10 years ago the cost of a national call was approx 8ppm via BT…

10 years ago many businesses were offered an 0870 number ‘for life’…

The telecoms market evolved, prices of national calls tumbled, competition opened up and eventually there was a huge delta between the cost of a national call and the cost of calling an 0870 number… In turn, this opened up the opportunity for revenue share and the possibility to fund network level services.

Clearly there was a need to address this ‘delta’ and to improve price transparency for the consumer…

However, what have we got ?  A complete mess !  Ofcom ends revenue sharing on 0870 and introduces a new 0370 range for migration… what does this ‘actually’ mean to consumers, businesses and telcos ?

Are consumers going to benefit – doubtful… faced with the cost of setting up and promoting new numbers are businesses really going to choose 0370 ?  More likely there will be a mass migration to 0871 (at 10ppm)… which is not good news for anybody !

Are businesses going to benefit – absolutely not !  Just for a moment consider the pain, effort and cost involved in setting up and promoting new contact numbers to consumers and suppliers – updating websites, re-printing brochures, letterheads, business cards, signage etc.  Potentially, this will costs businesses tens of thousands of pounds – are they then going to migrate to 0370 and start paying for calls received ?

Are telcos going to benefit – not really… The fact is whatever NTS range businesses use telcos will take a margin – whether it’s 0800, 0844, 0845, 0870, 0871 or even 0370… the one thing we can be fairly sure of is that most businesses will not revert back to geographic numbers and pay for in-house equipment to replace their network-level services.

So… who actually benefits from these Ofcom proposals ?

We’re on no-one’s side here… we just want to try and make sure businesses are informed and aware of what viable options they have going forward.

If you’re one of the 600,000 UK businesses that currently use 0870 numbers and are concerned about the Ofcom proposals visit www.0870advice.com for more info.

Cheers,
0870Advice

Yes, it's a real shame that UK businesses, so keen on exploiting customers by using premium rate numbering for basic and essential services, may have to change their ways. Perhaps you should look at how customer service is carried out in north America and the complete absence of these numbering regimes that are simply designed to extract revenue from the consumer.

UK businesses, government and non-profits that use these numbers deserve no sympathy whatsoever. Apart from ripping-off the UK consumer, those of us that live overseas fully understand the true difficulty of NGNs.

The UK numbering scheme, like the regulator that supposedly protects us, is an utter disgrace and for a so-called economic power to persist with this system is frankly laughable.

I would prefer to spare a thought for the long-suffering public rather than the likes of Sky, the DVLA and the NatWest bank.

0870advice.com wrote on Nov 9^th, 2006 at 8:45am:

If you’re one of the 600,000 UK businesses that currently use 0870 numbers and are concerned about the Ofcom proposals visit [url=www.0870advice.con[/url]]www.0870advice.con[/url] for more info.

Good grief!  600,000 business!

That's at least 599,990 with which I won't deal and ten with which I have to deal but which I won't phone.

Never realised it was that many ripping us off!

"Are businesses going to benefit – absolutely not !  Just for a moment consider the pain, effort and cost involved in setting up and promoting new contact numbers to consumers and suppliers – updating websites, re-printing brochures, letterheads, business cards, signage etc.  Potentially, this will costs businesses tens of thousands of pounds "

No whinges 10 years ago when changing 0870 caused the same?

From their site:

"Clearly, Ofcom’s proposals mean that any business that currently generates income through 0870 numbers will soon lose this revenue stream and instead be charged for calls received.

Therefore, those businesses will need to choose between keeping their existing 0870 numbers and paying a charge for calls received or introducing new contact numbers.

Potentially, this decision will depend on the pain, effort and cost involved in promoting new contact numbers on websites, brochures, other printed material, signage etc.

If the choice is to look at migrating away from 0870 then a number of viable options are available from freephone to premium rate and even reverting back to 01/02 geographic numbers.

This decision may well depend on whether businesses have (and rely on) network level services such as call queuing, IVR or call recording.  If this is the case, any move back to geographic numbers will have to include budget for replacing these services with in-house equipment."


Aaaah!

0870advice.com wrote on Nov 9^th, 2006 at 8:45am:

We’re on no-one’s side here… we just want to try and make sure businesses are informed and aware of what viable options they have going forward.

Interesting!!  So you're on no one's side?  In that case you are not related in anyway to a Communication Provider (CP) www.goldennumbers.com?  It is my belief that the website you mention is related/owned by CP in someway!!

This kind of thing is mentioned every now and then by members who work/own a CP but they generally stop posting after a while.

There are legitimate reasons for having an 08 number like IVR, call routing, etc to save having expensive in-house equipment hence why I agree big companies, government departments, etc that operate from more than one call centre may have a need for an 0845 but other number ranges are used purely to earn revenue without, in most cases, the customer (us consumers) being aware of it.

What I object to is the use of these numbers to gain revenue without us consumers being aware of it and the fact they are misleading us consumers stating (like you do) that 084x is local rate and 087x is national rate.  It's funny how you are fully aware that local/national rate no longer applies but yet your website still refers to them as being local/national rate.

Not only are you misleading us end consumers but also your customers (businesses, etc using these NTS numbers) by stating that consumers only get charged so-called local/national rate when calling these numbers are charged higher (significantly higher in some cases) compared to normal geographical local/national rate (ie those beginning 01 or 02).

Here take this example:

Say you have two companies in direct competition with each other and both offer same services at same prices, etc with the exception of the contact number.  One uses a 09x number costing 7p/min and the other using a 0870 also costing 7p/min.  
 
Now despite both companies having a contact number costing 7p/min which one is likely to attract more business?

Simple, the company having the 0870 because many consumers aren't aware that they are ringing a premium rate number when they ring an NTS number.

You state on your website, 0870advice:-


Quote:

Clearly, Ofcom’s proposals mean that any business that currently generates income through 0870 numbers will soon lose this revenue stream and instead be charged for calls received.

Where is your proof that companies will be charged for calls received?  I agree that for those companies using call routing, IVR, etc may have to pay monthly/annual fee, etc for these services (line rental so-to-speak) but why should they be charged for receiving calls on this number?  Simply so the underlying CP can still take their massive cuts.

For example, let's take CP, www.goldnumbers.com that charge businesses, etc wanting one of their 0845 (again misleadingly advertised as local rate) numbers but are expected to pay 3p/min for every call they receive but yet there are many other teleco's out there that don't charge for incoming calls at all.

All I want is for us consumers to be fully informed that NTS numbers are in fact premium rate numbers (because they cost more than geographical numbers) albeit smaller premium rate compared to 09x which can cost upto £1.50p/min (from a BT landline) because if this was to happen then consumers would complain and companies would be forced to use lower NTS numbers and/or the new 03x number range.

Of course companies don't like to admit they are receiving revenue from 08 NTS numbers for this exact same reason hence why they use 08 NTS numbers instead of 09x numbers as all consumers are fully aware that 09x numbers are premium rate whereas consumers think that 08 NTS numbers are local/national rate.

Why do so many (if not all) teleco's offering NTS numbers misleadingly state that calls to 084x are local rate and calls to 087x are national rate?  Again, simply because it's not good business (for the teleco's) to be forthcoming and state the truth that calls to NTS numbers are NOT local/national rate and can cost upto (in some circumstances) 40p/min.

Hi BBB_UK,

We're not trying to hide the fact we're a CP in any way at all.  We initially put www.0870advice.com up for our existing business clients to understand the history of this decision, the impact it may have on their business and what viable options they may have going forward.

As I said above we certainly want to avoid a mass migration to 0871 - a) because this would be bad news for consumers, b) the range is saturated and simply not enough numbers available, c) the ongoing 0871 pre-consultation which may result in restrictions on the use of these numbers with ICSTIS regulation.

We are trying to work with our clients to develop an appropriate mix of 08xx numbers which more closely matches the nature of the calls they receive, whilst still retaining thier now essential network level services.  This may include 0370, 0800, 0844, 0845, 0870 and 0871 etc depending on their business needs / requirements.

I agree with you entirely that there was a need for more price transparency in relation to the cost of 0870 and 0845 etc - do you really think this has been achieved by the Ofcom proposals ?

I also fully understand what you're saying in your example.  Again, do you think the Ofcom proposals address this problem in any way ?

Cheers,
0870Advice

Hi BBB_UK (again !),

Once again tend to agree with you on your points relating to businesses having to publicise the cost of the call.  This all relates to more price transparency and I'm afraid this should not be down to CPs - it should dictated by Ofcom...

Our view is that the NTS review has just added further confusion on NTS pricing and will confuse the consumer even more.

At least via www.0870advice.com we're attempting to keep businesses informed - surely this is a step forward ?

Cheers,
0870Advice

Companies have used the income from these calls to subsidise their outgoing call costs for years. Providers such as Energis set up some of the earliest 0870 numbers, and it was clearly stated near the beginning that calls could be connected for 3 or 4 pence a minute, and the rest of the 8 pence revenue was available to be shared.

If  there is such an administrative overhead in launching new phone numbers, why do large companies keep introducing yet more of them? And how often do websites need to be updated for other reasons?

Why do we need to spare a thought for these large companies that charge labour rates of £100 to £200 an hour? Can't they afford the minuscule proportion of this they spend on phone bills?


You mention 600,000. Is that numbers or companies? I strongly suspect the former as smaller businesses have not been so seduced into this practice.

A randomly chosen page in the local phone book has 22 such numbers out of over 200, for only 8 bodies none of them resident in the area.

Actually, perhaps that one's not so random as it includes British Airways and British Gas, so I looked at a page in the Fs. There are 3x 0800, 4x 0845, 4x0870. These companies and other bodies are from Bristol, Cardiff, Coventry, Edinburgh, Glenrothes, Leeds and other such dispersed places, so we might assume they are in almost every directory in the country.

Only 3 NGNs (1 each 0800, 0845, 0870) are from this phone book area out of two pages containing over 400 results, so I reckon up to 99% of businesses do not use such numbers. If your 600,000 businesses claim is correct and relates to 1 or 2% of the total, that could mean there are more businesses in the country than adult people.


I have (had) 6 NGNs myself - 4 fax to email numbers (one 0870 defunct and an 0845 that does not work), and two 0560 numbers. I hope nobody is counting me as 6 businesses that will have to spend money changing these, as only three bodies know one fax number, and 2 people recognised the 0560 caller ID when I called them 3 times in a day from a foreign mobile

0870advice.com wrote on Nov 9^th, 2006 at 12:30pm:

We're not trying to hide the fact we're a CP in any way at all.  We initially put www.0870advice.com up for our existing business clients to understand the history of this decision, the impact it may have on their business and what viable options they may have going forward.

Which is commendable except the website still maintains the deception that 084x is local and 087x is national rate and implying that its not worth companies keeping with 0870 as they've to pay an incoming per minute charge - and similar things for 0845 where you state that an incoming per minute charge is payable.  All this is untrue as many companies don't charge for incoming calls on 0845 numbers (as I mentioned earlier).


Quote:

I agree with you entirely that there was a need for more price transparency in relation to the cost of 0870 and 0845 etc - do you really think this has been achieved by the Ofcom proposals ?

They've tried a little but too late though if you ask me as consumer confusion over 08 NTS numbers being local/national rate is too much especially when teleco's still misleadingly state these calls are local/national rate.  They could do a lot more but are unwilling so as not to hurt companies, teleco's using these numbers.


0870advice.com wrote on Nov 9^th, 2006 at 12:41pm:

Once again tend to agree with you on your points relating to businesses having to publicise the cost of the call.  This all relates to more price transparency and I'm afraid this should not be down to CPs - it should dictated by Ofcom

If you're referring to my points on the fact that CPs misleadingly state that calls to 08 NTS numbers are charged at local/national rate then I disagree because it is the teleco that is misleading customers so Ofcom shouldn't have to force teleco's to stop this misleading claim as its the teleco that are being dishonest.  On the other hand, it is very clear that teleco's want to continue this lie about local/national rate so now Ofcom should force teleco's such as yours to stop these misleading claims.

The point is this misleading lie is too widespread to expect teleco's to do this of their own accord especially as they (teleco's) don't want to tell the truth as their profit margins would be affected by it so instead continue the lie and the scam so they (teleco's) can continue to get more customers (ie businesses) signing up to these so-called local/national rate numbers on false pretences.

Teleco's want to keep these lies so bad that most have not complied with Ofcom's regulation that OCPs (those that have control of prices of these calls) should clearly state on the same page and in similar format as existing geographical numbers, how much calls to NTS numbers actually are and that they're excluded.

This regulation came into force about 3 months ago now but yet hardly any OCP has actually complied with it - not even BT - simply because OCPs don't want us consumers knowing just how much these calls actually cost and that in most cases they're not included in any inclusive tariffs we may have.

This was discussed more in this thread which I think clearly shows how far OCPs will go to continue to mislead their customers and rob them blind.

Dear BBB_UK,

We need to clear something up here...

CPs sell 0845 and 0870 numbers to businesses who are 'fully aware' of what the cost will be to their customers.

We have no control of whether they then publicise the actual cost of the call to their customers.

It is the consumers who need to be made fully aware of the cost of 0845 and 0870 numbers and the consumers need to be made aware of the now inaccurate association with local and national rates.

As I said right at the start... We were in total agreement that there was (and still is) a need for more price transparency.

These proposals from Ofcom just make things even more confusing for the consumer...

It should be down to Ofcom (or associated Government bodies) to either dictate that businesses publicise the cost of the call to the consumer (as with Premium rate) or run some sort of publicity campaign to try and make more consumers aware.

I don't agree that the responsibility lies with the CPs - all of our customers are fully aware of the cost to the caller of any NTS number we provide.

Additionally, as I stated in first post... Whatever NTS number we provide we make a similar margin - 0800, 0844, 0845, 0870, 0871 etc - so there is no incentive for us to 'keep these lies so bad' !

Cheers,
0870Advice

This is nothing but SPAM by the back door. Why is it being allowed?

0870advice.com wrote on Nov 9^th, 2006 at 3:23pm:

CPs sell 0845 and 0870 numbers to businesses who are 'fully aware' of what the cost will be to their customers.

Yes CPs do but they do so by misleadingly advertising that 084x is local rate and 087x is national rate so then businesses think well consumers are only being charged local or national rate for any call to them.

Ofcom, ASA and Trading Standards all agree that describing 08 NTS calls as either local rate or national rate is misleading but so far Ofcom fail to do anything.  The ASA and Trading Standards do enforce hence why in non-broadcast adverts you now see the actual cost of calls to 08 NTS numbers and no longer can you mention they are local or national rate.

For example, your GoldNumbers website clearly is misleading potential customers and can be reported to Trading Standards but I personally think that Ofcom has to force CPs to stop these misleading lies about local or national rate simply because there are so many OCPs and CPs that still continue this lie.


Quote:

We have no control of whether they then publicise the actual cost of the call to their customers.

I realise CPs have no control over the cost hence why 08 NTS numbers can cost upto 40p/min from some mobile networks.  I was referring to OCP (those that actually have control over how they charge to certain number ranges like BT, NTL, TalkTalk, etc) they are currently required to provide clear/transparent info for us consumers but in most cases choose not to.  Ofcom are aware of this and are looking into it but as its seems to be standard practice for Ofcom to take 6 months plus to investigate these things - us consumers suffer in the interim.  This is not your fault as a CP and I admit that - it's Original Communication Providers that are obliged to follow this new regulation but so far fail.


Quote:

It is the consumers who need to be made fully aware of the cost of 0845 and 0870 numbers and the consumers need to be made aware of the now inaccurate association with local and national rates.

How can any reasonable person expect a consumers to be fully aware of the inaccuracies associated with 08 and their continued misleading descriptions of local rate and national rate when ALL OCP's and CP purposely still continue to go around misleading people with these inaccuracies.

Basically, even if a consumer did have some doubts about the cost of these calls then they would naturally visit their OCP website or any other OCP or CP for which it would basically state that NTS calls are local rate and national rate so therefore it is perfectly reasonable for a consumer to think that's its true simply due to how many teleco's actually still continue this lie.


Quote:

As I said right at the start... We were in total agreement that there was (and still is) a need for more price transparency.

Yes we are in agreement that there needs to be more price transparency but what I'm saying is that it doesn't help consumers become more aware of the 'actual' costs of these numbers if they are continually described as being either local rate or national rate.  A real local or national rate (ie geographical call) costs a maximum of 3p/min from a BT landline regardless of if you call someone around the corner or calling from London to Scotland - it all costs 3p/min.

It does become misleading when CPs state that calls to 084x/087x are either local rate or national rate simply because they would end up paying more for the call than a proper local rate or national rate.

acezing wrote on Nov 9^th, 2006 at 3:24pm:

This is nothing but SPAM by the back door. Why is it being allowed?

Clearly if it suits the mod its ok to keep plastering links that lead to ngn suppliers. 7 links in this thread alone? Which conveniently brings up their Google Ad at top of page!!!

I employed a landscape gardener when I moved into my new bungalow - to do the 'hard landscaping' I think it's called.

He was a one man band.

He had an 0800 number.

Why is it that UK companies which employ hundreds or even thousands don't have 0800 numbers too (like they do in the States)?

Sorry, I'll answer the question myself to save others the bother.

Greed!

Hi BBB_UK,

Still a slight mis-understanding.  Obviously, I agree with what you're saying regarding OCPs and I bet you're as worried as we are about the potential 'mis-use' of the network level message on 0870 calls post Feb 2008...

I was trying to explain that we have no influence on making our clients promote an 0845 number to their consumers at 3.95ppm - ie on a brochure or website or advert - call XXX company on 0845 123 4567 (call costs 3.95ppm) - as they would have to do with Premium Rate.  This should be down to Ofcom to potentially enforce.

I think what we're highlighting here is that this is a very complex area and we have done our best to inform our clients and now the wider business 0870 users of what the Ofcom proposals actually mean and what viable options they have going forward.

Maybe there's a need to do something similar (from an independent stand point) for the consumer - ie 'NTStransparency.com' or 'therealcostof08xx.com' or whatever ?  Maybe it's even something we could work on together... ?

Anyway, it's great to see consumers actually effect change and congratulations on the site and all you've achieved.

All the best,
0870Advice

acezing wrote on Nov 9^th, 2006 at 4:10pm:

Clearly if it suits the mod its ok to keep plastering links that lead to ngn suppliers. 7 links in this thread alone? Which conveniently brings up their Google Ad at top of page!!!

It's very difficult to have a conversation about these NTS numbers without, as in this case, mentioning a website or company that use or sell them.  The google Adsense is not picking up on the website I've mentioned, it's the fact that I've had to mention 'NTS' 0845, etc in this thread.

As I said, it's difficult to have a conversation without mentioning these numbers and it is this and anything else that is discussed that Google AdSense works.

Heinz wrote on Nov 9^th, 2006 at 4:51pm:

Why is it that UK companies which employ hundreds or even thousands don't have 0800 numbers too (like they do in the States)?

It is extremely common to have freephone numbers in the states and companies like BA use freephone in the states but 0870 here in the UK!!?!?

I believe its because its become the "norm" to have an NTS (mostly 0870) number in this country especially as the government themselves use them!

I have no idea of the cost difference of running a freephone in the UK compared to the states.  It could be a lot more expensive to run a freephone in the UK compared to the states which is inkeeping with us being in ROB (Rip Off Britain).

bbb_uk wrote on Nov 9^th, 2006 at 5:02pm:

I have no idea of the cost difference of running a freephone in the UK compared to the states.  It could be a lot more expensive to run a freephone in the UK compared to the states which is inkeeping with us being in ROB (Rip Off Britain).

But, as I said, if a one man band can afford it .........

0870advice.com wrote on Nov 9^th, 2006 at 4:52pm:

I was trying to explain that we have no influence on making our clients promote an 0845 number to their consumers at 3.95ppm - ie on a brochure or website or advert - call XXX company on 0845 123 4567 (call costs 3.95ppm) - as they would have to do with Premium Rate.  This should be down to Ofcom to potentially enforce.

I totally agree you have no control over this but I was referring to the fact that you mislead your own customers (businesses) by stating 0845 is local rate and 0870 is national rate.  You are clearly aware that you are misleading your customers and this could be brought to the attention of your local trading standards for misleading potential customers.  When I say 'local' or 'national' rate I don't just mean stating the cost I was talking about the misleading use of the two phrases, 'local and 'national'.  Both these phrases, by definition, could easily imply that 0845 costs the exact same as a real/geographical local number and that 087x costs the same as a real/geographical national number but I know you are aware that there are differences in prices.

This is why so many consumers are still confused simply because of the continuing misleading description of 'local' rate and 'national' rate.

Many years ago 0845 was local rate (and cost the same as a local geographical call) and 0870 was national rate (and cost the same as a national geographical call) but this changed two years ago due to competition, etc but yet CPs still misleadingly continue with these two phrases despite the fact it's not true at all and hasn't been for 2 years.

I'm sure the ASA ruled that a CP couldn't mention that 0845 was local rate and 0870 was national rate, etc.  Does anyone still have this link by any chance?

As I said in a thread earlier on today, I am very concerned that people are being sidetracked about the cost of ngn calls being PUBLICISED.   I KNOW they are more expensive & not included in my call package BUT THAT DOESN'T HELP ME WHEN I HAVE TO CALL THEM!   What I want is a legal compulsion on ALL users of ngns to provide a geographical alternative that IS included in my call package.   I don't care if this causes the organisation problems or if I have to hold for longer or call back  or whatever because at least it won't cost me anything!

bbb_uk wrote on Nov 9^th, 2006 at 2:13pm:

This regulation came into force about 3 months ago now but yet hardly any OCP has actually complied with it - not even BT - simply because OCPs don't want us consumers knowing just how much these calls actually cost and that in most cases they're not included in any inclusive tariffs we may have. This was discussed more in this thread which I think clearly shows how far OCPs will go to continue to mislead their customers and rob them blind.

Presumably this is because of the recognition that Ofcom is an utterly incompetent and/or more likely utterly corrupt toothless tiger who will never ever fine a good old business bro of Stephen Carter or David Currie in the telco industry when it would be easier just to let down the general public again content in the knowledge that nobody can ever fire the useless board directors or their other complacent 2nd level named but not actual "director" henchmen all earning in excess of £100,000 per annum total salary package. >:( >:( >:(

I suspect this could be a good issue to go to one's MP over asking for a complaint to be referred to the Parliamentary Ombudsman.

bbb_uk wrote on Nov 9^th, 2006 at 4:57pm:

acezing wrote on Nov 9th, 2006 at 4:10pm: Clearly if it suits the mod its ok to keep plastering links that lead to ngn suppliers. 7 links in this thread alone? Which conveniently brings up their Google Ad at top of page!!! It's very difficult to have a conversation about these NTS numbers without, as in this case, mentioning a website or company that use or sell them.  The google Adsense is not picking up on the website I've mentioned, it's the fact that I've had to mention 'NTS' 0845, etc in this thread. As I said, it's difficult to have a conversation without mentioning these numbers and it is this and anything else that is discussed that Google AdSense works.

You could remove the links,could you not.

bbb_uk wrote on Nov 9^th, 2006 at 5:08pm:

I'm sure the ASA ruled that a CP couldn't mention that 0845 was local rate and 0870 was national rate, etc.  Does anyone still have this link by any chance?

See the Artiste :) formerly known as NGM recent post in this thread.

http://www.saynoto0870.com/cgi-bin/forum/YaBB.cgi?num=1163008795

~ Quote box tidied up by Dave

Barbara wrote on Nov 9^th, 2006 at 5:16pm:

I KNOW they are more expensive & not included in my call package BUT THAT DOESN'T HELP ME WHEN I HAVE TO CALL THEM!   What I want is a legal compulsion on ALL users of ngns to provide a geographical alternative that IS included in my call package.!

Mr Matt Peacock, Communications Director of Ofcom, gave an unequivocal public commitment on a BBC Radio 4 You & Yours program two years ago that Ofcom would at the very least force businesses with 084/7 numbers to publish a geographic alternative number.

Unfortunately like most commitments on this matter by Ofcom personnel Mr Peacock's commitment has not been honoured and has been proven to be utterly worthless.  Perhaps though the commitment given at that time was just a matter of public display though? ;)

You have to face it Barbara that Ofcom have clearly received instructions from on high in the New Labour apparatus to keep this scam going so as not to destroy the valuable teelcoms businesses of various important New Labour friends.

The fact that they now select 0370 for the geographically priced non geographic number range goes to show just how throughly they deliberately try to mislead the public over the cost of the number they are likely to be calling.

Heinz wrote on Nov 9^th, 2006 at 4:51pm:

Why is it that UK companies which employ hundreds or even thousands don't have 0800 numbers too (like they do in the States)?

There are some American companies operating in the UK who do deploy the same telecoms strategy as they use back home across all their telephone contact numbers.  MBNA use 0800 numbers for all forms of customer contact. [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

See www.mbna.co.uk/contact/index.html

bbb_uk wrote on Nov 9^th, 2006 at 5:02pm:

I believe its because its become the "norm" to have an NTS (mostly 0870) number in this country especially as the government themselves use them! I have no idea of the cost difference of running a freephone in the UK compared to the states.  It could be a lot more expensive to run a freephone in the UK compared to the states which is inkeeping with us being in ROB (Rip Off Britain).

Its not because 0870 is the norm so much as because its hidden and these scam lines aren't forced on to Premium 09 and made to state the revenue share they earn per minute to callers.

I would imagine having an 800 number in the USA doesn't require you to pay much more than the cost of making a normal geographic phone call.

Ofcom and their predecessor OFTEL are entirely to blame for the organised Mafia like scamming that pervades the whole 084/7 NGN Industry.  Well them and New Labour and New Labour Cronies in business who are behind the whole sordid industry.

0870advice.com wrote on Nov 9^th, 2006 at 8:45am:

So… who actually benefits from these Ofcom proposals ?

Both companies like yours that sell the numbers and take part of the revenue share and the scam UK businesses who run these numbers and will continue to be able to earn hidden premium rate revenue share regulated by ICSTIS bit incredibly no longer presented to the public as or called Premium Rate.  Or just carry on without control at all on 0844 at 5p per minute at all times as scammers NEG have done with all the doctors surgeries practice managers they have encouraged to ripoff their patients.

The Ofcom proposals are deliberately and cynically intended to be seen to be doing something about 0870 whilst Ofcom knows full well that all the scams on 0870 will simply transfer to 0844 or 0871 at 5p or 10p per minute.  The only exception will be the BBC and major government agency contact centres who will find moving to 0871 politically unacceptable.

If you really objected to this whole scam you wouldn't have been selling it and earning your living from it and instead would have been finding a way to keep all your telecoms customers on PSTN 01/02 or Voip based 01/02 Geographic Numbers (which do exist as www.sipgate.co.uk shows).

NGMsGhost wrote on Nov 9^th, 2006 at 5:28pm:

There are some American companies operating in the UK who do deploy the same telecoms strategy as they use back home across all their telephone contact numbers.  MBNA use 0800 numbers for all forms of customer contact. [smiley=thumbsup.gif] See www.mbna.co.uk/contact/index.html

And I'll give you one guess which credit card company I use.

Heinz wrote on Nov 9^th, 2006 at 5:56pm:

And I'll give you one guess which credit card company I use.

I hope you also have their Conran Visa card which gives you 1% cashback on everything you spend.

www.conran.co.uk/activities/creditcard.html

Actually they have also lent me £12,000 interest free for 10 months for only a £50 cash advance fee.  I should earn over £300 net on that little deal from deposit account interest.

Such jolly nice chaps MBNA.

In response to NGM's ghost posting....

VoIP is an exciting development for the industry and for businesses alike, however to just assume that businesses can simply adopt VoIP straight away into their call handling processes it somewhat naive.  Most businesses have already incurred expense of installing expensive phone systems and the pain and cost of change, whilst VoIP is still undergoing yet further development (the quality is not yet up to the standard of circuit switched telephony) is difficult to justify in most cases.  You also need to consider the fact that many business VoIP systems are particularly feature rich and can require significant technical knowledge to get them to work the way they are intended to.  We all know the problems we face day to day with PC's, many VoIP applications and systems bring with them similar technical challenges for the user.  Whilst many companies that have come into the telco arena with VoIP offerings sing the praises of the technology, as they would do, the fact is that it is not an adequately reliable and high quality solution at this point in time.  If anyone out there has had problems in the past with their broadband link, which no doubt is most of you, you'll understand that if a business relies of VoIP connected by a broadband service, they will have no phones each time that broadband service fails!  This is a key reason why businesses have yet to embrace VoIP.  In addition to this, as margins are squeezed and squeezed more and more in the telco industry, which has benefitted consumers massively, there will be less and less competition in the market place and development will be stifled.  You can't expect change overnight, the same businesses that are getting lambasted as greedy and profiteering are also those that are paying salaries of hundreds of thousands of us.  

Changes were definately due, and the industry on the whole put forward lots of very good ideas for change which provided for price transparency for the consumer, simplified numbering and greater opportunity for businesses to manage their calls and lower their costs.  Ofcom pretty much ignored all these proposals, choosing instead to stick with their own proposals which practice don't work technically, don't provide price transparency in the way we would all like, leave the door open to further scams and give business a major headache to boot!  

In any case, it is too late to change this ruling now and we all have to work with it.  Businesses need to wake up to these changes and start planning now.  I think consumers can expect quite a few organisations to struggle with managing the change and the impact this will have on their call handling performance for the next few years will inevitably have a knock on effect on the consumer.  We are all set for deeper confusion in the years to come and perhaps when the ruling comes into effect Ofcom will realise that they have made some serious errors with these changes that are largely unsatisfactory for everyone other than BT.

0870advice.com wrote on Nov 9^th, 2006 at 7:12pm:

I think consumers can expect quite a few organisations to struggle with managing the change and the impact this will have on their call handling performance for the next few years will inevitably have a knock on effect on the consumer.

Taking Sky as the obvious example, heaven help us if their customer (dis)service suffers as a result!  We'll be waiting DAYS for a reply!

0870advice.com wrote on Nov 9^th, 2006 at 7:12pm:

Changes were definately due, and the industry on the whole put forward lots of very good ideas for change which provided for price transparency for the consumer, simplified numbering and greater opportunity for businesses to manage their calls and lower their costs.  Ofcom pretty much ignored all these proposals, choosing instead to stick with their own proposals which practice don't work technically, don't provide price transparency in the way we would all like, leave the door open to further scams and give business a major headache to boot!   In any case, it is too late to change this ruling now and we all have to work with it.

OK its clear that unlike some other NGN vendors who have posted here you do have a good understanding of the bigger picture and are a relatively intelligent and also fair minded person and so I think have been rather unfairly pilloried by some other forum members since you clearly haven't tried to insult our intelligence by claiming that 0845 and 0870 are local/national rate etc.  Nonetheless the website of the company you appear to be involved with does give us cause for concern on that score.

You must surely accept that 0845 and 0870 would never have been adopted by business in the way they have been if they hadn't been repeatedly sold the lie that it was a "free meal" where they got a revenue share or subsidised phone equipment and allegedly their callers still only paid local or national rate.  Unfortunately this was never ever true and became less and true over the years and in the end even for those residential phone customers lazy enough never to have moved away from BT.  Also the fact that the market cost of calls in 084/7 is driven not by consumers trying to lower them but instead by the call centre industry and their clients trying to outbid each other to offer or receive a higher and higher revenue share deal.

The solution we all here believe should have happened is that 08 should have been returned to Freephone only use and revenue sharers given the choice only of moving to 09 with full ICSTIS price disclosure (not the outrageous watered down form for 0871 that Ofcom Toady ICSTIS have now proposed) or moving to 03 where your clients pay the extra cost of call redirection and call features etc but at least they as large players are in a position to force the current disraceful prices charged for NGN convenience (not least to 0800 users if they have no feature at all other than the billing being reversed)

Matt Peacock Communications Director of Ofcom was interviewed on BBC Radio 4 You & Yours in Nov 2004 and claimed 084/7 call centre operators would be forced to publish the geographic alternatives by Ofcom as a minimum but that never happened and Ofcom allowing 0845 revenue share to carry on when it is mainly used by the charitable and public sector for voice calls is nothing short of a total outrage.  By Feb 2008 there will only be modest 0845 dial up traffic left and it should all have been forced to migrate to lower cost 0844 or 0808 solutions.  Anything that forced it to move in the direction of broadband would in any case have been a good thing.

I presume your preferred solution would possibly be that 0845 and 0870 became charged at geographic rates and 0844 and 0871 range users would be forced to migrate to a proper 09 code prefix?

However with reference to the alleged difficulties of these call centres changing number I really think this is a load of nonsense as new number ranges can be introduced and publicised straight away and the old number ranges being closed are merely then kept going for 6 or 9 months and then withdrawn after leaflets and stationery have changed.  The whole history of the big national number change from 0 to 01 preficed dialling codes and London changing from 01 to 0171 and 0181 and then to 020 shows that such parallel running for a cutover period is pretty straight forward to manage in practice.

The only real reason your clients make excuses about the difficulties of changing numbers to be quite blunt is because they don't want to give up the revenue share.

As to BT.  BT speak with forked tongue and Iain Livingston says the whole of 084 and 087 is a scam that must go while the BT response to the 0871 ICSTIS Pre-Consultation says the scam proposals there for a new hidden trojan premium rate class are perfectly acceptable.  The big corporate side of BT wants to claim it is there for the public but the scamming side of BT that has just introduced a 20% price hike in 01/02 call prices wants to go on raking is as high level of profit as it can.

But I repeat some forum members have been rather unfair to you because you are clearly trying to have an intelligent debate with us rather than just simply trying to pretend that 084/7 numbers are the only basis on which it is now possible to operate large UK call centres.

The issues are quite straightforward.

• Providing proper pricing information for these numbers is simply shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted. The industry has mislead consumers into thinking that these calls cost a particular price. You can't simply say that really the true cost is y and expect everything to be OK. The demand of a product is related to its price. The misleading pricing labels leave consumers with the perception that the rates are lower than they actually are. The product has been 'sold' on the basis that it is priced lower than it really is.
  
• The whole framework for these numbers never allowed for competition on retail price. The only competition is at the receiver's end (as NGMsGhost has pointed out).
  
• Any company operating a national rate number (where geographical rates are different for local and national calls) is disadvantaging local customers. Where do (did) these extra call charges go? Was this the real reason BT set up 0990 numbers?

Finally, perhaps you would like provide a link to Say no to 0870 from your 0870Advice website, to allow businesses to see what consumers think.  :-?

Thank you for your acknowledgement!  I'll answer a few of your points before signing off....

People that run businesses are smart people (for the most part) and selling lies to them results in one thing....very few sales !  I disagree with your point here and would say that virtually all businesses are fully aware of what the caller is paying to call their business!  The fact is that the regulatory environment has allowed for this and businesses owners have made decissions based on finance, which is a plain fact of life commercial approach of most business owners... keep costs down, increase revenue, increase profits, maximise resources etc.!  The only way those of us working for a private enterprise will get a salary is if that business is making a profit.  The regulatory environment has allowed for the growth in the use of 0870 whether this is right or wrong, its not the fault of the business owners, they are following basic business principles.  

I disagree that 0870 / 0845 were never national / local rate, they were infact tied to the BT standard national and local rate up until quite recently, although non discountable.  The problem for an organisation in publishing geographic numbering is that it is so inflexible with respect to growth or relocation.  Management information is hard to gain, and its difficult to manage call flow and the callers experience without significant hardware investment.  Whether it is right or wrong, the flexibity offered by NGN's is the major contributory factor to the growth in their use.  Revenue share is rarely the key driver and is normally a drop in the ocean compared with the savings a business realises by maximising staff and infrastructure resources.  It is simply not possible to get the same level of call handling performance using geographic numbering versus non geographic numbering.  Business owners can gain all the benefits of NGN's with freephone, but simple business principles tend to apply and many decide that rather than pay many thousands of pounds to receive calls, they will generate an income which they can then invest back into call handling efficiency, possibly more staff too!  This may sound one sided but in my experience this is the most common approach from a business, they all want to receive more calls and answer them more quickly so they can sell you more stuff.  In an ideal world every business would pay for us all to call them, but that can put strain on an enterprise because it often encourages lots of time waster calls, which is more of a problem in terms of the staff time wasted (which is expensive) versus funding the cost of the call.  Many organisations choose to use higher charging NGN's as a deterrant to time waster calls where information a caller may require can be found on a website or in a manual.  

Can you remember back to the old days when you would try to reach an organisation who would be constantly engaged?  They didn't even know how many people where trying to reach them and it would drive you crazy that you couldn't get through without countless redialling.  How often does this happen now when you try to reach a business that uses 08 numbers?  

My preferred solution would actually be a very simple and transparent approach to the numbering scheme, which would be easy for the public to recognise from the number they are dialling exactly what they are paying for the call, whilst at the same time giving lots of choice to the business owner for the band of charge the caller pays v's revenue stream they do / don't receive.  Such as the following

080X   = Free to Caller
081X   = 1ppm to Caller
082X   = 2ppm to Caller
083X   = 3ppm to Caller
084X   = 4ppm to Caller
085X   = 5ppm to Caller
086X   = 6ppm to Caller
087X   = 7ppm to Caller
088X   = 8ppm to Caller
089X   = 9ppm to Caller

Such a numbering scheme is straight forward and transparent, provides a breadth of choice for businesses, provides the industry with opportunity to further develop services and help businesses manage their customer calls, requires little change from the current numbering scheme, provides minimal disruption to business and could be backed up with the 03XX range for public bodies.  Remember I am saying this would be my preferred approach, I don't expect you guys to agree to it, but I'm sure you can see how easy it would be for the consumer to know exactly what they are paying for a call.  We would all like all our calls to be free, but that is never going to happen so long as the telco industry employs people that need to feed their children etc.  

The changing numbers problem is real.  Many businesses will have to respray vehicle fleets, most will have to reprint stationary but the biggest problem is that numbers stay in the public domain for a long time....for example, numbers printed on tins of paint, packaging, warrentees, catalogues etc. can often be dialled years after they are printed and a business has relocated.  This is why it is so important for businesses to avoid changing numbers if at all possible.  Changes in the big number change are somewhat different as it involved a universal change to just the prefix.  

I agree that numbers with a high call charge should be premium rated and possibly fall under the 09 prefix, the problem here again is that this numbering system is not clear to the caller with so many bands its impossible to tell from the prefix (unless you are Rain Man!) what the call will cost!

I also wanted to say that the GN website is somewhat out of date, for over a year now the inbound specialising telecoms industry has been in a state of paralysis.  Any business owner in their right mind is not going to make a decission with wholesale regulatory change around the corner which could result in having to make a complete u-turn.  Our website will be replaced with an update next week where no mention is made of local and national rate, although 0845 and 0870 is still in our offering.  Over the passed year we have spent our time focusing on existing customers and helping them to improve their call handling performance and in tandem with this we have spent a great deal of time lobbying Ofcom, proposing alternatives to their own measures which would have achieved many of the goals aspired to by this site, but sadly Ofcom have pushed ahead with changes that are poorly thought out and technically flawed.  

An example of this, which many of you won't have picked up on is that when you dial an 0870 number from Feb 08, if the service provider you subscribe to choses to charge a rate for the call that is higher than the rate for an 01 or 02 call on your call plan, all they have to do is play a free to caller message at the start of the call notifying you of the charge.  This will allow them to charge whatever they want to for that call.  Not only this but, the owner of the 0870 number will be powerless to prevent this and will not benefit from any of that call charge, and this is the same for the host of the 0870 who will also be powerless to prevent this.  If NTL or Vodafone or any other significant network chose to do this, then they are free to charge 50p per minute or £1 per minute, whatever they want....imagine the damage that could be done to the reputation of business that owns that number!

Did you know that most calls to 0870 numbers are made whilst people are at work during business hours, businesses are largely funding their own revenue sharing as their staff make significant number of personal calls from work phones and on work time!  Outside of normal working hours, the cost to call an 0870 number is 4ppm in the evening and 2ppm at weekends, half this amount for 0845.  Where calls aren't made from work phones, many are now made from mobile phones (many of these provided by work!).  Those in the inudstry (the fixed line industry) are for the most part united against the abhorent abuse of surcharging to NGN's that goes on by the mobile networks.  I'm sure you are aware that the mobile networks surcharge for NGN calls, including calls to freephone numbers and that these charges can be as high as £1.20 per minute for calls to 0870, 0845 & 0800 calls on some pay as you go tariffs.  Pay as you go customers being the lowest paid and most financially vulnerable in our society!  Are you surprised to learn that Ofcom have completely ignored this issue within their numbering review, despite pressure from the fixed line industry to clamp down on it?  

Having said the above, the mobile networks have given us all access to some amazing technology that few of us can imagine being without now, and we should remember the vast sums of money they are trying to recoup back from the consumer as a result of the incredible amounts they paid to the treasury for 3G licences just a few years ago !  

I hope that what I've told you here today gives you a broader picture and you will have a greater understanding and appreciation of the difficulties that businesses and service poviders now face.  I firmly beleive that there is a solution to all these issues that would be acceptable to the public, whilst providing for the needs of businesses and the industry.  Unfortunatley Ofcoms measures fall a long way short of this.

Thanks for listening.

0870advice.com

. . . . Interesting debate, I agree Businesses should be allowed 0870 numbers (Sorry Guys) But I also have a stronger belief that Customers should not have to pay stupid prices (Up to 40 PPM from mobiles) to call banks/ISP's etc when they dont need to, simply by using this website to find the geographical number... I think OFCOM should make companies publicise the price of these calls as many people are vulnerable and do not understand the 087* numbers CAN cost more than the dreaded 090 numbers!!!

I also think that if businesses want more trade (Or at least mine and a few other forum members who have stated the same) they should give there geographical number out on request or even publish it... I personally would choose an ISP that gives me a geo/0800 number over an ISP with an 0871 number. (Some ISP's (And I emphasise the word SOME) use 0871 numbers to offset the cost of forwarding the calls to india and keeping jobs in the UK to a minimum!!!)

Or even better, ask customers what number they would want to ring, an 087* number that is supposed to make the company look professional or a geographical number that everybody has anyway!!! (INCLUDING THE COMPANIES WITH THE 087* NUMBERS) or a number that looks a little less professional (In some peoples opinion) and it would cost them 0-5ppm max???

Sorry if I am off topic or dont sound like I know what I am saying, I am new to this and would like to post my personal opinion

[edit]I know this post is going to get ripped to shreads... but please bear in mind it is 2am... lol[/edit]

0870advice.com wrote on Nov 10^th, 2006 at 12:20am:

Did you know that most calls to 0870 numbers are made whilst people are at work during business hours, businesses are largely funding their own revenue sharing as their staff make significant number of personal calls from work phones and on work time!  Outside of normal working hours, the cost to call an 0870 number is 4ppm in the evening and 2ppm at weekends, half this amount for 0845.  Where calls aren't made from work phones, many are now made from mobile phones (many of these provided by work!).  Those in the inudstry (the fixed line industry) are for the most part united against the abhorent abuse of surcharging to NGN's that goes on by the mobile networks.  I'm sure you are aware that the mobile networks surcharge for NGN calls, including calls to freephone numbers and that these charges can be as high as £1.20 per minute for calls to 0870, 0845 & 0800 calls on some pay as you go tariffs.  Pay as you go customers being the lowest paid and most financially vulnerable in our society!  Are you surprised to learn that Ofcom have completely ignored this issue within their numbering review, despite pressure from the fixed line industry to clamp down on it?

That is the whole point to this website, TO SAY NO TO 0870 AND OTHER NON GEO NUMBERS SO YOU DONT HAVE TO PAY THE £1.20 PM as you stated!!!

0870advice.com wrote on Nov 9^th, 2006 at 11:37pm:

Can you remember back to the old days when you would try to reach an organisation who would be constantly engaged?  They didn't even know how many people where trying to reach them and it would drive you crazy that you couldn't get through without countless redialling.  How often does this happen now when you try to reach a business that uses 08 numbers?

I don't think it is necessarily the phone number that is achieving that, but cheaoer and better equipment.

But it doesn't all work properly - just try calling the Inland Revenue some time. The Livingston office has no details of my affairs as they only deal with people in Scotland, so one wonders why the phone system connects the call several hundred miles instead of to 3 miles away, which a local number might manage more easily

And the Halifax found that it was impossible to connect me to the right department, and the clever phone system three times transferred me back to the same place. In the end a manager called me back. In January 95 they had only 10 people in the call centre for telephone banking, and no call queues at all.

0870advice.com wrote on Nov 10^th, 2006 at 12:20am:

I'm sure you are aware that the mobile networks surcharge for NGN calls, including calls to freephone numbers and that these charges can be as high as £1.20 per minute for calls to 0870, 0845 & 0800 calls on some pay as you go tariffs.

No I'm not.

Please supply evidence of tariffs over £1 a minute, as I'm unaware that any network or mvno charges more than fractions of that. We aren't talking about roaming tariffs.

Most networks charge between 5 and 30 pence a minute, broadly similar or actually the same as other UK calls. In fact, on tariffs where calls cost more to other networks, NGNs are almost always cheaper than these, eg

O2 NGNs 15p , vs 35p or 25p>5p on landline or O2 calls, or 40p mobiles on other networks

Orange - NGNs 25p, to Orange 10p, landlines 25p, , other mobiles 35p

Vodafone - identical to other calls on latest tariffs

easyMobile 15p for all calls

Virgin 10p or 15p NGNs vs 15p>5p landlines and Virgin, 35p others

T-mobile - I need to check, but may be more than the new 12p tariff for other calls

3 - NGNs 15p (check ?), 3 10p, landlines 15p, other mobiles 30p

On superseded tariffs, one of the cheapest is OVP Virgin where 0845 is 10p all the time, and strangely 0870 drops to 5p after 5 minutes.

I'm sorry, but whilst people are upset about the cost of NGN numbers, emotive fabrication of call charges over £1 a minute does nothing to help rational  discussion, especially when they are on average probably cheaper than other off-network calls.

Let us look at Vodafone Passport in most major EU countries:-

01/02 calls - a flat 75p per call then calls out of bundled minutes on contract or at your prevailing PAYG tariff from 5p to 30p per minute depending on time of day and tariff.

0870 calls - 99p per minute at all times.

A 1 hour call to 0870 might costs just 75p.  A 1 hour call to 0870 would cost £59" :o :o

It seems to me entirely realistic to worry about the premium rate surcharges charged for these numbers from other EU countries when numbers such as credit card loss notification lines often use 0870.  Also given that NEG expects you to use an 0870 number to contact their doctor surgery clients from overseas this again appears to be an entirely valid comparison.

Also back in the UK let us look at Vodafone Stop the Clock on PAYG which lets you call an 01/02 number for up to 60 minutes for the cost of 3 minutes after 7.30pm at night and all weekend on some PAYG tariffs. This will usually total either 15p or 30p for the call for one hour depending on the Stop the Clock qualifying tariff you are on.  But 084/7 numbers will go on being charged per minute and are excluded from Stop the Clock and will cost between £3.00 and £6.00 per hour depending on the qualifying Stop the Clock tariff you are on.  A price differential between 084/7 and other call tariffs of a staggering 2000%  These differential levels of charging cannot possibly be justified and there isn't even an announcement to tell you which calls do and which calls do not qualify for Stop The Clock.

Tmobile's special tariffs page for Pay As You Go does not explain whether or not they regard 084/7 as being "special tariff numbers" and if so which kind.  Their main price page for Pay As You Go also fails to clarify whether they regard 084/7 as special rate calls or not.

0870advice.com wrote on Nov 9^th, 2006 at 11:37pm:

People that run businesses are smart people (for the most part) and selling lies to them results in one thing....very few sales !

Things have changed greatly since the 1950s when my father started in business but many successful people today are unfortunately extremely selfish complusive obsessive types who put the making of profit and success in their own career ahead of all other moral and ethical considerations.  They are often prepared to breach moral and ethical codes in the relentless pursuit of profitability at all costs.


Quote:

I disagree that 0870 / 0845 were never national / local rate, they were infact tied to the BT standard national and local rate up until quite recently, although non discountable.  The problem for an organisation in publishing geographic numbering is that it is so inflexible with respect to growth or relocation.

This is completely untrue and shows your own incomplete knowledge of this issue which seems only to read from the standard 084/7 salesman propaganda hymn sheet here in claiming the price difference with 0870 is all a recent problem.

I moved here in December 1996 and at that stage there was already competition using Mercury on fixed line although the price difference was minimal with BT.  Then starting some time around late 1997 or early 1998 indirect access call carrier competitors to BT were allowed and the cheapest (which I used) AXS Telecom on indirect access code 1615 let you call uk geographic numbers (which may then only have started 1 rather than 01) at 2p per minute but would not route calls at all to NGNs.  So my GNs were costing me 2p per minute while 0870s were costing me 7.91p per minute in the weekday peak (almost 300% more).  And to add insult to injury BT refused to let a customer pick a National Rate NGN number as a Friends and Family number, even though any UK GN could be selected and even one mobile number.

As the numbers weren't even 0870 back then your claim that the differential with 01/02 numbers is only a recent problem certainly isn't true and I would call nearly 300% a pretty significant price difference.

Also long before BT made the price of an 01/02 daytime call less than 50% per minute the price of an 0870 call for BT Option 1 and 2 customers on 1st July 2004 they had been offering an all geographic numbers calling plan (Option 3) and again 0844, 0845, 0870 and 0871 numbers were excluded from it.


Quote:

My preferred solution would actually be a very simple and transparent approach to the numbering scheme, which would be easy for the public to recognise from the number they are dialling exactly what they are paying for the call, whilst at the same time giving lots of choice to the business owner for the band of charge the caller pays v's revenue stream they do / don't receive.  Such as the following 080X   = Free to Caller 081X   = 1ppm to Caller 082X   = 2ppm to Caller 083X   = 3ppm to Caller 084X   = 4ppm to Caller 085X   = 5ppm to Caller 086X   = 6ppm to Caller 087X   = 7ppm to Caller 088X   = 8ppm to Caller 089X   = 9ppm to Caller Such a numbering scheme is straight forward and transparent, provides a breadth of choice for businesses, provides the industry with opportunity to further develop services and help businesses manage their customer calls, requires little change from the current numbering scheme, provides minimal disruption to business and could be backed up with the 03XX range for public bodies.

I would alter the 09 number range so as to include these lower cost premium rate numbers in a banded way and would also make compulsory call price announcements and a statement that a revenue share is going to fund the activities of the called party compulsory for all 09 numbers before the call is connected.


Quote:

The changing numbers problem is real.  Many businesses will have to respray vehicle fleets, most will have to reprint stationary but the biggest problem is that numbers stay in the public domain for a long time....for example, numbers printed on tins of paint, packaging, warrentees, catalogues etc. can often be dialled years after they are printed and a business has relocated.  This is why it is so important for businesses to avoid changing numbers if at all possible.

What utter tosh.  Easyjet for instance had no trouble repainting their whole airline fleet to show only their website address instead of their former 0990 number.  Also you guys never seems to see these terrible problems for companies when they are renumbering form their 01 or 02 number to their 0870 or 0871GN.  In fact usually they can't renumber fast enough.  The problem of the old out of date number is taken care of by a recorded announcement pointing to the existence of the new 0870 number and that you now have to call that.........


Quote:

I agree that numbers with a high call charge should be premium rated and possibly fall under the 09 prefix, the problem here again is that this numbering system is not clear to the caller with so many bands its impossible to tell from the prefix

Introduce compulsory call price announcements and make all OCPs have set tarrifs for all calls at any point in time so they will always know the rate.  If their underlying wholesale costs change then it is up to them periodically set new tariffs for customers which they will be able to clearly announce through the compulsory call price announcement.

trubster wrote on Nov 10^th, 2006 at 1:58am:

I personally would choose an ISP that gives me a geo/0800 number over an ISP with an 0871 number. (Some ISP's (And I emphasise the word SOME) use 0871 numbers to offset the cost of forwarding the calls to india and keeping jobs in the UK to a minimum!!!)

You will want to consider www.aceinternet.co.uk who have just published their 0161 number for technical support calls and provided SIP to SIP and other Voip to Voip free internet call alternatives to using the PSTN.

0870advice.com wrote on Nov 10^th, 2006 at 12:20am:

An example of this, which many of you won't have picked up on is that when you dial an 0870 number from Feb 08, if the service provider you subscribe to choses to charge a rate for the call that is higher than the rate for an 01 or 02 call on your call plan, all they have to do is play a free to caller message at the start of the call notifying you of the charge.  This will allow them to charge whatever they want to for that call.  Not only this but, the owner of the 0870 number will be powerless to prevent this and will not benefit from any of that call charge, and this is the same for the host of the 0870 who will also be powerless to prevent this.  If NTL or Vodafone or any other significant network chose to do this, then they are free to charge 50p per minute or £1 per minute, whatever they want....imagine the damage that could be done to the reputation of business that owns that number!?   Having said the above, the mobile networks have given us all access to some amazing technology that few of us can imagine being without now, and we should remember the vast sums of money they are trying to recoup back from the consumer as a result of the incredible amounts they paid to the treasury for 3G licences just a few years ago !

This was one of Ofcom's original utterly crazed proposals in their consultation document but I honestly had got the impression now that no one was going to charge more for an 0870 number than a GN after 1st Feb 2006.  What possible excuse can Ofcom have for letting companies like Vodafone that do not even provide any access to accurate billing for their PAYG customers charging a hidden premium rate to 0870 when their underlying costs will be the same as 01/02 numbers? :o >:( >:( >:(

One has to conclude that this kind of thing only goes on because Ofcom is an utterly corrupt regulator that totally ignores its duties under Section 3 (i) of the Communications Act 2003 and instead constantly tries to find ways for telco scammers to hang on to their ill gotten revenues by almost any means.  This is what happens when you let someone like Stephen Carter interested only in business profitability and with not a clue about the public interest in charge of a so called regulator.

Why is this being allowed to happen.  It seems only in order to provide yet further opportunities for the uk mobile phone mafia like Vodafone, O2, Orange, TMobile and Three to rip the public off without them even knowing it is happening (not least on Vodafone PAYG where you cannot get access to records of how your call credit was docked).

I think some serious press publicity on the fact that 0870 scamming is going to be able to continue and Ofcom having lied to the public is needed.

andy9 wrote on Nov 10^th, 2006 at 3:58am:

Most networks charge between 5 and 30 pence a minute, broadly similar or actually the same as other UK calls. In fact, on tariffs where calls cost more to other networks, NGNs are almost always cheaper than these..

Actually they all did use to charge around 35/40p/min but when the new regulations came out to force them to be more upfront on these charges and give them more prominence, that's around when prices changed.


Quote:

O2 NGNs 15p , vs 35p or 25p>5p on landline or O2 calls, or 40p mobiles on other networks

Remember that o2 is one of the few that still reduce the cost of landline calls after 3mins from 25p/min for first 3mins that day, then 5p/min thereafter for the remainder of that day so therefore calls to NGN's are still a lot more expensive except if you are only on the phone to an NGN for less than 3mins a day which is extremely unlikely.  Therefore, you do end up paying a premium for the call.  Also, before this new regulation came into force, o2 used to charge upto 30p/min (daytime).


Quote:

Orange - NGNs 25p, to Orange 10p, landlines 25p, , other mobiles 35p

I was unable to find the cost to NGNs on Orange's website for either contracts or PAYG.  Could you provide a link for us?


Quote:

Vodafone - identical to other calls on latest tariffs

Website is down now but I also believe the costs are the same as geographical calls on their latest tariffs which were only changed not so long ago.  Again before this, the cost varied and was a lot higher than geographical calls.


Quote:

easyMobile 15p for all calls

I believe EasyMobile have always been this price and wasn't changed like the rest were when the new so-called price transparency regulation came into force.


Quote:

Virgin 10p or 15p NGNs vs 15p>5p landlines and Virgin, 35p others

Similar thing applies here to that of o2 and that is 15p/min for first 5mins of calls that day then drops to 5p/min.


Quote:

T-mobile - I need to check, but may be more than the new 12p tariff for other calls

40p/min to 0845/0870 on all PAYG tariffs, 10p/min for Contracts.  T-Mobile only specifically mention calls to 0845/0870 & freephone - nothing is mentioned about 0844 and 0871 so this can't be confirmed although I assume they cost the same as 0845/0870.


Quote:

3 - NGNs 15p (check ?), 3 10p, landlines 15p, other mobiles 30p

3 charge 15p/min for calls to NGNs for most tariffs except off-peak where it costs 35p/min peak, 15p/min off-peak.


Quote:

I'm sorry, but whilst people are upset about the cost of NGN numbers, emotive fabrication of call charges over £1 a minute does nothing to help rational  discussion, especially when they are on average probably cheaper than other off-network calls.

Whilst I agree that on average, calls to xnet cost more than same network or landlines, the difference is that most consumers are aware that calls to xnet maybe more expensive and/or not included in any inclusive tariffs.  In comparison to NGN's, very few consumers are aware that calls to NGN's can be really expensive instead possibly thinking they cost the same as local/national calls.

In my response to Ofcom's many, many, many consultations on these numbers, I always stated that call announcements should be mandatory for calls to NGN's if they cost more than geographical calls.  This I thought was a fair/balanced decision from both consumers and the teleco's point-of-view.  This was really aimed at mobile networks because at the time calls to NGNs were on average around 30p/min but mobile networks have been forced to reduce this cost otherwise risk highlighting to their customers the actual cost of the calls by way of the new regulation that is meant to force them to equally highlight these costs the same as their geographical costs.

Although I aimed this free call announcement mostly at mobiles due their prices at the time but since then both NTL and Telewest have increased their 0845/0870 numbers and it now costs 10p/min (daytime) to ring an 0870 number.

Basically, the cost of these numbers remains higher than they need to be simply because OCP's are using them to earn extra revenue without, in most cases, consumers being fully aware of the actual costs involved in making calls to these numbers.  I believe 10p/min (daytime) to an 0870 is THE highest for a landline provider!?!

Now for mobile networks, I understand that they must have more running costs than that of landline providers simply because they have to pay for cell sites (pay rent, maintenance, etc) hence why although I hate NGNs being on average 15p/min I can understand (to a certain degree) the need for these costs to be higher as they're probably used to subsidise the running costs of mobile network.  However, when they were on average 30p/min+, it was purely to rip-off the consumers.

None of these additional overheads apply to landline providers like they do mobile networks so the main reason why some landline providers charge a lot more for calls to NGN's (eg 10p/min to an 0870 on NTL/TW) is purely to increase profit without, in most cases, consumers being aware.

One simple approach to the numbering and pricing regime (and this was proposed to Ofcom) would be to follow the system that is used in the Irish Republic and many other countries around the world whereby a levy is charged the recipient of the call if a call to them is made from a mobile phone.  It is understandable that the network that starts a call wants to make some margin on carrying that call as its using up space on their network which they need to be making money to maintain.  However reversing the charging mechaninism here would mean that its possible to have all networks charge exactly the same price for a call to any NGN regardless.  Many businesses chose not to use 0800 as so many of their callers ring from mobile phones and they know full well that the call will not be free to them in any case, so why are they paying for the call to be free if the mobile network is charging that call at the same price as an 0845 or an 0870 number?  

Applying this 'recipient pays surcharge' model would work for most businesses, the industry and provide consumers with very straight forward means of recognising how much they will be paying for each call - and this would not differ network to network.  Ofcom could mandate the levels of surcharge industry wide.  One of the reasons that mobile networks charge for freephone calls is to prevent charge card companies giving 0800 access to very cheap calls, blocking up the network capacity of the mobile network at the same time.  If a surcharge of say 1 or 2ppm was applied to the model below for calls origanited from mobiles or least cost routing service providers we'd have our transparrent and universally applied simple numbering scheme!  

080X   = Free to Caller             Originator Surchage 1 to 2ppm paid by owner of number.
081X   = 1ppm to Caller
082X   = 2ppm to Caller
083X   = 3ppm to Caller
084X   = 4ppm to Caller
085X   = 5ppm to Caller
086X   = 6ppm to Caller
087X   = 7ppm to Caller
088X   = 8ppm to Caller
089X   = 9ppm to Caller

Technically the above is achievable.

0870advice.com

0870advice.com wrote on Nov 9^th, 2006 at 11:37pm:

People that run businesses are smart people (for the most part) and selling lies to them results in one thing....very few sales!  I disagree with your point here and would say that virtually all businesses are fully aware of what the caller is paying to call their business!

I'm afraid I would disagree with that simply because (again) that CPs and OCPs still claim that calls to 084x are local rate and calls to 087x are national rate which we all agree is misleading which would technically mean any company signing a contract with such businesses could easily get out of that contract due to being mislead.

There is proof that gov departments (and therefore businesses) were mislead simply because the JobCentre in their response to an ofcom consultation basically said they didn't realise that their 0845 was so expensive and thought it was actually local rate.  This is also why god-forbid the next caualty/info line following a terrorist attack will have a geographical number as well.   This is also why Homeoffice/Ofcom don't use NGNs and why some GPs have stated that their so-called new telephony system (an 0844 number - costing 4p/min all the time) was so expensive from mobiles and they have received complaints from patients.

Basically, because I do firmly believe that a lot of the time these companies/gov departments do think that calls to NGNs are local/national rate as they have no other reason to think otherwise when they were probably missold their NGN on this basis.


Quote:

The regulatory environment has allowed for the growth in the use of 0870 whether this is right or wrong, its not the fault of the business owners, they are following basic business principles.

I agree. Companies are making full use of something that Ofcom/Oftel have allowed to continue unhindered until now (to a certain degree anyhow).


Quote:

I disagree that 0870 / 0845 were never national / local rate, they were infact tied to the BT standard national and local rate up until quite recently, although non discountable.

It is my understanding that until 2 years ago this was correct simply because calls to 0845 were charged same as local rate and calls to 0870 were charged same as national rate call.


Quote:

Revenue share is rarely the key driver and is normally a drop in the ocean compared with the savings a business realises by maximising staff and infrastructure resources.  It is simply not possible to get the same level of call handling performance using geographic numbering versus non geographic numbering.  Business owners can gain all the benefits of NGN's with freephone, but simple business principles tend to apply and many decide that rather than pay many thousands of pounds to receive calls, they will generate an income which they can then invest back into call handling efficiency, possibly more staff too!

I wish I could believe this but why are so many businesses (including one man bandits) using these numbers?  Why would a one-man bandit or even small firm that only probably has one or two people answering phone calls still use 0870s, etc?  Simply, it's extra profit for them without us consumers being aware (in most) cases.


Quote:

In an ideal world every business would pay for us all to call them, but that can put strain on an enterprise because it often encourages lots of time waster calls, which is more of a problem in terms of the staff time wasted (which is expensive) versus funding the cost of the call.  Many organisations choose to use higher charging NGN's as a deterrant to time waster calls where information a caller may require can be found on a website or in a manual

This is weird when in the states the most common number found is a freephone number even for companies like BA.  So by your reasoning, only in the UK does using a freephone, a geographical or at the very least an 0845 number bring loads of problems like time-wasters and those that didn't bother checking a website, etc first but in the states none of these problems occur hence why they use freephone?

The simple truth is that calls to higher costs NGN's is becoming the "norm" and because it's been accepted in the UK as the "norm", it continues.  The real reason why its unfortunately been accepted in the UK is that many consumers are not aware of the true costs and the fact that revenue is earned.  That is until recently with all the bad-press.

Don't get me wrong I understand fully where you are coming from with regards to staff costs, etc all I would like to see is "full disclosure" on these numbers.  That is consumers should be aware of the true cost of ringing these numbers and that revenue is earned.  Exactly the same as what happens now with 09x numbers.  Then we see if the wide-spread use of these numbers continues which I doubt it would simply because consumers would then be in a position to make a fully informed decision on whether to go with that business or not, etc.

If us consumers knowing all these facts, still continue to ring these numbers then that is fine and no one can be blamed at all then - not the companies, etc.

0870advice.com wrote on Nov 10^th, 2006 at 10:31am:

Applying this 'recipient pays surcharge' model would work for most businesses, the industry and provide consumers with very straight forward means of recognising how much they will be paying for each call - and this would not differ network to network.  Ofcom could mandate the levels of surcharge industry wide.  One of the reasons that mobile networks charge for freephone calls is to prevent charge card companies giving 0800 access to very cheap calls, blocking up the network capacity of the mobile network at the same time.  If a surcharge of say 1 or 2ppm was applied to the model below for calls origanited from mobiles or least cost routing service providers we'd have our transparrent and universally applied simple numbering scheme!

Presumably if businesses with NGNs in general agreed to pay the extra carriage costs associated with termination of the call on an NGN network rather than their customers paying for the privilege then all 084/7 NGNs could be delivered to the caller at the same price as calling 01/02 geographic phone numbers on that network.

I find it odd indeed that you argue for price parity between the cost of calling GNs and NGNs for calls originated from mobiles but not for those originated on a landline? :-/

We don't ask that calling an 084/7 number costs no more than an 01/02 number on a mobile phone.  We simply ask that the markup over a standard call price is the same as the underlying extra costs to the mobile phone company in conveying the call instead of many multiples thereof.

Vodafone's enormous price differential between included in bundled minutes + fixed 75p surcharge for roaming Vodafone Passport calls to 01/02 numbers versus 99p per minute at all time to 080/4/7 numbers is an obvious case in point of an obscene pricing differential not justified by the true variation in the underlying costs of carrying the call to the number.

bbb_uk wrote on Nov 10^th, 2006 at 10:42am:

It is my understanding that until 2 years ago this was correct simply because calls to 0845 were charged same as local rate and calls to 0870 were charged same as national rate call.

Wrong bbb.

Both 0845 and 0870 numbers have cost much more than the cheapest cost of routing a call to an 01 or 02 number from a BT landline using the cheapest indirect access call carrier for at least the last 8 years.  Also BT Option 3 started a lot longer ago than 2 years ago and always excluded 084 and 087 calls but covered all 01 and 02 calls.

For instance in 1998 a UK GN cost me 2p per minute on my BT Line with AXS Telecom but calling an 0870 number cost 7.91p per minute and calling 0845 cost me 4p per minute in the weekday daytime (with BT as AXS simply wouldn't carry calls to these numbers on their service).

Therefore these NGN salesman have been knowingly selling numbers that did not cost many price aware consumers the price of a GN fixed line call for many, many years.  It is not a recent problem.  The fact that you yourself did not become aware that 0845 or 0870 calls could cost you extra until 2004 is presumably because you were a happie little chappie making all your calls with BT until that time and not shopping around for a better deal for calling GN numbers?

0870advice.com wrote on Nov 9^th, 2006 at 11:37pm:

The changing numbers problem is real.  Many businesses will have to respray vehicle fleets, most will have to reprint stationary but the biggest problem is that numbers stay in the public domain for a long time....for example, numbers printed on tins of paint, packaging, warrentees, catalogues etc. can often be dialled years after they are printed and a business has relocated.  This is why it is so important for businesses to avoid changing numbers if at all possible.  Changes in the big number change are somewhat different as it involved a universal change to just the prefix.

I'm in agreement that costs are involved but this is why 2 years nearly was given for companies to do this overtime to reduce to a bare minimum as possible the costs of changing.

Businesses are very happy to do this when changing from a geographical to a NGN, or do it without moaning when forced to under any 'big number changes' but when it comes to going from a revenue generating number to another number, they start to moan!!

I also agree (and have previously stated this) that there are legitimate reasons for NGNs like one single number that doesn't need to be changed if they move premises, and network features like Call routing, IVR, etc but all this can still be done on 0870 or the new 03x number range.

I like to believe that some companies/gov departments are purely using these numbers for the features that NGNs bring and not to make money from people calling them.  This is why we'll see which companies are more interested in the 'revenue' they make than anything else because they will migrate to either 084x or 0871 from their current 0870.

In fact some companies have already started doing this which shows they're more interested in the revenue than the network features these numbers bring.

I disagree with your website, 0870advice, that companies would have to then start paying to receive calls on 0870?  Why would this be necessary, unless it's to increase the money that CP/OCP make.  A line-rental charge or a small monthly fee for every 'network feature' would be sufficient.  It's too early to say that businesses using 0870 will have to pay x amount per minute for calls they receive or is the reason why you are saying this is that GlobalNumbers will start charging x amount per minute for calls received to 0870 once 2008 arrives much similar to what you charge now for businesses using one of your 0845.

As I said in an earlier post, a lot of other CP/OCP don't actually charge for incoming calls on 0845 numbers.

In fact, in one of Ofcom's statements I'm sure I read that Ofcom said any company wanting such features should be expected to pay for them which I believe is correct and this is exactly what Inland Revenue and DWP (JobCentre Plus) told me in an FOI.  They basically use these numbers for the features and what they thought was just a local rate call for consumers but they now realise this isn't true and call charges can (and do) vary from one network to another.

NGMsGhost wrote on Nov 10^th, 2006 at 11:05am:

Wrong bbb. Both 0845 and 0870 numbers have cost much more than the cheapest cost of routing a call to an 01 or 02 number from a BT landline using the cheapest indirect access call carrier for at least the last 8 years.  Also BT Option 3 started a lot longer ago than 2 years ago and always excluded 084 and 087 calls but covered all 01 and 02 calls.

Sorry, I should have made that post more clear.

I meant that calls from a BT landline to a geographical were exactly the same as 0845 or 0870 and this is why they were referred to as local/national rate because most consumers only had or could use BT or weren't aware of the cheaper alternatives available so therefore the vast majority of landline telephony customers did pay this rate.

This is why upto about 2 years ago both the ASA and Ofcom didn't stop or entertain any complaint that 0845/0870 wasn't local/national rate simply because for most people it was local/national rate because of BT Standard rate where calls to these numbers were the same as either geographical or NGNs.

However, when BT forced their customers from BT Standard to BT Together 1, this so-called 0845 is local and 0870 is national rate was deemed inaccurate simply because the only landline telephony customers paying these rates were those on the little used/known Light User Scheme.  And it was this very reason why the ASA now stop the misleading use of these numbers being described as local/national rate.

BT's decision to force their customers from BT Standard to BT Together 1 was purely for money reasons and was unpopular (obviously) but at the same time this helped us stop the continued misdescribed cost of these calls.  I realise this wasn't BT's intention at all but as it happens without the removal of BT Standard then I don't believe ASA and Ofcom would be of the opinion that 0845 wasn't local and 0870 wasn't national.

Dear bbb,

The 084/7 scam has been going on for at least 8 years and loads of telecoms customers including BT Option 3 customers have been losing out due to the existence of the scam since a lot longer ago than July 2004.

The fact that you personally seem to have used BT Option 1 and not routed your calls away from 0845 or 0870 until July 2004 is clearly your problem and reflects your comparative lack of long term history in the struggle against these numbers.

I can assure you that I have been trying to avoid 084/7 numbers and 0345 and 0990 numbers before them to find GNs instead for at least the last 8 years.

The fact that the ASA didn't take any action earlier is what allowed the "its only a local rate or only a national rate" call lie to grow up in the first place.  Once BT had Option 3 and excluded 084/7 calls (way pre July 2004) the ASA should as a minimum have stopped calls being called local and national rate at that stage.

0870advice.com wrote on Nov 9^th, 2006 at 11:37pm:

People that run businesses are smart people (for the most part) and selling lies to them results in one thing....very few sales !  I disagree with your point here and would say that virtually all businesses are fully aware of what the caller is paying to call their business!  The fact is that the regulatory environment has allowed for this and businesses owners have made decissions based on finance, which is a plain fact of life commercial approach of most business owners... keep costs down, increase revenue, increase profits, maximise resources etc.!

And why do you think charging customers a hidden premium rate for ordinary customer service calls has never been popular in the USA and indeed most companies run 800 customer service lines.

Is this because:-

(a) 800 numbers don't involve the ripoff surcharge costs of our 0800 numbers for receiving the calls

or

(b) Because the US system has a clear NTNP that does not allow for deceiving customers that premium rate calls are normal calls

or

(c) That US customers are more militant in standing up for their rights against such ripoffs

or

(d) that unlike Ofcom the US FCC is not a corrupt regulator infiltrated by business telco interests and instead stands firm in ensuring proper price competition and price disclosure in the US telecoms industry?

Discussion of Vodafone Passport or Stop-the-clock does not really counter my statement that another person's assertion about call charges at £1.20 a minute is way over the top. I stick with the suggestion that calls to NGNs are more often priced between same- and  off-network mobiles,

I specifically said excepting roaming tariffs, which can be near £1 a minute for all calls though are falling (like 35p O2) but if someone wants to use Vodafone Passport to call an NGN from abroad, it is not difficult to use a 18185 or calling card account, costing a few pence over the Vodafone tariff.

The same goes for Stop-the-clock - 18185 costs 4 or 2 pence a minute for 0870

bbb_uk wrote on Nov 10^th, 2006 at 9:54am:

Quote: O2 NGNs 15p , vs 35p or 25p>5p on landline or O2 calls, or 40p mobiles on other networks Remember that o2 is one of the few that still reduce the cost of landline calls after 3mins from 25p/min for first 3mins that day, then 5p/min thereafter for the remainder of that day so therefore calls to NGN's are still a lot more expensive except if you are only on the phone to an NGN for less than 3mins a day which is extremely unlikely.  Therefore, you do end up paying a premium for the call.  Also, before this new regulation came into force, o2 used to charge upto 30p/min (daytime).

I hoped I'd alluded to the bit about 25 to 5p rates, albeit highly condensed, and likewise for Virgin later


Quote:

[quote]Orange - NGNs 25p, to Orange 10p, landlines 25p, , other mobiles 35p

I was unable to find the cost to NGNs on Orange's website for either contracts or PAYG.  Could you provide a link for us? [/quote]
pay as you go price guide, page 22
http://www1.orange.co.uk/service_plans/downloads/payg_services_costs.pdf


Quote:

T-mobile - I need to check, but may be more than the new 12p tariff for other calls

40p/min to 0845/0870 on all PAYG tariffs, 10p/min for Contracts.  T-Mobile only specifically mention calls to 0845/0870 & freephone - nothing is mentioned about 0844 and 0871 so this can't be confirmed although I assume they cost the same as 0845/0870.


Quote:

[quote]I'm sorry, but whilst people are upset about the cost of NGN numbers, emotive fabrication of call charges over £1 a minute does nothing to help rational  discussion, especially when they are on average probably cheaper than other off-network calls.

Whilst I agree that on average, calls to xnet cost more than same network or landlines, the difference is that most consumers are aware that calls to xnet maybe more expensive and/or not included in any inclusive tariffs.  In comparison to NGN's, very few consumers are aware that calls to NGN's can be really expensive instead possibly thinking they cost the same as local/national calls.

In my response to Ofcom's many, many, many consultations on these numbers, I always stated that call announcements should be mandatory for calls to NGN's if they cost more than geographical calls.  [/quote]

I was replying to a post specifically about very high rates to NGNs from pay-as-you-go mobiles.

As we seem to have established, on payg only T-mobile charges significantly more for NGNs than other landlines; on O2 and Virgin it depends a bit on relative amounts to whichever destinations. The rest are the same rates as landlines.

There are certainly none at anything like the £1.20 I was refuting, and I doubt we'll be given any proof that they ever were.

What this has made me think about again is using the old Orange OVP Virgin tariff to make calls to UK mobiles and int'l landlines and mobiles via an 0870 number for 5p a minute.

On the point you make in your first paragraph, I'd say yes there are people in business that are like that, even though it is a massive generalisation.  I am less cynical, and in my day to day dealings with business owners I find this to rarely be the case.  Most desire to earn an honest living and provide a descent service.  I don't think businesses are to blame for the regulatory environment they work within, there are many restrictions, regulations and guidelines businesses have to work within and these restrictions typically make it harder and harder as time goes by to run a profitable business and pay staff salaries.  

Re your second para - I stand my ground here, but do acknowledge that discounted call costs have fallen, beginning around the time you state, what I have said is that the published BT standard rate was until quite recently mirrored by the 0870 and 0845 charges.  

I'm not arguing the point that there is a price differential between discounted 01 and 02 numbers of varying degrees versus 0870, however it is not the fault of UK businesses that this is so.  We all know that change is rarely effected in this country without a significant number of people stamping their feet!  This is what you guys have done here and you have effected change, the problem is that the change doesn't work for the consumer, doesn't work for the industry and very significantly doesn't work for businesses - and if things don't work for businesses then the knock on effect will come down to the ordinary man and woman in the street!  

0870 is actually the same as 0990 and was changed so that 09 could become premium rate range, where as prior to this the start of the number range did not reflect in any way the price of the call and there were different prefixes for each network, freephone from Mercury (later C&W) was 0500, local rate for for the same was 0645 and national rate was 0541 versus BT 0800 (10 digit) 0345 local rate and 0990 national rate, even more confusing that now!  

Your reference that my points surrounding number change are 'utter tosh' is rather blinkered.  The reference case you make to easyjet respraying their fleet of aircraft is a reference to a marketing decission that was in line with their efforts to become "the webs favourite airline" !  The change to a web address was not in response to any numbering change enforced upon them, they decided to do this purely for marketing purposes and had significant budget to do so, in addition to this they were making efforts to take web only bookings and phone bookings were subject to premium rate call and a surcharge.  Their respray was simply in line with their marketing objectives!  Many other businesses however will not have budget to do so and in a great many cases businesses have impelemented non geographic numbers so that they would not need to reprint, respray etc. for the forseable future!  It is both time consuming and expensive for a large number of organisations, and the consumer again will pay for this in the cost of the product or service.  I'm not using this as a defence to say that the status quo should stay the same, but the ruling is going to affect businesses and many drastically so!  This is a great shame when all parties could have been satisfied for the most part (and within reason) with a sensible and measured approach to the numbering framework.  

I wouldn't say that compulsory price announcements are a bad thing but, if the numbering framework were clear, and it is possible to make it clear and back that up with consumer education, the need for price announcements would be minimal, as lets face it....do we all really want to hear a price announcement everytime we call a call centre if we already know what the call is going to cost us by looking at the number we are dialling?  

You are probably aware, but for those of you that aren't, when a mobile (or other landline operator) charges a higher rate for a non geographic number, all the extra margin from those extra charges is retained by that operator, the business advertising the number nor the telco hosting it receive a share of any of that additional revenue.  It is technically possible for the host network to be charged an inbound levy by BT for calls originated by AN other network which BT would then pass on to the originating network as their margin for the call.  The owner of the number could then be billed this surcharge by the number host.  This would be preferrable to a large number of businesses and would see freephone use grow once again.  Freephone use has been stifled by the fact that the mobile networks charge the caller anyway, so if you are a business owner you are discouraged from using freephone if you can't even guarantee that you're picking up the tab for your customers to call you!  I can imagine MBNA feel somewhat like mugs paying all that money when half their callers are being charged regardless!  The model I proposed in a previous posting can work and could result in a flat rate charge to all callers regardless of which network they are calling from.  I believe that businesses would welcome such changes with open arms!  A great many of them would then gravitate towards 0800 or the lower charged number ranges in preference to the higher charged ranges.  Most businesses primary aim is to answer as many calls as they can as quickly as they can so they can sell you as much of their stuff as they possibly can.  

0870advice.com

Here we go again, businesses having to pay to change their 0870 numbers back to geographic, and the huge cost of respraying vans, and changing letterheads etc.

I accept that before, companies made a choice to change, and knew they would have to change letterheads, but the cost back then wasn't enough to deter companies from changing to 0870.

So why is the cost so much now.  What has changed in the last few years, that companies don't have budgets to respray vans, or change letterheads.  Companies can change logos on a regular basis, which involves alot more work than changing a number.  E-mail and web addresses have been added to stationary, and vans, but again, no complaints about the cost.

Every business has had change forced upon them, and if they feel they will be out of business because of it, then it is down to the poor management of the company.  Restaurants have had to deal with a recent non smoking rule, and they complained it would affect their business, by offending their smoking customers.  Instead more non smokers visit these places.

In the last 10 years or so, since NGN numbers came on the scene, technology has evolved alot.  Telecoms equipment that would have cost a fortune, can now be in the reach of many small businesses.  Phone calls to geographic numbers is now almost free.  Most people have mobiles.  Calls to 0870 numbers in this time have remained almost the same.  The lower cost of delivering the service, has instead been passed on to the telecoms companies supplying the numbers, rather than through cheaper calls to the public.  Some of this has been passed onto the company using the 0870 number.

The end result has been that telecoms companies have been scaremongering businesses about the cost of changing their 0870 number, because they stand to lose more than the most out of the deal.  In the past, they supplied free telecoms equipment, rather than revenue share.  This telecoms equipment might have cost a great deal 10 years ago, but is within easy reach of any business now.  A small office would need a lower spec than a large call centre employing 1000 people.

Perhaps companies should listen to what customers want.  Some spend alot on mystery shopping, because they're keen to see how their staff perform, and use the results to put things right.  Why not listen to your customers now, when we say we don't want 0870, and 0845 numbers.  There are many companies that use geo numbers and they are thriving.  I'm sure that the loss of the revenue will be replaced by customer goodwill.

I'm not arguing the point that there is a price differential between discounted 01 and 02 numbers of varying degrees versus 0870, however it is not the fault of UK businesses that this is so.  We all know that change is rarely effected in this country without a significant number of people stamping their feet!  This is what you guys have done here and you have effected change, the problem is that the change doesn't work for the consumer, doesn't work for the industry and very significantly doesn't work for businesses - and if things don't work for businesses then the knock on effect will come down to the ordinary man and woman in the street!

If us customers spend less on 0870 calls, then we will have more money to spend with these businesses.  The people that stand to lose most are the 0870 suppliers.  Insurance comapaines will still sell insurance.  Customers will still call, but if we pay less for our calls, and companies buy telecoms equipment at the market price (by paying fixed costs for the machines etc) then the only losers will be 0870 suppliers like yourself!!

I'm sure most businesses can cope with the change, given the right information, without it affecting their operations, or causing bad customer service.

The key point I was making is that a number change is not necessary to achieve the majority of aims you aspire to.  We are clearly never going to agree on whether it is or isn't a big deal to change numbers but, the consumer has not got what they wanted out of the changes being imposed by Ofcom, so businesses going through yet another number change benefits no one!  The measures Ofcom have put in place do not work in practice and will not achieve what you are hoping they will.  The industry has accepted the changes and is set to work with them.  We are merely saying that come Feb 08 things will not be significantly different from how they are now for the consumer, but the industry and businesses are left with a bit of a mess to work with.  

0870advice.com

NGMsGhost wrote on Nov 10^th, 2006 at 11:31am:

The 084/7 scam has been going on for at least 8 years and loads of telecoms customers including BT Option 3 customers have been losing out due to the existence of the scam since a lot longer ago than July 2004.

I realise that but I was referring mostly to the cost and until July 2004, calls to 0845/0870 were charged the same as geographical calls (for majority of telephony consumers) except not included in any inclusive minutes.  It's not uncommon to have t&c, exclusions, FUP's, etc with a service you get.  Therefore, its harder to state they weren't local/national simply because they did cost the same looking at it from the cost point-of-view.  However, I also agree that they shouldn't have been described local/national rate as they were excluded from inclusive tariffs.

I realise this sounds like I'm contradicting myself but it depends on which direction you approach this from (so-to-speak) - from a purely 'cost' point of view they were the same cost as geographical numbers but from an 'inclusive plan' point of view, then they shouldn't have been described as local/national rate.


Quote:

The fact that you personally seem to have used BT Option 1 and not routed your calls away from 0845 or 0870 until July 2004 is clearly your problem and reflects your comparative lack of long term history in the struggle against these numbers.

Yes, I agree.  Before July 2004, I was aware of the cost of these numbers and they were excluded from inclusive price plans (and always have been) however until I found this site, I never realised that revenue sharing was taking place despite the fact they were still being (and still are) described as local/national rate calls and not premium rate calls as they should have been.


Quote:

I can assure you that I have been trying to avoid 084/7 numbers and 0345 and 0990 numbers before them to find GNs instead for at least the last 8 years.

I've also (where possible) been trying to avoid ringing these numbers and searching the 'net for alternatives for many years and until I found this site, didn't realise a database of alternatives existed and once I had found this site, I obviously added all those alternatives I'd found.


Quote:

The fact that the ASA didn't take any action earlier is what allowed the "its only a local rate or only a national rate" call lie to grow up in the first place.  Once BT had Option 3 and excluded 084/7 calls (way pre July 2004) the ASA should as a minimum have stopped calls being called local and national rate at that stage.

I have to agree here as it was unfair for those on inclusive price plans but again, calls did still cost the same as geographicals for those that weren't on an inclusive plan hence why I think the ASA/Ofcom didn't entertain such complaints.

However, after July 2004 and the forced migration by BT, these NGN's should have definitely stopped being misleadingly described not just because they were excluded from inclusive tariffs but because of the price difference between 084/087 and that of normal geographical calls.

The ASA are helping in this (to a certain degree) but Ofcom, the so-called regulator, doesn't care and just passes any such misleading descriptions complaints to other gov departments but yet this problem is so wide-spread especially as at least 99% (in my opinion) of CP's and OCP's still describe 084/087 calls as local/national rate respectively that I believe it is for the telecom regulator (or another regulator) to sort out and NOT trading standards which has no legal powers to do anything.

If there was only a few CP's/OCP's misleadingly describing these numbers as local/national rate then I agree that trading standards could deal with it the best they can.

0870advice.com wrote on Nov 10^th, 2006 at 10:31am:

080X   = Free to Caller             Originator Surchage 1 to 2ppm paid by owner of number. 081X   = 1ppm to Caller 082X   = 2ppm to Caller 083X   = 3ppm to Caller 084X   = 4ppm to Caller 085X   = 5ppm to Caller 086X   = 6ppm to Caller 087X   = 7ppm to Caller 088X   = 8ppm to Caller 089X   = 9ppm to Caller Technically the above is achievable.

Yes it is and it would improve consumer transparency so long as call announements were made for any OCP wanting to charge more than the stated cost.  This is a little similar to what Ofcom proposed (well for 0844 numbers at least) but nothing will be done because it would cost businesses to migrate to an alternative revenue scheme.  I'm guessing, however, that companies wouldn't moan about migrating on this instance because they were/are still getting revenue in return as the only time companies moan is when their revenue is threatened (as in 0870 numbers) but not when they make the decision to change from a geographical to a NGN, or from a lower NGN to a higher NGN!

However to be completely fair, I would expect that consumers are informed they are in fact ringing a premium rate number (which technically according to the dictionary and in terms of telephony would be any call costing more than a geographical and in addition to EC law).  As I said in a previous post, "full disclosure", that way consumers can make a full and informed decision on whether to use that companies services, etc knowing they are receiving revenue from 08 numbers.  This is similar to what happens with 09x numbers where consumers are fully aware that revenue sharing takes place so if they still continue to make that call then that is fine as they are aware of the costs and that revenue sharing takes place.

None of this at all happens with 08x and this is why over the recent years more and more businesses are moving to revenue sharing 08 numbers knowing they can get more money from most consumers without their knowledge.

0870advice.com wrote on Nov 10^th, 2006 at 12:20am:

I also wanted to say that the GN website is somewhat out of date, for over a year now the inbound specialising telecoms industry has been in a state of paralysis.  Any business owner in their right mind is not going to make a decission with wholesale regulatory change around the corner which could result in having to make a complete u-turn.  Our website will be replaced with an update next week where no mention is made of local and national rate, although 0845 and 0870 is still in our offering.

That is good news that you will stop these misleading descriptions.  However, the widespread use of these misleading descriptions is all to great and is why ultimately some businesses/gov departments and most consumers still believe this misleading description.  A recent perfect example, derrick's thread here where his call to Consumer Direct and a manager revealed that they are still under the belief that 0845 is local rate.


Quote:

Over the passed year we have spent our time focusing on existing customers and helping them to improve their call handling performance and in tandem with this we have spent a great deal of time lobbying Ofcom, proposing alternatives to their own measures which would have achieved many of the goals aspired to by this site, but sadly Ofcom have pushed ahead with changes that are poorly thought out and technically flawed.

Yes some of their measures are badly thought out as has always been the case even from days of Oftel.  If Oftel would have thought in advance about call transparancy then the 0844 range would have made more sense and each of the 'fifth' digit would indicate the cost of the call - at least from a BT landline.

However, it seems to me that your main problems are the loss of revenue share on these stealth premium rate numbers.

You say you would also like greater call transparency (which is great) except do you agree that consumers should be fully aware that calls to 08 numbers are in fact just stealth premium rate numbers (ie revenue sharing takes place in most cases)?

Here's a good solution, which should help customers remember the numbers, if companies wanted to migrate to the 03 number range.

Any company wanting to migrate to the 03 number range, can choose an 0345, 0370, 0371 number, that is almost identical to their own, but obviously with a 3, instead of 8 as the 2nd digit.

Therefore companies who want to provide a number range, with the flexibility of call routing, and all these extra services that they claim don't exist on geo number ranges (well in fact they do, but it's more expensive) and are more interested in the services, rather than revenue share, should have few problems migrating to the new number ranges.  There could even be a recorded announcement on the old number, or the old number could still go through to the same service as the 03 number.

This will mean, only changing 1 digit on the letterheads, and sides of vans, and of course the loss of revenue share, however you do clearly state that companies are more interested in the extra value benefits, rather than the revenue share which is minimal, so hopefully that won't be a problem, will it?

Shiggaddi,

That's a very good point and because businesses apparently get very little 'revenue' back and the fact that it isnt the main reason for using an 084x/087x then you are right and we can all look forward to businesses migrating to 03x and only having to change one digit.
[smiley=2vrolijk_08.gif]

That also means there is no need for this forum or its database from around February 2007 when the new 03x range is available.  :'(

Actually I was thinking about that point on 03... numbers, and on reflection I'm not so sure I agree with it.

At a quick glance a 3 looks similar enough to an 8 that I would not be surprised if some companies wanted to run the two numbers in parallel, and rely on the inertia of people not switching, whereas changing to such as maybe 0321 and 0333 could not be conducted with as much stealth, and might help make people more aware of the underlying reasoning.

Couple of key problems for businesses in using 03 ranges

*  Cannot be called from overseas
*  Changing a number is the same effort whether its 1 digit or all digits
*  With number portability across networks being in place for quite a few years now, its far from guaranteed that a business will be able to attain the equivelant 03X number to their 08X number.  

The 1st and 3rd of these should be overcomeable if Ofcom were to put in place the approapriate planning but they have failed to do so at this point in time...

On the point that bbb made, Ofcom do have the power to mandate the level of 'margin' that an OCP can be receive for a non geographic call and this 'margin' could be reversed so that the payment is collected from the recipient of the call as a surcharge or a deductioon from revenue, so there should be no need for the caller to ever pay more than the stated cost of the call no matter what the pricing band is, this would remove the need to for call announcements, would remove all the confusion and would be pretty straightforward to administer!  

0870advice.com

bbb Quote:  However, it seems to me that your main problems are the loss of revenue share on these stealth premium rate numbers.

You say you would also like greater call transparency (which is great) except do you agree that consumers should be fully aware that calls to 08 numbers are in fact just stealth premium rate numbers (ie revenue sharing takes place in most cases)?

Reply:  As a service provider it is an issue for us to lose revenue share yes, there is no debt risk to us in providing 0870 service, bad debt is a big problem in the telecoms industry.  In addition to that, selling a service that pays the customer is obviously much easier than selling one that they have to pay for...no doubt about that!  

As a service provider we have no problem with number ranges that are charged above the 'normal geograpic call rate' being described as premium rate.  It would be preferrable for us to avoid all the extra admin of ICSTIS but we certainly have no problem at all with price transparency.  I think the same is true of most business owners too.  The problem for businesses with premium rate is that its a real jumble of pricing and its not clear from the prefix dialled what price you are paying for the call, anything from 10p to £150 per minute.  Also, what exactly is the 'normal geograhic call rate' ?  If premium rate ranges / banding were clearer, businesses would accept premium rate more readily.  In addition to this I think it would assist in scuppering the business plans of the 'service providers behaving badly'!  The numbering scheme is a mess and becoming messier for all concerned.  Ofcom need to step back and think long term as you say!  Sadly its rare to get that kind of thinking from civil service and at this point in time they have closed the door, leaving us with an unsatisfactory and technically flawed set of changes to work with.  

0870advice.com

0870advice.com wrote on Nov 12^th, 2006 at 7:53pm:

Couple of key problems for businesses in using 03 ranges *  Cannot be called from overseas *  Changing a number is the same effort whether its 1 digit or all digits *  With number portability across networks being in place for quite a few years now, its far from guaranteed that a business will be able to attain the equivelant 03X number to their 08X number.   The 1st and 3rd of these should be overcomeable if Ofcom were to put in place the approapriate planning but they have failed to do so at this point in time...

I agree with all of them.

On your first point, there is no reason why 03 couldn't be open from overseas but I realise it would take a while (I can imagine).  According to Ofcom, some of the reasons why existing 08 NGNs may not work from overseas (this does include 0845/0870 but is more likely to a problem with 0844/0871) is that overseas operators may not be certain on how much a call will cost due to high cost of these numbers and the uncertainty of the revenue share that takes place amongst the different providers involved.  However, once the new 03x range becomes widely used (I have my doubts it will due to the loss of revenue for the business concerned) then overseas calls to 03x should be just as diallable as geographicals (I realise this will take time) as no revenue sharing takes place and they cost the same as geographicals.

I read that 0844/0871 is more than likely uncertain due to the fact that BT, etc do not open these numbers up from overseas as very few businesses use them - currently anyhow but obviously that will change.

On your third point, I'm sure that the old 0345 were given priority and similar numbers when they were forced to 0845 (especially with gov depts, etc)


Quote:

Ofcom do have the power to mandate the level of 'margin' that an OCP can be receive for a non geographic call and this 'margin' could be reversed so that the payment is collected from the recipient of the call as a surcharge or a deductioon from revenue, so there should be no need for the caller to ever pay more than the stated cost of the call no matter what the pricing band is, this would remove the need to for call announcements, would remove all the confusion and would be pretty straightforward to administer!

I totally agree.  I read in one of the consultation statements that they could force OCPs to charge the same to maintain price transparancy but of course Ofcom haven't.

As I said in an earlier post, the cost of these numbers can be significantly higher from mobiles and as such at the very least they should have call announcements from mobiles.  This was rejected by Ofcom as they were told by OCPs that this would cost way too much which is weird as no-frills cheap call providers like Call1899, Call18185, Call18866 all have free call announcements available which can be turned off or on from within online account settings, etc.  Now these companies only charge on average 4p per call to a geographical and in most cases are cheaper on other calls as well so obviously their profit margins (if any) must be low in comparison to that of BT, TW/NTL, etc.  Now if these companies can provide a free call announcement on their profit margins then I'm certain that other big OCPs can.  The difference being is that they don't want to as their customers could be fully aware of how much they are paying for their calls which may force them to move to another provider.

0870advice.com wrote on Nov 12^th, 2006 at 9:46pm:

As a service provider it is an issue for us to lose revenue share yes, there is no debt risk to us in providing 0870 service, bad debt is a big problem in the telecoms industry.  In addition to that, selling a service that pays the customer is obviously much easier than selling one that they have to pay for...no doubt about that!

Again I agree.  This also means going by what you say here is that revenue share is a big deal which contradicts one of your earlier posts where you state that revenue wasn't really the deciding factor - it was the service features and the one number that wouldn't change if they moved premises, etc.

Out of curiosity, when 0870 revenue share ends - what are your plans?

• Charge an incoming call fee for those that haven't already migrated to 0844/0871
  
• Charge an linerental fee and a small monthly fee for any network services they utilise

Ideally and if possible, you could do two tariffs.  Charge them for every incoming call which would then pay for network services, or charge small linerental fee and small fee for any network services used.

Surely from an end business point of view, the option of having a set fee monthly (or annually) which would cover your costs for routing, etc would be of more beneficial than one where they pay for incoming calls as this means companies can't accurately plan on how much their NGN (s) would cost as they couldn't say how many calls they would/could get.

The revenue from 0845 is minimal but yet many CP/OCPs don't charge the business for incoming calls and may not even pay any revenue to the business (some still do though) but yet its possible to have a nearly free, from the business point of view, 0845 number so having an 03x (or 0870 when revenue ends) surely means it possible to have such a number (03x or 0870) without an incoming call fee - instead just a linerental fee and fees for any network service they need?

Quote: Again I agree.  This also means going by what you say here is that revenue share is a big deal which contradicts one of your earlier posts where you state that revenue wasn't really the deciding factor - it was the service features and the one number that wouldn't change if they moved premises, etc.

Reply: The contradiction you are picking up on is that we feel that for most businesses revenue share isn't the deciding factor, but for us as a service provider it is a big deal as we now have to plan for alternatives to replace that revenue once it is lost.

To answer your other questions

We plan at this point in time to charge a per minute fee to receive calls as we will also be charged a per minute fee in transitting the calls.  Much as charging a rental which is inclusive of minutes would obviously be appealing to any business, it doesn't allow us to grow the back end as usage grows.  Network capicity, ivr facilities etc. all cost plenty of money and you have to have the revenue source to increase capacity in line with adding more customers but also in line with a customers growth of their own businesses.  Don't forget of course that networks and fancy technology don't work without people support, and clued up staff don't come cheap!  

OCP's that don't make call charges for 0845 are the ones that offer particularly 'vanilla' service, with no bells & whistles and very little people support.  Their business plan tends to work on mass volume of customers which is ok perhaps in the small business market, but once a busienss starts to grow they need support of a service provider that has the people resource to hold their hand somewhat in putting the right telephony processes in place so that they minimise growing pains and prevent giving their customers poor experience as they grow their businesses.  

0870advice.com

On the reasons why the numbers cannot be called from overseas, is this only because other networks will not have defined them as valid numbers? In fact I can see one or two providers that might work already as they haven't blocked the codes.

This applies to 0870, 0845 from one or two countries, just as cheap providers here will not connect to similar numbers abroad, but surely once it is realised that the tariff should be the same, it should be easy enough.

Unfortutely its not just down to datafill but rather down to BT restrictions, apparently this is due to the risk of fraud!?!  

0870advice.com

0870advice.com wrote on Nov 13^th, 2006 at 3:25pm:

Unfortutely its not just down to datafill but rather down to BT restrictions, apparently this is due to the risk of fraud!?!

And its not the only fraud perpetrated on these numbers is it which is why the whole scam of imposing hidden extra charges on the caller while telling them its only BT local or national rate should be banned.  If you want revenue share get 09 and be properly regulated - its that simple.

This at a stroke would ensure that OAPs can afford to call their local council or make non emergency calls to the Police and would ensure a huge downward pressure in NGN feature costs given that now that large businesses are paying directly for them they would use their substantial buying power to drive the prices down.

0870advice.com wrote on Nov 13^th, 2006 at 12:12pm:

Reply: The contradiction you are picking up on is that we feel that for most businesses revenue share isn't the deciding factor, but for us as a service provider it is a big deal as we now have to plan for alternatives to replace that revenue once it is lost.

If the revenue wasn't a big deal then most of these call centres would be using a 1p per minute at all times 0844 number wouldn't they? ;) ::)

Instead of which whole rafts of people are already starting to switch over to 0871 having realised that there is currently no greater a price disclosure requirement than with 0870.

The reality is that all 087 users and all 0844 5p per minute users want the revenue share.  Its just a standard cynical marketing ploy of the call centre industry to pretend that the existence of the revenue share is unimportant to the call centre.

If this revenue share was actually so unimportant then why would the BBC/Capita, for whom the use of 0870 is so especially unaccceptable, have fought tooth nail to hang on to them no matter how much public criticism they may have received and regardless of the content of the COI's latest updated Contact Centre Guidance. :-/ ;) :o

0870advice.com wrote on Nov 13^th, 2006 at 12:12pm:

We plan at this point in time to charge a per minute fee to receive calls as we will also be charged a per minute fee in transitting the calls.

That makes sense and I forgot that the TCP charge per minute for calls ending on their network (not to mention any other provider that may be involved).

The fee can't be that great though as for example, call08.com, only charge 4.95 per month for a freephone number and this allows upto 500 minutes inclusive per month before being charged to receive incoming calls and then it's 2p/min.  Which is very good value I would have thought for a freephone number.

As a per minute fee would be payable to the TCP then I guess that means our hopes of the new 03x range not having an incoming per minute charge is very, very slim.  As this is the case the incentive for companies/gov depts, etc to migrate to an 03x number will be less as it is going to cost them to receive calls.

You are correct there is no chance that you will not pay an incoming ppm charge for calls over 03xx for that very reason !  

0870advice.com

0870advice.com wrote on Nov 13^th, 2006 at 5:07pm:

You are correct there is no chance that you will not pay an incoming ppm charge for calls over 03xx for that very reason !

But don't geographical providers charge? Most calls will of course, go to BT. Don't 'inclusive' packages exist because the price charged allows to OCP to pay to terminating these calls? Thus, prices will have to go up for these packages?

Can these per-minute charges by TCPs be reduced/done away with, or am I right in assuming that it is down to the TCP what they charge?

Dave wrote on Nov 13^th, 2006 at 5:20pm:

Can these per-minute charges by TCPs be reduced/done away with, or am I right in assuming that it is down to the TCP what they charge?

I think within reason its down to each TCP involved in delivering of the call as sometimes it can be more than one provider involved in the call and each one take their cut of the call.

However, they can't get carried away as OCP/CP's, etc complain to Ofcom that such a TCP is being anti-competitive.

So if someone has an NGN with BT and their underlying geographicals are also with BT then only BT are involved so BT are, as they say, laughing all the way to the bank.

However, if a CP is involved then they also have to take their cut along with anyone else who is involved in the call.

It's not a per call fee that TCP, etc charge it's an actual per minute fee which is why I very much doubt 03x wont have incoming call charges payable by the business using the 03x number not without a big hefty setup/linrental and/or network feature fees.  So it'll actually be cheaper for businesses using 0845 to keep their 0845 and not move to 03x unless forced to under pressure.  As 0845 is still known as and accepted as 'local' rate then they'll think there is no need to migrate as the caller already apparently only pays so-called 'local' rate for the call.

If I remember correctly this is what happened with 0845 when they were first introduced but due to competition in geographical calls area most CP/OCP don't charge businesses for using an 0845 instead recoup the money from the difference in price between geographical calls and 0845 calls

This is why I do wonder how Call18185, etc can actually get away with only charging 4p per call to a geographical.  Obviously things like most calls are under a few minutes long which means Call18185 can make a profit from the call but if a call is 30mins or hours or something then I guess they may possibly lose money on that call.  Don't forget that Call18185 also have to pay BT for us to be able to dial 18185 first to route the call.  I believe this is a setup fee and not a monthly/annual fee.

BT are the only ones that don't lose at the end of all this.

Each call to an 03 number will have to be relayed by BT so they will levy a charge to pass it off to the host telco who will have to pay that charge and pay to terminate the call then add their mark up.  Whatever charge is made to the caller none of that revenue will go in any way towards subsidising the cost of the BT handover or the call termination fee, so in a nutshell BT will indeed be the ones laughing all the way to the bank as you've said!  

03xx is actually quite a threat to competition as it will potentially be very difficult, if not impossible, to compete with BT on this numbering range.  I do say this in advance of any pricing information being released, but looking at the transit model its difficult to arrive at any other conclusion.

0870advice.com

0870advice.com wrote on Nov 13^th, 2006 at 8:29pm:

03xx is actually quite a threat to competition as it will potentially be very difficult, if not impossible, to compete with BT on this numbering range.

As is already the case surely for 0845 and 0870 from the point of view of the telecoms consumer when making calls to those numbers.

0870advice.com wrote on Nov 13^th, 2006 at 8:29pm:

03xx is actually quite a threat to competition as it will potentially be very difficult, if not impossible, to compete with BT on this numbering range.  I do say this in advance of any pricing information being released, but looking at the transit model its difficult to arrive at any other conclusion.

But with the way it works at the moment, we all have to pay (pretty much) old BT rates for these calls. Is it not keeping this high call rate that has allowed companies such as yours into the marketplace? In which case, the competition has done nothing to alleviate these high prices.

And you talk about tight profit margins. But the original brief was to drive down prices that had been defined by BT. I do not see that this is really happening.

Dave wrote on Nov 14^th, 2006 at 2:46pm:

But with the way it works at the moment, we all have to pay (pretty much) old BT rates for these calls. Is it not keeping this high call rate that has allowed companies such as yours into the marketplace? In which case, the competition has done nothing to alleviate these high prices.

It's the revenue share that takes place that is keeping these prices artificially high and therefore excluded from inclusive minutes as including them in inclusive minutes would mean a higher inclusive plan charge (similar to what Telewest do now as they include calls to NGNs) so OCPs wouldn't lose out from such calls to NGNs.

Obviously these high call prices does allow companies such as goldnumbers into the marketplace but with the advent of 03x range this changes things as the 03x range is designed for consumers and NOT OCPs/CPs like the existing NGNs.

In the past, Ofcom have pretty-much been on the side of CPs/OCPs, businesses, etc and not us end consumers which is why it has taken so long to have something done but even then they (Ofcom) only tackled 0870 numbers.

0870advice,

Here is something you may be able to answer!  I realise your company is just a CP and not an OCP but you may still know.

When Ofcon announced the new 03x range they said it will cost national geographical rate (and be included in inclusive plans, etc).  Now I'm unsure why Ofcom said it will cost the same as national geographical rate when as far as us consumers are aware, calls to local or national geographical calls are the same (except those on BT's LUS).

Did Ofcom state this because internally, calls to local and national geographical numbers are still charged for separately?  Ie, calls to local geographicals are cheaper that calls to national geographicals?

Hi bbb_uk,

Our interpretation of Ofcoms proposals is that calls to 0370 numbers will cost the caller the same as calls to 01/02 geographic calls (and fall within inclusive free minute plans).

There should be no distinction between local and national calls any more... although this will obviously depend on the callers call plan from their LCR provider.

0870advice.com wrote on Nov 15^th, 2006 at 12:24pm:

Our interpretation of Ofcoms proposals is that calls to 0370 numbers will cost the caller the same as calls to 01/02 geographic calls (and fall within inclusive free minute plans). There should be no distinction between local and national calls any more... although this will obviously depend on the callers call plan from their LCR provider.

I think bbb was asking whether the wholesale cost of a local area call vs a national call to an 01/02 number was now the same to a call originating company like BT or whether their costs for the two types of call were still different even though on most price plans (apart from BT Light User) the customer now pays the same for local and national 01/02 calls.

Hi NGMs Ghost,

To clarify then... certainly from all of our suppliers, the wholesale cost of local and national calls is exactly the same.

Yep NGMGhost, that's what I was asking.

I'm still curious why Ofcom said 03x range would be chargable at national geographical rates (for those without inclusive plans, etc)!!

Never mind.


0870advice,

You keep mentioning 0370?  I didn't realise Ofcom have only specifically announced that number range!  I thought other number ranges within 03x will be available like easy-to-remember ones for charaties/gov depts, etc given preference.

bbb_uk wrote on Nov 15^th, 2006 at 3:35pm:

You keep mentioning 0370?  I didn't realise Ofcom have only specifically announced that number range!  I thought other number ranges within 03x will be available like easy-to-remember ones for charaties/gov depts, etc given preference.

Perhaps Ofcom is hoping to introduce some revenue share NGN services on other 03 numbers just so as to keep the public totally confused about what these number prefixes mean. ;)

But to clarify one point with 0870Advice will the deal for the companies selling or using these numbers be any different on 0870 from 0370 after 1st Feb 2007?  And will new 0870 numbers still be available for allocation to customers?  Will the only difference be that on 0370 the call company you originate the call with can't choose to apply its own anomalous and outrageous surcharge above national rates so long as there is an announcement stating the price of the call?

Its still hard to even begin to imagine why Ofcom allowed this highway robbery surcharge for 0870 numbers to be imposed if a call originating company wants to do so.

OK Guys,

Here's a couple of out-takes from NTS FAQs (http://www.ofcom.org.uk/media/mofaq/telecoms/nts/) which may answer your questions... or may not !

4. How much will 0870 calls cost when the changes have been implemented?

As proposed in September 2005, Ofcom will require mobile and fixed-line providers (including payphones) to charge the same or less for 0870 calls as they do for national-rate calls to geographic numbers (starting 01 or 02). If providers wish to charge more for 0870 calls they will have to make a free-to-caller price pre-announcement at the start of the call.

This change is likely to significantly reduce the price of many calls to 0870 numbers. It will also mean that 0870 calls will generally be included in call packages. Currently daytime 0870 calls usually cost around 8 pence per minute from fixed-lines. Typical fixed-line call packages offer calls to geographic numbers at 3 pence per minute or less.

The requirement to charge no more than the rate for geographic calls will also extend to all-calls packages and bundled-minutes. So for example, if you have subscribed to a package that allows you to make national calls to geographic numbers at no charge then 0870 calls must also be free of charge. Similarly if your subscription has a call allowance that includes national calls to geographic numbers then you will also be able to use the allowance to make 0870 calls.

8. When the changes to 0870 numbers are implemented, how will 0870 differ from the new 03 number range proposed in Ofcom’s Numbering Review? Why would organisations choose to use 03 instead?

The 0870 and 03 ranges will be very similar after the changes to 0870 are implemented. Both with have tariffs linked to geographic rates and neither will support revenue sharing in practice.

The changes to 0870 are designed to repair the linkage to geographic tariffs that is currently broken whilst allowing service providers to retain their existing numbers if they wish.

Ofcom has proposed to introduce the 03 range to accommodate future growth for services that do not require revenue sharing since the 0870 range is filling up and will eventually run out of spare capacity.

Ofcom's hopes that in time the new range will become trusted by consumers as covering clearly-understood services and price ranges. Some organisations currently using 0870 numbers may find the 03 brand attractive and decide to move their services to 03 numbers.


NGMs Ghost - I think we discussed the network message earlier... and the potential 'mis-use' of this facility !

The best laid plans...........................

Most of the telephone consumers I speak to, assume that “long distance” 01/02 calls within the UK are charged more than “local calls”, and are reluctant to make calls to telephones located outside the local area..  Few realise that all customers pay 3p/min or less for any type of 01/02 call, except a small number of users on the special “low user rate”.

BT should publicise the fact that the local/national rate has been abolished and enjoy the increased revenue that would flow from an increase in call volume.

And that's more than 2 years after the change!

Someone at BT Marketing needs a kick up the ....

Heinz wrote on Nov 16^th, 2006 at 4:51pm:

And that's more than 2 years after the change! Someone at BT Marketing needs a kick up the ....

But perhaps they do not wish to draw attention to the fact that 0870 is no longer National Rate. ;)

There is probably more money to be made from people calling 0870 at peak rate thinking it is only a standard national call than there is money to be made from more fixed 5.5p per call for 1 hour national calls off peak............... ::)

0870 Advice,

There has been a discussion that got going on over in the Site Related section of the site about how you came to know the precise 03 number access codes would be 0300, 0303, 0345 and 0370.  I made a rather interesting discovery that its all fully laid out in Ofcom's consulation document "Safeguarding the Future of Numbers" which is the one Ofcom consultation I never had time to fully plough through the 175 pages of (also it was just too depressing after seeing the summary of its proposals) after of course fully reading every page of the NTS Options For the Future and NTS Way Forward consultations.

Anyhow I thought it would be useful to bring the comments I made there here as follows and see if you wanted to follow up on the points I have made.

I think we are all united that Ofcom's proposals are a total disgrace that won't help anyone better understand what they are paying for NGN phone calls and leave everyone either very unhappy and/or in a quandy about how they should react to them.  Here are my comments.

This is the thread on Site Related as follows:-

www.saynoto0870.com/cgi-bin/forum/YaBB.cgi?num=1165067612/0


Quote:

A quick Google reveals that 0870 Advice who actually has to deal with selling these new number ranges and make his living from them (unlike us) is taking his comments from none other than the table on Page 130 of Ofcom's own Consultation document - Safeguarding The Future of Numbers:- www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/numberingreview/statement/statement.pdf This can be summarised as:- 0300  Reserved for the public sector for brand new 03 NGN numbers or services with no historic legacy 0844, 0845 or 0870 related preceding services. 0303  Reserved for everyone else apart from the public sector wanting an NGN but with no historic legacy connection with 0844, 0845 or 0870 0344/0345  Reserved for existing users of 0844 and 0845 numbers who want to migrate to an NGN numbers only charged at geographic rates and included in inclusive call packages fro 01/02 numbers 0870/0871 Reserved for existing users of 0870 and 0871 numbers who want to migrate to NGN numbers only charged at geographic rates and included in inclusive call packages to 01/02 numbers. Well, well I don't know how we missed this.  No doubt it was our failing to read the full 175 pages worth. ;) :o :'( This new plan is quite clearly designed to completely confuse the public so they won't have a clue what they are paying.  Just what the call centre industy ordered in other words. So 0300 will be for the public sector except that most public sector operators will be migrating and 0844, 0845 or 0870 number so would end up on 0344, 0345 or 0370 where they are entitled to the exact equivalent to their old 08 NGN with just the new prefix.  So hardly anyone will have 0300 and 0300 due to the 03 designation will be confused with 0500 and 0800 calls.  Just brilliant Ofcom.  An email spoofer or spammer couldn't have done better to devise such a devious plan. Then 0303 will gradually increase in size as new people wanting NGNs with call redirection with no legacy number want them. No problem here and surely the public sector should also just have got these for new services since most will in fact be migrating 0844 and 0845 numbers where they will be mixed up with the private sector.  But hang on doesn't 0303 look like 0808 and wrongly imply its Freephone again.  Oh dear Ofcom - what a tangled web of deviousness you weave to protect the bank balances of your Telco chums. 0370 - Ummmm clearly I have missed something obvious but as 0870 will be changed to geographic rate (unless there is an announcement by your OCP that they want to scam you for more despite there no longer being a revenue share that justifies them doing so) why would anyone want to migrate an 0870 number to 0370 with all the marketing confusion that involves.  Only reason I can think is because 0870 will continue to be tarred in some minds with the brush of not being part of inclusive call packages especially due to Ofcom allowing the OCP scam loophole with call price announcement 0871 - Apparently for migrating 0871 numbers that will no longer be premium rate.  Yeah sure I bet there will be loads of them migrating to 03 won't there? ::)  And if they do they will really want to go on ending the number with 71 which implies it is expensive. :-? :-/ :'( So in other words some clown at Ofcom spent about five minutes thrashing out with their telco chums what would best further confuse the public about what they are paying for NGN calls and came up with this.  Just brilliant Ofcom.  Now that's what I call really protecting the UK citizen consumer and being fully compliant with the EU Misleading Advertisng Directive.  What a shame Ofcom never asked consumers rather than the telcos what new NGN structure they might find most helpful. ;) ::) >:( :'( :'( :'( What a pity I couldn't muster the strength to respond to this consultation so soon after NTS Way Forward and all the other Ofcom consultations I had written pages to respond to only to be ignored.  Still if I had responded no doubt I would have ignored anyway and Ofcom would have still proceeded anyway with their Masterplan previously agreed with their telco chums who attend their NTS Focus Groups sessions. >:( >:( >:(

Hi we  are a small business and haved used an 0845 for more than 5 years, the reason we did this was because when we moved office from Liverpool to Skelmersdale we could not take our 0151 number with us.

We had operator announce on our 0151 number for 5 years informing of the new number and wrote to all our customers telling them of the new number. Believe it or not 7 years after moving office I bumped into an old customer on a night out and he thought we had gone out of business as he was dialing the old 0151 number.

We new we would be moving again in the next 2-3 years so we decided to use an 0845 number because at that time 0845 was the same price as a local call.

Since then with inclusive minutes etc and some operators charging more for 0845 numbers the cost of calling our number varies.

The major operators still do not offer number potability, (Although it is technically possible), I am experimenting with voip numbers and one of the operators based in London will give me an 0151 number which can be routed via voip into our phone system, however the call quality is variable.

Why carnt BT or other operators allow me to transfer my 0151 number at no additional cost to anyarea that i might move to? I would not need to have an 0845 number then.

degsod wrote on Dec 9^th, 2006 at 8:28pm:

Why carnt BT or other operators allow me to transfer my 0151 number at no additional cost to anyarea that i might move to? I would not need to have an 0845 number then.

And why didnt the post office let me take my post code when I moved? Inconvienient really, damn companies.

degsod wrote on Dec 9^th, 2006 at 8:28pm:

Why carnt BT or other operators allow me to transfer my 0151 number at no additional cost to anyarea that i might move to? I would not need to have an 0845 number then.

And why couldn't you just have written to all your customers and have paid for an announcement for a year of the new 01/02 number as you would have done before 0845 numbers came along rather than falling for the 0845 scam. :-/

Anyhow soon you will be able to get a new 0345 number which will be the same as your 0845 apart from the prefix and allegedly is portable (until phone numbers themselves vanish which must happen in the next 10 years) but won't cost your callers anything more than an 01/02 number.

Of course you rather than your cusomers will be required to pay a small service fee per call for this convenience but it will be less than 0800 although more than 0845 unless you were being ripped off on your 0845 deal.

And what's the betting that your outfit was calling its 0845 "local rate" or "lo-call"  And that you don't publish your 01/02 number anywhere? ;) :o

Convenience in case you move is a poor excuse for using 0845.  Just publicising your number change would have been an adequate alternative.

NGMsGhost wrote on Dec 10^th, 2006 at 11:58am:

And why couldn't you just have written to all your customers and have paid for an announcement for a year of the new 01/02 number as you would have done before 0845 numbers came along rather than falling for the 0845 scam. :-/

[color==#ff0000]We did pay for operator announcement for 5 years, thi did not work as people did not take note of new numbers.[/color]


NGMsGhost wrote on Dec 10^th, 2006 at 11:58am:

Anyhow soon you will be able to get a new 0345 number which will be the same as your 0845 apart from the prefix and allegedly is portable (until phone numbers themselves vanish which must happen in the next 10 years) but won't cost your callers anything more than an 01/02 number.

[color==#ff0000]Yet another number change, how long before Ofcomm decide they have cock that up and change the numbers yet again, years ago 0345 was local call.[/color]


NGMsGhost wrote on Dec 10^th, 2006 at 11:58am:

Of course you rather than your cusomers will be required to pay a small service fee per call for this convenience but it will be less than 0800 although more than 0845 unless you were being ripped off on your 0845 deal.

We Set up an 0800 number as well, I would much prefer to have number portability than be ripped of on 0845 0870 0871 etc


NGMsGhost wrote on Dec 10^th, 2006 at 11:58am:

And what's the betting that your outfit was calling its 0845 "local rate" or "lo-call"  And that you don't publish your 01/02 number anywhere? ;) :o

You are so wrong, we do not say 0845 is local rate or lo call we just publish the number.


NGMsGhost wrote on Dec 10^th, 2006 at 11:58am:

Convenience in case you move is a poor excuse for using 0845.  Just publicising your number change would have been an adequate alternative.

It's not convenience, its a fact, we sent out several mailings saying we are moving then several saying we have moved, we paid for operator announcement for 5 years, hardly the actions of a company trying to rip off its customers as you are trying to make out. Like I said erlier, If I could have transferred my original 0151 number I would not have had to look at other options. Offcomm has a lot to answer for. Just look at the mess they have made getting rid of 192. Sure there is choice but it costs a lot more than it did.

~ Edit by Dave: Quote boxes added.

Oh, and one other small point when a customer calls our 0845 number the call is answered with in 30 seconds by our call centre who take the customers name and phone number.

The customer is then informed that the details will be passed on to the person and they will call back. That information is then emailed to correct person whi will call the customer back at our cost.

Not all companies are rip off merchants as you suggest, but are trying to make a living and survive.

OK I can see you have been trying to do the right thing then but confused why you would have the 0845 number and the 0800 then and not just the 0800?

As to people still using the old number well human nature being what it is they will do until you cut the old one off of course ;)

The thing is to back up the disconnection of the old number on the day it is cut off with postal mailings or emailings that remind people.

That is exactly what we did, in total we sent out 15 mailings to remind people of the phone number change, as you say about human nature, that is why i didn't want to change numbers again.

We give out the 0845 number to suplliers and the 0800 number for customers, both numbers are on our stationery, The 0800 number is on our website for Sales and Tech support and the 0845 number is for General enquiries/Suppliers.

But all of the messing about with numbers could have been avoided if  we could have transferred our geographical number.

There should be no reason why we  carnt have full number portability, just BT dragging their feet as usual.

degsod wrote on Dec 10^th, 2006 at 11:18pm:

There should be no reason why we  carnt have full number portability, just BT dragging their feet as usual.

Only reason is because OfCoN and their predecessor OFTEL allowed BT to charge a fortune in extra call charges for providing standard call diversion on a geographic 01/02 numbers and allowed BT to set up a system that let businesses have free call diversion so long as customers paid a fortune for making the calls instead.

Yet Ofcom's primary duty is supposed to be the best interests of uk citizen consumers. ;) ::) :-? :-/ >:( >:( :'( :'(

NGMsGhost wrote on Dec 10^th, 2006 at 11:59pm:

Only reason is because OfCoN and their predecessor OFTEL allowed BT to charge a fortune in extra call charges for providing standard call diversion on a geographic 01/02 numbers and allowed BT to set up a system that let businesses have free call diversion so long as customers paid a fortune for making the calls instead. Yet Ofcom's primary duty is supposed to be the best interests of uk citizen consumers. ;) ::) :-? :-/ >:( >:( :'( :'(

I agree completely, OFTEL have never done anything in the interest of the consumer, all they are interested in is making it more difficult and confusing for the consumer and the honest businesses who just want to use the phone as a tool.

Look at the ripoff with the 0506 VOIP numbers, it costs more to dial aVOIP number than it does to call a mobile. Until OFTEL started messing about directory enquiries was free of charge, then they made BT give us £1 a quarter back off our bills and charge us 50p per call, now we pay 50p per minute and stupid amounts if we fall for letting them connect us.

It could be nice and simple of they just had 01/02 for geoneral numbers with full portability. 07 for mobile, 08 for freephone and 09 for premium rate services. Also they should make it mandatory that you have to opt in to being able to dial 07 and 09 numbers.

There are some telco's who wont let you bar 09 numbers. But then this is asking them to do the right thing for the consumer which is something that is not going to happen anytime soon.

degsod wrote on Dec 12^th, 2006 at 6:26pm:

There are some telco's who wont let you bar 09 numbers. But then this is asking them to do the right thing for the consumer which is something that is not going to happen anytime soon.

Not so long as OfCoN is allowed to remain in charge of proceedings I agree.

If the OFT was allowed to investigate these matters instead of telecoms competition being an issue only for Ofcom then it might be a different story.