Carriers Might Profit From Cell Number Portability

Makarand writes "Carriers that are adding cell-number portability fees to your monthly cell phone bills (while fighting against actually implementing the requirement) may actually rake in profits from these levies as the total amounts collected will be more than the projected costs of meeting the FCC's number portability requirements. Although federal law requires that such fees be 'just and reasonable', it does not require reporting of their actual expenses. Consumer advocates feel that the number portability verification processes required are similar to those used by long-distance phone companies when a customer switches from one service provider to another and there is little reason to believe that expenses to meet portability requirements should vary widely among carriers and be so excessive as to bring profits for the carriers."

Comments

Portability in action

[idles]

The portable cell numbers came to use in Finland just a month ago. The result was a furious fight between the operators fighting for customers: free radio phones, DVD players etc. if you became their customer. But then one of the operators realized it's better off to give benefits for existing customers. They lowered prices for the weekend and started a campaign saying "Our customers are doing better". I think that's the right way to go. I don't want to be switching my cell phone operator all the time. So in the end, customers really did benefit from the change.

Re:Portability in action

[seanadams.com]

Hear hear!

I stopped using my cell phone about a year ago when I realized that I could get by in life just fine without being on call 24x7. To be fair, before that I was running an ISP and *did* need to be on call but anyway...

I went about six months paying the bill on the thing, thinking that the next time I go on a business trip it'd come in handy. Last month I needed to go to Europe, so I figured no problem - I'll just go upgrade my plan and switch to the GSM phone. But could I just upgrade my plan, NO! They needed my social security number to run a new credit check, they insisted that I needed the model with a 4" color screen that played video games, and they said that even the base model would cost me $400 ust to get started. AND I'd have to sign a NEW two-year contract to get that special price. I just left my old phone on the counter and walked out. Called Xingular when I got back to the office and cancelled my service.

I will sign up fora cell phone again when I can get my choice of a flat monthly rate or a per-minute-only rate on a phone that works everywhere in the world with no long term contracts. And don't pull stupid shit like subsidizing the service with the price of the phone and vice versa. I don't insist that it be "dirt cheap". I know it costs $$$$ to build a world-wide cellular network, but there is a fair and reasonable way to charge for it and nobody's offering that.

Important Question

[Go Aptran]

There's an administrative fee to cover costs of maintaining the transfered phone number.... but will my cell phone company charge me an extra fee to take my number with me when I leave it after November?

Re:Side effects

[ThaReetLad]

Here in the UK number porting takes a couple of weeks with no paper work and no fee. The competition between networks is so intense that the mobile telcos are desperate to make it easy for people to change from one network to the other.

Re:Side effects

[arivanov]

Well,

Complain to your regulator and your competition authority. At least in Germany they have some serious teeth.

There is no technical reason whatsoever for the operators not to use ISDN call divert (or the equivalent mapping for this service in SS7 terms) as a mechanism for transfering the call to the new destination. In this case the only time when the call travels to the premises of the old operator is when it is set up. The actual voice (or data) should go directly to the new destination. There is no reason to charge you for the call set up only as for an entire call and there is no reason to route the call through the old operator network.

The fact that the phone operators in Europe do not use this on purpose (it has been in GSM since 1997) is already a part of an investigation by the European comission. More specifically, it is the investigation on unfair roaming charges.

So you are in you right to b*** and should do so. As a result of enough people b*** we may sooner or later get decent roaming charges for roaming mobile to roaming mobile calls so it may be a good idea to be persistent in this.

Sptint charges this fee already

[EmagGeek]

I pay $2.20 on my bill for "number portability."

I called to let them know that I am dropping them for another carrier at the end of this month, and that I planned on taking my number with me...

They said, and this was a real gas, "We don't offer that service. You'll have to give up your phone numbers if you leave Sprint."

"But you're charging me for number portability!"

"I'm sorry, sir, but you won't be able to keep your numbers"

"Then why are you charging me for number portability"

"Sir, Federal regulations require that we charge the number portability fee"

"..."

I couldn't believe my ears..

Anyone else with Sprint heard the same story? I think that charging a fee for a service one can't utilize comes down to, oh I dunno, fraud...