Companies Without 0844 Numbers Are Missing Profit Opportunities, Warns Commsready

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2010/02/prweb3626584.htm

<<
(PRWeb UK/PRWEB ) February 22, 2010 -- Telecoms expert Commsready is promoting the use of 0844 numbers by UK businesses to earn revenues whilst receiving calls.

Companies which purchase and advertise numbers beginning 0844 - known as 'revenue sharing' numbers - will earn money for each incoming call that they receive on that number, advises Commsready.

Revenue share numbers help businesses to offset the cost of providing services to incoming callers by giving the host company a share of the call charges. 0844 numbers create profit for companies and can be linked to existing phone numbers to avoid disruption.

These numbers are typically used for ticket hotlines, technical assistance and other popular services.

Traditionally, UK companies used 0870 numbers for contact with their customers.

But last year Ofcom added call charges to 0870 numbers– turning them from profit centres to cost centres overnight. As a result, Commsready is urging all businesses to switch to more profitable 0844 numbers.

Commsready Senior Account Manager Will Burton warned: “There are still many companies using 0870 numbers when they should be using 0844 numbers instead.

“Using 0844 numbers offers a way of reducing the cost of calls for customers against traditional 087 revenue share numbers, while still giving businesses a revenue share.”

He added: “0844 numbers provide a national image and can be an additional and valuable revenue source for many businesses.”

With 0844 numbers from Commsready, companies can receive 1.5p per minute from incoming calls while the cost for customers to call these numbers is 5p per minute.

Commsready’s mission is to provide clients with the latest high quality, cost-effective communications solutions via a user-friendly website fully supported by dedicated personnel.

A wide range of telephone numbers – including standard, gold or platinum 0844 numbers – is available from Commsready.

For more information about 0844 numbers, please contact Commsready Senior Account Manager Will Burton, 0808 168 6600, www.commsready.co.uk
>>

idb wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2010 at 2:36am:

Companies Without 0844 Numbers Are Missing Profit Opportunities, Warns Commsready

For those of us pressing for the truth about revenue sharing numbers to be recognised in the context of the NHS and public services, this is a delightful piece. It does however get a bit carried away with itself. I am especially amused by:


Quote:

Traditionally, UK companies used 0870 numbers for contact with their customers.

This presents a rather unkind image of all UK business as showing "the unacceptable face of capitalism".


Quote:

But last year Ofcom added call charges to 0870 numbers – turning them from profit centres to cost centres overnight.

Not strictly true, the call charges were always there, Ofcom simply took steps to change who paid them.


Quote:

As a result, Commsready is urging all businesses to switch to more profitable 0844 numbers.

Again untrue. As stated previously, 0870 is no longer profitable at all. 0871 and 09 is where the real opportunities for profit lies. 0844 only earns subsidy to offset call handling costs. Like the PR release - rather feeble.

Just decided to have a little look at the company they mention Comms Ready .. they seem to also promote 03 Numbers... as they sell them..

http://www.commsready.co.uk/03_numbers.html

It's a shame we can't shut down half these companies!

I wonder what the situation is in other countries about calls costs to Business' do they have special numbers?

an employee at commsready - part of uniworld i believe which is part of gamma, was oblivious to the deterrent effect of these numbers on potential customers of companies who use them and the consequent damage to their business. i have been an independent telecomms agent for 20 years and have NEVER offered paid for 08x numbers. they are not best advice for my clients and any call revenue gain is pretty much certain to be swamped by the commercial losses due to the customer deterrent factor.
even though the employee was happy to offer these numbers to his employers clients he stated that on a personal level he avoids calling them. QED i believe.

i have a very interesting and very worrying email exchange with sky on the subject of 0844 numbers and i am happy to make this available to saynoto0870.com or anyone else.

as with the above employee a sky executive support employee didn't know she was talking about either.  her lack of telecom knowledge was horrific especially since her employer is a telecom provider.

TONYDH wrote on Mar 5^th, 2010 at 11:59am:

i have a very interesting and very worrying email exchange with sky on the subject of 0844 numbers and i am happy to make this available to saynoto0870.com or anyone else.

Post away on the Sky thread.

Unfortunately for them they're not going to make 'more profit' from me. Dial A Flight just lost my business because of their 0844 numbers as I went to Trailfinders instead (using a local number).

CJT-80 wrote on Mar 4^th, 2010 at 11:58am:

I wonder what the situation is in other countries about calls costs to Business' do they have special numbers?

I think the Asda thread answers this one - as they started using 0844, the parent company in the US was still toll free.

I am still trying to find out if Spanish Santander customers have to pay premium rate, but previous emails to the CEO are passed to a lapdog who, incidentally, gives me an 0845 number to call with any complaints!

The Rip Off Britain Gravy Train rolls on.....

regarding the general use of 08 numbers,  something shocks me quite a lot when dealing with these organisations, and that's there general lack of knowledge into how much WE the general public pay to call THEM.

my biggest gripe I am sure is shared with many others on here and goes as follows:

I buy / use a product from Supplier/Shop A, it fails or I need assistance with it, I call them and I am expected to pay EXTRA for this privilage via the use of an 084 number which does nothing more then show me that they like to take as much money from me as possible, and have no regard for genuine customer service.

A good example of this happened to me recently, I will try and keep it as short as possible:  I visited a friend a few weeks back, and had to travel by train (in this case Southern), there was engineering works, and so I had to change on route... The info given, was lacking to say the least, and I subsequently missed my connecting train, making me late!  Rather than call Southern on their advertised number, and not having access to SNT0870, I fired off a somewhat discusted e-mail to them, which they replied to.. part of that e-mail I will copy in here:

"If it is not possible to talk to a member of staff at a station, please feel free to call us on 0871 27 29 20 and we can let you know anything you need to know about a station or how to make your connection." A few things to note, the type of number given and the fact NO call charge info is attached to it, also it's missing a digit, and therefore most likely won't work.

I have yet to reply to them, but I will asap.

That's my view on it.... they just read it and sent me a rather awful reply.

there is a company whose chief executive is an ordinary working class lad who has done well for himself.
the chairman is the son of the founder.

however the cloud in this particular sky (good pun?) is that although the new chief exec bangs on to the press about putting their customer first they make it impossible for customers to contact them without being forced to use an 0844.

my emails are not acknowledged.

i tried many numbers in what i correctly guessed would be a series of consecutive ddi numbers.

try this yourself.

i called 0207 7705 3000, 3001, 3002 etc. all the way to 0207 7705 3018. these numbers go directly to extensions within the business. that's what a DDI (direct dial in) number does.

just start with a number and call all sequential numbers.

i also called all of the geographic numbers listed on this site. many of them are answered by reception.

between us we will find the direct dial number(s) for customer services.

please publish it if and when you do.

i spoke to many of their departments this way.

none of their staff would transfer me to customer services.

some thought that 0844 was a "local rate" number.

the very, very few who would comment said that they would totally avoid calling these numbers themselves.

so put the customer first - first for what? -

Nickel and dime the customer for a few pence on each call; refuse to respond to email or direct calls in any meaningful way; be oblivious to justified criticism.

yes lots of calls = lots of revenue for the business - but the damage to goodwill and customer relations?

i for one will NEVER be a customer for these businesses.

how many other sales will they lose?

then it isn't as if dozens of channels of tv, mostly old repeats with long ad breaks is essential to life is it.

put the customer first eh. say one thing and do another - maybe he should have been an mp.


do we really want large corporates with huge market power who have no real competition therefore decide that they have no need to worry about commercial damage that would be of major concern to most other companies.

no thought not.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
any company that abuses its market power or treats the customer with contempt should be avoided not supported.

please argue with me on that one if you can.

working for a company whose policy you disagree with is a forced choice facing more and more people because of the spread of companies who do not value their staff or their customers.
yes people need an income therefore need a job.

people who need a job and are afraid of losing it so have to lose their ability to voice their personal opinion on company time. how very sad.

is this the kind of job anyone would freely choose?

more and more people believe that they no longer have that freedom of choice.

you've met them in all sorts of large companies and they do seem to be a growing band.

i leave you to ponder the internal management style and employer policies that produce this effect.

p.s. i have considerable telecoms expertise - 20 years as a freelancer - there i go being modest again - but it is true and in my view there is  no justifiable economic case for businesses to use the, now outdated caller paid for 08xx NUMBERS, unless the business chooses to receive a revenue for their inbound calls and there is a business case for them. we do not offer them - they are a minefield.

yes they offset the outbound cost but that sum can be TRIVIAL against the loss of turnover due to the deterrent effect to potential customers - especially domestic ones, of paid for 08xx's.

using these numbers has to be thought through very carefully. the supplier has in my view a responsibility to provide best advice and i would certainly personally avoid making generalised benefit claims to any potential client.

PUBLIC AWARENESS GROWS - BUSINESS DAMAGE INCREASES FOR REVENUE COLLECTING 08XX COMPANIES.


I AM HAPPY TO CLEAR UP ANY 08XX CONFUSION AND I AM NOT TRYING TO SELL YOU ANYTHING.

Tony, perhaps you can clear up a few small points for me as follows:

I am with BT on an Anytime Call Plan. According to BT the number I want to call 0844 277 2000 is charged at G6 (5p per minute at ALL times) plus an initial set up fee of 9.90p inc VAT.  Who sets the call set up fee? Out of the 5p per minute rate, how much on average per minute would the company who's number this is stand to make per minute?

I am getting increasing tired of these numbers, and the methods companies provide to stop us circumventing them.. such as knowing when we call their International Number!

On that note do you know HOW they know? I 141'd my call 1st.

Thanks in Advance.

CJT-80 wrote on Apr 16^th, 2010 at 3:19pm:

On that note do you know HOW they know? I 141'd my call 1st.

That is mentioned elsewhere on this site. I think I am right in saying (and I am sure SCV will correct me if I am not) that they can tell where the call originates from but not the caller.

sherbert wrote on Apr 16^th, 2010 at 3:59pm:

I think I am right in saying (and I am sure SCV will correct me if I am not) that they can tell where the call originates from but not the caller.

You are correct. The regulations, which derive from a EU directive provide the right to withhold one's actual number (which is done by 141) but permit the use of "location" data. Perhaps TONYDH can confirm just what that is and how it is done in cases such as this.

---

Maybe TONYDH, who makes some very good points in his welcome impassioned posting, can also advise us on how to avoid supporting Microsoft, BT, Google, Virgin Media and anyone else who inevitably takes advantage of achieving a dominant position in a market. Should we pay more for an inferior product or service, or go without altogether, if that is necessary?

In my experience, levels of customer service vary enormously regardless of the size and market strength of the company and often within individual companies. Some companies give great attention to customer service in order to climb the greasy pole and then let it go when they get to the top. Others cannot afford the high overheads associated with high service standards on the way up, but find it necessary to incur them when in order to maintain a dominant position. I find myself adopting a generally neutral moral position in respect of companies of all types and sizes. We all have a particular respect for the keen newcomer and the established brand that has lasted for a long time; I have a special affection for cooperatives, such as the John Lewis Partnership, and mutuals, such as the remaining building societies.

I take no pride in being a customer of BSkyB and of all the companies I list above. They do however provide services that I use either exclusively, or on the best terms available to me, even though they inevitably treat their customers with contempt in some respects. All public service providers may be seen as falling into the same category, as their users cannot have the respect that is due to a customer who is directly and personally paying for a service. (Attempts to pretend that such a relationship exists, or to try to construct such a relationship, are misguided and improper in my opinion.)

Whilst there may be particular cases that could be worthy of blacklisting and boycott, where this could be done on a sufficient scale to make a difference, I generally feel that there is little point in trying to split the world into good guys and bad guys. It is particular actions and policies that need attention. General standards of customer service is one valid area - misuse of revenue sharing and PRS telephone numbers is the issue that we address here.

Thank you TONYDH for your support from the inside.

to answer cjt-80 and silent calls victim's questions and for everyone's general information

please be careful with bt set up charges. as far as i am aware they are one of the last if not the last company to cling on to call set up charges. there is no actual cost to bt to "set up" a call. they are straight profiteering and yet one more example of bt trying to exploit their "household name".

their commercial activities over the 20 years or so that i have been in telecom deregulation have not matched what i suspect most people's image of a national icon might be.

let us just say that their commercial reputation in our industry is the subject of much criticism.

from the inside view, we cannot understand why anyone would choose them as a supplier when there are so many, much better alternatives.

to answer your question, bt unilaterally set their own call set up charges. they are now at a level that means that bt calls outside package inclusive calls can now cost up to around 9p minimum.

most businesses will not be aware of this recent hike in charges since most unfortunately don't bother to examine their telephone bill (if it is a bt bill they may well have a difficult task anyway); and are being nicely ripped off because a set up charge of i think about 5p + a minimum call charge of 4.7p means a call of even a few seconds costs about 9p.
in some cases i believe bt still round up to the full minute.

some competitors have minimum call charge of around 1p, we do not charge a set-up fee or minimum call charge.

the average take for a company using 0844 will be at a minimum of around 1.5p per minute out of your 5p.

the 5p is split between between the carrier - in this case bt - the provider - which could be a separate reseller or could be the carrier taking both splits if sold direct - and the called party.

09xx numbers pay the seller(s) generally 50 to 70% of the call charge. bt takes the rest.

Bt charges are not clear to the user and their billing is opaque. use another supplier please

even if you conceal your number from the called party your supplier/carrier - in this case BT - is able to see the numbers at both ends of the call.

it used to be the case that suppliers could not see the last four digits of a "concealed" number - i don't know if that is still the case - it is not something that i keep a check on.

they therefore could tell where the call originated because std codes will identify the trunk exchange and the first 2 numbers of the six digit bit identifies the local exchange.

if you use any "cable" company you will not be able to use any other company on that infrastructure to your house.

you just have to judge whether their pricing and support justifies this restrictive choice.

they will always win on broadband because fibre optic will support much higher bandwidth than established copper twisted pair.

my view would be that twisted pair broadband is adequate for the majority of users.

do not go for the cheapies if you need more than basic internet access - in broadband you pretty much get what you pay for.

----------------------
my comments were aimed at the public face of a company as being often indicative of what to expect.

in my experience if a company wants you to pay for a call before you join them - expect to see a high level of unacceptable arrogance and contempt for the customer.

it is interesting that in the usa the vast majority of companies use free to call 1-800 numbers (95% is anecdotally quoted but i have no evidence to support that actual figure - perhaps someone knows the figure)  and anecdotally 95% of companies in this country don't use them.

use the free services available from microsoft, google etc - not the paid for ones.

there is free software available for the microsoft office type applications which is at least as good as ms

at the risk of repeating what i said in my last post - there is no justifiable need at all to call paid for 08xx or 09xx numbers. send an email asking them to call you. if they don't reply or call - well you then  know what kind of company you are dealing with.

don't waste your time on them.

the reason we are in this situation is because people still call these numbers and out of laziness, complacency or for whatever reason, these people CAUSE and underwrite the proliferation of these abominations to the detriment of everyone else.

TV VOTE OFF SHOWS WITH THEIR PREMIUM RATE 09 NUMBERS FROM WHICH THEY AND BT COLLECT TENS OF THOUSANDS OF POUNDS PER SHOW SHOULD BE BOYCOTTED COMPLETELY.

is it going to change your life if your choice doesn't win. better to get some real quality back on tv

THAT IS THE ONLY WAY TO STOP THAT ABUSE.

i'm sorry i do not wish to offend but not doing something that you want to do because of a fear of lack of enough support is why nothing changes. witness a certain political party still in the wilderness because of exactly that approach.

i am not espousing any political party but use the above as an example.

do what you want - don't wait for the comfort of mass endorsement.

large companies like "comfort" motivated apathetic, low expectation, customers.

TONYDH wrote on Apr 15^th, 2010 at 11:28pm:

i tried many numbers in what i correctly guessed would be a series of consecutive ddi numbers. try this yourself. i called 0207 7705 3000, 3001, 3002 etc. all the way to 0207 7705 3018. these numbers go directly to extensions within the business. that's what a DDI (direct dial in) number does. just start with a number and call all sequential numbers.

This is a tried and tested method that has found many an alternative number. BTW, the numbers you quote should be 020 7705 3000 etc. There is no 0207 code!



TONYDH wrote on Apr 15^th, 2010 at 11:28pm:

i also called all of the geographic numbers listed on this site. many of them are answered by reception.

That is because they take them out of normal service when they are published on this website. As you can see, they are (or were) direct numbers to named senior members of staff; there is no intention on our part to misrepresent them as being for customer services.



TONYDH wrote on Apr 15^th, 2010 at 11:28pm:

between us we will find the direct dial number(s) for customer services. please publish it if and when you do.

This has been done before and $ky always removes DDI customer service menu numbers from service; this has been mentioned numerous times on the Sky Customer Services thread.



TONYDH wrote on Apr 15^th, 2010 at 11:28pm:

none of their staff would transfer me to customer services.

It is quite clear that Sky operates a policy where employees are resolutely forbidden from transferring customers to customer services.



TONYDH wrote on Apr 15^th, 2010 at 11:28pm:

some thought that 0844 was a "local rate" number.

The written responses posted on the forum have also said this rubbish.



TONYDH wrote on Apr 15^th, 2010 at 11:28pm:

using these numbers has to be thought through very carefully. the supplier has in my view a responsibility to provide best advice and i would certainly personally avoid making generalised benefit claims to any potential client.

But the benefit to providers of these numbers is that great a stream that they often misrepresent call charges or paint a picture of lower than normal call charges, primarily due to BT's abonormally low call charges which are brought about due to regulation imposed on it.

---

CJT-80 wrote on Apr 16^th, 2010 at 3:19pm:

I am with BT on an Anytime Call Plan. According to BT the number I want to call 0844 277 2000 is charged at G6 (5p per minute at ALL times) plus an initial set up fee of 9.90p inc VAT.  Who sets the call set up fee? Out of the 5p per minute rate, how much on average per minute would the company who's number this is stand to make per minute?

The call set-up fee is set by BT.

In your posting you only identify two parties: BT (your provider) and the company you are calling. As telecommunications are now privatised with competiting operators, there are now two telephone companies and the company you are calling. This is of critical importance, but many people seem to overlook it.

So you place your call with your chosen provider (in this case BT) which then passes the call to the telephone provider of the company you are calling (in the case of 0844 277 numbers, this is TWL Inbound Ltd which passes the call to the receiver. BT will pay TWL Inbound a "termination charge" because TWL Inbound "terminates" the call.

The termination charge for 0844 g6 numbers is around 5 pence per minute, whereas for 01, 02 and 03 numbers it's roughly 0.5 pence per minute. So the issue is not how much of that extra 4.5 pence per minute is taken by the company receiving the call, but the fact that it chooses to impose this charge on its customers.

The margin BT (as a call originator - a telco we make our calls with) can take on 08 and 09 calls is kept to a very low level due to regulation. This is why the retail charge is about the same as the amount it pays over to the telco that operates the number.

Other originating providers such as Virgin Media and TalkTalk must pay over the same amount as BT to connect these calls. So they must decide whether to reflect the higher termination charges in their retail prices. Of course, it is natural for telcos to charge 084 numbers at a higher rate, and in general that is what they do. But organisations that use the numbers usually opt to give BT's atypical prices because it suits their cause. The "local rate" description with respect to 0845 numbers only applies to BT, hence they are just advocating their customers make their calls with BT. As a campaigner for "Fair Telecoms", I find this to be totally unfair.



CJT-80 wrote on Apr 16^th, 2010 at 3:19pm:

On that note do you know HOW they know? I 141'd my call 1st.

It has been mentioned before on this forum that as well as CLI (the service that provides the caller's number), there is also a service (I don't know how widespread use of it is) that provides the number that the caller dialled. If they have this, then they could see you dialled 14101908… and hence see you are not overseas. Try dialling it in international format; I seem to recall that one or two "overseas" alternatives only work if you do this.

TONYDH wrote on Apr 16^th, 2010 at 10:36pm:

please be careful with bt set up charges. as far as i am aware they are one of the last if not the last company to cling on to call set up charges. there is no actual cost to bt to "set up" a call. they are straight profiteering and yet one more example of bt trying to exploit their "household name".

AFAIK, call set-up charges or call connection charges as they are sometimes known, were coined by the cable provider Virgin Media formally as ntl and Telewest. Only relatively lately have they become a staple of BT, Talk Talk, Sky Talk and maybe others.

What I believe was a BT first was whole minute billing. If we still had clockwork exchanges, then I could maybe understand it. But now whole-minute billing has spread like a cancer, just as call set-up fees.

BT's 5 pence minimum charge and per second billing for geographic calls, RIP. :'(



TONYDH wrote on Apr 16^th, 2010 at 10:36pm:

their commercial activities over the 20 years or so that i have been in telecom deregulation have not matched what i suspect most people's image of a national icon might be. let us just say that their commercial reputation in our industry is the subject of much criticism. from the inside view, we cannot understand why anyone would choose them as a supplier when there are so many, much better alternatives.

You speak as an industry insider which means you will appreciate termination charges and how call charges are split up between the various operators that carry a call. I mentioned this in my previous posting, but I will come on to it again in response to your posting.



TONYDH wrote on Apr 16^th, 2010 at 10:36pm:

to answer your question, bt unilaterally set their own call set up charges. they are now at a level that means that bt calls outside package inclusive calls can now cost up to around 9p minimum.

The minimum charge for a call with BT during the daytime (for all but those on Anytime) is now about 16 pence.



TONYDH wrote on Apr 16^th, 2010 at 10:36pm:

most businesses will not be aware of this recent hike in charges since most unfortunately don't bother to examine their telephone bill (if it is a bt bill they may well have a difficult task anyway); and are being nicely ripped off because a set up charge of i think about 5p + a minimum call charge of 4.7p means a call of even a few seconds costs about 9p. in some cases i believe bt still round up to the full minute. some competitors have minimum call charge of around 1p, we do not charge a set-up fee or minimum call charge.

This is looking more and more like you have copied the text from your company's literature. Which of your competitors have a minimum charge of around 1 pence? Surely if you have no minimum charge or set-up fee, then you would contrast it to a set-up fee of around 10 pence which your competitors charge and not the lowest. Please can you identify those providers that have a minimum charge of 1 pence where new customers can sign up because I don't know of any.



TONYDH wrote on Apr 16^th, 2010 at 10:36pm:

the 5p is split between between the carrier - in this case bt - the provider - which could be a separate reseller or could be the carrier taking both splits if sold direct - and the called party.

As I said above, BT takes a miniscule amount, unless it is the provider of the 0844 (or other) number in question.



TONYDH wrote on Apr 16^th, 2010 at 10:36pm:

09xx numbers pay the seller(s) generally 50 to 70% of the call charge. bt takes the rest.

BT as an originator or terminator? :-?

As you know, because of the regulation on BT (the NTS Condition), BT takes a tiny amount (when it acts as an originator). When it acts as a terminator (an operator of a 09 number), it takes a big chunk, just as other providers such as Cable & Wireless and ntl:Telewest (Virgin Media) do when they provide the numbers.



TONYDH wrote on Apr 16^th, 2010 at 10:36pm:

Bt charges are not clear to the user and their billing is opaque. use another supplier please

The more I read of your posting, the more it looks like spam.



TONYDH wrote on Apr 16^th, 2010 at 10:36pm:

in my experience if a company wants you to pay for a call before you join them - expect to see a high level of unacceptable arrogance and contempt for the customer.

This campaign has never been opposing charges for telephone calls to companies. It is about the covert-premiums with the 084 and 087 numbers (0870 numbers were removed from this bracket last year).



TONYDH wrote on Apr 16^th, 2010 at 10:36pm:

at the risk of repeating what i said in my last post - there is no justifiable need at all to call paid for 08xx or 09xx numbers. send an email asking them to call you. if they don't reply or call - well you then  know what kind of company you are dealing with.

Does not having internet access (such as an elderley person) not count as a "justifiable need"? :-?

TONYDH wrote on Apr 16^th, 2010 at 10:36pm:

the reason we are in this situation is because people still call these numbers and out of laziness, complacency or for whatever reason, these people CAUSE and underwrite the proliferation of these abominations to the detriment of everyone else.

The reason we are in this situation is because telephone companies that provide these numbers to businesses either misrepresent the prices, often using BT's abnormally low 08 rates to paint a picture of a "low cost" number.



TONYDH wrote on Apr 16^th, 2010 at 10:36pm:

TV VOTE OFF SHOWS WITH THEIR PREMIUM RATE 09 NUMBERS FROM WHICH THEY AND BT COLLECT TENS OF THOUSANDS OF POUNDS PER SHOW SHOULD BE BOYCOTTED COMPLETELY.

BT collects money when its customers call these numbers. Should it allow them to call these numbers, hand over the premiums without collecting it? When customers of other providers such as Virgin Media call these numbers, they too collect lots of money. Why single out BT? Surely it is the numbers that are problematic (if anything).

OTOH, if you were referring to BT as a terminator (i.e. where BT operates the 09 numbers), then I thought that the BBC and ITV took services from Cable & Wireless, and hence your message should be directed at it.

The truth, as well you know, is that the majority of the call charges collected by BT when its customers call 08 and 09 numbers are handed over to the telephone provider that operates the numbers. If this abnormally low margin is the reason for your attack on BT, then you are also calling on people to stop calling landline and mobile numbers.

Providers other than BT will naturally reflect the premiums in higher call charges. Why not attack them?  :-?

reply to dave and for everyone else's benefit.

we do not spam - i resent the suggestion that we use this forum to tout for business - we do not - and i will certainly not get involved in the domestic market at any time. - that is NOT why i spend my time on these posts.

we have never supplied paid for 08xx numbers to anyone; which is why my figures may not be accurate but are enough of an indication to get my points across.

because we have no interest in using any supplier that has a minimum call charge or set up charges.
because there are now very very few companies that we would consider as meeting our requirements and preserving our credibility and reputation.

we use ONLY those companies that have proved themselves to us over many years.

as a b2b telecom reseller we know who we would use and have no interest in the others. we have never made any direct reference to any non bt company and we certainly would not recommend bt - but it is up to people to choose for themselves.

I HAVE NO INTENTION WHATEVER OF NAMING NAMES.

we take the view that other suppliers do whatever they do commercially and i absolutely will not get into the business of trying to explain in detail why we choose not to use them as our supplier.

all i know is that it is and was the practice of some providers to charge a minimum call charge - i admit to not having kept up to date with the minutiae of  these companies because as i said we would not consider them as a possible supplier.

we know them by historic long term reputation and have no need or desire to use them.

in any event we no longer have any interest whatever in stand alone telecom supply.

telecoms will be charged very differently. business software tools, such as crm applications with business management tools and internet based ip telephone, are already and will continue to be incorporated into the fabric of more and more businesses and the stand alone per minute charge for businesses will eventually be consigned to history.

our clients are given best advice concerning the usage and benefits to them of leading edge integrated and converged telecom technology.

we do not persuade - we do not spam - we do not need to.

our interest is confined to the leading edge of ip telephony and web crm.

domestically a similar scenario will eventually apply. there are ip telephony suppliers for domestic use - unfortunately they still charge you per minute charge (called a break out charge) to call a non ip enabled phone number and the quality can be patchy.

this will change over time - ip for domestic use will replace current packages and call charges will disappear.

when i said use another supplier i did not mean me. we do not want domestic customers. perhaps i should have made that clear.

we leave domestic suppliers to their in store and door to door sales and their web presence.
try to get unbiased advice from them if you can.

if you do not want unbiased advice and suggestions from me without accusing me of spam - i no longer wish to assist in your campaign.

i do not understand your comment about the need of elderly people.

there is an abundance of wifi hotspots and library internet usage is free.

what age is elderly? some people might consider me to be elderly.

i am 66 and still have a number of active business interests.

i choose to remain active, "elderly or not"

i hate the sheep like apathy and indifference that seems to be a fixture in the culture of this country but as so often happens when we try to offer our experience and knowledge to help those who are not subscribers to this "culture" and want to be involved - we get the kind of offensive comments that you make.

i would have thought that people in the telecom business would be valuable to you - but your replies suggest you know all of the answers so i will not be contributing to the more polite members of this post.

why don't you accuse the 08xx supplier at the head of this post of spam or does direct advertising not count in your book?

you no longer have my cooperation and i will not waste any more of our time on this forum.

CJT-80 wrote on Apr 16^th, 2010 at 3:19pm:

On that note do you know HOW they know? I 141'd my call 1st.

It has been mentioned before on this forum that as well as CLI (the service that provides the caller's number), there is also a service (I don't know how widespread use of it is) that provides the number that the caller dialled. If they have this, then they could see you dialled 14101908… and hence see you are not overseas. Try dialling it in international format; I seem to recall that one or two "overseas" alternatives only work

I called the "international" number, with 141 both as an 020 3 and +44 20 3 number, on both occasions I was given an automated message telling me the number was NOT for UK use, only overseas.

So I guess for now, I will have to stick to calling the 0844 number. Which as you can imagine annoys me greatly.

Quote:

The minimum charge for a call with BT during the daytime (for all but those on Anytime) is now about 16 pence.

Also with Virgin Media!