Those who are at all interested in getting to grips with the subject may be interested to read the following document.
It provides some useful insight into how the issue is seen, as is being dealt with, by the various parties.

Determination to resolve a dispute between BT and each of the T-Mobile, Vodafone, O2 and Orange about BT's termination charges for 080 calls

Just one tip - I suspect that this is not suitable reading for those who find my contributions to the forum impenetrable. It is for those who are ready to become seriously engaged with the complexities of what is going on.

I will not attempt a literary criticism, I will simply comment that I have considerable sympathy with Ofcom's position on this one. This is essentially a commercial dispute between competing private sector interests. Ofcom cannot be seen to favour any one party, and it has to try to show concern for the interests of customers of both sides, both callers and providers of 080 numbers. To be objective it has to get into the silly game of economic theory, entertaining the wholly theoretical concept of "efficient cost". Any definitive ruling would have been open to appeal through the courts.

This is going to be one the many issues dealt with in the forthcoming NTS review. That is going to be most significant, as it will cover almost all of the topics dealt with in this forum.

I will be very interested to read what others may have to say on this important and highly relevant matter.

sherbert wrote on Feb 8^th, 2010 at 1:58pm:

Many have criticised my style of writing.
I look forward to reading some informed and aposite comments on the topic, rather than this ceaseless bitching.

Post 47 - apposite (dictionary)

For what it is worth, and purely an opinion, I see no issue with any aspect of SCV's contributions wrt to clarity or understandability. There are complex matters being discussed, and for these matters, it would not be unusual for any given reader to have to read the contribution more than once. I for one value his contributions, both here and elsewhere, to the general campaign, as I do with most of the efforts from others. So, let us stop the bickering!

Barbara wrote on Feb 8^th, 2010 at 5:14pm:

I use my dictionary to look up the meaning of words as well as the spelling. Both are important, and I apologise for the typo. I am sad that the response noted only the latter, not the former.

Barbara wrote on Feb 8^th, 2010 at 5:18pm:

I could not disagree more.

Barbara wrote on Feb 8^th, 2010 at 5:18pm:

The necessity of any complication is a matter for a debate that I am always happy to join.

Barbara wrote on Feb 8^th, 2010 at 5:18pm:

The suggestion that I have not noted the comments that have been made is unkind and foolish. If some readers assume that all of my postings will be incomprehensible by design, then they are engaging in a pointless activity by trying to read them.

Barbara wrote on Feb 8^th, 2010 at 5:18pm:

The point is valid as a personal opinion, it has been made and it stands.

idb wrote on Feb 9^th, 2010 at 12:32am:

Let us not push this matter too hard. None of us are perfect. Throwing bricks is relatively easy. Let us try to move forward.


Perhaps this particular discussion is better continued here - Re: How to post to the forum

---

Please let us get back to the topic:

• Ofcom / BT / MNOs - good, bad; fair, unfair; wise, foolish?  
• Review of NTS - worthwhile, waste of time; suggestions; likely outcomes?
• Other 080 TCPs vs. MNOs - pay, charge?
• THA scheme - distortion, model for all?
• DWP arrangement - rip-off of taxpayers, to be copied?
• Dial-through geo providers - heroes, parasites?
• Mobile charges - given that the mobile operators have a primary duty to maximum their return to their shareholders, how should they adjust their charging structures?

There are so many relevant and topical points to discuss in this thread, why are we distracted?