Resisting the temptation to make some awful Bond-related joke, one must ask if you have considered the possibility of using a 03 number for the same purpose.

It should give the same image as the 0845, but cost no more to call than your geo number. Landline callers would still be keen to know your 0800 number.

The difference between 03 and 0845 is that you pay for the features and the image, rather than your callers.

agentq wrote on Sep 5^th, 2009 at 3:23pm:


That is exactly what the 03 range is there to avoid. It enables use of a single non-geographic number (reflecting or projecting a national presence) without obtaining subsidy from callers and with regulatory support for the fact that no telephone company may charge more than the cost of a call to a 01/02 number.

03 numbers are underused, because the absence of the subsidy makes them more expensive to adopt, even though every 084 user has the equivalent 034 number reserved for them. Furthermore, BT has clouded the issue by charging all Call Plan customers for the premium on 0845 calls, by making them inclusive in its packages. Some have copied this dodgy cross-subsidy idea, whereas others continue to properly reflect their costs by charging a premium for 0845 calls.

Nobody includes 0844 numbers (as used by GPs) in their inclusive packages.