How many users actually benefit from $99 unlimited?

For the cost of one of those $99 unlimited plans (which will be about
$115 after taxes and fees), you could buy about 2150 minutes on a
prepaid network (at about 5.3¢ per minute). That's about 35 hours a
month. Other than certain business people, i.e. realtors, field service,
etc., how many users actually use over 2000 minutes per month?

PagePlus charges as low as 5.3¢/minute for voice, and as low as 3.5¢ per
text message (when you buy the $80 "1400 minute" card at a discounted
price of $74). They also offer unlimited voice minutes for $2.49 a day,
or $75 for a 30 day month.

It seems that too many consumers look at the "unlimited" part, without
understanding that $99 is a) not really $99, and b) not such a great
deal compared to non-unlimited plans, and c) a lot more than they have
to pay for unlimited voice.

Great post. You are 1000% correct. I don't even need the 1000 minutes I get
from T-mobile, but I'm only paying $39.99 & that includes free nights &
weekends.


"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
news:47bdabbd$0$36387$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
> For the cost of one of those $99 unlimited plans (which will be about $115
> after taxes and fees), you could buy about 2150 minutes on a prepaid
> network (at about 5.3¢ per minute). That's about 35 hours a month. Other
> than certain business people, i.e. realtors, field service, etc., how many
> users actually use over 2000 minutes per month?
>
> PagePlus charges as low as 5.3¢/minute for voice, and as low as 3.5¢ per
> text message (when you buy the $80 "1400 minute" card at a discounted
> price of $74). They also offer unlimited voice minutes for $2.49 a day, or
> $75 for a 30 day month.
>
> It seems that too many consumers look at the "unlimited" part, without
> understanding that $99 is a) not really $99, and b) not such a great deal
> compared to non-unlimited plans, and c) a lot more than they have to pay
> for unlimited voice.

Ben Skversky wrote:
> Great post. You are 1000% correct. I don't even need the 1000 minutes I get
> from T-mobile, but I'm only paying $39.99 & that includes free nights &
> weekends.

Yes, T-Mobile is a great deal for a lot of peak minutes. Unfortunately
they have no coverage yet where I live, and poor coverage where I
usually travel to.

I pay $30 for 300 minutes and unlimited N&W on Verizon, and I just don't
get into long gab fests during peak times.

On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 12:02:25 -0500, "Ben Skversky"
<bskv19114@comcast.net> wrote:

>Great post. You are 1000% correct. I don't even need the 1000 minutes I get
>from T-mobile, but I'm only paying $39.99 & that includes free nights &
>weekends.
>
>
>"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
>news:47bdabbd$0$36387$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net.. .
>> For the cost of one of those $99 unlimited plans (which will be about $115
>> after taxes and fees), you could buy about 2150 minutes on a prepaid
>> network (at about 5.3¢ per minute). That's about 35 hours a month. Other
>> than certain business people, i.e. realtors, field service, etc., how many
>> users actually use over 2000 minutes per month?
>>
>> PagePlus charges as low as 5.3¢/minute for voice, and as low as 3.5¢ per
>> text message (when you buy the $80 "1400 minute" card at a discounted
>> price of $74). They also offer unlimited voice minutes for $2.49 a day, or
>> $75 for a 30 day month.
>>
>> It seems that too many consumers look at the "unlimited" part, without
>> understanding that $99 is a) not really $99, and b) not such a great deal
>> compared to non-unlimited plans, and c) a lot more than they have to pay
>> for unlimited voice.
>

ATTs previous plans offered 2000 minutes for $99.99
4000 for $149.99 and
6000 for $199.99

Many folks prefer the greater convienence of post-paid plans,
so anyone with any of those three previous plans would be a candidate
for a $99.99 unlimited plan, as would anyopne one the 1350 minutes
$79.99 plan that ever went over and paid 35 cents a minute for that
overage.

Ron wrote:

> ATTs previous plans offered 2000 minutes for $99.99
> 4000 for $149.99 and
> 6000 for $199.99
>
> Many folks prefer the greater convienence of post-paid plans,
> so anyone with any of those three previous plans would be a candidate
> for a $99.99 unlimited plan, as would anyopne one the 1350 minutes
> $79.99 plan that ever went over and paid 35 cents a minute for that
> overage.

I suppose, but if I were those people I'd definitely choose the PagePlus
unlimited at about $75 per month, plus it's not "plus taxes, fees, etc."

Actually you can get it for about $2.30/day or about $69/month, if you
buy the refill cards at a discount. I.e. the $80 card can be purchased
for $73.72, a discount of 7.85%.

The biggest benefit is that it's on Verizon, which has the best coverage
of any U.S. network.

Ron wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 12:02:25 -0500, "Ben Skversky"
> <bskv19114@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Great post. You are 1000% correct. I don't even need the 1000 minutes I get
>
>>from T-mobile, but I'm only paying $39.99 & that includes free nights &
>
>>weekends.
>>
>>
>>"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
>>news:47bdabbd$0$36387$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net. ..
>>
>>>For the cost of one of those $99 unlimited plans (which will be about $115
>>>after taxes and fees), you could buy about 2150 minutes on a prepaid
>>>network (at about 5.3¢ per minute). That's about 35 hours a month. Other
>>>than certain business people, i.e. realtors, field service, etc., how many
>>>users actually use over 2000 minutes per month?
>>>
>>>PagePlus charges as low as 5.3¢/minute for voice, and as low as 3.5¢ per
>>>text message (when you buy the $80 "1400 minute" card at a discounted
>>>price of $74). They also offer unlimited voice minutes for $2.49 a day, or
>>>$75 for a 30 day month.
>>>
>>>It seems that too many consumers look at the "unlimited" part, without
>>>understanding that $99 is a) not really $99, and b) not such a great deal
>>>compared to non-unlimited plans, and c) a lot more than they have to pay
>>>for unlimited voice.
>>
>
> ATTs previous plans offered 2000 minutes for $99.99
> 4000 for $149.99 and
> 6000 for $199.99
>
> Many folks prefer the greater convienence of post-paid plans,
> so anyone with any of those three previous plans would be a candidate
> for a $99.99 unlimited plan, as would anyopne one the 1350 minutes
> $79.99 plan that ever went over and paid 35 cents a minute for that
> overage.

35 cents a minute? Gawd! If my mother or my stepmother had lived to
see cell phones, they would have talked sixteen hours per day and the
family would have been bankrupt!

Richard B. Gilbert wrote:

> 35 cents a minute? Gawd! If my mother or my stepmother had lived to
> see cell phones, they would have talked sixteen hours per day and the
> family would have been bankrupt!

35¢ a minute is actually pretty low for overage charges.

That's actually one of the big advantages of prepaid, you don't pay
outrageous overages, you just pay the normal per minute rate. Prepaid is
available on Verizon's network for as little as 5.3¢ per minute.

Sprint had a deal for a while that got rid of the huge overage charges,
called "Fair and Flexible."

It's a double-edged sword for the carriers. If they made the overages
reasonable then subscribers would be less careful about going over, and
use more than their plan minutes without much concern. However that
would cause some subscribers to move to lower tiers, which would cost
the carrier money.

On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 10:17:24 -0800, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote in <47bdbf80$0$36372$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:

>I suppose, but if I were those people I'd definitely choose the PagePlus
>unlimited at about $75 per month, plus it's not "plus taxes, fees, etc."

Deity help us -- you're morphing into a shill for PagePlus!

>Actually you can get it for about $2.30/day or about $69/month, if you
>buy the refill cards at a discount. I.e. the $80 card can be purchased
>for $73.72, a discount of 7.85%.
>
>The biggest benefit is that it's on Verizon, which has the best coverage
>of any U.S. network.

But still a Verizon shill I see.

--
Best regards,
John Navas <http:/navasgroup.com>

"Usenet is like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhea - massive,
difficult to redirect, awe inspiring, entertaining, and a source of mind
boggling amounts of excrement when you least expect it." --Gene Spafford

In my job, I go as far west on the Pa. turnpike to Harrisburg, Pa., on the
NJ turnpike I go as far north to Fort Lee, NJ. I have no problems with
T-mobile.



"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
news:47bdafd6$0$36367$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
> Ben Skversky wrote:
>> Great post. You are 1000% correct. I don't even need the 1000 minutes I
>> get from T-mobile, but I'm only paying $39.99 & that includes free nights
>> & weekends.
>
> Yes, T-Mobile is a great deal for a lot of peak minutes. Unfortunately
> they have no coverage yet where I live, and poor coverage where I usually
> travel to.
>
> I pay $30 for 300 minutes and unlimited N&W on Verizon, and I just don't
> get into long gab fests during peak times.

Ben Skversky wrote:
> In my job, I go as far west on the Pa. turnpike to Harrisburg, Pa., on the
> NJ turnpike I go as far north to Fort Lee, NJ. I have no problems with
> T-mobile.

Yes, T-Mobile seems to work very well in the eastern U.S.. My mother
switched to T-Mobile prepaid in Florida after AT&T/Cingular converted
her from TDMA/AMPS to GSM and increased the monthly rate by 40%. She
started a movement among her senior friends when they found out how
little she was paying. However now she uses OneSuite for long distance
at 2.5¢/minute, where before she could use free N&W on AT&T.

In the western U.S., T-Mobile took over the horrid Cingular/Pac Bell
1900 MHz GSM network, which has poor coverage. They've been trying to
improve things, but have run into a lot of opposition to suburban cell
sites. Still, it's slowly improving. Sometime in 2008 I should get
coverage at my house, but there are still a lot of areas of the Bay Area
with coverage holes, much more than with Verizon or AT&T.

On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 12:56:57 -0800, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote in <47bde4e5$0$36327$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:

>In the western U.S., T-Mobile took over the horrid Cingular/Pac Bell
>1900 MHz GSM network, which has poor coverage. They've been trying to
>improve things, but have run into a lot of opposition to suburban cell
>sites. Still, it's slowly improving. Sometime in 2008 I should get
>coverage at my house, but there are still a lot of areas of the Bay Area
>with coverage holes, much more than with Verizon or AT&T.

Nonsense. The old Cingular now T-Mobile actually has good coverage.
Will you stop the trolling when you finally get coverage in your house?
Or must your wife get coverage at work too?

--
Best regards,
John Navas <http:/navasgroup.com>

"Usenet is like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhea - massive,
difficult to redirect, awe inspiring, entertaining, and a source of mind
boggling amounts of excrement when you least expect it." --Gene Spafford

On Feb 21, 11:53*am, SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
> For the cost of one of those $99 unlimited plans (which will be about
> $115 after taxes and fees), you could buy about 2150 minutes on a
> prepaid network (at about 5.3¢ per minute). That's about 35 hours a
> month. Other than certain business people, i.e. realtors, field service,
> etc., how many users actually use over 2000 minutes per month?
>
> PagePlus charges as low as 5.3¢/minute for voice, and as low as 3.5¢ per
> text message (when you buy the $80 "1400 minute" card at a discounted
> price of $74). They also offer unlimited voice minutes for $2.49 a day,
> or $75 for a 30 day month.
>
> It seems that too many consumers look at the "unlimited" part, without
> understanding that $99 is a) not really $99, and b) not such a great
> deal compared to non-unlimited plans, and c) a lot more than they have
> to pay for unlimited voice.

I think that with a low enough price point that unlimited becomes
useful for those who want to drop a landline and go all cellular all
the time.

Unfortuantely I think that getting Magic Jack is a bigger bang for
the buck in dropping a old fashioned landline then trying to cut the
cord using a cell phone plan. You can't beat unlimited calling in the
US and Canada 24 X 7 for only $20 a year. Plus you get all those
advanced phone services thrown in for free also .

Magic Jack is one kick ass phone company when it comes to net cost!
Now if AT&T could drop the cell bill to only $20 a year that would be
something.

SMS wrote:
> Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
>
>> 35 cents a minute? Gawd! If my mother or my stepmother had lived to
>> see cell phones, they would have talked sixteen hours per day and the
>> family would have been bankrupt!
>
> 35¢ a minute is actually pretty low for overage charges.
>
> That's actually one of the big advantages of prepaid, you don't pay
> outrageous overages, you just pay the normal per minute rate. Prepaid is
> available on Verizon's network for as little as 5.3¢ per minute.
>
> Sprint had a deal for a while that got rid of the huge overage charges,
> called "Fair and Flexible."
>
> It's a double-edged sword for the carriers. If they made the overages
> reasonable then subscribers would be less careful about going over, and
> use more than their plan minutes without much concern. However that
> would cause some subscribers to move to lower tiers, which would cost
> the carrier money.

But frankly I find the business model of raping customers when they go
over just plain wrong. Just imagine if other services operated in a
similar fashion. Say you needed to cross a bridge every day and you
could buy a monthly pass that cost say $50 that entitled to cross once
each day. You are a loyal customer and have been using the bridge for
years. Some event happens where you need to cross more often and they
charge you $7 for each additional crossing. I doubt anyone would put up
with it.

Cell phones are no longer something magical. The days of having to
accept whatever is offered are winding down..

SMS wrote:
> Ben Skversky wrote:
>> In my job, I go as far west on the Pa. turnpike to Harrisburg, Pa., on
>> the NJ turnpike I go as far north to Fort Lee, NJ. I have no problems
>> with T-mobile.
>
> Yes, T-Mobile seems to work very well in the eastern U.S.. My mother
> switched to T-Mobile prepaid in Florida after AT&T/Cingular converted
> her from TDMA/AMPS to GSM and increased the monthly rate by 40%. She
> started a movement among her senior friends when they found out how
> little she was paying. However now she uses OneSuite for long distance
> at 2.5¢/minute, where before she could use free N&W on AT&T.

That would be except in the large region of the eastern US that I am in.
A tmobile phone is a paperweight here if you go a few miles away from
the interstate.


>
> In the western U.S., T-Mobile took over the horrid Cingular/Pac Bell
> 1900 MHz GSM network, which has poor coverage. They've been trying to
> improve things, but have run into a lot of opposition to suburban cell
> sites. Still, it's slowly improving. Sometime in 2008 I should get
> coverage at my house, but there are still a lot of areas of the Bay Area
> with coverage holes, much more than with Verizon or AT&T.

Ben Skversky wrote:
> In my job, I go as far west on the Pa. turnpike to Harrisburg, Pa., on the
> NJ turnpike I go as far north to Fort Lee, NJ. I have no problems with
> T-mobile.
>
>
>
> "SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
> news:47bdafd6$0$36367$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
>> Ben Skversky wrote:
>>> Great post. You are 1000% correct. I don't even need the 1000 minutes I
>>> get from T-mobile, but I'm only paying $39.99 & that includes free nights
>>> & weekends.
>> Yes, T-Mobile is a great deal for a lot of peak minutes. Unfortunately
>> they have no coverage yet where I live, and poor coverage where I usually
>> travel to.
>>
>> I pay $30 for 300 minutes and unlimited N&W on Verizon, and I just don't
>> get into long gab fests during peak times.
>
>
Can I suggest that isn't much of a test? I think every carrier has the
PA & Jersey pike lit up.

4phun wrote:
> On Feb 21, 11:53 am, SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
>> For the cost of one of those $99 unlimited plans (which will be about
>> $115 after taxes and fees), you could buy about 2150 minutes on a
>> prepaid network (at about 5.3¢ per minute). That's about 35 hours a
>> month. Other than certain business people, i.e. realtors, field service,
>> etc., how many users actually use over 2000 minutes per month?
>>
>> PagePlus charges as low as 5.3¢/minute for voice, and as low as 3.5¢ per
>> text message (when you buy the $80 "1400 minute" card at a discounted
>> price of $74). They also offer unlimited voice minutes for $2.49 a day,
>> or $75 for a 30 day month.
>>
>> It seems that too many consumers look at the "unlimited" part, without
>> understanding that $99 is a) not really $99, and b) not such a great
>> deal compared to non-unlimited plans, and c) a lot more than they have
>> to pay for unlimited voice.
>
> I think that with a low enough price point that unlimited becomes
> useful for those who want to drop a landline and go all cellular all
> the time.
>
> Unfortuantely I think that getting Magic Jack is a bigger bang for
> the buck in dropping a old fashioned landline then trying to cut the
> cord using a cell phone plan. You can't beat unlimited calling in the
> US and Canada 24 X 7 for only $20 a year. Plus you get all those
> advanced phone services thrown in for free also .
>
> Magic Jack is one kick ass phone company when it comes to net cost!
> Now if AT&T could drop the cell bill to only $20 a year that would be
> something.
>
But magicjack doesn't have a sustainable business plan. Also there is a
huge difference between a wireless carrier who has to have a massive
infrastructure compared to a VoIP provider who needs some equipment in
one location.

SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

>For the cost of one of those $99 unlimited plans (which will be about
>$115 after taxes and fees), you could buy about 2150 minutes on a
>prepaid network (at about 5.3¢ per minute). That's about 35 hours a
>month. Other than certain business people, i.e. realtors, field service,
>etc., how many users actually use over 2000 minutes per month?

But don't these unlimited plans include Internet use on
smart phones?

If yes.. THAT would be where I'd make my savings with
such a plan over say a prepaid plan. No?

At 21 Feb 2008 13:06:23 -0800 4phun wrote:
>
> I think that with a low enough price point that unlimited becomes
> useful for those who want to drop a landline and go all cellular all
> the time.
>
> Unfortuantely I think that getting Magic Jack is a bigger bang for
> the buck in dropping a old fashioned landline then trying to cut the
> cord using a cell phone plan. You can't beat unlimited calling in the
> US and Canada 24 X 7 for only $20 a year. Plus you get all those
> advanced phone services thrown in for free also .


Magic Jack is an interesting option, but it's probably doomed.

The "$20/year" is a money losing proposition for them- they don't own their
phone numbers, so thy have "rent" them from a provider like Level 3 for
maybe $3 or even more depending on the amount of incoming calls. Then they
have to pay termination fees of $0.01-0.05/minute (depending on where you
call.)

Magic Jack is hoping to make it up on sales of banner advertising you'll
see on the softphone display, which may or may not cover their costs.

> Magic Jack is one kick ass phone company when it comes to net cost!

Sure. Anytime you give a product away, consumers will be happy! Magic
Jack will be a heck of a bargain...

....until the VC money runs out! ;-)


> Now if AT&T could drop the cell bill to only $20 a year that would be
> something.

Maybe after they start running 30-second commercials on your iPhone display
before and after each call they will!

4phun wrote:

> I think that with a low enough price point that unlimited becomes
> useful for those who want to drop a landline and go all cellular all
> the time.

Yeah, unless: a) you want to have DSL, in which case you may as well get
a landline anyway since the price difference between naked DSL and DSL
plus a landline is minimal, and b) you have kids or seniors that need
the 911 service of a landline.

Also, in natural disasters, often the wireless networks are overloaded
or go down, but landlines still work. During the bad hurricane season a
few years ago, we also saw that a lot of wireless sites had no back-up
generator, only batteries, so they went down pretty quickly. Cingular
had 25% of their sites with generators (according to their own press
release), while Verizon had 80% with back up power (Verizon claims to
have a generator at every site where they are allowed to have one).
Cingular's goal is to have enough sites up to provide complete coverage,
but to sacrifice capacity, "We will sacrifice the capacity piece to try
to attain blanket coverage as much as possible."

"http://telephonyonline.com/mag/telecom_signal_end_storm/"
"http://news.vzw.com/news/2006/03/pr2006-04-04a.html"

> Magic Jack is one kick ass phone company when it comes to net cost!
> Now if AT&T could drop the cell bill to only $20 a year that would be
> something.

How long do you think Magic Jack is going to survive at $20/year? It's
great while it lasts though. They'll probably be going the way of
SunRocket before long.

George wrote:

> But frankly I find the business model of raping customers when they go
> over just plain wrong. Just imagine if other services operated in a
> similar fashion. Say you needed to cross a bridge every day and you
> could buy a monthly pass that cost say $50 that entitled to cross once
> each day. You are a loyal customer and have been using the bridge for
> years. Some event happens where you need to cross more often and they
> charge you $7 for each additional crossing. I doubt anyone would put up
> with it.
>
> Cell phones are no longer something magical. The days of having to
> accept whatever is offered are winding down..

Well I hope that the winding down doesn't mean moving to an unlimited
model at $99 from a metered use at various tiers. I don't like the model
of high overage charges either, but the alternative may be worse for
relatively low-usage users.

If I were a new low-usage user then I wouldn't be a postpaid customer.
T-Mobile and PagePlus offer reasonable per-minute rates (5.3-8.8¢). The
downside is no free nights and weekends, but in reality the only reason
people talk so much on their cell phones on N&W is because it's free.
They could get a 2¢/minute long distance service and still be better off
in most cases.

George wrote:

> That would be except in the large region of the eastern US that I am in.
> A tmobile phone is a paperweight here if you go a few miles away from
> the interstate.

Yeah, but apparently that model fits quite a few users.

I remember commenting once about how one carrier had coverage throughout
the Sierra Nevada mountains, by virtue of both their native network and
roaming, including coverage on several state roads over mountain passes
with ski resorts. A competing carrier lacked coverage in these areas.
One response was along the lines of planning your routes so you avoid
routes where your carrier has coverage issues! It's true, if you stay on
Interstate 80, you have pretty much uninterrupted coverage on any
carrier, at least with roaming.

It's amazing to me how many people live their lives without ever
venturing more than a few miles from their homes. Unfortunately we're
seeing repercussions of this now in California, where one of the budget
cutting moves is to close down 48 state parks. There's not much of a
constituency to keep them open since they are little used.

4phun wrote:

> I think that with a low enough price point that unlimited becomes
> useful for those who want to drop a landline and go all cellular all
> the time.

I find it amusing to see all the news reports of how the $99.99
unlimited plan is a "price war." Yeah, it's a price war to get
subscribers to increase their monthly expenditure for wireless.

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <47be02c7$0$36402$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>,
> SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>
>> I find it amusing to see all the news reports of how the $99.99
>> unlimited plan is a "price war." Yeah, it's a price war to get
>> subscribers to increase their monthly expenditure for wireless.
>
> I work with a guy (salesman) who, last year, had a 2000 minute plan
> (don't know with whom)--and every month he was 1000 minutes over.
>
> Let's see, that was probably a $125/month plan, and $0.25 overage, so he
> was probably $375/month.
>
> No, I'd say plenty of people will eat this up.

Yeah, I'm sure there are plenty of sales people that would benefit, but
for the vast majority of subscribers, I don't believe that it's much of
a deal.

SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> amazed us all with the following in
news:47be0c0b$0$36374$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net:

> Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
>> In article <47be02c7$0$36402$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>,
>> SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I find it amusing to see all the news reports of how the $99.99
>>> unlimited plan is a "price war." Yeah, it's a price war to get
>>> subscribers to increase their monthly expenditure for wireless.
>>
>> I work with a guy (salesman) who, last year, had a 2000 minute plan
>> (don't know with whom)--and every month he was 1000 minutes over.
>>
>> Let's see, that was probably a $125/month plan, and $0.25 overage, so
>> he was probably $375/month.
>>
>> No, I'd say plenty of people will eat this up.
>
> Yeah, I'm sure there are plenty of sales people that would benefit,
> but for the vast majority of subscribers, I don't believe that it's
> much of a deal.
>

The answer to this question is amazingly simple- look at ARPU for each
carrier. With voice ARPU generally being in the $55-60 range, $100 users
are going to represent the upper end of the scale. With the influx of
lower creditworthy customers on all networks over the last three years,
there will be more customers on the network below that line than above it.

At 21 Feb 2008 18:27:55 -0500 Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:

> > I find it amusing to see all the news reports of how the $99.99
> > unlimited plan is a "price war." Yeah, it's a price war to get
> > subscribers to increase their monthly expenditure for wireless.
>
> I work with a guy (salesman) who, last year, had a 2000 minute plan
> (don't know with whom)--and every month he was 1000 minutes over.
>
> Let's see, that was probably a $125/month plan, and $0.25 overage, so he
> was probably $375/month.
>
> No, I'd say plenty of people will eat this up.


Agreed. My cousin, a consultant back east who uses 3000 or so daytime
minutes a month is still on a grandfathered ATTWS GSM Charter plan (a $99
unlimited plan they originally used to con suckers from switching from
their excellent TDMA/analog network to their, at the time, very crummy GSM
one.)

Since the merger he's been stuck buying unlocked handsets to upgrade since
the "new" AT&T can't sell him a subsidized phone that'll accept his blue
"old" AT&T SIM, and won't switch him to a "new" orange AT&T SIM unless he
takes a new plan.

Ironically, I'll bet he'll probably switch to Ve izon- Verizon has a little
better reception in his neighborhood, and he uses a Verizon EVDO laptop
card for mobile data- it works on his boat, where the AT&T 3G card he tried
first doesn't always reach- (apparently "Extended UMTS" didn't make it to
Rhode Island!) ;-) IIRC, Verizon will knock the PC card rate down from
$79 to $59 if you also have a voice plan. The $20 savings didn't justify
dumping the AT&T Charter plan, but when Verizon offers the $99 unlimited,
he can port over and save the $20/month on the data card.

Maybe he should try extended GSM.

"Todd Allcock" <elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote in message
news:aYsvj.37$OB5.33@fe127.usenetserver.com...
> At 21 Feb 2008 18:27:55 -0500 Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
>
>> > I find it amusing to see all the news reports of how the $99.99
>> > unlimited plan is a "price war." Yeah, it's a price war to get
>> > subscribers to increase their monthly expenditure for wireless.
>>
>> I work with a guy (salesman) who, last year, had a 2000 minute plan
>> (don't know with whom)--and every month he was 1000 minutes over.
>>
>> Let's see, that was probably a $125/month plan, and $0.25 overage, so he
>> was probably $375/month.
>>
>> No, I'd say plenty of people will eat this up.
>
>
> Agreed. My cousin, a consultant back east who uses 3000 or so daytime
> minutes a month is still on a grandfathered ATTWS GSM Charter plan (a $99
> unlimited plan they originally used to con suckers from switching from
> their excellent TDMA/analog network to their, at the time, very crummy GSM
> one.)
>
> Since the merger he's been stuck buying unlocked handsets to upgrade since
> the "new" AT&T can't sell him a subsidized phone that'll accept his blue
> "old" AT&T SIM, and won't switch him to a "new" orange AT&T SIM unless he
> takes a new plan.
>
> Ironically, I'll bet he'll probably switch to Ve izon- Verizon has a
> little
> better reception in his neighborhood, and he uses a Verizon EVDO laptop
> card for mobile data- it works on his boat, where the AT&T 3G card he
> tried
> first doesn't always reach- (apparently "Extended UMTS" didn't make it to
> Rhode Island!) ;-) IIRC, Verizon will knock the PC card rate down from
> $79 to $59 if you also have a voice plan. The $20 savings didn't justify
> dumping the AT&T Charter plan, but when Verizon offers the $99 unlimited,
> he can port over and save the $20/month on the data card.
>
>

> Also, in natural disasters, often the wireless networks are overloaded
> or go down, but landlines still work.

Actually, just the opposite is true. Granted, as usual you showed an
exception to the rule in order to pass it along as the rule. However,
during most natural disasters it's the landlines that go down first.

Janet Wilder wrote:

> Since so many of the people we call are also Verizon users, the IN
> calling saves gallons of minutes. We hardly eat in to our paid minutes
> with nights and weekends and IN. It would make no sense for us to go to
> "unlimited"

Yes, I have a feeling that between off-peak and MTM, very few
subscribers will benefit from a move up to $100 unlimited, while nearly
_all_ of the heavy users (not using smart phones) will move down to $100
unlimited. I notice the same scenario as your's around here. Most of my
relatives, friends, and co-workers have Verizon so I don't even use up
my measly 300 peak minutes.

The carriers also better hope that the heavy users don't find out about
the ways to get unlimited use at much lower cost. PagePlus offers
unlimited for about $75 per month, and that $75 isn't burdened with
extra fees and taxes like the $100 unlimited plans are. With Sprint and
Voicestick, unlimited is $52 plus taxes and fees paid to Sprint, and
Voicestick offers a lot of other advantages as well.

SMS wrote:
> George wrote:
>
>> But frankly I find the business model of raping customers when they go
>> over just plain wrong. Just imagine if other services operated in a
>> similar fashion. Say you needed to cross a bridge every day and you
>> could buy a monthly pass that cost say $50 that entitled to cross once
>> each day. You are a loyal customer and have been using the bridge for
>> years. Some event happens where you need to cross more often and they
>> charge you $7 for each additional crossing. I doubt anyone would put
>> up with it.
>>
>> Cell phones are no longer something magical. The days of having to
>> accept whatever is offered are winding down..
>
> Well I hope that the winding down doesn't mean moving to an unlimited
> model at $99 from a metered use at various tiers. I don't like the model
> of high overage charges either, but the alternative may be worse for
> relatively low-usage users.

It seems that is the direction it is going.

I am sure that the tiers will be just as disingenuous as the various
current ones are now. I imagine the "cellphone buffet" when I read the
prices. This month's special is one serving on a 3" plate for $9 or
unlimited for $10.50 .

I am a heavy user but unlimited is of no value to me because of free
m2m. All of my family and most of my friends and associates are on VZW.
So an unlimited package would cost me even more.


>
> If I were a new low-usage user then I wouldn't be a postpaid customer.
> T-Mobile and PagePlus offer reasonable per-minute rates (5.3-8.8¢). The
> downside is no free nights and weekends, but in reality the only reason
> people talk so much on their cell phones on N&W is because it's free.
> They could get a 2¢/minute long distance service and still be better off
> in most cases.

SMS wrote:
> 4phun wrote:
>
>> I think that with a low enough price point that unlimited becomes
>> useful for those who want to drop a landline and go all cellular all
>> the time.
>
> Yeah, unless: a) you want to have DSL, in which case you may as well get
> a landline anyway since the price difference between naked DSL and DSL
> plus a landline is minimal, and b) you have kids or seniors that need
> the 911 service of a landline.
>
> Also, in natural disasters, often the wireless networks are overloaded
> or go down, but landlines still work. During the bad hurricane season a
> few years ago, we also saw that a lot of wireless sites had no back-up
> generator, only batteries, so they went down pretty quickly. Cingular
> had 25% of their sites with generators (according to their own press
> release), while Verizon had 80% with back up power (Verizon claims to
> have a generator at every site where they are allowed to have one).
> Cingular's goal is to have enough sites up to provide complete coverage,
> but to sacrifice capacity, "We will sacrifice the capacity piece to try
> to attain blanket coverage as much as possible."
>
> "http://telephonyonline.com/mag/telecom_signal_end_storm/"
> "http://news.vzw.com/news/2006/03/pr2006-04-04a.html"
>

I bet many people don't realize how Mickey Mouse some carriers are.
Tmobile doesn't believe in generators and at least in my area the old
AT&T TDMA/analog sites had generators but now the GSM stuff just has
battery.