3 ms·
It also suggests that the NYT intern that wrote this has very little idea about phone companies. >DOUBLE BILLING In Europe calls to cell phones (from landlines
by plkjysfrtdhn 17y ago
It also suggests that the NYT intern that wrote this has very little idea about phone companies.
>DOUBLE BILLING
In Europe calls to cell phones (from landlines) cost the caller 5-10x as much as calls to another landline - local calls on landlines aren't free. Because of this cell phones have special numbers so the caller knows it's a cell phone. So you can't have a cell phone with a local exchange number. Which means you don;t have the wholesale replacement of home phones with cell phones in europe.
Many people there are campaigning for the US system of cell phone owner pays.
INTERNATIONAL CALLS:
The reason your call to Greenland costs $3/min is that the Greenland state telephone company is charging them this. It's also the reason that calls to say the UK cost less than to geographically closer countries in S America and why calls to the 3rd world cost a fortune. For a lot of countries 'settlement charges' are their main source of hard currency.
THE SUBSIDY GAME
Have they not heard of interest? Of return on investment? Perhaps not, perhaps they built a new office block in NY because they assumed they simply paid back a fraction of the cost each month until the capital was repaid.
- tome 17y agoI don't know anyone in Europe who'd like the US system of cell phone owner pays. In fact, quite the opposite: I imagine everyone I know, without exception, would hate it.
- whatusername 17y ago"Many people there are campaigning for the US system of cell phone owner pays." Certainly in Australia - which has the "rest of the world" system - I haven't heard people arguing for double billing.