brian@apt.bungi.com (Brian Litzinger) (10/30/90)
My cellular phone was parked in one spot for two days out of my
standard service area. I made several calls each day, and I knew that
my phone was roaming.
I had heard about daily service charges of $2 per day in some areas.
I checked my roaming rate chart, and there was no daily roaming charge
in the area that I was in.
Well, the bill and apparently the truth has now arrived. I don't so
much mind the $2.00 per day charge, but two $2.00 per day charges per
day?
I asked my celluar carrier about the $2.00 per day charge when my
chart said they were no per day charges in that area. They responded
that I should have dialed *611 and gotten the information that was
accurate for the particular minute is was planning to dial during 8-).
Now what about the two $2.00 per day day charges?
In my bill they look like:
xxx-xxx-xxxx: ROAMER CALL: Sacramento, CA: MCCAW CELLUALR COMM
PLACE & NUMBER DATE TIME OTHER TAX TOTAL
DAILY CHRG 001-29 - Jul 29 12:00A 2.00 .02 2.02
...
xxx-xxx-xxxx: ROAMER CALL: Stockton, CA: MCCAW CELLUALR COMM
PLACE & NUMBER DATE TIME OTHER TAX TOTAL
DAILY CHRG 002-33 - Jul 29 12:00A 2.00 .02 2.02
...
My phone didn't budge an inch during that day. Also, about
half the calls I placed and was billed for failed to go through.
So what is the deal? Do I pay?
I can't wait till they have about 40 different services in the same
area so my roaming charge will be $80 a day! 8-)
<> Brian Litzinger @ APT Technology Inc., San Jose, CA
<> brian@apt.bungi.com {apple,sun,pyramid}!daver!apt!brian
<> Disclaimer: Above are my opinions and probably wrong.couric@mcgp1.uucp (Carl Couric) (11/02/90)
In article <14176@accuvax.nwu.edu> brian@apt.bungi.com (Brian Litzinger) writes: >My cellular phone was parked in one spot for two days out of my >standard service area. I made several calls each day, and I knew that >my phone was roaming. And so did McCaw :-) . You were using our network. You are not a normal customer and we have to verify you against your home system. This costs us in computer time/switch time. >I had heard about daily service charges of $2 per day in some areas. That's what we charge to set you up for the day into our switch. >Well, the bill and apparently the truth has now arrived. I don't so >much mind the $2.00 per day charge, but two $2.00 per day charges each >day? We have to verify every 24 hours. Let's say you MOVED to the area and didn't want to pay your previous carrier. We sure don't want to get stuck with the bill, would you ;-) . >I asked my celluar carrier about the $2.00 per day charge when my >chart said they were no per day charges in that area. They responded >that I should have dialed *611 and gotten the information that was >accurate for the particular minute is was planning to dial during 8-). True, If you ever have a question hit 611. It is free (ie: we don't charge), because the information to use our network should be free. >My phone didn't budge an inch during that day. Also, about >half the calls I placed and was billed for failed to go through. >So what is the deal? Do I pay? If you do have a problem PLEASE call the Cellular One local to you. If they can help, they will. You could also call down to the McCaw Cellular One and see if the charges should stand. I know that here in Florida, McCaw does not charge for incomplete calls, busy, or no answers. That's nice considering you're using the radio spectrum to find out if the number you want to talk to is available. >I can't wait till they have about 40 different services in the same >area so my roaming charge will be $80 a day! 8-) Lets see, with just two carriers per area, you would have to scan AB (please!), and if you were in a plane, you just might do it! 8-). Do note that when the snow birds come down, they usually register with us instead of paying the $2 a day. They also get a cheaper rate compared to the roam rate. You're using another carrier's system, and as such, that carrier is providing you a service as quickly as possible. We verify you against your home system (and that network is not free!). So, $2 a day is not to much if you really think about it. Hope this helps... Carl Couric VAX systems manager Florida Cellular One (McCaw Corp). (305) 792-2355 x543
kaufman@neon.stanford.edu (Marc T. Kaufman) (11/03/90)
In article <14237@accuvax.nwu.edu> couric@mcgp1.uucp writes: >McCaw does not charge for incomplete calls, busy, or no >answers. That's nice considering you're using the radio spectrum to >find out if the number you want to talk to is available. Great. What a fine, generous attitude. I suppose when I dial New York from my home near San Francisco, I am *NOT* using radio spectrum or system resources to find out if the number I want to talk to is available. Bah! This just reinforces my decision NOT to get a cellular phone. They're just like COCOTs, but they cost more. Marc Kaufman (kaufman@Neon.stanford.edu)
CRW@icf.hrb.com (Craig R. Watkins) (11/05/90)
In article <14176@accuvax.nwu.edu>, brian@apt.bungi.com (Brian Litzinger) writes: > I asked my celluar carrier about the $2.00 per day charge when my > chart said they were no per day charges in that area. They responded > that I should have dialed *611 and gotten the information that was > accurate for the particular minute is was planning to dial during 8-). I was amused to find roaming charges on my bill for Philadelphia once, and no charge for any calls. It seems that I had made a (free) call to (*)611 while changing planes which invoked the roam charge. I know I called and complained about such a silly concept but I don't recall how far I got. If you have to ask how much it costs, then you had better be able to afford it. Craig R. Watkins Internet: CRW@ICF.HRB.COM HRB Systems, Inc. Bitnet: CRW%HRB@PSUECL.Bitnet +1 814 238-4311 UUCP: ...!psuvax1!hrbicf!crw [Moderator's Note: That's why I fully support the concept of learning to program your own phone, and getting accounts on many systems. PAT]
flak@mcgp1.uucp (Dan Flak) (11/07/90)
Dear Brian,
I read your article in comp.dcom.telecom, and have forwarded a copy of
it to the Manager of National Customer Care here at McCaw Cellular
Communicattions Headquarters. Obviously, the experience you had is not
something we would like to have happen to our customers.
We would like to correct your specific problem, and also get from you
more specific information so we can keep this type of problem from
occurring to others in the future.
Either call or E-mail me with a telephone number at which you would
like to be contacted, and I will forward it to the customer care
representative who is handling your case.
Dan Flak - McCaw Cellular Communications Inc., 201 Elliot Ave W.,
Suite 105, Seattle, Wa 98119, 206-286-4355, (usenet: nwnexus!mcgp1!flak)couric@mcgp1.uucp (Carl Couric) (11/07/90)
In article <14279@accuvax.nwu.edu> kaufman@neon.stanford.edu (Marc T. Kaufman) writes: >In article <14237@accuvax.nwu.edu> couric@mcgp1.uucp writes: >>McCaw does not charge for incomplete calls, busy, or no >>answers. That's nice considering you're using the radio spectrum to >>find out if the number you want to talk to is available. >Great. What a fine, generous attitude. I suppose when I dial New >York from my home near San Francisco, I am *NOT* using radio spectrum >or system resources to find out if the number I want to talk to is >available. Yes, you are! In fact, It is a generous attitude. Neither the long distance company OR McCaw charge you. You are correct in that calling New York will use Various radio spectrum, either Via Microwave or Sattlelite. I don't mean to come off sounding harsh or rude. I just want to say that the cellular company does not charge you, it the same convience you already enjoy with your current hardline system. >Bah! This just reinforces my decision NOT to get a cellular phone. >They're just like COCOTs, but they cost more. It really depends on what you want. Why are we like a COCOT? I see this as a convenience to go wireless, just like push button compared to rotary. In some cases, its even cheaper than hardwire (I can show physical proof :-). Marc (and anyone else), still have questions on this, PLEASE reply or call me. I hope I have shed some light on this subject. Carl Couric VAX System Manager Florida Cellular One (McCaw Communications) (305) 792-2355 x543 or Please reply to this account... ;-) [Moderator's Note: You are quite correct that cellular calls are as cheap as or cheaper than landline in many cases. When I tell people that my Ameritech service allows me to call *anywhere* in northeastern Illinoiis, from Wisconsin on the north to Morris, IL on the southwest and parts of northern Indiana at the rate of 10 cents for the first three minutes and ten cents a minute thereafter they can't believe it. A four minute cellular call to a place forty miles distant costs 20 cents. On a 'genuine Bell' payphone the same call costs 50 cents! People who know little or nothing about cellular service think I am a wealthy person. My total monthly bill: $35-45, period. They look at me and say 'is *that* all?' .... Yes, and I use it at least once or twice daily. Cellular service is a definite answer to the COCOT menace. PAT]
pbhx@midway.uchicago.edu (Peter B. Hayward) (11/07/90)
In article <14279@accuvax.nwu.edu> kaufman@neon.stanford.edu (Marc T. Kaufman) writes: >Great. What a fine, generous attitude. I suppose when I dial New >York from my home near San Francisco, I am *NOT* using radio spectrum >or system resources to find out if the number I want to talk to is >available. >Bah! This just reinforces my decision NOT to get a cellular phone. >They're just like COCOTs, but they cost more. Marc, I am mystified by the reason for your angry response here. Neither of you are charged for "incomplete calls, busy, or no answers." How does this make cell phones different from LD carriers? Peter B. Hayward N9IZT/AE University of Chicago Computing Organizations
jmm@uunet.uu.net (John Macdonald) (11/07/90)
|[Moderator's Note: That's why I fully support the concept of learning |to program your own phone, and getting accounts on many systems. PAT] Perhaps eveyone should throw out their AT&T cards and get a separate one for each local telco they deal with too. The problem here is that cellular service sort of falls in the cracks of the great breakup - they are local service providers except that their service is available over a wide range of locations. John Macdonald jmm@eci386
kaufman@neon.stanford.edu (Marc T. Kaufman) (11/08/90)
In article <14414@accuvax.nwu.edu> pbhx@midway.uchicago.edu (Peter B. Hayward) writes: >In article <14279@accuvax.nwu.edu> I write: ->Great. What a fine, generous attitude. I suppose when I dial New ->York from my home near San Francisco, I am *NOT* using radio spectrum ->or system resources to find out if the number I want to talk to is ->available. >Marc, I am mystified by the reason for your angry response here. >Neither of you are charged for "incomplete calls, busy, or no >answers." How does this make cell phones different from LD carriers? Sorry for the outburst. I got angry because the original poster (from McCaw?) said it in a way that implied the no-charge for busy was a gracious gift, rather than just a part of the business. Most of us here on the net know at least a LITTLE about computer networking, and I can't believe a $2.00 charge is warranted for a couple of packets of data exchanged with the home provider. Especially considering the high probability that the $2 is spread among only a very few calls (like only 1 call in the examples that started this thread). I agree with an earlier poster who suggested that roaming should be handled as a per-minute surcharge of, say, 10 or 20 cents per minute. And for those of you who think Cellular is not like an AOS -- how do they justify double-dipping for non-existant air time on forwarded calls? Marc Kaufman (kaufman@Neon.stanford.edu)
john@mojave.ati.com (John Higdon) (11/08/90)
Much has been said concerning various cellular operators and what appear to be outrageous charges. Quite honestly, most cellular charges are way out of line. However, what you are seeing is the marketplace at work. Demand for cellular service is greater than the wildest expectations of the developers. Every trick in the book is used to handle the flood of customers and the resultant traffic -- from multiplying the number of cell sites to (and here's the nasty part) keeping the price high enough to discourage casual use. A number of operators have requested rate reductions from the appropriate regulatory agencies and have been denied due to the heavy demand. Does this mean that McCaw, PacTel, GTE, and the like are getting rich? You bet! If you have a product that is mega-popular, you make money. At the moment I am roaming in the much-maligned LA area PacTel system. These are the slimes who charge for call attempts even if it's the system's fault that the call bombs. They charge roamers $0.70/min during the day. BUT, they have no per-day roaming charge. This means that I can activate FMR daily without charge, and pay only if I get a call. I find this preferable to the instant $2.00/day charge that is tacked on to a single call in many systems. But don't expect rates to come down any time soon. Those who find the system convenient and helpful will use it; those who do not think the charges are worth it will not. The providers are NOT hurting for customers. When someone complains that the charges are outrageous, he's right. And when he refuses to subscribe, that's natural selection at work. John Higdon <john@mojave.ati.com> (hiding out in the desert)