From dsr1 Sat Jun 6 16:18:05 1998 Return-Path: <dsr1> Received: by interpage.net id m0yiPPg-00119aC; Sat, 6 Jun 98 16:18 EDT Message-Id: <m0yiPPg-00119aC@interpage.net> Date: Sat, 6 Jun 98 16:18 EDT Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Lower Wireless Roaming Rates, but More Charges? References: <telecom18.87.4@telecom-digest.org> Organization: Interpage Network Services / www.interpage.net Status: O In article <telecom18.87.4@telecom-digest.org>, Stanley Cline <roamer1@pobox.com> wrote: >I just got a digital cellphone from BellSouth Mobility with Atlanta >service. >[...] >Recently I went out of town and placed several long-distance calls on >the cellphone to here and there. I just got the bill today. Charges >incurred on other BellSouth systems were quite reasonable, however, it >looks as if other carriers who have roaming agreements with BellSouth >have begun screwing BellSouth customers, not with roaming RATES as in >the past, but with other charges and techniques. > >* Two carriers charged for multiple busy/no-answer calls that I KNOW > were less than 20 seconds in duration It is unfortunately commonplace for these "soak-the-roamer" tactics to go on, generally with smaller RSA carriers (such as the B-side in Harrisburg, run by GTE, I believe, but even some large carriers, like ATTWS, which has a percentage stake (if not full ownership, I believe) in the Albany, NY 00063 A-side market. The B-carrier in Harrisburg bills for incompletes, charges outrageous toll charges for long distance (we can get T-1 based LD for about 3 cents per minute to Bell LEC destinations (GTE for some reason expects higher termination charges), so why on earth are they charging 30 cents per minute? Easy -- they make a lot of money and no one complains) The A-carrier in Albany New York -- one of the first sites on the NACN BTW -- charges for feature code activation (call forwarding, call delivery, do not disturb, etc.), any incomplete call (even 2 seconds), ringtime for incoming calls (your phone rings, you pay, even if you don't answer), and in general, milks you for just about all they can get away with legally. I'm surprised they don't charge you a fee for just registering! :( (see my earlier post about this on www.wirelessnotes.org). So far, nothing has been done, and I haven't had time to pursue the matter with authorities outside of the CO/Albany organization. (BTW, ATTWS customers who roam into the market are just as subject to these charges as other roamers, at least they milk everyone in an unbiased manner!) >I think this gouging has come about SOLELY because of BellSouth's >reductions in roaming rates to their customers. I have roamed on >certain of the mentioned systems in the past, when roaming rates were >higher, and didn't remember seeing anything like this. I don't think carriers where roaming takes place care too much WHY there is roaming (unless it is a capacity issue), they just like the traffic and see it is a means to make a lot of money on their existing infrastructure (ie, they don't need to build new towers to make a lot of money on roamers). The roamers are a captive market -- especially so since although there are finally some alternatives to the A/B carriers, once you commit to a given carrier you generally have to roam on the same "side" (A or B only, it is rare that you can choose carriers while roaming and even rarer that there is a price difference; BAMS customers are an exception). Additionally, most people look at the airtime component of the bill and fail to look at other things, like toll charges, special fees, taxes, etc, which can make up to 40% of their bills! So carriers work out seemingly good deals on roaming rates and then get you with other things, like LD, call delivery charges (another LD charge), etc. >This sort of BS reminds me of the crap US Cellular used to pull (they >have improved SUBSTANTIALLY over the past year or so), and that other >crummy carriers (LA Cellular, CellOne/Boston, etc.) still do. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Ahhh...Southwestern Bell's wonderful A-side carrier which blesses Eastern New England with their presence! Want to roam outside of the Boston/00007, RI/00119 or NH/00445 systems? WHAM! $4.00 per month as a "roamer administration fee". Want to roam into New York and receive calls with automatic call delivery? Sure -- you need to pay $.25 per minute for toll delivery to NY (it costs them like 2 cents if that), then roaming airtime in New York (fair enough, perhaps), and then HOME AIRTIME (around 50 cents per minute) for the privilege of having CO/Boston's switch route your call to the Temporary Dialed Number (TDN) in New York. Thus, a 1 minute call, delivered to a Cell One Boston customer roaming in NY (or anywhere else outside their small "home" region) will pay $4 + $.50 + $.25 + $.59 (roamer rate in NY generally) just to receive a one minute call in the NY Market. And if you roam outside the of the Eastern Seaboard, well, just add a nice old-fashioned $3 daily roamer fee to that as well! (Why people use CO/Boston I don't know: Bell Atlantic has better price plans, including unlimited off-peak, BAMS does NOT charge for local toll calls for most plans (you don't for local calls anywhere in BAM's substantially larger calling area, from Rhode Island all the way to New Hampshire), there is no home airtime charge for call delivery, no roamer admin. fee, no aritme charge for voicemail deposits from landline, and very nice roaming packages both in and outside of BAMS's markets which will save by an order of magnitude over CO/Boston's roaming "plans". Customers of CO/Boston should run -- not even walk -- but run to their nearest BAMS store and switch immediatley.) >I think I might just go to CellularOne in Dalton and get A-side >service on the second NAM of my phone (they cover most of the areas >where I ran into the above as "home market". I do NOT want to have >ANYTHING to do with AirTouch in Atlanta, and GTE/Chatt has generally >[...] >of other customers -- there is no reason for it, especially given the >increasing pressure that AT&T's digital one-rate plan and Sprint's >extensive owned coverage are putting on many carriers. Gouging >roamers will come back to haunt many carriers, especially B-side ones, >as they lose roamers to other carriers (most PCS providers who support >analog roaming have agreements with A-side carriers, not B-side ones), >and if a carrier gouges roamers it's likely they play games with local >customers as well. Yes, by all means, if a given carrier is not responsive or charges ridiculously insulting charges, then DO switch, and let them know why. In many cases, you can get out of a contract if their service in an area where they promised there would be service doesn't work well, or if a given feature doesn't work while roaming, or if you are billed for calls that you should not be billed for and having them credited each month is taking too much of your time. It is only by forcing carriers, especially those in less-competitive markets, to realize that they will not be able to retain customers with these roaming and other revenue enhancing tactics -- many of which are not obvious to the customer -- that they will start to make progress towards a liberalization of their often burdensome roaming rates and practices. I strongly applaud ATTWS for their current simplified PCS plan, as well as Bell Atlantic for their very expansive Northeast CDMA coverage area (and somewhat less ambitious Philadelphia and DC CDMA extended home areas). Although both still have vestiges of roamer soaking practices (ATT withy Albany and Bell Atlantic with their analog customers and charging ATTWS analog customers who roam into CT local toll charges while BAMS customers do not pay this as examples), both early on offered expanded single-rate northeast roaming and simplified plans without hidden charges like CO/Boston has. Also of note are carriers like Nextel and Sprint, which pioneered these plans (probably in the case of Sprint because their coverage is still pathetic, they don't hand off other to carriers which supplement their still-in-infancy coverage areas, and you pay to roam -- even in your "home" area -- if you go off of Sprint's network, something which AT&T fortunately did not emulate with their PCS plan). Overall, there is defintely progress in terms of roaming, but there are still some dinosaurs out there like CO/Boston who haven't caught on yet. Fortunately, customers of these dinosaurs do or shortly will have a choice, which is a definite sign of progress in this once duopolistic industry. Regards, Doug