|
Cellular forums Home > Archive > Cingular cell phone service > April 2007 > EU Officials OK Cap on Roaming Charges
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
EU Officials OK Cap on Roaming Charges
|
|
|
|
| DevilsPGD 2007-04-14, 10:33 pm |
| In message < 1322ks8f32cv05a@corp
.supernews.com> Jer <gdunn@airmail.ten>
wrote:
>http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory?id=3033966
| The industry committee voted for the retail price ceiling to take effect
| after the regulation is approved and apply automatically to all
| customers, unless they opt for a package with higher roaming fees that
| would be, for instance, compensated for by a lower tariff for domestic
| calls.
That looks like a loophole waiting to happen...
Unless there is a cap on domestic calls, the solution is simple, raise
domestic calls to $100/minute, and offer roaming at the previous rates
in exchange for the current domestic rates.
--
Always remember you're unique, just like everyone else.
| |
| John Navas 2007-04-17, 10:33 am |
| On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 17:13:23 -0600, DevilsPGD
< spam_narf_spam@crazy
hat.net> wrote in
< 9fn2235vqc9jevi9bu61
vll922uudvanqs@4ax.com>:
>In message < 1322ks8f32cv05a@corp
.supernews.com> Jer <gdunn@airmail.ten>
>wrote:
>
>
>| The industry committee voted for the retail price ceiling to take effect
>| after the regulation is approved and apply automatically to all
>| customers, unless they opt for a package with higher roaming fees that
>| would be, for instance, compensated for by a lower tariff for domestic
>| calls.
>
>That looks like a loophole waiting to happen...
>
>Unless there is a cap on domestic calls, the solution is simple, raise
>domestic calls to $100/minute, and offer roaming at the previous rates
>in exchange for the current domestic rates.
Except that would wipe the carrier out in the market. What would keep
that from happening is brutal competition. Roaming rates are inflated
because the market doesn't pay much attention to them.
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/ Cingu...less_FA
Q>
| |
| DevilsPGD 2007-04-17, 3:33 pm |
| In message < 4do923hp976cbge7ata1
4ttc5p25kpfcrv@4ax.com> John Navas
< spamfilter1@navasgro
up.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 17:13:23 -0600, DevilsPGD
>< spam_narf_spam@crazy
hat.net> wrote in
>< 9fn2235vqc9jevi9bu61
vll922uudvanqs@4ax.com>:
>
>
>Except that would wipe the carrier out in the market. What would keep
>that from happening is brutal competition. Roaming rates are inflated
>because the market doesn't pay much attention to them.
How do you figure? The loophole plan would become the defacto standard
plan, since not many users would opt for the $100/minute option.
--
I'd give my right arm to be ambidextrous.
| |
| John Navas 2007-04-17, 3:33 pm |
| On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 11:51:15 -0600, DevilsPGD
< spam_narf_spam@crazy
hat.net> wrote in
< rf0a23ddbaciotua52j1
489t1sdncjvhnn@4ax.com>:
>In message < 4do923hp976cbge7ata1
4ttc5p25kpfcrv@4ax.com> John Navas
>< spamfilter1@navasgro
up.com> wrote:
>
>
>How do you figure? The loophole plan would become the defacto standard
>plan, since not many users would opt for the $100/minute option.
That would almost certainly run afoul of the EU and result in big fines.
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/ Cingu...less_FA
Q>
| |
| DevilsPGD 2007-04-17, 3:33 pm |
| In message < pd3a231fck402gujc6oh
319t05nk159v3e@4ax.com> John Navas
< spamfilter1@navasgro
up.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 11:51:15 -0600, DevilsPGD
>< spam_narf_spam@crazy
hat.net> wrote in
>< rf0a23ddbaciotua52j1
489t1sdncjvhnn@4ax.com>:
>
>
>That would almost certainly run afoul of the EU and result in big fines.
What part? Charging too much money? Or having almost everyone choose a
second plan?
--
I'd give my right arm to be ambidextrous.
| |
| John Navas 2007-04-17, 3:33 pm |
| On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 12:37:31 -0600, DevilsPGD
< spam_narf_spam@crazy
hat.net> wrote in
< ku4a23l2c59fdqqjalci
nq6osq8t4hmigj@4ax.com>:
>In message < pd3a231fck402gujc6oh
319t05nk159v3e@4ax.com> John Navas
>< spamfilter1@navasgro
up.com> wrote:
>
>
>What part? Charging too much money? Or having almost everyone choose a
>second plan?
Trying to evade the order. Unlike the USA (under Republicans at least),
the EU has smart and effective enforcement.
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/ Cingu...less_FA
Q>
| |
|
| John Navas wrote:
> Unlike the USA (under Republicans at least),
> the EU has smart and effective enforcement.
[snicker mode engaged]
Which is good as we in the U.S. have to deal with some pretty stupid laws.
| |
| John Navas 2007-04-18, 10:33 am |
| On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 22:19:16 GMT, DTC < no_spam@move_along_f
olks.foob>
wrote in <EJbVh.22740$PL.13262@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net>:
>John Navas wrote:
>
>[snicker mode engaged]
>
>Which is good as we in the U.S. have to deal with some pretty stupid laws.
Makes no sense not to enforce the good ones just because we also have
some stupid ones.
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/ Cingu...less_FA
Q>
| |
| DevilsPGD 2007-04-18, 10:33 pm |
| In message < 2bdc2315vsq06pikaqvu
j3pui5vo2a7o2h@4ax.com> John Navas
< spamfilter1@navasgro
up.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 22:19:16 GMT, DTC < no_spam@move_along_f
olks.foob>
>wrote in <EJbVh.22740$PL.13262@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net>:
>
>
>Makes no sense not to enforce the good ones just because we also have
>some stupid ones.
Who decides which ones are good ones and which ones are stupid ones?
--
I'd give my right arm to be ambidextrous.
|
|
|
|
|