Text 9026, 74 rader
Skriven 2010-07-07 19:39:12 av Robert Bashe (2:2448/44)
   Kommentar till text 9010 av Roy Witt (1:387/22)
Ärende: Cellphone woes
======================
Roy Witt wrote to Robert Bashe on Tuesday July 06 2010 at 18:55:

RB>> You're confusing the American system with those in other countries
RB>> again: I've seen what lousy conditions the American prepaid SIM cards
RB>> offer - extra-short validity periods and then the companies keep any
RB>> unused balance:

RW> Not exactly right. If you allow your prepaid phone to lapse, then you
RW> lose the minutes.

In the States that may be true. Here it's not, since there is no such things as
paying for "airtime" on incoming calls.

RW> If you continue to keep your phone paidup, you don't lose the minutes
RW> you paid for and didn't use.

Again, in the States. You're only familiar with the system there, and I have
only a vague idea of the system where you are, except that incoming calls are
_not_ free in the States. You can deny that until you're blue in the face, but
there are too may people confirming that to accept your claims.

[Providers keeping balance on prpaid cards]
RB>> we did away with that in Germany around 5 years ago, when several
RB>> providers were sued for that kind of practice.

RW> That's also been the case here for a few years now.

It is? Interesting - in view of the fact that the few American prepaid cards
I've seen have a _very_ short validity period (a few months down to only 30
days without adding cash), I would have thought people would first try to have
that changed (longer validity times or eliminate the limits altogether) rather
than to first get a prepaid balance refunded.

RB>> You pay even if you don't need or want the time. Nice system for the
RB>> provider: a guaranteed income regardless of whether you use the
RB>> service or not.

RW> You conveniently overlook that my minutes (airtime) continue to add up
RW> rather than go away.

So what? Do you get paid for the unused balance when you switch providers? If
not, my above comment stands.

RW> BTW, this is also the reason there are no 'pay phones' at the liquor
RW> store or gas station anymore. Nobody used them and they went away!

They are disappearing here too, but there are still people who have no
cellphone, and thus a few can still be seen around.

RW> Have you ever heard the old saying that 'some people will never
RW> believe anything someone else tells them because they already know it
RW> all'?

Yes, and I immediately thought of you. Interesting, isn't it?

RB>> In Germany, the charges for fixed-line calls are _much_ lower than
RB>> for any cellphone rate (prepaid or contract), so only people who
RB>> rarely call anyone find it practical to do without a land line.

RW> Just the opposite here. Even with the bare minimum landline service in
RW> the US, it costs more than half as much as a cell phone, which can be
RW> used anywhere.

Did you mean "more than twice" instead of "more than half" above? Otherwise I
don't think I understand you. Anyway, I suppose it's cheaper to build a few
transmission towers than to string land lines, and in a place like the USA,
with a huge area and many sparsely populated places, it would be logical that
cellphone service would be cheaper than a land line (except in a metropolitan
area).

Cheers, Bob

--- GoldED+/W32 1.1.5-0613
 * Origin: Jabberwocky System - 02363-56073 ISDN/V34 (2:2448/44)