The SayNoTo0870 Article Discussion Area

theloft

IvanOpinion wrote: »

America is a different market working on a different pricing model with many companies going bankrupt in a matter of months.
ivan

You may have some argument about costs being built in but most of us agree it is a stealth revenue. Just look at the profits some of the Banks, Insurance companies, SKY etc. etc. make. Are you trying to say they could not afford to offer an 0800 service ? I would argue that one with you forever! despite the fact that you are obviously a very seasoned MSE contributor. Plus your comment about America is nonsense - I have spent some time there and yes it is a larger market, but our economy runs alongside theirs and practically every single company, including all major ones some of whom have been in business for 50 years and more, offer freephone contact. It is the norm there. I don't object to paying for a national phone call to any company but when it is a revenue builder, and at a premium rate, I strongly object.

DonnyDave

The US also has a different telephone system. It's a larger country and therefore calls can be "long distance" and therefore more expensive. In the UK tariffs charge the same for local and national geographical calls, so there is no such thing as "long distance".

Numbers beginning 03 are neutral in that they are no more expensive than geographical calls, but are not free (unless on an inclusive package).

IvanOpinion

bbb_uk wrote: »

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion on this. Yes, these numbers may have a legitimate usage but also they're used to gain money from callers without the callers knowing about it.

The companies/gov depts using these numbers (moreso 087x) are doing so not for routing services but a sneaky way of obtaining revenue without the caller knowing about it.

If it was known that these numbers cost more than normal numbers, excluded from nearly all inclusive minutes and the fact that the called company/gov dept is most likely gaining revenue from it then I believe their would be a public outcry.

I would suggest that if anybody does not know that these numbers cost more then they only have themselves to blame since there has been so much hype and informaiton in the press and, on sales literature etc. about them. where are these people living?

You state you like it the way it is now which is fine but how do explain companies that use these numbers when you're actually buying their product/service and then continue to charge for any support, etc thereafter.

I think I have stated on many occasions that generally I think sales lines should not use premium numbers. However in various industries there is a growing number of 'agents' that are funded from such revenue. At 10p per minute that would barely fund minimum wage. On the other hand use of free phone numbers means the cost of sales has to be embedded in the price of the goods .. that includes the cost of door-to-door salesmen etc. which in some industries, given the takeup, means that anybody purchasing has to actually pay for all those who turn it dowm .. that however I think is an acceptable cost.

As far as i'm concerned the truth of the matter is that these numbers (087x) are used stealthly to gain revenue without their customers knowing about.

If a company/gov dept needs to use a premium rate number then that's up to them but they never choose a 09x costing 10p/min (or thereabout) instead most opt for the stealth method of collecting revenue 087x.

Remember 10p per minute would barely pay minimum wage. There is a growing minority in this country who appear to have nothing better to do all day but waste vast amounts of public sector workers time on trivia by continually making unnecessary phone calls (sadly everybody has to pay for growing numbers of peoples to take such calls). I say let them pay for the privilege. As an example our own local council pretty much has to employ someone full time to continually tell people that what they are asking for is not the job of the council ... every year the council produces and sends out a glossy pamphlet telling people exactly what services they offer .. every year people do not read it and make thousands of complaints to the council. Since I have to pay taxes in that area I do not see why I should have to pay for people who are basically too stupid to read a pamphlet.

Similarly for support lines, every product I buy comes with installation instructions .. why should i pay an indeterminate but significant amount extra for support that I may or may not use. Let those requiring support pay for those services.

another example could be In the airline industry ... people want the lowest possible fare (often 'free') .. when something costs 'nothing' then one cannot complain that an 0870 number is being used to cover the costs of sales and support. The alternaitve is to go back to the old 'all inclusive' pricing model where you paid for services whether or not you wanted or used them.

i have no issue over the campaign against 0870, my issue is with the generality of it. I believe it needs to focus on certain areas to ensure maximum benefit for the customer. So for example rather than randomly saying 'no' to 0870 (and other premium numbers) .. it should be looking at situations where it is beneficial to the customer NOT to have 0870 and situations where it is beneficial to have 0870 .. because BOTH exist.

Ivan

IvanOpinion

theloft wrote: »

You may have some argument about costs being built in but most of us agree it is a stealth revenue. Just look at the profits some of the Banks, Insurance companies, SKY etc. etc. make. Are you trying to say they could not afford to offer an 0800 service ? I would argue that one with you forever! despite the fact that you are obviously a very seasoned MSE contributor.

there are 3 points I can make on that.
1. it is irrelevant what profits companies make because those profits may not be generated in that part of the industry that is being discussed .. for example the retail side of banking may make very little profit therefore why should it be subsidised by the commercial side.
2. when financial institutions make profits it is good news for everybody since that ensures our pensions, investments, isas etc. continue to reward us
3. if you think any financial institution will spend its profits ons omething without a route to get them back then you are mistaken. what they would (and I know for a fact that such conversations have been held), look at a breakdown of support costs (e.g. cost of sales, cost of support, cost of complaints etc.) and then see what would happen if they simply spread that over everybody and if their product would remain competitive. Maybe banks would add a little bit onto loan rates, take a little bit of a savings rate etc. .. you still end up paying for it.

Price comparison sites are a very powerful marketing ploy these days and I know of several instances where companies have 'massaged' figures purely to get their product to the top of the list using loopholes in how the broker sites work. The customer often then only looks at what is at the top of the list and maybe ignores that something further down includes free telephone support (but then it is not free it has been embedded in the price, people are forced to pay for support whether or not they need it).

Think of it if you had a choice of purchasing exactly the same product. In one place it was £20 with 0870 support while in another it was £40 but that included 30 minutes free support, or you could buy it for £50 including unlimited free support ... which one is offering the better marketing message? which one is going to sell .. because ultimately that is the bottom line?

Plus your comment about America is nonsense - I have spent some time there and yes it is a larger market, but our economy runs alongside theirs and practically every single company, including all major ones some of whom have been in business for 50 years and more, offer freephone contact. It is the norm there.

I also have spent a lot of time in america (both business and pleasure) and it is a totally different market to here, there are similarities but you are not comparing like-for-like.

I don't object to paying for a national phone call to any company but when it is a revenue builder, and at a premium rate, I strongly object.

This phrase 'revenue builder' keeps cropping up. Most 'premium rate' lines won't even cover the cost of the person you are talking to not to worry the call logging, the iVR, call monitoring and all the other IT systems that a call centre actually needs. In that context one could equally argue that having to pay for their product in the first place is a 'revenue builder'.

Always remember you have a choice .. you could send a letter .. but then it is likely that will cost you as much if not more than an 0870 number.

Ivan

theloft

IvanOpinion wrote: »

Always remember you have a choice .. you could send a letter .. but then it is likely that will cost you as much if not more than an 0870 number.Ivan

Well thank you for your very detailed but obviously biased opinion. I don't wish to dwell on this any more, but thousands of ordinary people like me , dislike these premium rate numbers intensely and will continue to do so. Letters and emails often remain unanswered and if there is a problem with a company's product or service, why should it cost extra to let them know.

IvanOpinion

theloft wrote: »

Well thank you for your very detailed but obviously biased opinion.

'Biased'? I believe this 'sayno to0870' has become a bit of a 'cause' and the only thing guaranteed with a 'cause is that common sense has been allowed to go out the window. Therre is a happy medium but, as I explained to BBB while the campaign is unfocussed on 'global removal', it lacks credibility. It needs to differentiate between those areas were it is of benefit to the consumer to use free phone and those areas where it is of benefit to use premium rate.

I don't wish to dwell on this any more, but thousands of ordinary people like me, dislike these premium rate numbers intensely and will continue to do so. Letters and emails often remain unanswered and if there is a problem with a company's product or service, why should it cost extra to let them know.

Duh! It always has whether that be the price of a letter, a standard rate phone call, a premium rate phone call, built into the retail price or simply the persons time. In the main, all the 'just-in-case' costs funded by pemium rate numbers means the customer pays less. Oddly enough proof of a letter or email is often more legally binding than claiming you made a phone call.

I have just spent a fruitless few minutes looking back over my phone bills since last March (on 1899). Between then and now we made 14 phone calls to premium rate numbers totalling just over £6 (that would barely have paid for me to write a single letter). BTW the biggest cost was £1.80 when I was on hold for about 15 minutes (significantly less than the cost of a letter).

You may dislike them, that is your right, however I want the best value for the consumer which means I do not want 'additional services' that most people will not use built into the retail price.

Ivan

bunking_off

Ivan, notice you use 1899 for 0870s. As an aside, there's a logic in letting these calls default back to BT...I find it doesn't cost much more, and is useful for making the couple of calls a month that BT require to give you Caller Display free.

IvanOpinion

bunking_off wrote: »

Ivan, notice you use 1899 for 0870s. As an aside, there's a logic in letting these calls default back to BT...I find it doesn't cost much more, and is useful for making the couple of calls a month that BT require to give you Caller Display free.

In my case they would default to Pipex (not BT) .. which, last time I looked, was slightly dearer .. but we are only talking of pence. It is easier to explain to my wife to stick to using 1899 while I use up the free Pipex minutes

ivan

bunking_off

IvanOpinion wrote: »

In my case they would default to Pipex (not BT) .. which, last time I looked, was slightly dearer .. but we are only talking of pence. It is easier to explain to my wife to stick to using 1899 while I use up the free Pipex minutes

ivan

Similar myself...goes to TalkTalk...so I just over-ride with 1280. I only have CPS, though, not WLR. Same issue with my wife & explaining which prefix to use...that's where the Orchid dialler comes in . I look at it that it costs me 1ppm more, but saves me 3 quid a month for the caller display.

bbb_uk

IvanOpinion wrote: »

Therre is a happy medium but, as I explained to BBB while the campaign is unfocussed on 'global removal', it lacks credibility. It needs to differentiate between those areas were it is of benefit to the consumer to use free phone and those areas where it is of benefit to use premium rate.

I like to think I'm a fair person and try and look at both sides to the story.

Some Sayno forum members are of the opinion that all 084/087 users should migrate to 09x because that's what that number range was setup for (revenue sharing).

In a perfect world and if it wasn't already too late then that would be great but in the interests of a 'happy medium' (as you state), I've always been of the opinion that if consumers were:-

1. Made fully aware of the costs to these numbers (ie accurate (as far as possible) pricing info
2. the fact that they're excluded from inclusive minutes
3. the fact that revenue sharing takes place (ie the company/gov dept called is most likely earning revenue)

Then that would be a happy medium as far as i'm concerned. All this takes place now on 09x numbers.

Call me stupid/weird but I'm of the opinion that consumers should be made aware of all these facts and that companies/gov depts should stop their misleading claims that they're local/national rate (especially as some CPs maintain this lie and go one further and state from anywhere in the UK!!!)

Now the phrase "premium rate numbers" has been given a bad name when it came to light all the different quiz type TV programmes, etc that were cheating, etc. Now to avoid this stigma on 084/087 number range then they could be called "special services number" (I believe Ofcom has sometimes referred to them as such in consultations).

As I've said many times before, I believe that companies, etc using 087x are doing so for the money they make from the calls. This is fine if they want to make money because it subsidises something else, etc but the very reason why they've chosen an 087x is because most consumers aren't aware of revenue sharing taking place and so are using this to their advantage.

If it was known by all consumers that 087x are in essence just "stealth" premium rate and as such that consumer still chooses to use that company, etc then that, in my opinion, is fine because the consumer was made fully aware of the costs involved beforehand so it's pointless moaning about it later.

Now for those companies/gov depts operating multiple call centres and handling a huge volume of calls then 0845 is a fair compromise. It's possible to get an 0845 for free with call routing, etc and without paying an incoming call charge. I'd, ideally, prefer them to use 03x but 03x numbers are expensive at this moment in time and I hope once they've been out a while and more and more CPs start competing (where possible) then this new range will cheaper to have.

I realise that there will always be incoming call charges but one CP offers 0800 numbers for £4.95 a month with 1000 inclusive minutes and then it's only 2p/min for calls received over and above the inclusive minutes.

Now if it's possible to get a 0800 number at that price then surely it's possible to get 03x number with more inclusive minutes included or a lower ppm rate.