Verizon increases SMS Rates

[SampSon]

I see that basically no one in this thread has a any idea of the internal workings of telcos. Apparently they are just behemoths that sit there, rake in the money and do nothing but pick their noses.

I'd like to take this space to remind everyone that a lot of the bullshit terms we agree to everyday will not actually hold up in court. Companies like to make a bunch of sh|t up in their terms but if certain things were actually challenged they would be thrown out.

Thoes companies have much more resources than anyone on this forum. They can easily drag it out just enough to make it hurt your wallet, while their retained lawyers file their nails.
If you're willing to spend thousands of dollars just to save yourself a couple hundred, then go for it.

I didn't know anyone was still on analog network. It's all digital now, it doesn't matter if you're talking or sending sms message, it's all zeros and ones.

The majority of cell networks in the country are still analog I believe. Digital channels still transmit over FM. The digital networks are primarily concentrated in metropolitan areas.

As for the rate changes, the rest of the providers will follow suit. Some will offer a discount for $.10/msg, what a deal! Do you think that with the amount of people requesting cellular service, and the networks constantly expanding, that prices will remain consistant forever, or will go down?

If you're really that strapped that a $.05/msg increase will break your bank, mabey you should consider getting a better job, or working out a better budget. Nickel and diming it may be, but no one is forcing anybody into purchasing their services.

 

[Inspector Jihad]

^^^I should still be able to get out of the contract right? After all, it is a contract, which they did not hold up.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: Inspector Jihad
^^^I should still be able to get out of the contract right? After all, it is a contract, which they did not hold up.

How many text messages do you send per month?

 

[Inspector Jihad]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: Inspector Jihad
^^^I should still be able to get out of the contract right? After all, it is a contract, which they did not hold up.

How many text messages do you send per month?

about 50 or so. i have a plan for 300 msgs. but still, say i go over 300 msgs, then I'd have to pay 15 cents instead of 10. Now you can say thats absurd or whatever and I agree it is, but I would like to take advantage of the fine print for once.

Also, they stuck my parents with this 2 year contract with some obviously hidden conditions. The lady at the booth even admitted to it.

In the end though, it is a contract and they arent keeping up their end of it.

 

[chrisms]

Hey, .15 cents per message is CHEAP!! Why are you all complaining LOL!!!!!!!!!11111oneone

 

[OS]

i hope someone starts a class action lawsuit.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: Inspector Jihad

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: Inspector Jihad
^^^I should still be able to get out of the contract right? After all, it is a contract, which they did not hold up.

How many text messages do you send per month?

about 50 or so. i have a plan for 300 msgs. but still, say i go over 300 msgs, then I'd have to pay 15 cents instead of 10. Now you can say thats absurd or whatever and I agree it is, but I would like to take advantage of the fine print for once.

Also, they stuck my parents with this 2 year contract with some obviously hidden conditions. The lady at the booth even admitted to it.

In the end though, it is a contract and they arent keeping up their end of it.

Well, don't get your hopes up.

 

[Inspector Jihad]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: Inspector Jihad

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: Inspector Jihad
^^^I should still be able to get out of the contract right? After all, it is a contract, which they did not hold up.

How many text messages do you send per month?

about 50 or so. i have a plan for 300 msgs. but still, say i go over 300 msgs, then I'd have to pay 15 cents instead of 10. Now you can say thats absurd or whatever and I agree it is, but I would like to take advantage of the fine print for once.

Also, they stuck my parents with this 2 year contract with some obviously hidden conditions. The lady at the booth even admitted to it.

In the end though, it is a contract and they arent keeping up their end of it.

Well, don't get your hopes up.

yeah i know. i'm gonna try though

 

[Koing]

You guys get charged to receive text messages from other networks? wtf?!

We get charged to send. 10p per message. I have 100 in my calling plan on one phone and 500 on the other one. Not that I have used any of the 500 on that phone, it has 800minutes which is nice. We get shagged by poorer network allowances in England...

Koing

 

[Soybomb]

I think I've been paying $.25 for sending text messages in the us for quite some time with verizon....

I hate cell carreries, talk about being nickled and dimed to death.

They treat their customers like absolute crap, which most carriers probably do, but Verizon is by far the worst for nickle and diming the sh!t out of you.

My favorite is the $10 to move your address book to your new phone. That should be a courtesy service for remaining a customer.

 

[jersiq]

Originally posted by: fleshconsumed

Originally posted by: jersiq
Large assumption concerning whether or not a voice call and an SMS have the same backhaul from the perspective of the provider.

A voice call does not equal a text message.

I didn't know anyone was still on analog network. It's all digital now, it doesn't matter if you're talking or sending sms message, it's all zeros and ones.

Considering you don't even know what "backhaul" is, (evident by your post referring to analog being a backhaul network), pardon me if I take exception to your "statistical" analysis.

-If you still hold to the notion that a voice call is X amount of bytes, please refer to an article on EVRC. You see the interesting this about phone conversations is that you are only really talking about 50% of the time. The rest of the time the CODEC can ramp down to a lower rate, thus sending less ones and zeros over that digital network.

-Analog is still alive and mandated by the FCC to remain in place until 2008, for the 850 mHz carriers. The PCS band (that's 1900 mHz) never had analog, as the infrastructure investment at the time would have been too great.

-Again, I implore you to test your findings. Find out what the relative cost between a voice and SMSC platform are. I think you may find some interesting things. Call Lucent or Nortel (Nortel works with Motorola in CDMA environments), and get some prices. Find out how many call legs are available on a 14-wide DS0 packet pipe, and comparatively rate the throughput of an SMSC, for the same volume of calls, bit-for-bit, while maintaining interoperability with other carriers.

-Guess what, the companies that provide the infrastructure for companies like Verizon Wireless, over a period of time will start charging more. (that whole inflation thing) Are you telling me that if AMD raised their prices, you would call Newegg a horrible company for charging you more? Last I checked it is an FCC rule that a infrastructure provider cannot also be a service provider, so it's not as if they can just tell the infrastructure provider to go take a long walk off a short pier, VZW will make their own hardware. They are stuck with the only providers available.

 

[Xyclone]

My plan comes with 100 free TXT's for each phone each month. It's enough for me. Most people just call me, they'll only text if I don't pick up my phone.

 

[chambersc]

This is an awesome way for someone to get out their contract! All cell phone companies have a "get out of contract free (with no ETF)" clause that says if they raise rates you get an out.

 

[oCxTiTaN]

Originally posted by: Rock Hydra
Heh, doesn't affect me I guess since I have a plan that covers unlimited In Texting and up to 500 other text messages for $15 a month.

have the same plan, only costs me $5 though cuz I locked it in a while ago

 

[Raduque]

Originally posted by: getbush

I'd like to add that if raduque posts again in this thread he agrees to let me garnish a portion of his punk phone retailer wages as I see fit from here until all eternity. Thems the terms.

This contract is null and void because I'm not a retailer.

Originally posted by: QueBert
Thought I would pass along some info I read on howards forums, I don't have the link *sorry* but the dude who posted said if you have the unlimited data plan on a PDA/Smartphone and call Verizon CS you can get 300 text messages a month for free. I know a lot of people who pay the 4.99 for texting, could save a few people a few bucks.

I haven't heard anything about this, and I haven't seen any special codes that become available when a customer is on an unlimited data plan, I'll have to look into it.

 

[alkemyst]

only for those on a non-messaging plan...personally I think that is fair.

If you are raping a loop-hole expect it to be closed.

Unfortunately for Verizon, if they stated messaging rates in the original contract they lose.

 

[Raduque]

Originally posted by: alkemyst
only for those on a non-messaging plan...personally I think that is fair.

If you are raping a loop-hole expect it to be closed.

Unfortunately for Verizon, if they stated messaging rates in the original contract they lose.

As it's already been addressed, the contract states vzw has the right to change it at any time with a notice. As for the part where it says "adverse affect", if you were OK with paying say $50 for 500 text messages a month (as opposed to an unlimited/500 bundle for $10), why aren't you OK with paying $25 more? Considering the $50 is $40 more then you needed to pay in the first place.

As far as I can see, the "adverse effect" only comes in when you're doing massive amounts of text overages or usage without a plan, and it's really not an adverse effect, because we do offer the bundles. It'd be different if there were no bundles offered, IMO.

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: Raduque

Originally posted by: alkemyst
only for those on a non-messaging plan...personally I think that is fair.

If you are raping a loop-hole expect it to be closed.

Unfortunately for Verizon, if they stated messaging rates in the original contract they lose.

As it's already been addressed, the contract states vzw has the right to change it at any time with a notice. As for the part where it says "adverse affect", if you were OK with paying say $50 for 500 text messages a month (as opposed to an unlimited/500 bundle for $10), why aren't you OK with paying $25 more? Considering the $50 is $40 more then you needed to pay in the first place.

As far as I can see, the "adverse effect" only comes in when you're doing massive amounts of text overages or usage without a plan, and it's really not an adverse effect, because we do offer the bundles. It'd be different if there were no bundles offered, IMO.

I am not sure why you quoted me, but your post makes no sense. If anyone was already paying $40 more for the non-exclusive messageing than the full package; they deserve to get further raped.

 

[thomsbrain]

texting is already the biggest ripoff currently being sold. it might represent the highest cost per unit of data transmission of all time, for any device.

each message much be equivilent to no more than a millisecond of actual call audio. and the data isn't even time-sensitive. messages can and occasionally do get delivered minutes or hours after being sent.

i've even started getting spam on text messages. i pay 10 cents each time some fvcktard tries to sell me something.

 

[Raduque]

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: Raduque

Originally posted by: alkemyst
only for those on a non-messaging plan...personally I think that is fair.

If you are raping a loop-hole expect it to be closed.

Unfortunately for Verizon, if they stated messaging rates in the original contract they lose.

As it's already been addressed, the contract states vzw has the right to change it at any time with a notice. As for the part where it says "adverse affect", if you were OK with paying say $50 for 500 text messages a month (as opposed to an unlimited/500 bundle for $10), why aren't you OK with paying $25 more? Considering the $50 is $40 more then you needed to pay in the first place.

As far as I can see, the "adverse effect" only comes in when you're doing massive amounts of text overages or usage without a plan, and it's really not an adverse effect, because we do offer the bundles. It'd be different if there were no bundles offered, IMO.

I am not sure why you quoted me, but your post makes no sense. If anyone was already paying $40 more for the non-exclusive messageing than the full package; they deserve to get further raped.

I quoted you mainly because of the "messaging rates in contract" thing.

Basically I'm saying, if you're on a text bundle, stop bitching. If you're not on one, stop bitching and get a package, because you're paying too much.

 

[GeekDrew]

Originally posted by: Soybomb
My favorite is the $10 to move your address book to your new phone. That should be a courtesy service for remaining a customer.

I can *almost* see that, just because it takes the support rep a few minutes to do it. You can do it for free on *most* phones, on their website.

 

[fleshconsumed]

Originally posted by: jersiq
Considering you don't even know what "backhaul" is, (evident by your post referring to analog being a backhaul network), pardon me if I take exception to your "statistical" analysis.

-If you still hold to the notion that a voice call is X amount of bytes, please refer to an article on EVRC. You see the interesting this about phone conversations is that you are only really talking about 50% of the time. The rest of the time the CODEC can ramp down to a lower rate, thus sending less ones and zeros over that digital network.

-Analog is still alive and mandated by the FCC to remain in place until 2008, for the 850 mHz carriers. The PCS band (that's 1900 mHz) never had analog, as the infrastructure investment at the time would have been too great.

-Again, I implore you to test your findings. Find out what the relative cost between a voice and SMSC platform are. I think you may find some interesting things. Call Lucent or Nortel (Nortel works with Motorola in CDMA environments), and get some prices. Find out how many call legs are available on a 14-wide DS0 packet pipe, and comparatively rate the throughput of an SMSC, for the same volume of calls, bit-for-bit, while maintaining interoperability with other carriers.

-Guess what, the companies that provide the infrastructure for companies like Verizon Wireless, over a period of time will start charging more. (that whole inflation thing) Are you telling me that if AMD raised their prices, you would call Newegg a horrible company for charging you more? Last I checked it is an FCC rule that a infrastructure provider cannot also be a service provider, so it's not as if they can just tell the infrastructure provider to go take a long walk off a short pier, VZW will make their own hardware. They are stuck with the only providers available.

Oh no, you know a fancy word backhaul. Backhaul does not change a thing, same backhaul that connects voice connection will be used to transmit sms.

Quick google shows that EVRC-B operates from 1.2Kbps to 9.6Kbps, take average and that's 5Kbps. I know it's not going to take 9.6Kbps all the time because it like most of the newer codecs reduce data transfer if they detect silence, i.e person not speaking, but since you speak when you call it's reasonable to assume 5Kbps average data transfer rate (even if EVRC-B is aiming at 2.4Kbps).

Ok, I missed hardware part, you win that part.

As for inflation... Right, so 3% yearly inflation somehow justifies 50% raise in sms cost?

Nothing is changed. Sms messaging still remains one of the biggest ripoffs.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: fleshconsumed

Nothing is changed. Sms messaging still remains one of the biggest ripoffs.

We're talking about something that is about as far from necessity as you can get. Is the price justified by the cost of the product? No. Neither is a $1.59 fountain soda or a $3 cup of coffee, but people pay the price they're asking. Why? Because they want to. If Verizon can raise the price of SMS to $.15 a message and people still use it, why should they sell it for less?

 

[Inspector Jihad]

its a ****** contract

 

[jersiq]

Oh no, you know a fancy word backhaul. Backhaul does not change a thing, same backhaul that connects voice connection will be used to transmit sms.

Ok, I missed hardware part, you win that part.

You still aren't getting it. You cannot compare a voice call to a text message.
Similarly, you can't compare a EVDO call to a voice call.

The backhaul occurs at the switching office. The channel element used in the air interface (either for voice or 1X-Data) from the cell site is virtual. There is a physical chip, but the channel assignments are virtual. That was the big improvement in CDMA from an IS-95 network.