Text Rip-Off? Pricey Messages 'Cost Virtually Nothing' to Carriers

I never understood why data transfer costs money. The cabling, the radios, the electronic equipment all exist whether they're in use or not. Charging for sending bytes down them is the biggest con ever.

Show me a solid-state electronic device that wore out quicker for being used than just left on.

The roaming "caps" that the EU propsed are a joke, too!! Sure, they're cheaper than they were, but still extremely expensive! It's rubbish!!

[edit on 30-12-2008 by mirageofdeceit]

Originally posted by NovusOrdoMundi
reply to post by Icarus Rising

 

it unfr dat dey do ths 2 us i duno y dey needa rip us of lyke dis it mkes me md

if da fyls r smll thn da prce needa b smll 2 LOL!!!!!!11111

k?

That little lot (whatever it says) comes in at a mere 142 characters... Well done NovusOrdoMundi, you stayed below the 160 characters... But you still get charged the full 5p

Hey thats a point - think about all the money they make from the bit of the message that is not used... NovusOrdoMundi should only of paid 4.4 pence for that nonsense... But I have to bill 5p

Just because somebody uses text messaging it doesn't mean that they're using leetspeak. People seem to equate texting with idiocy when it's not true, nearly all the texts that I send/receive are VERY coherent etc. The only time I really short out on the rules is if I'm in a hurry or if it's a longer message I'll go back and take out some letters and such so that I don't end up having to pay the price for two messages. Sure sometimes the spelling isn't perfect or the punctuation but they're usually very minor.

Texting is actually quite useful, like if you want to get a short message to someone you can just text instead of calling and it's usually cheaper than a phone call (I think that in my service it's like 2 texts cost a whole minute and one phone call, even if nobody answers, is a whole minute).

I do think that the price should be lowered because you have people on the "pay as you go" plans that don't have access to unlimited texting (such as myself).

I don't text message, I don't expect anyone smart to do so.

reply to post by die_another_day


Why? How can you tell whether someone's a complete genius or an utter moron depending on if they txt or not?
A lot of people use txt messaging because it's quicker than calling someone, and not everyone uses all those acronyms while txting.


I too have wondered why I get charged 15c per text (sending and receiving). What's going to stop them from charging us on the internet per kb we upload or download?

-Will

Corporate philosophy is to charge as much as they can while reducing their expenses to a minimum. This results inevitably in an economy where expensive trash is sold to people via credit, because they earn too little to keep up with the prices otherwise. This results in crumbling of the middle class. And yes, if they can they will take something for nothing, which is the case of texts and tolls and other silly fees that permeate our economies.

Corporations are elitist creations, their function is to feed the parasites while sucking the worker dry, with few exceptions.

"Texting" is just another method of communication, the content is the only place you may r may not find intelligence.

The problem here is kind of silly.

First of all, I could have told anyone YEARS ago that the text messages were being embedded in control communications between the phones and the towers. It really wasn't a secret.

It's just now people are realizing that in essence the data stream is not changed by the presence or absence of 'texting data' so the provider is essentially not 'paying' anything for the medium they charge you to use. It sounds like good business.

When the demand for media content became the driving force, that all changed; but the texting still remains a zero-drain on their cost per service unit. Why change it?

If you want to text for free.... hand deliver a letter; because the commercial paradigm demands that all mediums be controlled for exploitation. Thats what digital TV is all about ... that's why they need to control the medium. That's what the FCC does nowadays, assigns medium for commercial exploitation. Ostensibly taxes will offer some profit for the coffers of the people (oh yeah, in theory) - but we all know how THAT goes....

Originally posted by MikeboydUS
Txt Msgs are making our next generation coming up illiterate.

O noes! It's happening already!

Wow, I find it laughable and sad that anyone should pay for text messages. Paying any amount to fry your brains is terrible. The reports have made it clear that every time you put it to your heads it heats your brain bucket up. Personally, I don't have any spare brain cells so I will never light up to say hi to mom.

reply to post by ExquisitExamplE


Egad, must resist leet speak and bad grammar. Ive been pwned! Yay!

Happy New Year!

[edit on 30/12/08 by MikeboydUS]

Do you people know what a cell site cost? Over a $250 to 500,000 a pop... and all the carriers are constantly adding new ones to handle capacity and to give better coverage. And these things are not hooked to the wired world with $20 DSL lines... Each carrier pays thousands per month per site to connect their network... Bandwidth = Money... People will complain about spotty coverage, and they will complain about the cost.... You cant have it both ways. If you dont like it, dont buy it.

reply to post by MikeboydUS


Same to you friend.

On topic, I don't own, nor ever will I own, A cellphone. Perhaps if they made a model encased in tinfoil...

Well, today the new commodity is going to be information, and you know that corporate entities will do anything to meter and charge for the movement of this commodity.

I mean, does it really cost anywhere near $3 for a person to use an ATM machine from a different bank? Really? I could understand a few cents, that would be reasonable perhaps, but $3?

And a little text message? Maybe a cent per 10 messages or something, but anything beyond that is also raping the consumer. Then again, we have gotten to the point where consumerism is declining and unsustainable, so who knows where this will all go in a few years.

Ah.. another ATS 'consumer reports' thread

A couple points worth pointing are:

1) SMS messaging requires unique back-end architecture in the data centers. It is not 'free' in the sense that there is no incremental cost to the carrier to support text messaging over and above normal cell calls... there is quite a bit of cost in servers, networking, and the people to operate and monitor the service.

2) The carriers need to provide SMS architecture for peak traffic (i.e. American Idol voting). The more demand, the more investment in architecture.

Is it a rip-off? Well... yes, but really not a very big one. The carriers are making less and less on normal cell calls due to competition, so they need to take advantage of add-on services like texting. Also, folks here have pointed out that you can get an unlimited text plan with most carriers if you really need/want that sort of thing, so it really isn't that expensive for 'power texters'.

It's not like a loaf of bread is now 20.00 or something. It's just texting.

It's a service. Get over it. No one needs to text. If you like it and find it useful great. If not, then don't use it. Problem solved. I love it when people log onto the internet to post on forums about how much they hate all the new hi-tech stuff or the money they have to pay for it.

How much does a normal minute of a phone call cost the phone companies? I bet virtually nothing. I'm not surprised that the average txt message doesn't really cost much, either.

Originally posted by nydsdan
I mean, does it really cost anywhere near $3 for a person to use an ATM machine from a different bank? Really? I could understand a few cents, that would be reasonable perhaps, but $3?

Do you know what's ridiculous? When I had money in the bank, at a certain ATM (in a gas station), it cost $5.00 to take money out. And that was ass, because I could only take out $20 a day.

i've often thought about this one..more so in current times. its pretty absurd how much the service providers charge for transferring such small packets of data but thats the nature of the industry...interesting that i heard earlier that the "control channel" which the companies use to send the data are essentially free to operate since they don't effect bandwidth due to such small size... still waiting to get unlimited free text on my phone...i pay enough a month as is, #.

Originally posted by Zarniwoop
Ah.. another ATS 'consumer reports' thread

A couple points worth pointing are:

1) SMS messaging requires unique back-end architecture in the data centers. It is not 'free' in the sense that there is no incremental cost to the carrier to support text messaging over and above normal cell calls... there is quite a bit of cost in servers, networking, and the people to operate and monitor the service.

2) The carriers need to provide SMS architecture for peak traffic (i.e. American Idol voting). The more demand, the more investment in architecture.

Is it a rip-off? Well... yes, but really not a very big one. The carriers are making less and less on normal cell calls due to competition, so they need to take advantage of add-on services like texting. Also, folks here have pointed out that you can get an unlimited text plan with most carriers if you really need/want that sort of thing, so it really isn't that expensive for 'power texters'.

It's not like a loaf of bread is now 20.00 or something. It's just texting.

i was thinking this too, that there is quite a bit of cost in maintaining the infrastructure to make texting possible...

and the last line was hilarious mate

cheers

I will play devils advocate here if I may... I worked 2 years as a customer rep for a mobile telco - I yes I know I being brain washed was part of the job but back in 2000 - 2002 there was a lot of development and investiment in the infrastructure. Back then we were all goggle eyed at the tech we would have now in 2008 /09

Oh well, the basic tech is there... But no I am not living in a world where tech seamlessly makes my utopian life uber productive - where my wife is blonde and my perfect house cleans it's self and orders more beer. - Damn I should actually be quite bitter