Home  ›  News  ›

Senators Take Network Operators to Task Over SMS Charges

Article Comments  

all discussions

show all 18 replies

Kohl needs to leave free enterprise alone

SCTelephoneMan

Sep 9, 2008, 7:46 PM
Text messages cost what the market will bear. The government has no business stepping in here. People can choose to pay it, not pay it, block it, get a plan, whatever.

The government has no business setting prices for services.
...
h_aguilar84

Sep 9, 2008, 8:18 PM
However, it is quite odd that the providers would increase the messaging rate and the cost to send messages stay the same, knowing full well it constitutes a "material change" of the contract, thereby allowing people to cancel without penalty.
...
fracturedpsyche

Sep 10, 2008, 10:49 AM
read Terms and Conditions of the major carriers. that is not a 'material change' because specific pricing rates of services are not part of the contract. the TNC generally state that consumers agree to pay for services whatever the carrier deems appropriate, and that prices are subject to change with or without notice. the consumer has at least 15 days and up to 30 to read the TNC and agree to this, or they can cancel. after that, if prices change, the consumer has signed a contract that they willfully agree to pay for any and all prices changes. it is not the carriers fault when consumers don't take the time allotted to read the fine print. for example, i can't just cancel my mortgage after a year if i didn't understand how scheduled int...
(continues)
...
carmodboy99

Sep 10, 2008, 2:42 PM
More or less on that same topic, the problem and reason that the public would entertain govt interjection in this is simply because of the fact that your livelihood is being tied to a contract that is for the lack of a better term open ended, both in cellullar and mortgages (lets not forget car loans... theyre the worst at this). if you choose to walk away from this because its unfair, theres a line of idiots that would sign up to move into your dream house without reading that fine print and just deal with being screwed over, (or the cell phone you just HAD to have) and so you have no recourse but to either take the bullying involved or just stay in the situation you wanted to leave initially, unhappy and frustrated. In a perfect world we...
(continues)
...
durkadurkha

Sep 10, 2008, 3:24 PM
... i doubt you've ever taken a Law class let alone an Economics class but if all of the carriers charge $0.20 a message who would you switch to when you were out of contract?
...
dmack

Sep 9, 2008, 8:19 PM
I agree that the govt has no right in setting prices for services, but the basis is true. The prices have increased for customers, although the cost for using these services for the carriers have not changed. I'm tired of having to explain this to customers why they have to pay more for text messaging. Hopefully something positive will come out of this.
...
texaswireless

Sep 9, 2008, 10:40 PM
The costs have not changed?

How about the billions of $$ per year invested in these networks. The carriers can use many different methods for recouping their costs to make a profit.

If a customer does not understand BILLION with a B and how that means costs increase somewhere (yet at the same time messaging packages have plummeted) then maybe they need some remedial economic classes.
...
Mektah

Sep 10, 2008, 12:09 AM
you're getting ahead most cell phone users can't comprehend their own bills I think economics is wishful thinking on your part.
...
JesusSaves

Sep 10, 2008, 6:19 AM
🤣 🤣 🤣
...
texaswireless

Sep 10, 2008, 8:40 AM
Regardless of what they can and cannot comprehend that does not preclude us in sales from explaining items in a logical and informative matter.
...
rwalford79

Sep 9, 2008, 8:36 PM
Someone wants an answer for the reasoning why...the justification...

People are sending more messages, people are willing to pay more for them, and the infrastructure costs more to keep using more messages, then previously.

I remember when Texts were included in plans, and then you couldnt even GET a plan with them and paid per message.... Now thats changed, and anyone who DOESNT get a plan is asking for problems.
...
T-Mob

Sep 9, 2008, 10:08 PM
I agree that it is always hard to explain when the SMS prices go up but customers also want updated technology and increased coverage. For any company to improve their network it takes cash. For a company like T-Mobile they need money first of all to pay the initial cash outlay at the spectrum auction. Then when given the greenlight they need to update the network to 3G nationwide. There is hardware, software and labor involved. We are talking BILLIONS of dollars. People want the latest and greatest but don't want to pay for it.
...
johnnycashak

Sep 10, 2008, 4:03 AM
Seriously, could you be any more of a shill for the teleco's?
...
texaswireless

Sep 10, 2008, 8:43 AM
Please explain your statement using sound economic principals.
...
T-Mob

Sep 10, 2008, 4:53 PM
I have not read anything from anybody I would consider a "shill" for the teleco's. Just people who are informed and in touch with the realities of the industry. People who think that the government should take part in dictating the cost of a non-essential luxury item should think again. If people are hurt by the text prices the should get text bundles. These bundles take the cost of SMS and MMS messages down to in some cases under 2 cents. That is likely less expensive than a single text message has ever been. This truly is an issue of nickels and dimes.
...
mykeliam

Sep 10, 2008, 7:04 AM
It's not exactly free enterprise. Remember the government put these businesses into play by allowing them to merge and giving them money from the USF. Therefore, they have to make sure that the people who they represent are not screwed by these same companies charging them more than is justified for a service that actually uses very little spectrum and does little to increase the need for capacity.
...
eric815

Sep 10, 2008, 7:20 AM
The biggest problem I forsee happening to all of us down the road is getting hit with crazy monthly charges from receiving text messages we didnt solicit. More importantly for spammers and advertisers. As anyone with a clue know that your cell # is the end-all-be-all for marketing firms. Currently they are all cllecting cell numbers daily making their large database as they did with email addresses years ago. So remember that anytime you are asked for your cell number, think about what it will be used for.

Personally I think we should not have to pay for receiving texts. Just as you wouldnt want to pay to receive a telemarting call on your home phone. Some of you may say we pay to receive calls. true, but only if we answer them. We can c...
(continues)
...
texaswireless

Sep 10, 2008, 8:42 AM
I have had the same cell number for over 7 years. I cannot remember the last time I received an unsolicited text message. I do not use those "free" ringtone services and have given my cell number to countless companies for legitimate purposes. Those who receive these messages are most often the same ones who "subscribe" to services for which they will receive them.
...
WonderGrunion

Sep 10, 2008, 9:15 AM
Doesn't charge for incoming SMS or MMS, and on most plans doesn't charge for incoming calls.
😁
...

This forum is closed.

Please log in to report a message to the moderator.

This forum is closed.


all discussions

Subscribe to Phone Scoop News with RSS Follow @phonescoop on Twitter Phone Scoop on Facebook Subscribe to Phone Scoop on YouTube Follow on Instagram

 

All content Copyright 2001-2019 Phone Factor, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Content on this site may not be copied or republished without formal permission.