London Blasts 0870 'helpline' generates revenue for Met Police!

bbb_uk

Bunking_off,

I understood what you said and it makes sense especially the example that telewest would handle the call on their own network (to save costs) for as long as possible but as far as i'm aware we are the only country to have NGN (I know USA dont) except premium rate but yet their telephony networks can handle loads of calls so does that mean that our call handling facilities are just not as good enough as some other countries and that is the reason why our government and most companies are using 0870 numbers?

I still believe the main reason for our government and most companies to use these numbers is that they gain revenue. If OfCOM took away the revenue sharing a few years ago (which would possibly mean it wouldn't need to be priced at nearly 8ppm) then just how many companies that use them now would have even thought about using them.

I still believe the government did this to save on money and under normal circumstances then that is fine (to a certain degree) but the last thing on the governments mind at this time should not have been how to save money but concentrate on making it easier for those to ring and providing them with the answers they wanted. Instead people were left queuing for a very long time (I agree would be normal under such volume of calls) but then were not given hardly any information anyhow and were often told to ring back.

At the end of the day at the time of such tragedy no one should have made a profit. C&W agreed to donate profits to charity because of the uproar and I've emailed the networks and asked if they would do the same as they most likely earned more money as the cost of these calls can be upto around 40ppm.

bunking_off

bbb_uk wrote:

as far as i'm aware we are the only country to have NGN (I know USA dont)

To be honest, it's more of a question of where doesn't have such numbers. I looked at a few places at random in our numbering database, and Ireland, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Sweden, or farther afield Hong Kong, India, Tanzinia etc all have these numbers. I don't doubt that their usage probably isn't as prevalent as in the UK, but ultimately telephone companies can only offer the services to their customers - we can't force them to use a particular product any more than Tesco can force you to eat a particular food.

Also, in a few places they're positively badged as "services which will generate mass calling events", and you can get in trouble for using a geo number (e.g. Ireland), probably for the network integrity reasons I outlined above.

USA is a bit of an oddball, albeit one which benefits the caller. In most places, all the non-geo derivatives were introduced simultaneously, so businesses took a value call on which type to take....e.g. in the UK clearly most took the view that they weren't prepared to pay for inbound calls (remember when 0870, or its predecessor 0990 was introduced, there was no revenue share and the caller tariff just covered the costs of delivery).

In the USA, as far as I'm aware - and I'm happy to be corrected - the NGN concept was only launched with 1-800. By the time anyone thought of other tariff plans, it was completely ingrained in the customer attitude that calls were free and no-one dared asking their customers to pay for calls. I seem to recall that a very high proportion of trunk calls in the USA are on 1-800/1-888 etc, certainly more than use geographic numbers. I'd guess that it's unthinkable that any helpline that would generate any bursty traffic would use a geo number out there...partially for the reasons I set out above, partially because there's an expectation that businesses will pay for their customers to call them.

dag_2

In the USA, as far as I'm aware - and I'm happy to be corrected - the NGN concept was only launched with 1-800. By the time anyone thought of other tariff plans, it was completely ingrained in the customer attitude that calls were free and no-one dared asking their customers to pay for calls. I seem to recall that a very high proportion of trunk calls in the USA are on 1-800/1-888 etc, certainly more than use geographic numbers. I'd guess that it's unthinkable that any helpline that would generate any bursty traffic would use a geo number out there...partially for the reasons I set out above, partially because there's an expectation that businesses will pay for their customers to call them.

Which brings us back to the question - why do we put up with it in the UK?

Unlike bbb_uk, I'm not totally opposed to revenue sharing - as long as it's regulated by ICSTIS, with the same rules that currently apply to 09 numbers.

When it's regulated properly, revenue sharing works - and it still gets us dial-up internet access, and cheap dial-through international calls. Plus a few other clever things you might want to do with phones from time to time. But it'll stop banks, utilities and government departments ripping us off, by setting up premium rate numbers for normal communications without warning us.

Indeed, if the Metropolitan Police actually said that calls would cost up to 40p per minute, it wouldn't be so bad.

bbb_uk

bunking_off wrote:

...for the reasons I set out above, partially because there's an expectation that businesses will pay for their customers to call them.

Us ringing a geographical number doesn't cost the company anything. They still have to rent lines from BT, etc. The difference being is that companies are using 0870/0871 as a "stealth" premium rate number.

Apart from the cost of the calls which can vary depending on the number there is actually no difference between premium rate numbers or 0870. Both types of numbers cost x amount and both generate revenue for the company concerned. Most companies wont use premium rate because they know that their customers are fully aware of the cost and that they earn a revenue and the fact that they can't be held in a queue whatsoever.

But 0870 is an unregulated premium rate number that offers companies revenue and these companies can even keep you in a queue for ages (which is in their interest to do so) and have so far got away with NOT having to advertise the actual cost of these 0870 calls or the fact they earn a revenue.

How can it be because of the increase in telephony traffic? Most companies especially before this last year or two had geographical numbers and were able to cope with calls but now they all use the same excuss of handling calls efficiently. I bet you'll probably find that most companies using 0870 only have it linked to one number. Therefore, the use of these numbers is not to save the telephony network from collapsing but to gain revenue and doing it sneakily behind our back as most people are unaware of the true cost of these calls and the revenue sharing.

Most government departments use 0870 (inc the Home Office) for which they earn a revenue. If its to handle the amount of calls then what did they do a year or so ago before 0870 became so popular?

The likes of the passport office/DVLA have admitted they earn revenue from these calls but managed to survive just fine on geographicals a while ago for which it didn't cost them anything extra when we rung them.

Only on 0845 (not sure about 0844) numbers does the company have to pay x amount per minute for incoming calls as well as us paying about 3ppm but us ringing their 0870 numbers and us ringing their geographical doesn't cost them anything for receiving incoming calls.

How many companies would continue to use 0870 if they had to advertise the true cost of these calls and the fact that they earn revenue from these calls? A lot of companies I believe would go back to lower cost NGN's or geographicals. The latter being the cheapest for them.

I realise this is can be different in really big companies that are relatively new and use 0870 to divert calls between different call centres but most old but big companies did the same a few years ago but with geographical numbers instead as they've all got call handling equipment installed, etc. But of course these companies that can handle the calls just fine still use 0870 for the obvious reason.

pricefighter

bbb_uk There are in fact now quite a few suppliers of 0845 numbers that dont charge anything to the renter of the number.They just take all the call revenue instead.So the only person paying out is the caller of the number.

bbb_uk

dag wrote:

...Unlike bbb_uk, I'm not totally opposed to revenue sharing - as long as it's regulated by ICSTIS, with the same rules that currently apply to 09 numbers.

I would prefer to ring a geographical in all occasions but I realise that isn't possible. My concern is that these companies are ripping the public off basically taking advantage of (in most cases) our lack of knowledge on the true cost of these calls and the fact they earn a revenue.

If it was regulated just like 09 premium rate numbers it would stop the unneccessary queuing that some companies do. As I said in my previous posts, just how many companies that are using 0870 would continue to do so if they were told they had to publish the cost of ringing this number (inc it can cost upto 40ppm in some circumstances) and the fact they earn a revenue?

I believe (or it could just be a dream) that most companies would then go back to geographicals because they realise they could lose business if they were forced to do this.

I realise this then falls back on OfCOM and the ICSTIS but something tells me that in a few weeks when they announce their plans on NGN's that all they're going to insist is that it is published that calls can cost upto 8ppm (for an 0870). I believe it wont address the 40+ ppm that mobile networks charge or stop them from keeping us in a queue. If they did this then what would our own government do with regards to their continued use of 0870 numbers?

bunking_off

bbb_uk wrote:

I believe it wont address the 40+ ppm that mobile networks charge or stop them from keeping us in a queue.

....but if I make a call to a geographic number during the day from my personal mobile, it costs 40ppm (because I particularly picked an off-peak tariff as I use my work mobi during the day). Surely you wouldn't suggest that anyone publishing a geographic number in an advert would have to print a warning about that? If it isn't required for a geo number charging 40ppm, why is it needed for a non-geo number charging the same amount?

The best that is practicable is to print the BT rate - as that's the only thing that the number holder can have any surety about - and warn that tariffs from other networks may vary. This is what happens with 09. It's a bit like any other product we consume....all the manufacturer's advertising can do is quote the RRP, but if your corner shop wants to charge more, that's business and you've always got the option to use another shop.

The queuing side of things interests me. I must do some analysis sometime of how much it costs to hold a call in a queue (network port rental, purchase of the equipment that keeps you in the queue) versus the revenues received from the telecoms provider. I *suspect* that on 0845 the revenues wouldn't go anywhere near covering the cost, but there may be some incentive on 0870.

lipidicman

bunking_off wrote:

....but if I make a call to a geographic number during the day from my personal mobile, it costs 40ppm (because I particularly picked an off-peak tariff as I use my work mobi during the day). Surely you wouldn't suggest that anyone publishing a geographic number in an advert would have to print a warning about that?.

No, that is your responsibility. You signed up to that tariff. With 0870 many people do not understand the charge. They think of these numbers as 'local-rate' or 'national rate'

bbb_uk

lipidicman wrote:

No, that is your responsibility. You signed up to that tariff. With 0870 many people do not understand the charge. They think of these numbers as 'local-rate' or 'national rate'

I agree.

If OfCOM were to do a survey on how many people knew that calling an 0870 from a mobile could cost around 40ppm then I believe very few would actually know.

The argument that people know that calling a premium rate number (09x) from a mobile is likely to be more expensive is possibly true because they are classed as premium rate numbers. Calls to 0845/0870 are often (as pointed out above) classed as 'local' or 'national' or even don't bother mentioning the cost at all therefore they may assume that the mobile networks charge the same or something nearby what BT charge when in fact it is 4/5 times more expensive.

The reason being is due to lack of proper regulation by OfCOM over these numbers. In my opinion, calls to 0870 are premium rate numbers but just don't generate as much money as 09 numbers because 09x numbers can cost anywhere upto £1.50 a minute.

On a lighter subject, on Tuesday 12th July, I emailed the main four networks about the possibility of donating profits they made due to their customers ringing this expensive number and have today received my first reply - from Brian McBride, MD, T-Mobile:-

We are looking at the mechanics of doing this. It's a small number of calls (less than 1000) and small revenue (£500). We will do what's right. We will not seek to profit from these terrible events.

Regards,

From Brian.

Now assuming it is from Brian himself as I think the way its been signed isn't professional, then at least we have one network willing to donate the profits. The other people on my list haven't answered yet but most have read the email I sent.

bunking_off

lipidicman wrote:

No, that is your responsibility. You signed up to that tariff. With 0870 many people do not understand the charge. They think of these numbers as 'local-rate' or 'national rate'

...but, on my tariff it *is* national rate - albeit a ridiculously priced one. There's a compelling argument to mandate that the "headline" BT 8ppm rate by displayed with the number, but if callers use other providers that charge more, the user of an 0870 number can hardly be held responsible for callers knowing their own tariff plan. This is exactly the principle used on 090, which is that the BT rate is quoted, with a rider that other networks/mobile networks may charge more.