4 ms·

In Israel the caller pays for a mobile call, while in other countries the owner of the mobile pays. This one change alone is enough to explain quite a bit of t

by ars 6y ago

In Israel the caller pays for a mobile call, while in other countries the owner of the mobile pays. This one change alone is enough to explain quite a bit of the disparity in prices. I'm actually surprised the source article makes no mention of this.

JanisL 6y ago
I always feel as though having the calling party cover the costs of the call is one of the most effective ways to get rid of phone spam. When the receiving party has to pay it seems to create all the wrong sorts of financial incentives for the carriers to deal with phone spam calls.
tialaramex 6y ago
> while in other countries the owner of the mobile pays. Which other countries? The US did this, and I guess it's possible Canada was obliged to do the same but it's certainly not widespread. The article is about Internet access not how much you're ripped off for calls.
andi999 6y ago
I do not understand this. Does that mean in israel the callee pays (as well, or completely) and in other countries (only) the caller? Or does it mean you share mobile phones and in other countries the owner of the mobile phone pays while in Israel the callers somehow identify on the phone?
- gingerlime 6y ago
  I'm not sure I understand what the GP is trying to say (especially since the article focuses on mobile Internet, rather than calls). Just to clarify: only the caller pays for outbound calls in Israel. The receiver never pays for receiving a call. This is also true to all EU countries as far as I'm aware.
llimos 6y ago
I think this is the case in most countries besides the US. And (at least in Israel and the UK, and probably others, but not the US), you can identify a mobile number by the prefix, so you know what you're getting yourself into by placing the call.
Nginx487 6y ago
At least an example of one "other country" would be nice. Never heard of such practice, even though I was working in different countries of Europe and Asia

by ars 6y ago

JanisL 6y ago

I always feel as though having the calling party cover the costs of the call is one of the most effective ways to get rid of phone spam. When the receiving party has to pay it seems to create all the wrong sorts of financial incentives for the carriers to deal with phone spam calls.

tialaramex 6y ago

> while in other countries the owner of the mobile pays. Which other countries? The US did this, and I guess it's possible Canada was obliged to do the same but it's certainly not widespread. The article is about Internet access not how much you're ripped off for calls.

andi999 6y ago

I do not understand this. Does that mean in israel the callee pays (as well, or completely) and in other countries (only) the caller? Or does it mean you share mobile phones and in other countries the owner of the mobile phone pays while in Israel the callers somehow identify on the phone?

gingerlime 6y ago
I'm not sure I understand what the GP is trying to say (especially since the article focuses on mobile Internet, rather than calls). Just to clarify: only the caller pays for outbound calls in Israel. The receiver never pays for receiving a call. This is also true to all EU countries as far as I'm aware.

llimos 6y ago

I think this is the case in most countries besides the US. And (at least in Israel and the UK, and probably others, but not the US), you can identify a mobile number by the prefix, so you know what you're getting yourself into by placing the call.

Nginx487 6y ago

At least an example of one "other country" would be nice. Never heard of such practice, even though I was working in different countries of Europe and Asia