Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.mobile.android > #21358

Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy?

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

"nospam" <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in message 
news:250720152045033422%nospam@nospam.invalid...
> In article <d1cr4jFfpivU1@mid.individual.net>, Frank Slootweg
> <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
>
>> > >   True, but that doesn't make it right for the receiver to pay, just
>> > > because the caller wants to call hir.
>> >
>> > sure it does, because the receiver chose to use his/her cellphone.
>>
>>   They didn't 'choose' their cellphone. 'choose' implies there *is* a
>> choice, most of the time there isn't.
>
> yes they did.
>
>>   But - once again - you managed to dodge and divert: The *point* is
>> that the *caller* decided to call the receiver. The receiver had no
>> choice in the matter. (And don't bother to come up with your bull that
>> the receiver could choose to not answer the call.)
>
> the caller should pay the same rate, regardless of the recipient's
> choice of phone.

Completely and utterly mindlessly silly as only
you can be completely and utterly mindlessly silly.

And that was never the case with landline calls
and isn't the case with voip calls either even in the
most fucked system in the entire fucking planet.

> if the recipient uses a cellphone then they
> should pay associated airtime. not the caller.

Wrong, as always. And doesn't happen with voip calls.

>> > > > > In Europe, it seems, in general, that to RECEIVE a phone call on
>> > > > > a local SIM card doesn't cost them anything on a cell phone.
>> > > >
>> > > > however, there's a surcharge for calling a mobile phone versus a
>> > > > landline.
>> > >
>> > >   It's not a surcharge, but different pricing.
>> >
>> > word games.
>>
>>   No, a surcharge is a *seperate*  extra cost.
>
> word games.

You never could bullshit your way out of a wet paper bag.

> at the end of the day, it costs more to call a mobile number.

Not anymore it doesn't.

> whether that charge is itemized or not
> makes no difference whatsoever.

Wrong, as always.

>> > there is no reason to burden the caller to find out what type of phone
>> > the recipient is using.
>>
>>   That 'burden' only exists in the US. In the rest of the world, there
>> *is* no such burden, because it's clear from the number whether or not
>> it's a mobile phone number.

> which discriminates against those who use a mobile
> number because callers will have to pay more.

Plenty of times they pay no more than if it's a landline.

> that puts businesses at a disadvantage if they want to publish a mobile
> number, such as a repairman who is always on the road fixing things.

Stiff shit. They are free to divert the call from their landline to their 
mobile.

> in the usa, everyone is on an even playing field.

Like hell they are with landline calls, and voip calls.

> a customer is just as likely to call joe's fixit cellphone as he
> is bob's fixit landline because there is no additional fees.

And plenty are selective about which calls they answer because they
don't want to pay for a call that may be no use to them whatever.

> with mobile costing extra, a potential customer
> might choose to call bob first because it's cheaper.

Fred is free to divert his landline to his mobile and pay the cost of that.

>> > if the recipient uses a phone that incurs additional charges they
>> > should be the one to pay them.
>>
>>   And they do, if these charges are beyond the control/knowledge of the
>> caller.
>>
>>   In the US, the caller is protected, because they can't reasonably know
>> what's on the other end.

> exactly how it should be.

Wrong, as always.

> why should the caller pay for the type of phone the recipient uses?

Because he is the one who decides to make the call, fool.

> they should not.

Wrong, as always.

>>   In the rest of the world, that problem does not exists, so the caller
>> is charged according to *hir* choice.

> which puts anyone on a mobile phone at a disadvantage.

Like hell it does. They are free to divert their landline to their mobile
if they  don't like the fact that some wont call mobile numbers.

> the usa does it properly. everyone else got it *wrong*.

Yeah, yeah, the entire world is mad, except me. 

Back to comp.mobile.android | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2015-07-22 20:22 +0000
  Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-22 18:54 -0400
    Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-23 10:20 +1000
      Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-23 14:16 +1000
        Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-23 01:08 -0400
          Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-23 15:18 +1000
          Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> - 2015-07-26 10:00 +0000
    Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2015-07-23 18:46 +0000
      Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-25 20:45 -0400
        Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-26 14:14 +1000
        Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-27 17:33 -0400
          Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-28 08:41 +1000
          Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? Michael Eyd <invalid@eyd.de> - 2015-07-28 10:36 +0200
          Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2015-07-28 20:29 +0000
            Re: Who pays for a phone call to a US phone number, italy to italy? madodel ptd News <madodel@ptd.net> - 2015-07-29 13:55 -0400

csiph-web