. It just takes someone to start it up and research better technologies than the CELL period at a better cost.
In the day they had internet via Satellite and I think some companies still offer that. So your Skype phone then could be a Satellite phone per say. As I said some of the technology I'm suggesting may not even exist yet.
The fact is if EVERYONE dumped their cells the price would drop to nil for service period.
Remember gas prices and everyone going to public transportation, it made a dent???
You can't compare land line pricing to cell pricing. As already stated, cell technology is very expensive to operate and expand and going to satellites would be significantly more expensive then cell technology. Have you ever looked at what it costs to build and launch a satellite? Have you ever looked at how long it takes from start to finish to lunch one? How about the life span of a satellite? Not to mention the limited bandwidth. How about outages do to weather. Using satellites for phone service isn't practical.
Sure they are making a massive profit on SMS. But it beats paying $0.50 per minute that cell service used to cost. Notice the government didn't step in and tell cell providers that $0.50/min was to much. How about the price of data services. Did the government drive that down? Nope. The free market drives prices down. Just like it will drive SMS down.
It is possible to shop for cheaper SMS service. They aren't all charging the same price. All of them are ridiculous but so less then others. It really is a very simple concept.
I have a good deal on my mobile phone where I get billed each month but don't pay a line rental fee - sort of pay as you went rather than pay as you go! My average bill is less than £1 on an everage month due to carefull use...
So is it cheap or what ?
=/
So is it cheap or what ?
=/
Which one M1, Singtel or Starhub? Are they all charging the same price for text messages?
So is it cheap or what ?
=/
Which one M1, Singtel or Starhub? Are they all charging the same price for text messages?
All local carriers in singapore charge 5 cents per sms.
with mms costing same prices for Starhub(im on starhub) not sure about M1/singtel though
Some people pay WAY TOO MUCH!
Shop around, get a decent package.
I'm paying T-Mobile (UK) just £15 ($21 USD) a month for:-
UNLIMITED Landline calls (anytime).
10,000 minutes for off-peaks calls to any mobile network.
900 minutes or 1800 texts peak time.
It basically means, I never see a bill for calls or texts as they're all free in the package.
I also get 2GB of data on 3G for £5
Last edited by Exosphere on 29 Dec 2008 - 17:11
I never really saw the appeal of Pay As You Go - I always ended up spending more on credit than I do on my contract.
such irony...you get something free by paying for something else
Think about it guys.
Alright guys, does someone else want to handle this idiot or do I gotta do it? Obviously you haven't heard the words "bail-out" recently have you. Your kids would be eating Chinese lead from their unsafe toys. Ever heard of government regulations?
Get outta your cave. YOU think about it.
Alright guys, does someone else want to handle this idiot or do I gotta do it? Obviously you haven't heard the words "bail-out" recently have you. Your kids would be eating Chinese lead from their unsafe toys. Ever heard of government regulations?
Get outta your cave. YOU think about it.
Who said I was for bailouts? What do the bailouts have to do with this topic? Government regulating profit margins? No thanks. Clearly you don't own business. Now let me go back into my cave and think some more.
If you don't like the price, then for goodness sake stop using it.
I see text messaging as regressive technology anyways. Typing messages with a 10 number key pad that are limited to 160 characters and can't have attachments... sounds a lot like telegraph to me. 21st Century Telegraph.
Where is my satellite videophone watch they have been promising?
http://www.physorg.com/news129793047.html
Source: Ars Technica
This is disbalance.
All of the phones I have gotten for me and my family have texting completely blocked.
Exactly my thoughts, you just said it better, I call it "Regressive Technology"
Texting has many advantages - a silent conversation being one. Another is being the optional delay between messages. Another being the chance to think between replies. There's too many to sit here and type about - phone calls are only better in certain situations.
Texting has many advantages - a silent conversation being one. Another is being the optional delay between messages. Another being the chance to think between replies. There's too many to sit here and type about - phone calls are only better in certain situations.
Or you need to tell someone something real fast without getting sucked into a 2 hour conversation with that person that talks forever. Hahaha. I am not one that uses SMS often but I must say it does have it's legitimate uses from time to time. That is exactly why some are willing to pay for it.
Texting has many advantages - a silent conversation being one. Another is being the optional delay between messages. Another being the chance to think between replies. There's too many to sit here and type about - phone calls are only better in certain situations.
Another addition in the list: while at a noisy concert, club, party, etc. where it's next to impossible to hear anything on your phone given the noise level, and you're stuck in a sea of people and can't really get outside to talk.
Ah well.
Then the companys smelled the big profit and charged for it...
Now tell me that I'm being ripped off using PAYG. PAYG is fine for ppl who don't use their mobiles very much.
tats 3000 x .05 cents = $150 SGD
some girls in singapore just love to text.
Guess my country's ISP love them~
My missus got a free Sony PS3, unlimited SMS and way too many free minutes on a �35 a month contract... we worked out the PS3 really made the contract half that value.
U.S. is 0.2USD to receive/send text now that's bull****!
CDMA cell-phone voice-communications are provided at 9,600 bps (bits per second), and GSM is sent at 13,000 bps.
An SMS character (a letter, etc.) requires 7 bits. Therefore, a message with 160 characters will use 1,120 bits.
For CDMA:
(1,120 bits per "full" text message) divided by (9600 bits per second) = a little over 1/10 of a second of cell-phone-system time.
For GSM:
(1,120 bits per "full" text message) divided by (13,000 bits per second) = a little under 1/10 of a second of cell-phone-system time.
Assuming gross misunderstandings by myself regarding how the cellphone systems work, let's round up, and let's say that a text message uses the same resources as a full second of voice communications.
If you can get 400 minutes of talk-time for $40, that equates to 1/6 of a cent per second to talk.
If a second of voice communications costs 1/6 of a cent, and a text message using a second on the cell-phone-system costs 20 cents, then the text message is charged 11,900% more for an equivalent amount of cell-system resources.
And, I'm sure that's an underestimation.
Yeh, you get profits and make a good living. But, I think we're seeing more frequent examples of the damage done by "inordinate profits." Inordinate rates can only be charged if it's allowed.
Sending 1 message = $0.25, max 1.1KB, yet data plans have a typical 1-5GB limit. So, 1GB = 1024MB = 1,048,576KB and cost about $20 a month. So, sending 1.1KB costs $0.25, so sending 1,048,576KB should in theory cost $262,144 per month. Yet, the carriers get away with it!
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.