Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

What Carriers Don't Want You To Know About Texting

Posted by timothy on from the what-the-market-will-bear dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Randall Stross has just published a sobering article in The New York Times about how the four major US wireless carriers don't want anyone to know the actual cost structure of text message services to avoid public outrage over the doubling of a-la-carte per-message fees over the last three years. The truth is that text messages are 'stowaways' inside the control channel — bandwidth that is there whether it is used for texting or not — and 160 bytes per message is a tiny amount of data to store-and-forward over tower-to-tower landlines. In essence it costs carriers practically nothing to transmit even trillions of text messages. When text usage goes up, the carriers don't even have to install new infrastructure as long as it is proportional to voice usage. This makes me dream of the day when there is real competition in the wireless industry, not this gang-of-four oligopoly."

18 of 570 comments (clear)

  1. Correlation by conureman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The feckless youth I see texting in public do not appear to be the sort who employ reason or critical faculties. That's the kind of customer base dreams are made of.

    --
    The cost of that cleanup, of course, will be borne by taxpayers, not industry.
    1. Re:Correlation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's because their parents are the ones footing the bill... ouch.

    2. Re:Correlation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Or during an grammar test.

    3. Re:Correlation by michael021689 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There are reasons a lot of us prefer texting over a call in most situations.

      Calling represents a loss of time - you have to be somewhere away from others(if you are polite), wait as the phone rings, wait as you go over formalities, finally say what you needed to say, and then hang up. That is all a pain in the ass to us whippersnappers. Not to mention the annoyance of not getting an answer and having to wait to leave voicemail...(which is quite similar to a text, other than that it takes longer to convey a message and if something is missed it has to be replayed..)

      Texting is more polite. Although I know many over thirtys who disagree, many younger people often do not consider it impolite to receive and send text messages in public or with company (within reason, it can't distract you completely). Beyond that, sending a text does not heavily interrupt the day of you or your contact, unlike a phone call.

      Essentially, texting gets the same job done faster and with less hassle.

    4. Re:Correlation by WDot · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I disagree. To get the equivalent of a text message in a short call, I would have to say "My plane landed safely in Phoenix, I love you, bye," and then hang up before they have a chance to respond. I use phone calls for conversations, even short ones. However, if I can fit the entire conversation into 160 characters, I use a text message instead.

      I, like almost everyone else on Slashdot, think that text message rates are exorbitant, but I have no room to talk since I signed up for a plan. Yes, I'm a "feckless youth" like conureman says, but I pay out of my own pocket for my plan. I justify it to myself by saying that I'm paying for convenience, and I am.

    5. Re:Correlation by YttriumOxide · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I use text a lot for work. I live in Germany, but deal with people from all over Europe for work. Often, I may need to give or receive an address, and since I don't speak every European language, addresses are a complete pain if spoken to me on the phone or left in a voicemail. With text, I (or others) can just show the address to a taxi driver and there's no confusion. (example: The address of the Holiday Inn in Brno, Czech Republic is "Krízkovského 20" (carons over the r and z - can't show them on Slashdot) - if someone told me that by voice, I'd be lost - put it in a text, and it's dead easy)

      --
      My book about LSD and Self-Discovery
      Also on facebook as: DroppingAcidDaleBewan
  2. Isn't exactly news by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...but it's good to see this fact receiving some mainstream attention. I guess it's inevitable that people now tend to ask that if it costs x dollars to transfer y megabyte from my phone, why do text messages cost a lot more when they are so tiny? In the digital age text message fees seem more and more ludicrous even to ordinary people.

    --
    It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
    Be yourself no matter what they say
  3. This makes me dream... by TuaAmin13 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Of when we'll be nickled and dimed for text messages instead of quartered.

    1. Re:This makes me dream... by arashi+no+garou · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'm still looking forward to the day when I'm only charged for what I send, not what I receive. I have two phones on my account, one for me and one for my fiancee, and before I added a texting package any time one of us texted the other my account was charged twice. Once for the sent message, again when it was received. I honestly believe the cell companies do this to force you into a texting package.

  4. Goodness gracious me by hobbit · · Score: 5, Funny

    Next you'll be telling me that when you buy Coca-Cola, you're mostly just getting sugar and water!

    --
    "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
    1. Re:Goodness gracious me by FroBugg · · Score: 5, Informative

      High-fructose corn syrup. You've often gotta pay more for Coke if you want it with sugar.

    2. Re:Goodness gracious me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      World prices for sugar is about 1/5 that of sugar costs inside the USA.

      HFCS is less expensive in the US than sugar.

      The artificial prices of sugar and the artificial price of corn leads the USA to use corn for sweeteners and corn to make ethanol.

      The solution is to stop propping up the US sugar companies. If C&H cannot compete on the world market, then let them fail. Why should the population of the US prop up an industry which has had many many decades to compete on the world market.

  5. This just in... by geekmux · · Score: 5, Funny

    Addictive behavior (texting) + Monopolistic cellular rule over addictive technology = obscene rates.

    Even Larry Ellison is sitting back looking at his cellular bill going "Holy shit. And I thought I ripped people off."

  6. I'm in Japan for six months... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In Japan there's this magic concept. The $30 plan actually costs $30! Go figure! A brand new cell phone is also free with no contact. And you can watch TV for free on your cellphone. But, don't let the Americans know or they'll want decent service too! ...oops!

  7. Re:Failed economics class by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No, apparently you failed economics.

    If there is sufficient competition in the market profits will be driven to zero and the price of the service will approach the *actual* cost of providing it (which is close to zero, apparently). The fact that text messages cost 1000s of times more than they should indicates that there is insufficient competition in the industry, excessive barriers to entry into the market, etc.

  8. Re:Failed economics class by guacamole · · Score: 5, Informative

    Not really. In classical economic theory: the market price can be one of the following:

    1. Essentially the cost of making the product (firm's economic profits are 0). This arises in the model of perfect competition only.
    2. Each consumer pays the highest price this person can afford. This arises only in the model of monopoly with a perfect price discrimination.
    3. Everyone pays a single price, but the price is set by the single producer for the purpose of maximizing this producers profits. This is the model of monopoly with no price discrimination.
    4. Anything in between. Various models of oligopoly will render the equilibrium prices that are anything in between (1) and (3). There is no single model of oligopoly. So, each setting has to be analyzed separately (usually with the tools of game theory) based on the relevant assumptions.

  9. Re:INCORRECT Correlation by fdrebin · · Score: 5, Informative

    No, receiving calls/texts is free.

    While there may be some price plans that allow for free incoming calls or free incoming text messages, the majority of US price plans charge airtime for incoming calls and charge the same for incoming text messages as outgoing - currently 20 cents per message.

    You can also typically buy bundles of text messages, with say Verizon charging $5.00/month for 250 text messages (and other options as well)

    /F

    --
    Stupidity... has a habit of getting its way.
  10. Obligatory (in)Famous Quote: by lobiusmoop · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "Texting is the closest thing to pure profit ever invented" - Sir Chris Gent, founder of Vodafone.

    --
    "I bless every day that I continue to live, for every day is pure profit."