Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
SAYNOTO0870.COM

<---- Back to main website

 
Home Help Search Login Register

Pages: 1 2 3 
Send Topic Print
BT Evening period changes - April 2010 (Read 38,726 times)
Barbara
Supreme Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 598
Re: BT Evening period changes - April 2010
Reply #30 - Feb 4th, 2010 at 4:47pm
 
jrawle, with regard to your penultimate paragraph, the vast majority of people just want/need to pick up a phone and dial without having to do a calculation for which one would need a maths degree & the investigative powers of a top detective before deciding when and how to make the call.   I think simplicity is the key, I think inclusive call packages are good because they allow one to budget without individual call calculation or checking the time (if on Anytime), this is the problem with NGNs, there is a proliferation of slightly differing codes and tariffs, seemingly dependant upon the number following the four digit initial code and this is surely designed to muddy the waters to the stage where people have to give up and just make the call.   If there were no NGNs (other than overt premium rate like 09 which is generally used by organisations one doesn't have to call) and there was a standard per minute charge for those calls where people did not have inclusive packages, life would be as it should be - simpler!
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
sherbert
Supreme Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 2,011
Gender: male
Re: BT Evening period changes - April 2010
Reply #31 - Feb 4th, 2010 at 4:54pm
 
Barbara wrote on Feb 4th, 2010 at 4:47pm:
jrawle, with regard to your penultimate paragraph, the vast majority of people just want/need to pick up a phone and dial without having to do a calculation for which one would need a maths degree & the investigative powers of a top detective before deciding when and how to make the call.   I think simplicity is the key, I think inclusive call packages are good because they allow one to budget without individual call calculation or checking the time (if on Anytime), this is the problem with NGNs, there is a proliferation of slightly differing codes and tariffs, seemingly dependant upon the number following the four digit initial code and this is surely designed to muddy the waters to the stage where people have to give up and just make the call.   If there were no NGNs (other than overt premium rate like 09 which is generally used by organisations one doesn't have to call) and there was a standard per minute charge for those calls where people did not have inclusive packages, life would be as it should be - simpler!



I could not have put that better myself!  Wink
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
SilentCallsVictim
Supreme Member
*****
Offline


aka NHS.Patient, DH_fairtelecoms

Posts: 2,494
Re: BT Evening period changes - April 2010
Reply #32 - Feb 4th, 2010 at 8:28pm
 
sherbert wrote on Feb 4th, 2010 at 4:54pm:
I could not have put that better myself!

This is getting dangerously close to consensus, as I too find myself happy to endorse almost all of what was said.

It is inappropriate use of “revenue sharing” numbers that we object to, i.e. all beginning 084. I would say that the propriety to which I refer demands a clear declaration of a) the fact of revenue sharing and b) the likelihood that this will lead to a premium charge, a standard which almost all current users fail to meet.

I hope that we can accept 03 numbers for use in cases where there is some genuine benefit in having a NGN. This causes no additional cost to the caller, so the only grounds for objection to the use of the number are for those who wish to take issue with the fact that a relatively expensive item of telephone technology has been deployed. Centralisation of call handling, which is commonly the reason for use of a NGN, is a quite different topic.

There cannot be a standard per minute charge whilst 1) there is competition in the market for telecoms services, 2) users of mobile phones are subsidised by those who call them, and 3) revenue sharing numbers remain as an unregulated lower tier of PRS. The forthcoming work by Ofcom may address related issues and perhaps one aspect of the latter point. It will not however seek to undermine the first, as Ofcom is bound to encourage competition under the terms of its second principle duty; the second issue is a different topic altogether.

I am not sure what we would wish Ofcom to do about the first two of these issues, or how happy we would be if progress on the third is slower and less comprehensive than we would wish. There is fun to come.

Because the cost of providing a telephone network are mostly in the capacity required when under peak load, rather than in connecting individual calls, it has always been accepted that call charges will differ according to the time when the call is placed - a further dent in the idea of a "standard charge". Callers are encouraged to call at times when the network is relatively quiet by being penalised for calling when it is busy. This can never be very precise, as tariffs have to be relatively simple, however this has been tweaked from time to time. One might wonder if the hour between 6pm and 7pm has been found to be a peak, whilst continuing business calls and (inclusive) domestic calls overlap, thereby requiring the change that has been announced.

The cost predictability derived when subscribing to a fully inclusive package is mirrored by the revenue predictability on the other side. This not only provides financial security, but also, and thereby, makes it easier to invest in increased capacity, should this be necessary.
Back to top
 
WWW  
IP Logged
 
sherbert
Supreme Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 2,011
Gender: male
Re: BT Evening period changes - April 2010
Reply #33 - Feb 5th, 2010 at 10:35am
 
Oh dear, oh dear, SilentCallsVictim, no one can doubt that you put a lot of hard work, enthusiasm and effort into your various causes, even if some of us here are confused as to what they are. I have to say that some of your responses are so confusing, ‘long winded’, baffling  & difficult to comprehend,  that if it was not for the premium rate numbers at my local hospital & doctor’s, I would be telephoning them to say I was losing the will to live, by the time I get to the end of some of your posts. Cry

There is an excellent web site http://www.plainenglish.co.uk  which gives some excellent examples of précis writing.
As an example


Before

High-quality learning environments are a necessary precondition for facilitation and enhancement of the ongoing learning process.


After

Children need good schools if they are to learn properly.



I have a funny feeling that in a previous life (or may be in this one) you must  have been (or are) a politician or a civil servant as some of you your responses are typical Yes Minister ‘speak’, Sir Humphrey would have been proud of you!! Wink

Sometimes I have to re read your posts several times just to get an 'inkling' to what you are on about

Could you perhaps in future when making responses, make them easier for some of us to understand?

Thanks & best wishes

Sherbert  Smiley
Back to top
« Last Edit: Feb 5th, 2010 at 10:48am by sherbert »  
 
IP Logged
 
Barbara
Supreme Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 598
Re: BT Evening period changes - April 2010
Reply #34 - Feb 5th, 2010 at 11:08am
 
Can I please echo sherbert's comments?    It is a relief to know others feel as I do.  I too have problems with understanding SCV's posts, having to re-read them many times (I have similar problems American novels and American political speeches!)   My mother, whose English was superb, always impressed most forcibly upon me that the purpose of language, whether written or spoken, was to communicate effectively with others, if one's "audience" had problems understanding, then one had failed; this point was also made both at school and (in my distant working past) in the workplace.    PLEASE could we have clear and concise posts which we can all understand at first reading?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
SilentCallsVictim
Supreme Member
*****
Offline


aka NHS.Patient, DH_fairtelecoms

Posts: 2,494
Re: BT Evening period changes - April 2010
Reply #35 - Feb 5th, 2010 at 12:11pm
 
Our differences may actually be found in the depth of understanding that we wish to apply to the issues.

One uses language appropriate to the audience. I urge those who may challenge my recognition of this point to refer to my contributions to the debate in the media. In this open public discussion forum, I seek to connect with those able to follow what I have to say and perhaps to help promote a clearer understanding of the complex issues and positions that we have to address as campaigners.

There are many dumb and stupid comments made on both sides of the argument in which we are engaged. Those from our opponents have too often swayed decisions. I believe that we have to lift the level of debate a little to achieve our objectives.

If I ever fail in my efforts to make my points as clearly as is possible in good English, as I surely do from time to time, then please accept my apologies. If the level of understanding that I seek to promote is greater than that which other members are willing or able to achieve, then I must express regret, but cannot apologise.

I am happy to engage in private clarification of specific points by email or PM, or, if appropriate, here. I would rather not engage in personal arguments with particular members in the forum. I see the public forum as a place to discuss ideas, not people. As stated previously, I recognise that I may be in a minority in this respect. I offer an email address (as well as the option for a PM) for those who wish to engage with me directly.

I am tempted to respond to the request for only simple comments, by requesting only comments from those who have clearly thought through the issues and have something relevant and worthwhile to contribute. I MAKE NO SUCH REQUEST; this is a public forum, not a private club. All should be free to express their views as they wish. They must be ready to accept argument, but should not expect personal attack, unless they clearly make themselves the subject of their contribution.
Back to top
 
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Barbara
Supreme Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 598
Re: BT Evening period changes - April 2010
Reply #36 - Feb 5th, 2010 at 3:42pm
 
There are a number of inferences in post no 35 which many readers of this forum may see as less than complimentary, partciularly to those other posters who have merely sought to make posts accessible to all users of this forum, as I hope no one would seek to promote elitism where only a select few can understand all or certain posts.   I do not see any purpose in any kind of impolite exchange but I will state, again: clarity and brevity must always be admired as tools in the clear communication of facts and ideas, conversely, abtruseness can never be of any benefit unless the writer wishes deliberately to conceal meaning, an odd tool for a forum where one seeks to exchange ideas and perhaps influence others.  To cast aspersions on the intelligence or understanding of those who prefer clarity and brevity and who seek to promote same is, in my view, unhelpful to say the least.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
sherbert
Supreme Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 2,011
Gender: male
Re: BT Evening period changes - April 2010
Reply #37 - Feb 5th, 2010 at 4:13pm
 
Completely agree with that Barbara. It seems to me that  you have hit the nail on the head.

I think most of us here put our views over pretty well and straight to the point and also very helpful to others, who may be confused about the whole of the premium/revenue sharing set up.

I don't think many of us here  either, give the impression that 'I am  always right and everyone else is wrong.'

All what I was asking for in my post, is to make the posts easier to understand, rather than to read the thing, two or three times to work out what the hell it means.

I certainly do not intend to start a slanging match here and all I did was put in what I thought was a reasonable request.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Barbara
Supreme Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 598
Re: BT Evening period changes - April 2010
Reply #38 - Feb 5th, 2010 at 4:22pm
 
Thank you, sherbert.   Let's hope we can have a new beginning where everyone can understand and join the exchange of information and views, surely the best way for knowledge and understanding to grow.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
SilentCallsVictim
Supreme Member
*****
Offline


aka NHS.Patient, DH_fairtelecoms

Posts: 2,494
Re: BT Evening period changes - April 2010
Reply #39 - Feb 5th, 2010 at 5:23pm
 
It is no less easy to hide or lose meaning in brevity than in verbosity.

Important and comprehensive ideas are best expressed in simple words. It does not follow that simple words always express important and comprehensive ideas.

In an open public forum, not aimed at any particular audience, it is inevitable that not all readers will be able to fully or adequately comprehend all contributions. I repeat my opposition to the suggestion that contributions should be aimed at some particular elite group. Every contributor should feel free to contribute in whatever way they wish, being ready to have their ideas discussed.

If one had to go back to basics with every posting then we would never be able to advance understanding beyond a certain point. Perhaps we need a "new readers start here" section.

I have contributing to this thread essentially to make one point:
Quote:
BT's "penalty rates" are exceptional and not a valid point of reference for call charge comparisons.

This has demanded some explanation, notably the relevance of the increased promotion of the Anytime call plan.

I have responded to points made in response to my comments and have adressed broader points raised. I however find myself unable to continue this interesting discussion as I need to repeat a point I have made before:
Quote:
I see the public forum as a place to discuss ideas, not people

To be fair, we are now discussing the idea of how forum postings should be drafted, rather than who they are psoted by. I wold however rather discuss ...

If we want a "standard charge":
  • Should we force mobile users to pay the full cost of being connected to the network?
  • Should we seek to stop compeition, that enables some providers to offer cheaper calls than others?
  • Should we demand that dial-up ISPs levy charges, and charities (and businesses) obtain subsidy for their telephone costs, other than through use of revenue sharing numbers?

If anyone understands my points and feels that I could have expressed them more clearly or is interested in learning just exctly what I was trying to say, then please drop me an email, or make your own clearer posting for the benefit of other readers.
Back to top
 
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Dave
Global Moderator
*****
Offline



Posts: 9,902
Yorkshire
Gender: male
Re: BT Evening period changes - April 2010
Reply #40 - Feb 5th, 2010 at 9:40pm
 
jrawle wrote on Feb 4th, 2010 at 4:02pm:
Dave wrote on Feb 4th, 2010 at 3:03pm:
I understand that all BT "packages" have a minimum 12 month contract.

I think that's only the case now if you have a new line installed by BT, not just if you switch your calls to them. The pages linked earlier for new customers certainly say no minimum contract.

Thanks jrawle. The link you posted, www.bt.com/dealterms, says that a BT customer can switch to the most basic tariff, the "Unlimited Weekend Plan", or "Unlimited Evening & Weekend Plan" (paid for) and not enter into a minimum term contract. Of course, they can only do this if they are not in such a contract. As you point out, there is also a minimum 12 month contract for new customers and existing customers who move their service to another address.


Barbara wrote on Feb 4th, 2010 at 4:47pm:
jrawle, with regard to your penultimate paragraph, the vast majority of people just want/need to pick up a phone and dial without having to do a calculation for which one would need a maths degree & the investigative powers of a top detective before deciding when and how to make the call.   I think simplicity is the key, I think inclusive call packages are good because they allow one to budget without individual call calculation or checking the time (if on Anytime), this is the problem with NGNs, there is a proliferation of slightly differing codes and tariffs, seemingly dependant upon the number following the four digit initial code and this is surely designed to muddy the waters to the stage where people have to give up and just make the call.   If there were no NGNs (other than overt premium rate like 09 which is generally used by organisations one doesn't have to call) and there was a standard per minute charge for those calls where people did not have inclusive packages, life would be as it should be - simpler!

Simplicity existed when BT was the only provider. As jrawle has pointed, the changes are down to the changing market.

If, as you imply, all NGNs that cost more than the package were to disappear and all numbers were part of an inclusive package, it stands to reason that the marketeers within each telephone company will be busy devising some other way to set themselves apart from the competition.

Previously it was different call rates for geographic calls, but now it is moving towards the cost of included calls. Meanwhile, the cost of calls that are outside of packages, such as 0844 and 0871, have been rising, what with the "call set-up" fee which is proliferating everywhere.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
jrawle
Supreme Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 708
Didcot, Oxfordshire
Gender: male
Re: BT Evening period changes - April 2010
Reply #41 - Feb 6th, 2010 at 6:37pm
 
Going a bit off-topic, but I still think relevant to this thread.

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Feb 5th, 2010 at 5:23pm:
If we want a "standard charge":
  • Should we force mobile users to pay the full cost of being connected to the network?
    ...


I don't support calls for a "standard charge", which sounds to me to be what BT are calling for with their Terminate the Rate campaign. BT have to support such a campaign because, as a landline provider, they are slowly losing customers, so they are looking to make the cost of owning/using a mobile higher to make people think again.

The only way I'd support such a campaign is if, at the same time, BT were forced to offer a line-only product that could be used for ADSL. Otherwise, if everyone had to pay line rental to keep even at PAYG mobile, I'd no longer have a mobile phone. I don't need two phones, and I have to have a landline so that I can have ADSL.

The only reason I tolerate having a mobile phone is because it doesn't cost me anything to keep it. I avoid using it to make calls other than in exceptional circumstances. If I had to pay line rental, I wouldn't have one, and if I had to pay to receive calls, there would be no point in having one as I would never answer it (particularly as most calls I seem to receive these days are from scammers and spammers).

By forcing people to pay for an expensive inclusive calls package with a landline, BT are simply attempting to maintain their outdated business of providing fixed-line phone services, in a world where people would be better served by freeing up the infrastructure to provide advanced data services where the cost doesn't have to include paying for an unwanted, outdated landline.
Back to top
 
WWW  
IP Logged
 
SilentCallsVictim
Supreme Member
*****
Offline


aka NHS.Patient, DH_fairtelecoms

Posts: 2,494
Re: BT Evening period changes - April 2010
Reply #42 - Feb 6th, 2010 at 10:06pm
 
jrawle wrote on Feb 6th, 2010 at 6:37pm:
Going a bit off-topic, but I still think relevant to this thread.

I see it as perfectly acceptable to respond to the points made and to develop related themes.

jrawle wrote on Feb 6th, 2010 at 6:37pm:
I don't support calls for a "standard charge", which sounds to me to be what BT are calling for with their Terminate the Rate campaign.

The Terminate the Rate campaign has support from some unexpected organisations, who seem to believe that money grows on trees. They subscribe to the suggestion that the only effect of success for the campaign would be to the advantage of customers. There is an assumption that mobile operators would meet the loss of termination rate income by diminishing the size of a slush fund they have been holding, rather than preserving their income in some other way - e.g. stopping their customers from benefitting from this subsidy, which has kept their charges artificially low.

In principle it is fair that the user should pay for a service, rather than having it subsidised by others. The problem in this case is with the way in which the telecoms market in the UK has been allowed to develop, with “new” technology being favoured. A swift change back now would have considerable social consequences for those who have come to rely on using a mobile phone under the current terms. This is a tricky matter, where what is right in principle may not be right in practice.

Such matters are of no concern to BT, which is naturally in favour of mobile customers paying for their service, rather than them being subsidised by its customers. It is however disturbing to see organisations such as the NUS, RNID, RCN, GMB, Unite and Age Concern / Help the Aged taking a position that seriously threatens the interests of many less well off people.

The primary sponsor of the Terminate the Rate Campaign is “3”. Better informed contributors may be able to offer a clear explanation for its maverick position on commercial issues amongst the mobile network providers. It is however clear that this is all about some beef that it has with the other four.

jrawle wrote on Feb 6th, 2010 at 6:37pm:
... I have to have a landline so that I can have ADSL.

... The only reason I tolerate having a mobile phone is because it doesn't cost me anything to keep it. I avoid using it to make calls other than in exceptional circumstances.

... most calls I seem to receive these days are from scammers and spammers

... their outdated business of providing fixed-line phone services

... people would be better served by freeing up the infrastructure to provide advanced data services where the cost doesn't have to include paying for an unwanted, outdated landline.

The most interesting suggestion, that standard format voice telephony, and even SMS, is outdated, having been superseded by use of the internet, is certainly worthy of discussion.

If this were to be now, or to become, true then I do not agree that there should be an emphasis on access to communications technology only being provided through fixed point connections, which are only suitable for those who are housebound. Whilst some people may have no use for a mobile communications device, I am not sure that the potential for communications through the internet is really so great that it will prevent us all from ever needing or wanting to leave our homes. That is a very “brave” idea, which has many supporters, not least amongst the ranks of those concerned for the environment.

I personally believe that standard (i.e. not relying on a user ip connection) interactive voice telephony, both fixed and mobile, does have a future, if only of perhaps 20 or 30 years. It certainly retains a major place in the lives of most people today.

As VOIP develops, along with other subscription based services, the emphasis on “pay as you use” fees, i.e. call charges, will diminish as the overhead of call billing mechanisms will probably not be entertained as being economic, because the total cost will be so small. I see the current moves by BT and others as being part of this trend.

This will eventually kill off the option for “Premium Rate” services (including those presently classified as simply “revenue sharing”). We do however have some way to go before this point is reached and odd effects will be created in the course of the long drawn out transition. The original topic of this thread has served to point out examples of this.

(I would be delighted if someone with a better knowledge of VOIP, its current penetration, especially on mobile devices, and likely development of both this and other internet based interactive communications services, perhaps voice and image, could contribute some helpful thoughts.)


As most members of this forum are keen users of voice telephony, it is very interesting to hear the views of one who is not, and finds that he has to pay for it nevertheless. It is perhaps unfortunate that those who are not users of the internet are unable to contribute to our discussions! This means that we may not get a balanced view of its merits.
Back to top
 
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 
Send Topic Print
(Moderators: CJT-80, DaveM, Forum Admin, Dave, bbb_uk)

Website and Content © 1999-2024 SAYNOTO0870.COM. All Rights Reserved.
Written permission is required to duplicate any of the content within this site.

WARNING: This is an open forum, posts are NOT endorsed by SAYNOTO0870.COM,
please exercise due caution when acting on any info from here.


SAYNOTO0870.COM » Powered by YaBB 2.5.2!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2024. All Rights Reserved.


Valid RSS Valid XHTML Valid CSS Powered by Perl Source Forge