[Bill-Watson]

Think for a moment, huh?
It means that one has to either know which area the phone is in or having an additional charge for out of area calls.
Here it's the same cost using a 'cell phone to call next door or the length of the country - 1400km.. A land line to land line is only free in the same part of the area code, ie, local calls.

I'm pretty sure this isn't the case. It's more than likely to be based on provider-provider fees like it is in the UK until quite recently. Need to wake up a yank to find out for sure.

[MeatteCen]

Think for a moment, huh?
It means that one has to either know which area the phone is in or having an additional charge for out of area calls.

Maybe an American could answer this but I thought all calls in state were at one rate, not just area code? The numbers are just symbolic links.

Anyway, the system obviously works as there are hundreds of millions of mobile phones in the US.

[WaydayNef]

For your information I never reported him. If a mod decided he needed banning there was probably a very good reason for it.

No, it wasn't. It was for making fun of you.

[WaydayNef]

To clarify (all information is in general):

1. Your cell phone number has an area code that is tied to the billing address where you first start the service. I have friends that are from a different state that do not bother to change their number because everyone knows it, but it does not matter because (see point 2)
2. Almost every plan in this country is nationwide, from anywhere to anywhere on your particular mobile provider's network. That means you can be in NYC and call LA or in LA and call NYC without penalty or limitations
3. Any time you use your phone, you get charged for minutes. That includes incoming and outgoing calls. This applies to text messages too.
4. Talk time (In minutes - rounded up, of course), SMS (including MMS) and data are all listed and charged separately. There are tons of different plans: 500 minutes, 200 texts, 200MB of data; 1000 minutes, unlimited SMS/MMS, unlimited data; etc, etc. Some plans even have 0 minutes and unlimited SMS.
   
   Plans are normally tiered by the number of minutes, but have an option to increase the text and data volume. Most plans give you the option of upgrading to "unlimited texts and data" regardless of the number of minutes.

For Bungle (I will type slowly so you will not get lost):

1. You get charged minutes for incoming calls
2. You get charged minutes for outgoing calls
3. You get charged text messages for incoming texts
4. You get charged text messages for outgoing texts
5. Cell phone talk minutes and text messages and Internet use are completely separated in the billing
6. Derrrrrrrr

[hexniks]

As with some others, I was surprised to see that an area code was required for a cell phone - it rather removes some of the advantages of being able to roam with it? So, is the area code for where it's being used or where the account is?

The area code is for where the account is. You can even move permanently across the country and still keep the exact same phone number & area code, it's as much a part of your phone number as the rest of it. Over here our phone numbers are 7 digits + 3 for the area code, so it would look something like (555) 555-5850. With the explosion in numbers being used up for cell phones, the area code is just as important as reaching the right number as anything else, and being forced to have a different area code just because you're in a different state would be rather silly. Also, your phone, when turned on, is always in contact with the cell towers, so even if someone from a land-line on the other side of the country tries to call you, it will go directly to your phone because they know where you're at.

I remember back when I got my first cell phone over ten years ago, the calling plans used to be that if you were outside your local area, you were charged a hefty roaming fee even if you were still on the same provider's network (which was really stupid because your phone would just display the name of your provider, had no way to tell if you were still inside your local calling area without the map handy.) Pretty sure that even back then you were able to make calls outgoing to anywhere in the continental US without any extra fees, and it's still the same way now.

Fortunately, at some point I think most people, except maybe for the budget providers such as Cricket, got upgraded to a plan that allowed you to be anywhere in the US and make calls no matter where you were, without any roaming fees, as long as you are using your provider's network. I took advantage of this the last couple times I traveled to Denver.

[orison]

Maybe an American could answer this but I thought all calls in state were at one rate, not just area code? The numbers are just symbolic links.

The way it worked was local calls did not cost additional charges. It's not restricted to any one area code either. For example, in my area, there are a few area codes (770, 404, 678, etc). All of which are considered "local" for me.

Usually, on a landline (might not be the case anymore), if you call long distance, you get charged a flat fee no matter how far the call is, as long as it's in the US. So for me to call someone in California would cost the same as calling someone in Texas, even though california is twice the distance away.

This usually doesn't work the same on Cell phones since pretty much all plans have free long distance.

As for area codes on cell phones. It is a must in the US. Without having area codes, we would run out of useable numbers for phones way to quickly. But it does not represent the actual location of the phone, just where the number was assigned. As long as the phone is connected to the cell system anywhere in the US, you will be able to call it using it's area code.

[MeatteCen]

For Bungle (I will type slowly so you will not get lost):

1. You get charged minutes for incoming calls
2. You get charged minutes for outgoing calls
3. You get charged text messages for incoming texts
4. You get charged text messages for outgoing texts
5. Cell phone talk minutes and text messages and Internet use are completely separated in the billing
6. Derrrrrrrr

Just to head Bungle off at the pass, we in England also get charged for all of these things. The difference is the costs for incoming are soaked up in our outgoing costs and don't appear on our bills as chargeable costs. But don't be so naive as to think that we don't actually pay for them somewhere along the line.

[KukkoDrukko]

Just to head Bungle off at the pass, we in England also get charged for all of these things. The difference is the costs for incoming are soaked up in our outgoing costs and don't appear on our bills as chargeable costs. But don't be so naive as to think that we don't actually pay for them somewhere along the line.

The point is the person placing the call pays the charge, which is how it should be.

[MeatteCen]

The point is the person placing the call pays the charge, which is how it should be.

Jesus. That isn't the point at all. If someone calls me then my network has to pay a cost for the connection. That cost is passed on to me with higher outgoing call charges. It just sounds like the Americans are a bit more transparent about their costs than our networks but the business model will be identical.

[KukkoDrukko]

Jesus. That isn't the point at all. If someone calls me then my network has to pay a cost for the connection. That cost is passed on to me with higher outgoing call charges. It just sounds like the Americans are a bit more transparent about their costs than our networks but the business model will be identical.

That IS the point. The cost is born by the person in control, the person placing the call. It's not that hard to understand.

[pharweqto]

Thanks, US guys, that is sort of what I expected.
DM, Bungle has the right end of the stick - with you guys, as here, it's the person initiating the call, rather than each party paying half (or more likely each pays 60+%) of the call.
It means one isn't billed for unwanted and/or unsolicited phone calls or texts, as apparently happens in America and some other countries.
If you're making a lot of calls, the US system is best but if you receive more calls, it sucks - IMO, of course...

With that info', all the advertising and fuss about services offering discount interstate landline 'phone rates makes some sort of sense.

[orison]

You guys need to stop and realize most people get minute plans that suit their needs. You guys act like every single call carries a price tag, it doesn't.

It doesn't matter if I receive 10 calls or a thousand calls, the actual costs I pay to the phone carrier is the same.

Yes, there are people who get large bills because they exceed their minutes, but it's usually looked upon as their own fault for not planning their useage properly and not how the system works.

[gactanync]

Jesus. That isn't the point at all. If someone calls me then my network has to pay a cost for the connection. That cost is passed on to me with higher outgoing call charges. It just sounds like the Americans are a bit more transparent about their costs than our networks but the business model will be identical.

If you wanted to you could buy a pay as you go sim for £1 and it'll stay active for a year with zero top ups.

[Usendyduexy]

You guys need to stop and realize most people get minute plans that suit there needs. You guys act like every single call carries a price tag, it doesn't.

It doesn't matter if I receive 10 calls or a thousand calls, the actual costs I pay to the phone carrier is the same.

Yes, there are people who get large bills because they exceed their minutes, but it's usually looked upon as their own fault for not planning their useage properly and not how the system works.

Some Europeans are daft. What they don't understand is they are STILL PAYING whether its incoming or outgoing.

Beyond that, most people never go over there minutes and there are no long distance charges unless you call outside of the United States (and even in some cases, Canada).

[pharweqto]

OK, some of you don't get it.

You're in the US, you have a contract for 200 minutes and 500 texts, OK?
You receive 300 minutes of calls and 1000 texts - so you're over by 100 minutes and 500 texts = $$$
In the UK, and here, you'd still have 200 minutes of calls and 500 texts* credit - it's the party(ies) that called or texted* that lose their credit for them.

*I'll have to double check that with my niece (she's a high text user - but the adverts do say "send" xxx texts) as I use a pre-paid and very rarely send or receive texts - I prefer to speak to the person. Certainly the calls part is correct here.

[Bill-Watson]

Some Europeans are daft. What they don't understand is they are STILL PAYING whether its incoming or outgoing.

Beyond that, most people never go over there minutes and there are no long distance charges unless you call outside of the United States (and even in some cases, Canada).

Bungle's point was basically what Dhinshin just stated: you can buy a £10 unlocked phone, get a free sim and never top up. However, people don't realise that the people making the calls are subsidising the costs that the former put on the provider of their free sim. Both are making use of the infrastructure. In the UK, these costs are put on the caller and the receiver doesn't pay. In the US it's different. Whoop-dee-doo.

[kaysions]

Unsolicited calls are a pain but most people I know, never go over their minutes. Since I joined my current carrier, I have used 11,500 minutes over the years but I still have 5,000 minutes worth of rollover. Combine that with the fact that US users do not utilize minutes at night or during the weekend. These minutes a typically free or in a separate, larger pool of minutes.

If I receive a call from a number that is not in my address book, I will just ignore it, unless I am expecting a call back.

However, where we do get screwed over is MMS/SMS costs as most people tend to use those far more than make voice calls and they are almost completely free for the carrier.

[MeatteCen]

DM, Bungle has the right end of the stick

No he doesn't. He thinks that people receiving calls don't pay for it which is complete rubbish. It's just subsidised by people making calls. The other option is to charge less for outgoing calls and have a separate charge for incoming calls.

While it looks like we're getting a better deal, we're not. It's hardly degree level business economics to understand this.

In fact, if anything we get a worse deal because people on contracts HAVE to cover the costs of incoming calls for everyone that uses a pay and go phone for incoming calls only. That's why outgoing pay and go calls are so much more expensive, because the networks can't rely on those users to provide enough income to cover their operating costs otherwise.

[Grennios]

Unsolicited calls are a pain but most people I know, never go over their minutes. Since I joined my current carrier, I have used 11,500 minutes over the years but I still have 5,000 minutes worth of rollover. Combine that with the fact that US users do not utilize minutes at night or during the weekend. These minutes a typically free or in a separate, larger pool of minutes.

If I receive a call from a number that is not in my address book, I will just ignore it, unless I am expecting a call back.

However, where we do get screwed over is MMS/SMS costs as most people tend to use those far more than make voice calls and they are almost completely free for the carrier.

Hmm, I've never seen this issue. All the people I know pay the $5-$10 for the unlimited MMS/SMS.

[pharweqto]

No he doesn't. He thinks that people receiving calls don't pay for it which is complete rubbish. It's just subsidised by people making calls. The other option is to charge less for outgoing calls and have a separate charge for incoming calls.

While it looks like we're getting a better deal, we're not. It's hardly degree level business economics to understand this.

In fact, if anything we get a worse deal because people on contracts HAVE to cover the costs of incoming calls for everyone that uses a pay and go phone for incoming calls only. That's why outgoing pay and go calls are so much more expensive, because the networks can't rely on those users to provide enough income to cover their operating costs otherwise.

So, the receiver doesn't pay for it because the sender subsidises the receiver's costs? FFS, that's what we've been saying, the receiving person doesn't pay, the sender does! [rolleyes]
I said nothing about it being a "better deal" as far as total costs - but that it's fairer because one isn't paying for receiving calls or texts one may not wish to receive, only those that one initiates.