View Full Version : why do people pay for phone calls anymore?
i made a post a few months ago on this topic before and people thought i was some kind of agent for the firm i was recommending because i made a long detailed account of why you should switch to the firm.
here is my reply to that criticism that i recieved. i would reply in the thread but its now closed.
i am not in league with the firm mention below. the reason i gave a long winded argument for joining this firm is because some people are just either stuck in their ways and dont want to change, dont care, sceptical or stupid. i took the time to try and persuade such people because its frustrating to see people being obstinately unreasonable. even if it at their cost i dont like to see big companies ripping people off.
call18866 offer free uk calls (subject to 1p connection charge per call
)for bt customers. ntl customers using this service still get a good deal at 0.5p a minute
www.call18866.co.uk
call1899 which seems to be a sister company currently offers free uk to both bt customers dialing 1899 before the number they call and ntl customers using the 08081707474 access number. 3p connecting charge but still a good deal. no cut offs after an hour or anything like that.
www.call1899.co.uk
*you can also use this on telewest or on a mobile if u can dial 0808 for free!
i can understand why people are sceptical these days. when a stranger knocks on your door and asks how you are you automatically assume that in a moment he will try and sell you something.
the above url contains no agent referal codes. im not getting a penny for telling u this. the company doesnt advertise or pay people to be agents for them. if they did they wouldnt be able to offer the cheap calls.
the other reason im reposting this is in the hope that i can help some people who read this even if i get a load of criticism back from sceptics.
why pay 5.5p for an hours phone call in the evening when u can talk all day for 1p lol
why pay 3p and a 5p connecting charge to ntl in the day time. sounds madness to me.
ive been using the service for some months now. i programmed my phone to dial the 18866 access number before all my calls. they debit my debit/credit card each month.
calls to mobiles on 18866 are 14p per minute daytime/evening but 3p on weekends. i use 1899 for my mobile calls as its 10p daytime evening and 2p weekend at the moment.
internation calls are usually a lot cheaper than companies like one tel etc. check rates on website though to be sure.
another handy thing with the 1899 service is u can call personal numbers including the one they give u for phoning people at their bed in hospital for just 15p per minute. on a bt or ntl phone ull pay upto 40p per minute.
lol i think of that advert for egg when 2 men ring up people and say they have won 10,000 for example and then tell them there is a £60 administration fee. they say they are passing the person to claims deparment but in fact they just swap over phones and pretend to be the claim department. obviously the person pays the £60 admin fee but doesnt get the money coz its all a scam. the advert goes. IF YOU DONT LOOK AFTER YOUR MONEY WHO WILL. thats so true. if u refuse to take up a much cheaper deal when u can see clearly its cheaper u might as well be walking down the road with a hole in ure wallet.
http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/showpost.php?p=301374&postcount=1
http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/showpost.php?p=301374&postcount=1
when 18866 started offering mobile users and ntl users access to their service via an 0808 i was surprised because to my knowledge there is no way u can let people ring an 0808 number to get through to your service and not have to pay anything yourself to let customers do that.
i take the point that possibly they allowed use of the 0808 for ntl/mobile customers for a time to entice people but saying that i dont see why they need to lie to entice peope because even with the extra charges the rates are much better than ntl and bt. do ntl let u ring for 0.5p a minute and only charge u 1p connection? u can still get free uk calls by using call1899 call1899.co.uk but its a 3p connection charge.
the tariff notice is on by default. that is a lie abt it being off. i knew abt the price change immediately because the tarriff notice told me. they did send me an email and their website advertised it.
it is not cobblers that non bt operators charge to much [ the person expressed this wrongly. what he is referring to is the fact that there is extra charges when using the 0808 number even if u ring it from a bt line this is because it costs 18866 to allow u to ring them on the 0808 number]. it does cost 18866 to allow people to ring them in on an 0808 number. its only because bt had to unbundle the local loop that u can access the service using an indirect access number for free. its frustrating when people make criticisms when they dont know.
i can substantiate to some extent this claim abt the 0808 numbers costing the company extra. why do u think companies cancel their 0800/0808 numbers and change it to an 0845/0870 number. obviously it can be because they want to make money as 0845/0870 numbers bring in revenue. its also because it costs them extra to run an 0808/0800 service. they dont just register a number and pay a monthly fee and anyone can ring it for free and nobody picks up the cost of the 0808 call.
it is just speculation that they will pull the plug on the free calls for bt users. i have for quite a few months. i dont share the writer of that posts cynicism. i can much easier believe that ntl and bt and others rip people off. i know these companies rip people off because they have a monopoly. they have no reason 2 offer people cheaper calls unless they are forced to by competion. remember bt charge people 8p a min national calls and 4p local calls. it wasnt until companies like ntl and others came along and offered cheaper calls that it has forced bt to lower their prices coz they are seeing there customers run away.
ntl, bt and others rip people off. i know these companies rip people off because they have a monopoly.
How can 3 or more companies have a monopoly ?? I thought mono meant 1 :confused:
Let me see....
Monopoly.
1. Exclusive control by one group of the means of producing or selling a commodity or service: †œMonopoly frequently... arises from government support or from collusive agreements among individualsââ ¡Ã‚¬Ã‚ (Milton Friedman).
2. Law. A right granted by a government giving exclusive control over a specified commercial activity to a single party.
3.
1. A company or group having exclusive control over a commercial activity.
2. A commodity or service so controlled.
4.
1. Exclusive possession or control: arrogantly claims to have a monopoly on the truth.
2. Something that is exclusively possessed or controlled: showed that scientific achievement is not a male monopoly.
Maybe people are sceptical because if something looks to good to be true then it often is ;) There is also the point that members of forums don't always appreciate people registering and then declaring that they should all change their phone service provider and that they are being ripped off by their current contracts and are allowing themselves to be ripped off through sheer obstinance.
BTW....
what proof do we have that you do not work for this company in any way? Surely if you were that confident in your original post you wouldn't have taken so long to come back and try to argue it's merits again :erm:
Looking at your recent threads list, you seem to have some sort of obsession with Money and doing things on the cheap :erm:
* why do people pay for phone calls anymore?
* toner cartridge sell by date (buying cheap cartridges)
* Make £38.01 a month for doing nothing
* hp laserjet 4m plus (buying a cheap printer)
* why are projectors so expensive
All in the last month by the look of it.
zoombini
15-11-2004, 09:22
Don't we all. :D
How can 3 or more companies have a monopoly ?? I thought mono meant 1 :confused:
Let me see....
Maybe people are sceptical because if something looks to good to be true then it often is ;) There is also the point that members of forums don't always appreciate people registering and then declaring that they should all change their phone service provider and that they are being ripped off by their current contracts and are allowing themselves to be ripped off through sheer obstinance.
BTW....
what proof do we have that you do not work for this company in any way? Surely if you were that confident in your original post you wouldn't have taken so long to come back and try to argue it's merits again :erm:
yes mono does mean one. that 'one group' i was referring to was the group of large companies although not in anyway affiliated have some of the following things in common
- advertising through television / newspapers
- running a customer contact centre
- acquisition of news customers through agents
companies such as bt, ntl, onetel, tele2, telco, alpha telecom.
companies which dont fall into this group like telestunt, telesavers, telediscount, budgetcom.
it costs companies a lot to advertise, to run a customer contact centre and to pay agents commision for signing new customers. they past this cost onto you by charging higher prices.
have you any idea how many thousands of pounds it costs to put an advert in the newspaper, to run a call centre, to pay commision to agents for new customers.
if you have worked at a call centre you will notice the vast majority of calls involve explaining simple concepts to customers because they are too stupid to understand.
if you are one of those customers who hardly every ring a call centre because you understand your bill and you know how to use the services you have, well you are contributing towards the running of the call centre that you hardly ever ring.
the reason the company have the money to spend on advertising is because they charged you extra. if a company was charging what it cost them for a call and only a little extra for profit and to pay staff etc then they wouldnt have enough money for advertising.
----
sometimes things which are too good to be true arent too good to be true. its a great generalisation to say that. for example i just bought a laser printer off ebay for £26 is that too good to be true. i also managed to get two refill cartridges which would normally cost £30 each for just £5 each from someone in cardiff.
my parents because they are over 60 are on staywarm and pay just one fixed rate for all the gas and electricity they need. is that too good to be true.
i cancelled sky and stayed away from them for six months and they sent me a letter then saying if i come back to them they would give me half price for six months and i took them up on it. is that too good to be true?
i ring guatemala for 2p a minute on weekends by getting an o2 pay as you go which lets me ring any 0844 number for just 2p on weekends. this call would normally cost 5p. onetel charges 19p a minute for this. god forbid what ntl charges. i just checked 75p a minute.
you people got ripped off by bt a while ago and u changed to ntl, onetel and the like are behaving just like bt.
the only proof i can show u that im not an agent for them is for u to email them and ask them if they have any agents.
i think i have wasted my time writing this. its well said that " you cant argue with an i***t"
i worked at british gas for some time who are a rip off company but people still switched to them!!!! i realise now that even if i worked for the cheapest company with the best customer service i wouldnt be able to persuade the vast majority of people to change. sadly people just cannot be reasoned into common sense any more :(
SMHarman
15-11-2004, 10:25
ntl, bt and others rip people off. i know these companies rip people off because they have a monopoly.
How can 3 or more companies have a monopoly ?? I thought mono meant 1 :confused:
Let me see....
Monopoly.
1. Exclusive control by one group of the means of producing or selling a commodity or service: †œMonopoly frequently... arises from government support or from collusive agreements among individualsââ ¡Ã‚¬Ã‚ (Milton Friedman).
2. Law. A right granted by a government giving exclusive control over a specified commercial activity to a single party.
3.
1. A company or group having exclusive control over a commercial activity.
2. A commodity or service so controlled.
4.
1. Exclusive possession or control: arrogantly claims to have a monopoly on the truth.
2. Something that is exclusively possessed or controlled: showed that scientific achievement is not a male monopoly.
Maybe people are sceptical because if something looks to good to be true then it often is ;) There is also the point that members of forums don't always appreciate people registering and then declaring that they should all change their phone service provider and that they are being ripped off by their current contracts and are allowing themselves to be ripped off through sheer obstinance.
BTW....
what proof do we have that you do not work for this company in any way? Surely if you were that confident in your original post you wouldn't have taken so long to come back and try to argue it's merits again :erm:
Hmm, true, but they could be said to have a duopoly (or tripoply) if we include TW as the three providers owning the " last mile" to the house.
Duopolys can operate as (or more) effectivly than a monopoly as neither has an incentive to upset the applecart. You can also have an effective monopoly were one does not exist, DeBeers and the diamond industry is effectivly a monopoly as although there are many suppliers DeBeers exerts eccessive influence.
Of course many large players can choose to form a cartel. OPEC being the most famous of these controlling supply and price of oil.
This is all a little :notopic: though as although telcos have monopoly posiitons they have had these castrated by OfCom who make sure that their networks are open to competition. This can be seen by the likes of 18866, however OfTel still have an uphill battle against the power of inertia.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.