Text 9053, 104 rader
Skriven 2010-07-09 08:08:26 av Robert Bashe (2:2448/44)
   Kommentar till text 9046 av Roy Witt (1:387/22)
Ärende: Cellphone woes
======================
Roy Witt wrote to Robert Bashe on Thursday July 08 2010 at 09:43:

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

RW> You're obviously getting your information from people who don't know
RW> what they're talking about.

No, you're obviously thinking of something else, probably cellphones on
contract to a provider, and simply assuming the same system as that you know
applies everywhere.

RB>> [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.

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

RW> It depends on the provider you use. Those who aren't as big as the big
RW> boys give you better deals. Net10 for instance doesn't delete your
RW> minutes that you haven't used, as long as you keep the phone active.
RW> Let it expire and the minutes do as well.

The subject was _prepaid_ cards, Roy. You're obviously talking about phones
that are locked to a specific provider, with a contract.

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

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

RW> Your comment is from outer space.

You conveniently avoid answering the question.

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

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

RW> That was while you were looking at the know it all in the mirror of
RW> course.

No, my mirror is one of those things where you can look through from my side
and see someone else. Ever wonder about the funny bluish color of your mirror
when you shave in the morning? That's me behind it. And believe me, it ruins my
breakfast every day - imagine looking at something like that before your first
cup of coffee in the morning ;-((((

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
RW>>> in the US, it costs more than half as much as a cell phone, which
RW>>> can be used anywhere.

RB>> Did you mean "more than twice" instead of "more than half" above?

RW> No. More than half as much, is pretty clear to me. If you pay 40 EU
RW> for something and then you pay 22 EU for something else, isn't the
RW> latter more than half as much?

Except that if you meant that, your above quote would mean that the land line
was half the price of the cellphone. That's why I asked. What you mean is still
unclear, but I assume my interpretation is correct since otherwise your
statement would make no sense.

RB>> Otherwise I don't think I understand you. Anyway, I suppose it's
RB>> cheaper to build a few transmission towers than to string land lines,

RW> Especially when the price of copper is at a very high level. Not to
RW> mention that people actually steal that wire.

I've read about that, and not only in the States... there was also a case in
Australia, as I remember. Incredible.

RB>> and in a place like the USA, with a huge area and many sparsely
RB>> populated places, it would be logical that cellphone service would be
RB>> cheaper than a land line (except in a metropolitan area).

RW> That applies to San Antonio, which is a metropolitan area.

Which again confuses me, as I would expect a land line would be cheaper there
for the reasons given above. On the other hand, a cellphone might be cheaper in
West Texas, where prarie dogs are more common than humans.

Cheers, Bob

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