Sign of what to come or BS

Davy

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1026783/Now-mobile-phone-users-charged-RECEIVE-calls-UK.html#comments

I think this is madness but its in other countries so if it was introduced to the Uk could nearly guarantee it would be here too.

Consumers could be charged to receive mobile phone calls when using handsets in the UK, according to industry insiders.

A system could be imposed on domestic calls similar to that for customers who take their handsets overseas and have to pay up to 19p a minute to receive a call.

The notion of being charged to take calls will shock many UK consumers. It is, however, the norm in the U.S. and some Asian countries, including China and Singapore, and could result in overall bills falling.

The levy could be imposed as a backlash by mobile phone providers to proposals from EU Telecoms commissioner Viviane Reding.

Ah-Watch

ya I'm just back from America and picked up a T Mobile flier the day before I came home and when I was unpacking I read that prepay customers are charged for receiving texts! I hope they don't introduce it-obviously- as I think their already making enough out of people. I spent €100 credit in May and only €10 and I can honestly say tht I don't really know where the €100 went to other than the €25 for usage in America!!

7.Ronaldo

I seriously doubt this is a sign of things to come.

The US operate that way due to there network infrastructure. It is completely different to everywhere else in the world.

It just wouldn't work over here. Networks try their best to reduce cost where possible to get more customers on their network. Charging for a service that has been free for years wouldn't be a good move.

Bluefrog

Saw an article recently in The Register about this too. If you ask me its posturing by the telcos to try to weaken Viviane Reding's position as she's already taken action on the ridiculous roaming costs they were imposing. Our own regulator could learn a thing or two about consumer advocacy from Ms Reding.

There can be little doubt though that serious and profound changes are on the horizon for the telcos. Radical changes in their revenue stream from data based services like VOIP and instant messaging are already taking hold with the availability of wi-fi on some phones and as these technologies come down in price and get more user friendly there is little doubt that the telcos are going to have to have a long hard think about how they get their money.

I think the only way they could conceivably pull off something like that here would be if they did it in unison. A unilateral move like that by a single provider would be commercial suicide. One has to wonder about the implications of them acting in concert this way in terms of competition which was surely the point of issuing multiple licenses in the first place.

It does surprise me that, so far, 3 are the only ones who seem to be doing any serious exploration of alternative models of operating. Perhaps it is a case of the ostrich sticking it's head in the sand.

elderlemon

well one of the reasons why this is the model in the U.S. is that when you call someone you don't know in advance that it is a mobile number so why should you bear the entire (higher) cost of the call. Rembmer that here we have 085/86/87 etc so we know its a mobile and therefore a higher charge.

In the U.S. if I am in Boston then my mobile is 1-617-nnn-nnnn and my home number is 1-617-nnn-nnnn. There is no distinction between the different systems or operators.

As for texts - yes this is totally screwed. U.S. operators didn't think texting was going to be a revenue generator at all and made (and are still making)very poor decisions in regards marketing and pricing.

I can't see it happening here. If it does I will be the first to jump ship to the operator that sticks with the current model.

failsafe

The reason for the difference in charging is because the networks in the states and Asia don't charge each other termination fees, they do here. So for example, if an O2 customer sends a text to a meteor customer, o2 pay meteor a 5c (e.g.) connection fee. What Viviane Reding was discussing/proposing was making all telco's reduce this interconnect fee.

In the example above, the benefit would be to allow O2 to offer texts to their customers at less than 5c. This is something they can't do now (without losing money) and the reason why most networks do offers to their own network (e.g. vodafone to vodafone, meteor to meteor free texts.)

The disadvantage the proposal would have on the example above, is that meteor would lose a large revenue stream (from inbound traffic), and articles like the one above consider that they may need to charge customers for the inbound traffic (received calls and texts) to substitute the loss of earnings that the EU decision could cause.