4 ms·
> It was mostly an industry of carriers trying to charge as much as possible, while delivering as little as possible. I remember when carriers upped the cost
by mcny 4y ago
> It was mostly an industry of carriers trying to charge as much as possible, while delivering as little as possible.
I remember when carriers upped the cost of text message from 15c to 25c per message. All four major carriers, iirc, changed their pricing within a month of one another. This is another service that costs them almost nothing. This is like one of those "trout in milk" evidence. I am positive they all got together and decided to raise rates but nobody went to prison for this collusion.
I mean I wouldn't have minded if they only charged for messages sent but they charged me for incoming messages as well. My friends had unlimited texting and as a poor college student I was trying to save money. I was so glad when grandcentral/google voice became available. I joined it and never looked back.
- charcircuit 4y ago>I am positive they all got together and decided to raise rates but nobody went to prison for this collusion. Do you think it could have been simple as they all realized that the market value of sending a text message had increased? If you recognize that a competitor is able to make more money by raising the price of something you also sell you can use that as a case study for why you should raise your own rates.
- jrgoff 4y agoTheoretically it should be a market advantage to charge less (while still being profitable) than your competitor for the same service so you can get more customers.
- charcircuit 4y agoIt would matter how much of an advantage it would be. It isn't good enough to just be profitable, they want to find the most profitable thing to do. You would need to get enough people to text more / new customers to offset the potential profit you would have gotten from charging more.
- fmajid 4y agoAt one point 2 weeks of SMS revenue alone generated more revenue than an entire year of all Hollywood’s. What the OP fails to emphasize is that SIP was used to perpetuate the business model and all-important pricing. That’s why it was allowed to prevail: it did not challenge the status quo that really mattered.