15cents

Europe fights back against "rip off" texting prices

Brian Jackson — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 14:07:37 GMT

When Canadian Industry Minister Jim Prentice meets with the big-wigs of Bell Mobility and Telus Mobility next month to hear their explanation for hiking the price of text messages, consumers should hope that he takes his cue from across the Atlantic.

Imagine if the CRTC put their foot down and demanded that the telcos rescinded the new fee for incoming text messages. What's more, they added regulation that would stop travelling texters from coming back home and suffering from a case of "bill shock" - capping the price of text messages while roaming at one-quarter the current cost.

Such actions might seem like a wonderful dream that harried Canadian cell phone users might have before waking up to a harsh reality where regulators prefer a hands-off attitude to the marketplace - even one ruled by an "oliogopoly." But in Europe it's no dream, but a reality. The European Union's telecommunicaitons commissioner has stepped in to curb text message pricing. She's imposing a cap of 18 cents per message, down from about 46 cents charged per message sent when a customer is abroad. What's more, the eventual goal is to bring it down to just 6 cents a message!

Bell is hiking their roaming fee for text messages to 60 cents a message. Now it's just one more way Canadian wireless customers are getting shafted in comparison to their European and U.S. counterparts.

When Prentice is done looking at incoming text message fees, he should take stock of the roaming fee situation that is getting out of hand in Canada.

Bell's customer "service": sell irate customers a text bundle

Brian Jackson — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 17:07:53 GMT

Any cell phone owner almost expects it now. Every time you phone in to customer service with a problem or a question, you're inevitably pitched yet another service to add to your phone. The customer service reps are trained to sell you little extras that will nudge your phone bill up each month. Thats' because it means more guaranteed revenue for the phone company.

In my coverage of the text message fee issue this week, the most outlandish thing I came across was an internal Bell document. The document was posted on the Web site mobilesyrup.com and informs staff of the new incoming text message charge fees.

Unbelieveably, the document almost anticipates the customer outrage over this issue. "In cases where the client requests removal of access to the text messaging service, educate the client on the benefits of text messaging as an alternate form of communication (i.e. information on their Bell account, Amber alerts, promotion)."

The document also instructs customer service reps to point to Telus doing the same change in billing practices. There's also a section that talks about how to retain customers who are upset at the new fee.

"Show empathy and understanding of the customers' concerns. Explain that this price change is competitive and aligns to the current Canadian wireless carrier Text Messaging pricing," the document says.

The empathy doesn't last for long. The next step involves reminding the customer of the cancelled contract penalty fee. Customer service reps are also instructed to urge the customer to opt in to a text bundle plan!

I'm used to cell phone companies making sales pitches to me when I call in. But I can't believe that Bell thinks they will be able to spin customer frustration at arbitrary new fees into increased sales of text bundled plans.

When it comes to far-flung sales tactics, Bell takes the cake.

Canadians lambaste Bell Mobility, TELUS over "15 cent cash grab"

Joaquim Menezes — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 11:07:54 GMT

By Joaquim P. Menezes

Crooks, criminals, thugs, money grubbers, gougers, sleaze bags – these and other choice epithets (many unprintable) – appearing since yesterday in myriad blog posts – describe what scores of Canadians think of two of this country's largest cellular service providers Bell Mobility and TELUS.

The trigger for this widespread outrage was the announcements made by the duo on Tuesday that later this summer they're going to start charging wireless customers, who do not subscribe to a text message bundle as part of their calling plan, 15 cents per incoming text message.

Bell's new pricing plan will kick in less than a month from now, on Aug. 8, while Telus will start charging customers for incoming messages on Aug. 24.

Frankly it's difficult to determine what's more offensive – the newly minted charge for incoming messages, or how the two carriers have sought to justify that.

A Telus spokesperson called the charge "moderate" – and told a major TV station that it's being imposed to "recover the cost of the investment Telus is making in the network to handle the exponential growth in text messaging."

And a Bell spokesperson claimed his company is "simply aligning [itself] with market realities."

Let's look more closely at these claims, which by the way rank pretty high on my bs meter.

First, the one about the charge being moderate.

As customers will have to fork out 15 cents for any incoming message – regardless of whether it's from a known party or not, or whether it's spam or not – the "moderate" claim can't be substantiated.

Users have no way to block unwanted messages. And to be forced to pay for something you don't want, but have no control over is outrageous.

As one blogger put it: "Maybe I should quit my job and become a text-message blackmailer. Imagine getting a text message saying, in effect, "Please send us $10 or we will spam you with 10 text messages per day indefinitely."

As to the "recovering network costs" and "aligning with market realities" bit – these don't wash either.

When the two carriers formulated their existing rate plans they presumably factored in the impact text messaging would have on their networks.

To now charge users after the fact for incoming messages is unfair, to say the least – and I won't take issue with those who call it a "cash grab."

As a source interviewed by our writer Brian Jackson notes: "The carriers are also looking to move pay-as-you-go customers to a monthly billing model." Read Brian's fabulous coverage of this issue on our site today.

And that's simply arm-twisting you into opting for a pricing plan – that you may not really need or want.