|
Tube Wifi
Mizter T wrote:
If they have a contract UK mobile with inclusive minutes (or a PAYG plan that offers something similar), then calling from their mobile to yours wouldn't incur extra expense. That's an *if* though, and there are other factors such as availability of decent mobile reception for both the calling and called parties. My mobile is on and can be called all day, all week except for the 3 hours a week I presently spend on aircraft. I would be available to answer my landline for about 24-48 hours a week max, usually less than that. That convenience is most likely worth the extra few pence. As I have unlimited minutes, anyone who wants a call back so they aren't charged can have one. For international calls from abroad, the cost difference between calling a UK mobile or landline is minimal, and surprisingly used to be nothing at all! Neil -- Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK. Put first name before the at to reply. |
Tube Wifi
wrote:
Of course when (not if for most people) you lose your phone you'll be completely screwed until you get a replacement and give everyone your new number. Why would I need to get a new number? I would have the old SIM blocked and a new one issued with the old number. A lot of people don't do that, but they are just being lazy. I have had the same mobile number since 1998 and barring any prefix changes will ensure I keep it. Neil -- Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK. Put first name before the at to reply. |
Tube Wifi
wrote:
The SIM might be useless but you could still have given away or sold 400 quids worth of phone and then claimed you lost it and got a free replacement. Even if they block the IMEI number most smartphones can still use wifi. Who said you get a free phone? You would have to obtain a new one the same way you would if you didn't get a new number, either by buying one (as I did when I broke a phone mid contract) or you insure it and claim on your insurance. Uninsured, it was the same as buying a new one without a contract, you buy a PAYG one for the network you have a contract with and put the SIM in it. Neil -- Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK. Put first name before the at to reply. |
Tube Wifi
|
Tube Wifi
In message , at 11:41:38 on Thu, 14 Jun
2012, Mizter T remarked: The cost to me of subsidising callers is a fixed mnthly rental, and incoming calls are free. The cost to others of subsidising me not having a landline varies, but is normally an extra cost per minute on the calls (to my mobile). If they have a contract UK mobile with inclusive minutes (or a PAYG plan that offers something similar), then calling from their mobile to yours wouldn't incur extra expense. That's an *if* though, and there are other factors such as availability of decent mobile reception for both the calling and called parties. The callers I have in mind are from landlines, often not in the UK. Even inclusive minutes aren't "free" if they exceed the monthly amount by calling me, and their calls to everyone else suddenly become 40p/minute (or whatever). Or were you thinking they might, by complete co-incidence, be on the same mobile provider as me and have unlimited minutes? -- Roland Perry |
Tube Wifi
|
Tube Wifi
On 14 Jun 2012 11:27:08 GMT
Neil Williams wrote: wrote: The SIM might be useless but you could still have given away or sold 400 quids worth of phone and then claimed you lost it and got a free replacement. Even if they block the IMEI number most smartphones can still use wifi. Who said you get a free phone? You would have to obtain a new one the same Whoever it was who said you could get a replacement at an O2 shop. B2003 |
Tube Wifi
|
Tube Wifi
On 14/06/2012 12:40, wrote: In , (Mizter T) wrote: Evidence? VM broadband: http://store.virginmedia.com/broadband/compare-broadband/index.html VM phone line: http://store.virginmedia.com/phone/phone-fibre-optic/compare-fibre-optic/index.html Solo broadband is cheaper than taking broadband& phone line - yes, VM do discount the broadband if you take a phone line as well, but the total cost is still more. As ever, they'd prefer it if you took a bundle and so both price and market their services accordingly - disentangling the costs can take a bit of work. However I'm pretty sure that when VM started offering solo broadband, the cost was equivalent to a broadband + phone line bundle. Gosh! I'm paying a whole 40p a month more than the broadband-only price there for my broadband plus phone. 30Mb broadband service (costs per month). With phone line: £14.50 + £13.90 = £28.40 Without phone line: £22.50. |
Tube Wifi
|
Tube Wifi
|
Tube Wifi
On 14/06/2012 12:23, Neil Williams wrote: Mizter wrote: If they have a contract UK mobile with inclusive minutes (or a PAYG plan that offers something similar), then calling from their mobile to yours wouldn't incur extra expense. That's an *if* though, and there are other factors such as availability of decent mobile reception for both the calling and called parties. My mobile is on and can be called all day, all week except for the 3 hours a week I presently spend on aircraft. I would be available to answer my landline for about 24-48 hours a week max, usually less than that. That convenience is most likely worth the extra few pence. As I have unlimited minutes, anyone who wants a call back so they aren't charged can have one. For international calls from abroad, the cost difference between calling a UK mobile or landline is minimal, and surprisingly used to be nothing at all! The difference when calling from abroad isn't as minimal as you make out. |
Tube Wifi
On 14/06/2012 12:31, Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 11:41:38 on Thu, 14 Jun 2012, Mizter T remarked: The cost to me of subsidising callers is a fixed mnthly rental, and incoming calls are free. The cost to others of subsidising me not having a landline varies, but is normally an extra cost per minute on the calls (to my mobile). If they have a contract UK mobile with inclusive minutes (or a PAYG plan that offers something similar), then calling from their mobile to yours wouldn't incur extra expense. That's an *if* though, and there are other factors such as availability of decent mobile reception for both the calling and called parties. The callers I have in mind are from landlines, often not in the UK. Even inclusive minutes aren't "free" if they exceed the monthly amount by calling me, and their calls to everyone else suddenly become 40p/minute (or whatever). Or were you thinking they might, by complete co-incidence, be on the same mobile provider as me and have unlimited minutes? No, I was thinking what I was saying. Yes, exceeding inclusive minutes costs. (Though for those who do use a lot of inclusive minutes, many contract plans now come with inclusive talk time in abundance - but no, I don't make the assumption this is an option that is either available to everyone or suits everyone.) I absolutely agree that a landline is particularly useful when it comes to receiving (conventional) calls from abroad. |
Tube Wifi
|
Tube Wifi
wrote:
Whoever it was who said you could get a replacement at an O2 shop. A replacement SIM. You can of course also get a replacement phone, but will have to pay for that. Neil -- Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK. Put first name before the at to reply. |
Tube Wifi
In message
. net, at 13:01:50 on Tue, 12 Jun 2012, Neil Williams remarked: I'd be expecting most of the calls from other landlines. A generational thing I think. (I did warn her I'd post about this...) My daughter has got into the bad habit of calling me on my landline, using her mobile, from the next room. Sometimes, bundling too many minutes has its downside :) -- Roland Perry |
Tube Wifi
|
Tube Wifi
|
Tube Wifi
On Thu, 14 Jun 2012 16:46:12 +0100
Steve Fitzgerald ] wrote: In message , d writes Why would you have to to that? They just block the old SIM when they replace it. Cousin buys new SIM for phone you've "lost". New SIM logs onto the network and identifies the phone which is promptly blocked as the IMEI belongs to a phone that has been reported stolen. Since most smartphones can skype over wifi thats probably no great loss to someone who's got it on the cheap or even free. B2003 |
Tube Wifi
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 11:32:44AM -0500, wrote:
(David Cantrell) wrote: wrote: Even if you were in a cabled area you'd have to pay for a Virgin Media landline even if you didn't use it. These days they'll sell you interweb without phone service. Evidence? Their website, today. -- David Cantrell | Minister for Arbitrary Justice You may now start misinterpreting what I just wrote, and attacking that misinterpretation. |
Tube Wifi
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 07:14:07PM +0100, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 13:08:31 on Wed, 13 Jun 2012, David Cantrell remarked: As for having a landline, I need it for ADSL. I also think it's a bit rude to expect friends and family to call an expensive mobile number rather than a landline. I think it's a bit rude of people to expect me to pay to receieve calls from them. Cos that's what having a landline would mean. So which rudeness is worse? At least the landline cost is fixed each month, and not per minute of call made. The landline cost is of the order of 10 to 15 quid a month, every month. The cost to my mother (the only person to regularly call me from a landline) of calling my mobile a few times a month is considerably less than that. -- David Cantrell | semi-evolved ape-thing Hail Caesar! Those about to vi ^[ you! |
Tube Wifi
In message , at 12:48:48
on Thu, 21 Jun 2012, David Cantrell remarked: As for having a landline, I need it for ADSL. I also think it's a bit rude to expect friends and family to call an expensive mobile number rather than a landline. I think it's a bit rude of people to expect me to pay to receieve calls from them. Cos that's what having a landline would mean. So which rudeness is worse? At least the landline cost is fixed each month, and not per minute of call made. The landline cost is of the order of 10 to 15 quid a month, every month. The cost to my mother (the only person to regularly call me from a landline) of calling my mobile a few times a month is considerably less than that. YMMV. -- Roland Perry |
Tube Wifi
On 21/06/2012 13:05, Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 12:48:48 on Thu, 21 Jun 2012, David Cantrell remarked: As for having a landline, I need it for ADSL. I also think it's a bit rude to expect friends and family to call an expensive mobile number rather than a landline. I think it's a bit rude of people to expect me to pay to receieve calls from them. Cos that's what having a landline would mean. So which rudeness is worse? At least the landline cost is fixed each month, and not per minute of call made. The landline cost is of the order of 10 to 15 quid a month, every month. The cost to my mother (the only person to regularly call me from a landline) of calling my mobile a few times a month is considerably less than that. YMMV. Indeed. FWIW, a stat I heard this morning was that 1 in 7 UK households now only use mobiles... googles... and here's a reference to said stat in an Indy article: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/-7872099.html It'd be interesting to have a bit more info on that, for example the vague way it's worded in the aforementioned article could potentially include households that have a landline (e.g. for ADSL) but never use it. |
Tube Wifi
In message , at 13:21:50 on Thu, 21 Jun
2012, Mizter T remarked: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/-7872099.html It'd be interesting to have a bit more info on that, for example the vague way it's worded in the aforementioned article could potentially include households that have a landline (e.g. for ADSL) but never use it. That articles a bit at the "bleeding heart" end of the spectrum. No-one forced those households to eschew a landline for a mobile whose costs were well known. -- Roland Perry |
Tube Wifi
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 02:16:44PM +0100, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 13:21:50 on Thu, 21 Jun 2012, Mizter T remarked: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/-7872099.html That articles a bit at the "bleeding heart" end of the spectrum. No-one forced those households to eschew a landline for a mobile whose costs were well known. Quite. It's full of lies from the companies they talk to though. Churchill said "The 0800 numbers are used for new customers looking to take up our insurance cover and 0845 for existing customers seeking changes to policies or making claims. We cap the 0845 numbers to local rate so existing customers can take time to discuss their policy with our experts without worrying about premium rate phone calls." But if they only care about people worrying about premium rate phone calls, they could use an 0800 number, or an 03whatever number, or a geographic number. On most tariffs these days there's little difference between calling a local number and any other geographic number, and 0845 is sometimes more expensive than both. HSBC said "Our use of differing prefix telephone numbers enables us to ensure we offer an effective, flexible and resilient service for the tens of millions of customer calls we receive each month." The prefix has nothing to do with it. Offering different *numbers* for different purposes might make sense, but different prefices are *only* useful for doing different billing and charging. Scottish Power said "The main reason we use non geographic numbers is because we operate across multiple locations and call centres in the UK. Non geographic telephone numbers allow us to direct customer calls quickly and efficiently to any call centre agent at any location" Any number can be directed to any place these days. I know people who have 020 numbers that ring phones in Cornwall, but which get forwarded to all kinds of different places in Cornwall (home, office, mobile, whatever) depending on how the PBX is set up. If an individual can do that, so can Scottish Power, and so can anyone provided a phone service to any business. -- David Cantrell | Cake Smuggler Extraordinaire " In My Egotistical Opinion, most people's ... programs should be indented six feet downward and covered with dirt. " --Blair P. Houghton |
Tube Wifi
In message , at 17:38:59
on Mon, 25 Jun 2012, David Cantrell remarked: Any number can be directed to any place these days. I know people who have 020 numbers that ring phones in Cornwall, but which get forwarded to all kinds of different places in Cornwall (home, office, mobile, whatever) depending on how the PBX is set up. If an individual can do that, so can Scottish Power, and so can anyone provided a phone service to any business. Yes, but I expect it costs them more to redirect a geographic like that. -- Roland Perry |
Tube Wifi
On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 10:17:10PM +0100, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 17:38:59 on Mon, 25 Jun 2012, David Cantrell remarked: Any number can be directed to any place these days. I know people who have 020 numbers that ring phones in Cornwall, but which get forwarded to all kinds of different places in Cornwall (home, office, mobile, whatever) depending on how the PBX is set up. If an individual can do that, so can Scottish Power, and so can anyone provided a phone service to any business. Yes, but I expect it costs them more to redirect a geographic like that. Depends on the number. It would be cheaper (for the recipient) to have a geographic number going to the "wrong" place than to have an 0800 number, and for any non-trivial number of calls the costs would be overwhelmingly the costs of dealing with calls, followed by the costs of routing the calls, with any fixed costs being utterly insignificant. Well, at least that's how it would have been when I was writing telecoms billing software a few years ago. -- David Cantrell | London Perl Mongers Deputy Chief Heretic "There's a hole in my bucket, dear Liza, dear Liza." "WHAT MAKES YOU SAY THERE IS A HOLE IN YOUR BUCKET?" |
Tube Wifi
In message , at 12:59:43
on Tue, 26 Jun 2012, David Cantrell remarked: Any number can be directed to any place these days. I know people who have 020 numbers that ring phones in Cornwall, but which get forwarded to all kinds of different places in Cornwall (home, office, mobile, whatever) depending on how the PBX is set up. If an individual can do that, so can Scottish Power, and so can anyone provided a phone service to any business. Yes, but I expect it costs them more to redirect a geographic like that. Depends on the number. It would be cheaper (for the recipient) to have a geographic number going to the "wrong" place than to have an 0800 number, Isn't the alternative here an 0845? and for any non-trivial number of calls the costs would be overwhelmingly the costs of dealing with calls, followed by the costs of routing the calls, It's the cost of routing the calls I was talking about. with any fixed costs being utterly insignificant. -- Roland Perry |
Tube Wifi
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 04:32:48PM +0100, Roland Perry wrote:
Yes, but I expect it costs them more to redirect a geographic like that. Depends on the number. It would be cheaper (for the recipient) to have a geographic number going to the "wrong" place than to have an 0800 number, Isn't the alternative here an 0845? I forget exactly what the rates were, and I know that revenue sharing has changed a bit since. Wikipedia says that revenue share only exists on 0844 these days, not 0845. -- David Cantrell | Enforcer, South London Linguistic Massive Computer Science is about lofty design goals and careful algorithmic optimisation. Sysadminning is about cleaning up the resulting mess. |
Tube Wifi
In message , at 12:56:44
on Wed, 27 Jun 2012, David Cantrell remarked: Yes, but I expect it costs them more to redirect a geographic like that. Depends on the number. It would be cheaper (for the recipient) to have a geographic number going to the "wrong" place than to have an 0800 number, Isn't the alternative here an 0845? I forget exactly what the rates were, and I know that revenue sharing has changed a bit since. Wikipedia says that revenue share only exists on 0844 these days, not 0845. Revenue share gets a bad press, but isn't the sole reason for the extra cost of non-geographic numbers, or indeed involved in the cost of "out of area" geographic numbers that you mentioned a few turns upthread. I suspect OFCOM is trying to get the price of 0845 to be genuinely the same as a local call, in which case the issue shifts to whether 0845 is counted in local call *bundles*. It's a game of whack-a-mole, and all it ever does is shift the earning potential from one entry on the pricelist to another (as we've seen with mobiles over the last year or two). -- Roland Perry |
Tube Wifi
I have never had a telephone in this flat as I my mobile plan is more
than suitable and I can pay pennies to call abroad via Skype from my Internet connection. Same here. In a cable area, so no need for a landline at all. DSL is way slower than cable anyway. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 11:37 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk