123 Votes

Avatar forLeo

First buzzed by: Leo

About those text message fees...

Remember when you used to pay a dime for a text message... or maybe even a nickel? And now you likely pay 20 cents a pop, coming and going. ... » Full Story on Yahoo! Tech
Leo

Some competition would be nice. I thought we deregulated this so we could benefit from capitalism, not from corporate monopolies. Well, that's a lie, I didn't really believe that.

posted Jan 6, 2009 |
+5
Reply

not a surprise, if your going to complain about the price of text messaging, start complaining about the price of health care, or complain about how long it took senator Herb Kohl took to figure this all out since text messaging was around forever now i'm assuming it took awhile. We all know it's f***** up, it's all on how much these guys are lining the senators pocket to shut up. Obviously verizon, at &t and the rest of the phone company didn't like him or else he'd stop his little reasearch a long time ago.

posted Jan 6, 2009 |
+4
Reply

I think this is an excellent story. It's about time we really knew what it costs the cell phone companies for texting. Almost nothing....it really irritates me that something that costs them almost nothing costs me $20 a month. It's all about greed, these companies will never make enough money to satisfy them. I just hope that maybe by blowing the lid off of this issue, we the consumer will see pricing that reflects actual cost to supplier + small profit.

posted Jan 6, 2009 |
+3
Reply

Texters are retarded. The people who text will not understand this article. May the "Economic Crisis" destroy them all!!

posted Jan 6, 2009 |
-6
Reply

The prices for all the the cellular services are outrageous. You can buy a 1000 minute simm card at 7/11 overseas for about 5 bucks; pop it in your phone and off you go. The U.S. market has a huge scam going with packaging the phone device into the "calling plan" and "contract". What a rip off!!

posted Jan 6, 2009 |
+4
Reply

Its about time people started learning how we are being ripped off. "Long distance" phone charges also fit into that category as well.

posted Jan 6, 2009 |
+3
Reply

This is just more big corporate at work, paying off congress to pass law to protect them. Whether is to make it easier for lenders to get their money, prevent customers from suing insurance companies, putting tarrifs on foreign raw goods, to subsidizing big farms. That's what 8 years of republican rule does to a country. Always on the side of big business.

posted Jan 6, 2009 |
+3
Reply

Um... They are in business to MAKE money people!

People buy things all the time at jacked up prices that cost barely anything to make. So what'd the big deal?

I mean you're just wasting braincells even thinking about it- find something better to do already!
-- Don't use the service if you don't like paying for it!

posted Jan 6, 2009 |
-3
Reply

You guys are a bunch of whiners. Just because it doesn’t cost anything the phone companies for txt it doesn’t mean they have to give it away for free (if you found $1000 on a street, would you give it away for free? it didn’t cost you anything to find it). It’s the basics of economy/capitalism: they provide service, you pay for it. If you don’t like the price, then don’t text, nobody is forcing you to pay $20/month. I’m not too happy to pay $15 for 1500 sms, but I’ll survive for now.

Now, if the companies broke a law or did not provide the service we paid for or there was a deception, then yes they should be punished for it. Recently a multimedia message never arrived to me from a Verizon user (I use AT&T); resending the message a few days later took 6hrs to be received on my phone. One (or both) carriers are at fault, they will hear about this. Once a while a txt sms takes between 30min -60min to be delivered from AT&T to Verizon.

posted Jan 6, 2009 |
-3
Reply
Bob

I really don't mind paying for messages I send. But why pay to receive them? I think they're dipping in the well twice there; sending 0.20 receiving 0.20 with my math that's 40 cents for one message that doesn't cost them anything. Plus, I keep getting messages from unknown sources that I don't request but I'm still getting charged for them.

posted Jan 6, 2009 |
0
Reply

I think this is outrageous!!
Why on Earth would the carriers inflate prices for sending text messages, when there is no inflation in costs to them? I think it is a greedy move by the carriers, taking advantage of the market, and maximizing personal profits. And especially in this economy!!

Something should be done...

posted Jan 6, 2009 |
+3
Reply

I think this is outrageous!!
Why on Earth would the carriers inflate prices for sending text messages, when there is no inflation in costs to them? I think it is a greedy move by the carriers, taking advantage of the market, and maximizing personal profits. And especially in this economy!!

Something should be done...

posted Jan 6, 2009 |
+1
Reply

When the wireless age hits everybody jumped on board. Something should be done! STOP BUYING THE DAMN things.. Remember, when??? $99.00 phone (paid for) and 19.95 a month. No service fees, no activation fees and it was month to month, no yearly or 2 year contracts. This is no different than the gas prices.. You stop using it the price will come down!

posted Jan 6, 2009 |
0
Reply

This is not Fish or Cut Bait Time.

That is what is being asked.

If the fish do not bite, then the bait changes. That means they stop supplying the service. Not that they lower the prices. That is why a Boycott of the service would NOT work.

posted Jan 6, 2009 |
0
Reply

Now as for the prices.

This stuff was paid for many times over when the systems were installed 11 or 12 years ago with surcharges to cover the expenses to install the systems in the first place. This is like the Telecomm charges that were just recently repealed by Congress that no longer were technically being used for what they were written to provide, they kept being sent to other processes and projects by Congress.

That is exactly what the Telecomms are doing now. They are continuing the charges that have been forever on the bills and jacking them up. When the original reason for their existence has been many times over paid for and this is all pure profit and not going to cover anything other than a bloated support system that has many times more workers than it really needs to have.

posted Jan 6, 2009 |
0
Reply
Post Comment

Want to post a comment?

Just sign in and you'll be good to go

New User? Sign Up | Sign In