Slashdot Mirror
80,012 Text Messages In One Month
webguru4god writes "According to an article on AZCentral.com, a man in New Zealand sent an average of 2,580 text messages a day for a whole month to protest his cell phone provider cancelling their unlimited text messaging plan. I recently received a faulty cell phone bill for $2000 claiming that I sent 40,000 text messages in one month, which I thought was physically impossible. But apparently this man has doubled that number and managed to get 8 hours of sleep each night for the month!"
You can send tons of text messages with programs like this
And with sites like CellularOneWest you can send up to 12 at a time.
It was on the news here. He was sending the same message to all the users in his addressbook with the send to all function of his phone. So if you have a hundred ppl listed it can add up pretty quick.
In Australia we pay an average of 20c to 25c per SMS message.
Considering how little data is traversed to wager the cost, I can't see how its anywhere near reasonable.
Our postal service will physically send a letter to anywhere in Australia for 40c - which requires much more signficant investment in resources. And yet somehow telcos feel they can charge -that- much.
Whenever I can, I prefer to pick up the mobile to call somebody, if you stay on the phone for no longer than 30 seconds its about the same cost. And the call is calcuated per second airtime.
What do other countries such as Asia, Europe and America pay?
Tell us!
For 100,000 messages that accounts to NZ$8000 per month. The Telecom deal was $10 per month so they would lose $7990 per month for a customer that texted that much to Vodafone!!
Telecom didn't think this out before they offered the deal, have lost shitloads of money, and are now backtracking furiously and blaming "spammers".
Uh - no bill. His protest was in the last month of the text deal that Telecom NZ had, so it was all their loss, not his. He still got charged the same total as the previous months.
Thanks, Mr A.C., for injecting a little local perspective! While I'm not a Telecom NZ subscriber, allow me to explain a little more...
The two main phone networks in NZ are Vodafone and Telecom. Vodafone initially dominated the texting market, with 20c-per-text prices using its GSM network. In order to reclaim some marketshare, Telecom introduced its "$10-per-month for unlimited texting deal" last year, and advertised it nationwide.
Here's the kicker. Telecom's network is based on CDMA, and to switch from Vodafone to Telecom you have to purchase a new phone and get a new phone number. Lots of people I know were spending hundreds of dollars a month on text charges with Vodafone, so justifying the expense of ~$300NZD for a midrange Telecom phone and switching over made sense economically.
During this period, I don't recall Telecom mentioning any time limit on the deal whatsoever. Anyone who paid more attention than I to the extremely small print at the bottom of their TV screens can feel free to post a rebuttal, but many people received an assurance from Telecom store clerks in person that the $10 deal was guaranteed for a long time (years to decades) and correspondingly switched over to the Telecom network, expecting their initial outlay for a new phone to eventually pay for itself.
Fast forward to 2004, and Telecom pulls the bait and switch on its subscribers, causing a lot of them to get very angry and send as many text messages as they could before the $10 deal terminated as a protest.
I can see where Telecom is coming from, as they do pay interconnect agreements with Vodafone and have to pay approximately 8c to 14c (can't recall the exact figure) per text message that terminates on Vodafone's network, and as such the $10 deal is uneconomic in the long term. And they do still have a monthly deal, but it's capped at ~500 messages last I heard, which is less than many people require (especially when forwarding one message to several people; it adds up rapidly!). However, I still feel that Telecom's behaviour with regards to advertising their phone deal was a little unethical, and I can see exactly where the person in the article is coming from...
<!-- DHTML / JavaScript menu, popup tooltip, Ajax scripts -->
I'm a long time Vodafone subscriber (switched _from_ telecom before their $10 text deal) and am incredibly happy with the service Vodafone provides.
Now when Telecom announced their $10/month for unlimited text almost everyone I knew could see into the (near) future that Telecom was going to pull the old "bait and switch" with this whole deal.
I would constantly put the sales reps that accosted me at my University on the spot by asking in a loud voice when the deal will end. They said "indefinate" while umming and ahhhing which then I would say "So, you could change it next month, right?".
Now while this "unlimited" texting went on, people started to wonder how Telecom could afford this kind of madness, but Telecom in New Zealand controls a huge majority of Phone lines, toll calls, ADSL connections and controls one of the largest ISP's in NZ (Xtra). We knew where they were getting their money from they were subsidising their losses in the cell phone division from their other (more profitable) departments.
So as more and more people started to poke their nose into Telecom's business, we knew their next move was coming next. $10/month for 500 texts. Now the deal is still a huge savings in money, but it's just the fact that Telecom changed the rules while the game was being played and that upset a lot of people.
Vodafone cannot compete with those prices, so Vodafone chose to start pushing their interactive GPRS technologies such as Vodafone Live! (neat wap portal) and PXT (picture messages). Now even though I could save $50/month I simply do not trust telecom! I'm an account holder with Vodafone (not prepay) and I just will not deal with Telecom more than I have to, lest they choose to rip me off.
It's worse than 3 times as expensive. Three minutes of standard GSM-encoded voice traffic equals about 9600 * 60 * 3 / 8 = 216000 bytes of traffic (ignoring encoding etc, since we're looking at payload). Those 140 bytes (7 bits * 160 chars) in an SMS message are 0.065% of that amount of data. Round it up to 0.1% to allow for reliable delivery and routing overhead, that's 1000 times as expensive.
SCO employee? Check out the bounty