Re: Telstra launches SMS from fixed lines

[Rod Speed]

Brendon <no@way.man> wrote in message
news:4241503d$0$27629$61c65585@un-2park-reader-02.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au...
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote

>>> 30 Cents an SMS is a rip off

>> Not when you consider the cost of the payphones.

> A customer dosnt give a shit about the cost
> of the payphones, only the cost of using them.

The customer's shit is completely irrelevant to what needs
to be charged to make those payphones viable, fuckwit.

[Rod Speed]

"The Family" <someone@somewhere.com> wrote in message
news:42413b97@duster.adelaide.on.net...
> "Michael" <michael@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:z8a0e.8731$C7.6728@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>
>> "Simon VK3XEM" <usenet@vk3xem.net> wrote in message
>> news:423f7897$1_2@news.melbourne.pipenetworks.com. ..
>>> Giles wrote:
>>> >>>"Text messaging makes the home phone more versatile than ever
>>> >
>>> > before,"
>>> >
>>> >>>she said. "It follows the roll-out of hundreds of SMS-enabled
>>> >
>>> > public
>>> >
>>> >>>payphones across Australia."
>>> >>
>>> >>SMS payphones where it only costs 20c to send a message.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > In case you're interested - there's a new trial of 'interactive'
>>> > payphones in Sydney where SMS is charged at 30c.
>>> >
>>> > http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=46647
>>> >
>>> > Telstra trials interactive pay-phones
>>> > 11:48 AEDT Tue Mar 22 2005
>>> >
>>> > AP - Telecommunications giant Telstra has launched new generation
>>> > interactive public telephones in a bid to compete with the country's
>>> > increasing number of mobile phone users.
>>> >
>>> > The new pay phones feature colour touch screens and allow users to
>>> > access the Internet via a broadband connection. Text, e-mail, picture
>>> > and video messages all can be sent.
>>> >
>>> > Telstra currently owns about half of Australia's 65,000 pay phones,
>>> > from which about 1 million calls are made each day.
>>> >
>>> > Ten new interactive phones - which cost about $10,000 each - will be
>>> > tested over a 10-week period in Sydney's central business district.
>>> >
>>> > Internet access will cost $2 for 20 minutes, text messages are 30 cents
>>> > each, and video messages cost A$1.50. Local calls are the same as
>>> > conventional pay phones, 40 cents.
>>> >
>>> > Pay-phone use has declined over the past 10 years in Australia as more
>>> > people adopt mobile technology.
>>> >
>>> > customers to connect remotely to the Internet from their laptops when
>>> > near the phone.
>>>
>>> 30 Cents an SMS is a rip off and I wonder how long one of these
>>> interactive phones will last on the street?
>>
>> A rip off?
>>
>> What price do YOU currently pay for SMS, from your non-SMS capable grey
>> payphone?
>> Dickhead
>>
>
> Well, SMS from regular SMS payphones (ie the ones with upgraded firmware)
> costs 20c. So what is so special about these new payphones that justifies a
> 50% surcharge for SMS?

They're more expensive payphones, fuckwit.

[Rod Speed]

"The Family" <someone@somewhere.com> wrote in message
news:4241767d@duster.adelaide.on.net...
> "Michael" <michael@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:cpb0e.8863$C7.7773@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>
>> "The Family" <someone@somewhere.com> wrote in message
>> news:42413b97@duster.adelaide.on.net...
>>> "Michael" <michael@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>> news:z8a0e.8731$C7.6728@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>> >
>>> > "Simon VK3XEM" <usenet@vk3xem.net> wrote in message
>>> > news:423f7897$1_2@news.melbourne.pipenetworks.com. ..
>>> >> Giles wrote:
>>> >> >>>"Text messaging makes the home phone more versatile than ever
>>> >> >
>>> >> > before,"
>>> >> >
>>> >> >>>she said. "It follows the roll-out of hundreds of SMS-enabled
>>> >> >
>>> >> > public
>>> >> >
>>> >> >>>payphones across Australia."
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>SMS payphones where it only costs 20c to send a message.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > In case you're interested - there's a new trial of 'interactive'
>>> >> > payphones in Sydney where SMS is charged at 30c.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=46647
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Telstra trials interactive pay-phones
>>> >> > 11:48 AEDT Tue Mar 22 2005
>>> >> >
>>> >> > AP - Telecommunications giant Telstra has launched new generation
>>> >> > interactive public telephones in a bid to compete with the country's
>>> >> > increasing number of mobile phone users.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > The new pay phones feature colour touch screens and allow users to
>>> >> > access the Internet via a broadband connection. Text, e-mail, picture
>>> >> > and video messages all can be sent.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Telstra currently owns about half of Australia's 65,000 pay phones,
>>> >> > from which about 1 million calls are made each day.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Ten new interactive phones - which cost about $10,000 each - will be
>>> >> > tested over a 10-week period in Sydney's central business district.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Internet access will cost $2 for 20 minutes, text messages are 30
>> cents
>>> >> > each, and video messages cost A$1.50. Local calls are the same as
>>> >> > conventional pay phones, 40 cents.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Pay-phone use has declined over the past 10 years in Australia as
>> more
>>> >> > people adopt mobile technology.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > customers to connect remotely to the Internet from their laptops when
>>> >> > near the phone.
>>> >>
>>> >> 30 Cents an SMS is a rip off and I wonder how long one of these
>>> >> interactive phones will last on the street?
>>> >
>>> > A rip off?
>>> >
>>> > What price do YOU currently pay for SMS, from your non-SMS capable grey
>>> > payphone?
>>> > Dickhead
>>> >
>>>
>>> Well, SMS from regular SMS payphones (ie the ones with upgraded firmware)
>>> costs 20c. So what is so special about these new payphones that justifies
>> a
>>> 50% surcharge for SMS?
>>
>> Its THEIR product, THEY get to decide what they charge
>>
>> You get to like it or lump it.
>>
>> You arent paying anything for the "handset" or "service", so you get to pay
>> a higher premium on the message cost.
>> The phones are expensive as they are basically a mobile, payphone, and
>> internet kiosk in one

> In this case the customer has much more choice than simply liking or lumping.
> In particular, he decides what he'll pay. within limits.

And its unlikely that clowns so stupid that they are stuck with having
to send an SMS from a payphone will baulk at 30c over 20c, fuckwit.

> The market takes at least two to tango.

Pathetic, really. No surprise that you get to suck dicks.

> There's a heap of competition out there for SMS cents.

Not for the fools that dont have a mobile
phone with them to send SMS using, fuckwit.

Reams of your puerile shit flushed where it belongs.

[Michael]

"Brendon" <no@way.man> wrote in message
news:4241503d$0$27629$61c65585@un-2park-reader-02.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au...
> "Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:3a9fdjF6679t1U1@individual.net...
> > > 30 Cents an SMS is a rip off
> >
> > Not when you consider the cost of the payphones.
>
> A customer dosnt give a shit about the cost of the payphones, only the
cost
> of using them.

So they get to pay the 30c and use the SMS facility, or they get to buy a
mobile and pay 25c per SMS.
Their choice.

[Michael]

"The Family" <someone@somewhere.com> wrote in message
news:4241767d@duster.adelaide.on.net...
> "Michael" <michael@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:cpb0e.8863$C7.7773@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> >
> > "The Family" <someone@somewhere.com> wrote in message
> > news:42413b97@duster.adelaide.on.net...
> >> "Michael" <michael@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> news:z8a0e.8731$C7.6728@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> >> >
> >> > "Simon VK3XEM" <usenet@vk3xem.net> wrote in message
> >> > news:423f7897$1_2@news.melbourne.pipenetworks.com. ..
> >> >> Giles wrote:
> >> >> >>>"Text messaging makes the home phone more versatile than ever
> >> >> >
> >> >> > before,"
> >> >> >
> >> >> >>>she said. "It follows the roll-out of hundreds of SMS-enabled
> >> >> >
> >> >> > public
> >> >> >
> >> >> >>>payphones across Australia."
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>SMS payphones where it only costs 20c to send a message.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > In case you're interested - there's a new trial of 'interactive'
> >> >> > payphones in Sydney where SMS is charged at 30c.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=46647
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Telstra trials interactive pay-phones
> >> >> > 11:48 AEDT Tue Mar 22 2005
> >> >> >
> >> >> > AP - Telecommunications giant Telstra has launched new generation
> >> >> > interactive public telephones in a bid to compete with the
country's
> >> >> > increasing number of mobile phone users.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > The new pay phones feature colour touch screens and allow users to
> >> >> > access the Internet via a broadband connection. Text, e-mail,
> >> >> > picture
> >> >> > and video messages all can be sent.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Telstra currently owns about half of Australia's 65,000 pay
phones,
> >> >> > from which about 1 million calls are made each day.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Ten new interactive phones - which cost about $10,000 each - will
be
> >> >> > tested over a 10-week period in Sydney's central business
district.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Internet access will cost $2 for 20 minutes, text messages are 30
> > cents
> >> >> > each, and video messages cost A$1.50. Local calls are the same as
> >> >> > conventional pay phones, 40 cents.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Pay-phone use has declined over the past 10 years in Australia as
> > more
> >> >> > people adopt mobile technology.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > customers to connect remotely to the Internet from their laptops
> >> >> > when
> >> >> > near the phone.
> >> >>
> >> >> 30 Cents an SMS is a rip off and I wonder how long one of these
> >> >> interactive phones will last on the street?
> >> >
> >> > A rip off?
> >> >
> >> > What price do YOU currently pay for SMS, from your non-SMS capable
grey
> >> > payphone?
> >> > Dickhead
> >> >
> >>
> >> Well, SMS from regular SMS payphones (ie the ones with upgraded
firmware)
> >> costs 20c. So what is so special about these new payphones that
> >> justifies
> > a
> >> 50% surcharge for SMS?
> >
> > Its THEIR product, THEY get to decide what they charge
> >
> > You get to like it or lump it.
> >
> > You arent paying anything for the "handset" or "service", so you get to
> > pay
> > a higher premium on the message cost.
> > The phones are expensive as they are basically a mobile, payphone, and
> > internet kiosk in one
> >
>
> In this case the customer has much more choice than simply liking or
> lumping. In particular, he decides what he'll pay. within limits.

Thats exactly what "liking it or lumping it is".

Liking it - you pay the 30c and get the SMS
Lump it - you go without.

> The market takes at least two to tango.

There is no "tango" involved. no negotiation. 30c or piss orf

> There's a heap of competition out there for SMS cents. One bet I'd take
> anytime: That I could, within 3 minutes in a busy street, borrow a
> passer-by's mobile to send an SMS - and the passer-by would politely
decline
> my offer to pay 20c.
>
> So you see, Mikey, SMS can easily be free for me.

As if any passerby would lend a mobile to a freak like you
>
>

[Brendon]

"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3adroeF6alb7fU1@individual.net...

> The customer's shit is completely irrelevant to what needs
> to be charged to make those payphones viable, fuckwit.

A payphone wont be viable if no-one uses it due to the cost of using it
being high.

[Brendon]

"Michael" <michael@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:OGp0e.9454$C7.6843@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> So they get to pay the 30c and use the SMS facility, or they get to buy a
> mobile and pay 25c per SMS.

Easy to get a mobile plan where SMS is less than 25c, which makes the 30c
charge look even worse.

> Their choice.

Yep, and it dosnt take much to work out what the popular choice will be.

[Brendon]

"Michael" <michael@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:wLp0e.9461$C7.4674@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> There is no "tango" involved. no negotiation. 30c or piss orf

And you'll find that most people will just piss off and not pay the 30c,
making the return on these phones lower.

[Brendon]

"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3adrq2F67jm2sU1@individual.net...
> > Well, SMS from regular SMS payphones (ie the ones with upgraded
firmware)
> > costs 20c. So what is so special about these new payphones that
justifies a
> > 50% surcharge for SMS?
>
> They're more expensive payphones, fuckwit.

And the customer wont give a shit how much the phone costs, just how much
it's costs them to use.

Would people pay a higher cab fare because they were in a new falcon instead
of a 5 year old one? Dont think so, but by your logic they would.

[Michael]

"Brendon" <no@way.man> wrote in message
news:42426bb6$1$27631$61c65585@un-2park-reader-02.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au...
> "Michael" <michael@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:OGp0e.9454$C7.6843@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> > So they get to pay the 30c and use the SMS facility, or they get to buy
a
> > mobile and pay 25c per SMS.
>
> Easy to get a mobile plan where SMS is less than 25c, which makes the 30c
> charge look even worse.

Telstra would be more than happy for all to get mobile phones, better
revenue for them and they can get rid of a few more loss-making payphones

> > Their choice.
>
> Yep, and it dosnt take much to work out what the popular choice will be.

Yep, the SMS-enabled payphones will do nicely
>
>

[Michael]

"Brendon" <no@way.man> wrote in message
news:42426bb6$0$27631$61c65585@un-2park-reader-02.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au...
> "Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:3adroeF6alb7fU1@individual.net...
>
> > The customer's shit is completely irrelevant to what needs
> > to be charged to make those payphones viable, fuckwit.
>
> A payphone wont be viable if no-one uses it due to the cost of using it
> being high.

I hardly think that those who need to send SMS are going to baulk at 30c

[Michael]

"Brendon" <no@way.man> wrote in message
news:42426bb6$2$27631$61c65585@un-2park-reader-02.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au...
> "Michael" <michael@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:wLp0e.9461$C7.4674@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> > There is no "tango" involved. no negotiation. 30c or piss orf
>
> And you'll find that most people will just piss off and not pay the 30c,
> making the return on these phones lower.

I hardly think anyone will baulk at 30c

do you see people refusing to use payphones at 40c per local call when the
standard local call cost is 22c?
nope

[Michael]

"Brendon" <no@way.man> wrote in message
news:42426bb6$3$27631$61c65585@un-2park-reader-02.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au...
> "Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:3adrq2F67jm2sU1@individual.net...
> > > Well, SMS from regular SMS payphones (ie the ones with upgraded
> firmware)
> > > costs 20c. So what is so special about these new payphones that
> justifies a
> > > 50% surcharge for SMS?
> >
> > They're more expensive payphones, fuckwit.
>
> And the customer wont give a shit how much the phone costs, just how much
> it's costs them to use.
>
> Would people pay a higher cab fare because they were in a new falcon
instead
> of a 5 year old one? Dont think so, but by your logic they would.

Melbourne has peak taxis, they are only licensed to operate in peak hours,
like 12am-6am fri/sat/sun nights, or something like that, and the charge is
a 20% premium on normal costs

do people use them? of course they do

you pay a bit more for convenience.

[Charlie Wong]

On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 09:52:50 GMT, "Michael" <michael@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Telstra would be more than happy for all to get mobile phones, better
>revenue for them and they can get rid of a few more loss-making payphones

Isn't the cost of these "loss-making payphones" paid for under USO?

[Rod Speed]

Brendon <no@way.man> wrote in message
news:42426bb6$0$27631$61c65585@un-2park-reader-02.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au...
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote

>> The customer's shit is completely irrelevant to what needs
>> to be charged to make those payphones viable, fuckwit.

> A payphone wont be viable if no-one uses
> it due to the cost of using it being high.

Wont happen with 30c, fool.

Thats already about the cost of a voice, call and plenty obviously use them.

[Rod Speed]

"Charlie Wong" <willwasteyou@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:rf4541tecabbv7avq4m473cke857hn0n0u@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 09:52:50 GMT, "Michael" <michael@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>Telstra would be more than happy for all to get mobile phones, better
>>revenue for them and they can get rid of a few more loss-making payphones
>
> Isn't the cost of these "loss-making payphones" paid for under USO?

Nope.

[Rod Speed]

Brendon <no@way.man> wrote in message
news:42426bb6$2$27631$61c65585@un-2park-reader-02.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au...
> Michael <michael@yahoo.com> wrote

>> There is no "tango" involved. no negotiation. 30c or piss orf

> And you'll find that most people will just piss off and not pay the 30c,

We'll see.

> making the return on these phones lower.

We'll see.

[Rod Speed]

Brendon <no@way.man> wrote in message
news:42426bb6$3$27631$61c65585@un-2park-reader-02.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au...
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote

>>> Well, SMS from regular SMS payphones (ie the ones with
>>> upgraded firmware) costs 20c. So what is so special about
>>> these new payphones that justifies a 50% surcharge for SMS?

>> They're more expensive payphones, fuckwit.

> And the customer wont give a shit how much the
> phone costs, just how much it's costs them to use.

And they keep paying 40c for local calls from payphones, fuckwit.

> Would people pay a higher cab fare because they were in a new falcon
> instead of a 5 year old one? Dont think so, but by your logic they would.

Presumably you actually are that stupid.

[Michael]

"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3agh66F675ji0U1@individual.net...
>
> "Charlie Wong" <willwasteyou@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:rf4541tecabbv7avq4m473cke857hn0n0u@4ax.com...
> > On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 09:52:50 GMT, "Michael" <michael@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >>Telstra would be more than happy for all to get mobile phones, better
> >>revenue for them and they can get rid of a few more loss-making
payphones
> >
> > Isn't the cost of these "loss-making payphones" paid for under USO?
>
> Nope.


Wrong

[Michael]

"Charlie Wong" <willwasteyou@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:rf4541tecabbv7avq4m473cke857hn0n0u@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 09:52:50 GMT, "Michael" <michael@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >Telstra would be more than happy for all to get mobile phones, better
> >revenue for them and they can get rid of a few more loss-making payphones
>
> Isn't the cost of these "loss-making payphones" paid for under USO?

And who contributes most to USO? Telstra.