Dissecting The Mobile Phone Plan Markup
Mobile phone companies provide the basic service of transferring information, whether that be in the form of phone calls, text messaging or internet data plans. However, the method in which they charge for these services is not so basic. By coupling various services into packages and failing to disclose specific details, these companies make it difficult to understand exactly what you are paying for, and exactly how much you are paying for it. With messaging and phone calls, both the sender and the recipient are being billed, doubling the charge on the transfer of the same data. When we took a look into exactly how much data is being transferred, and how much it is costing the customer, we found that each service is each being charged at relatively high and largely different rates.
(click image to enlarge)
You forgot one. MetroPCS. All services, voice, data and text, with taxes and fees, less than $65 per month, all unlimited. And no, I don’t work for them.
Comment by Varuka_Salt — March 8, 2009 @ 4:46 pm
SMS text messaging uses only 7 bits per character, resulting in a total message (max) size of 140 bytes. So they’d actually be getting more messages per MB than what is listed, making the chart look even more dramatic.
In reality, though, SMS text messaging uses almost no additional bandwidth. There is some overhead with maintaining the system, but overall it is a total ass rape to the customers.
Comment by Commenter — March 8, 2009 @ 5:40 pm
That’s why I don’t have a cell phone.
Comment by Mark — March 8, 2009 @ 7:38 pm
Nothing a little competition wouldn’t fix. Google?
Comment by AEC — March 8, 2009 @ 8:14 pm
The reason is simple, they provide mobility.
Comment by Neo — March 8, 2009 @ 8:47 pm
about the lack of disclosure you state on the bottom of that chart: you’re either lying or ignorant. i checked the terms and conditions of four of the largest US carriers (T-Mobile, AT&T, Sprint Nextel and Verizon Wireless) and two of them mention the bandwidth limits clearly in the terms and conditions while the other two imply a soft cap. definitely far from ‘most’.
interesting research you’ve done otherwise, don’t cloud it with lies and/or misinformation.
Comment by lowell — March 9, 2009 @ 12:13 am
Neo - bull**** that the reason is simple. Price gouging is unacceptable any way you slice it, and this is a classic case of it. Why would you defend getting bent over and having to take it, unless you’re already used to being pounded in the ass?
SMS is built-in to the carrier’s networks… essentially the data stack through which mobile data is sent has a built-in header of around 256 characters. The carriers all realized they have this extra room and could start charging people to send messages on it.
Of course, only in the US will you find such exorbitant charges and only in the US will you find users getting charged for RECEIVING text messages.
At least some government reps are finally starting to investigate. Check out this New York Times article for more on the history of getting drilled without lube by the cell carriers:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/28/business/28digi.html?_r=2&partner=rss&emc=rss
Comment by Jake — March 9, 2009 @ 12:38 am
How can they get away with this! Isn’t some consumer group going after them?
Comment by Suits — March 9, 2009 @ 1:20 am
The reason is simple, they provide mobility.
Sorry, forgot to add great post! Can’t wait to see your next post!
Comment by Neo — March 9, 2009 @ 1:47 am
yes but metro pcs is not everywhere.
Comment by Peeple — March 9, 2009 @ 2:55 am
i use net 10 and i pay as i need works for me
Comment by barb — March 9, 2009 @ 3:16 am
Contracts are always more expensive than they seem at first. It used to be more economical to have a contract phone as opposed to a prepaid, but now the prepaid cell phones are a way better option. There are actually prepaid plans with cheaper per minute rates out there so why sign into a restrictive contract when you can have the flexibility of a prepaid? I switched to a Tracfone prepaid a while ago because of hidden costs, overage charges and bad service on my contract. Now I decide up front what I want to spend and don’t get a heart attack at the end of each month.
I simply have to have a cell phone but I can’t see why I must be a slave to some contract.
Comment by RolandD — March 9, 2009 @ 4:33 am
MetroPCS and other smaller carriers were not included because they aren’t as widely available as T-Mobile, AT&T, and Verizon Wireless.
lowell: Sorry for the wording issue. What we meant is, when carriers advertise the messaging or data plans, they don’t generally disclose the cap. If you add in the servicing through your online account or through the phone via a customer service rep, there isn’t a cap limit mentioned. It is of course buried in the thousands of words terms and condition.
Jake: you have a point that being charged for SMS receiving is somewhat of a unique feature of the US consumers. I’m not sure about you guys, but I’m always tired of my European friends telling me about how outdated and anti-consumer our wireless phone networks our whenever they’re in the states.
RolandD: Excellent point. For some people, if you use less than 100 or so minutes per month (or you’re in certain regions), you may be better off going with a prepaid plan. Taking the ‘hidden’ fees, taxes and other misc fees out of the equation will often make the prepaid plan the better bang of the buck!
Comment by BillShrink Guy — March 9, 2009 @ 5:12 am
Well, I pay about 25 euro’s for a 300 minute outgoing call plan with unlimited text and internet (about $32).
That is in the Netherlands.. still way too much money.
Comment by mark — March 9, 2009 @ 5:40 am
mark: Equivalent plan in the states is about 60 euros (or about $75 USD). Ouch to us Americans!
Comment by BillShrink Guy — March 9, 2009 @ 6:44 am
Did that graphic come from a template / tool?
Comment by Sean — March 9, 2009 @ 7:14 am
Sean: we made the infographic. Hope you found it informative!
Comment by BillShrink Guy — March 9, 2009 @ 8:22 am
Disclaimer: I do not work for the mobile/cell industry, I just happen to know a little bit about the engineering:
This is a ridiculous comparison, utterly stupid.
You are comparing fixed-line cable service (ISP) to mobile cellular service where each provider has coverage and wireless service almost anywhere in the country.
This may be a poor analogy, but I’ll give it a shot:
Compare taking a train vs a car. Trains are your cable/ISPs: faster in a straight line, get more data through from point A to point B, more efficient and cheap (for that purpose).
But guess what, most people like the freedom of (mobile) cars. They are way more expensive (gas, insurance, maintenance), but you have the freedom and convenience to ‘roam’ everywhere, even if at slower speeds.
People who come up with such ‘data comparisons’ are most likely clueless to the differences in the technology and the costs behind them!
Bandwidth over RF costs multiple times compared to over fixed cable… but you knew that, right?
This comparison is naive at best.
Comment by mike — March 9, 2009 @ 10:41 am
Some of your pricing is incorrect or no longer available.
Comment by Phil — March 9, 2009 @ 1:14 pm
I don’t deny your dataset, although I don’t agree with the point you are trying to make either. You are taking a very small portion of a corporations business and blowing it up. The larger companies use mobile phone contracts as their main source of profit. AT&T & Verizon are taking record losses on the land line side of the phone market due to increased federal regulations, and federal leasing requirements. Your graph doesn’t factor those things in. As an example, Dell charges between $20-50 for a keyboard/mouse combo. The cost of that combo might be 10-25% of that price, but because their margin is so tight on the multitude of other products offered, they use that increased profit percentage to sustain a small profit margin across the board. I understand people are upset over cell phone plans, but until the government lets these companies operate freely in this supposed free market we live in, this will not change. Your scope is too minimal, and you are blaming the wrong people.
Comment by Kyle — March 9, 2009 @ 1:21 pm
where is sprint on this grid? would be interesting to see considering their “all you can eat” everything plans.
Comment by justin — March 9, 2009 @ 1:29 pm
mike: The majority of the infographics is simply showing everyone a breakdown of a mobile phone plan’s data and SMS servicing cost. We’re aware that both types of service has vastly different infrastructures, but we’re just giving a point of reference for people in how much more data transfer cost when you use a mobile phone device compared to regular Internet services.
Kyle: We’re not really out to blame any of the specific corporation for trying to make money in providing a service. The graph’s main point is to educate and highlight some of the cost of a mobile plan’s data/SMS service to the general consumer so people are more aware of what they’re paying for.
Phil: We’ve approximate some plans where necessary as different regions/areas will often give different prices even with the same carrier. That’s one of the true headache for many consumers when trying to find the right cell phone plan, the prices keeps changing!
justin: Unfortunately we didn’t include Spring Nextel in the current graphics.
Comment by BillShrink Guy — March 9, 2009 @ 1:56 pm
Great article! Too bad no-one feels strongly enough about the price gouging to do anything about it.
As a comparison, its 4 times more expensive to get 1MB of data from one phone to another via text message than it is to get 1MB of data from the HUBBLE TELESCOPE
http://www.physorg.com/news129793047.html
That is some serious price gouging going on there. Telecoms are the new oil it seems ;)
http://testingthetesters.blogspot.com/
Comment by benjy button — March 9, 2009 @ 2:00 pm
That’s why im happy with Sprint :D I pay $33 per month and get 500 anytime (and free nights/weekends), unlimited texts, and unlimited data. Can anyone beat that? (not unless you are on their referral program =Þ)
Comment by futurich — March 9, 2009 @ 2:05 pm
I’m with Telcel in Mexico, I pay 100dlls a month for 900 outbound minutes, unlimited inbound, nationwide and free ld, unlimited data, and a free iPhone 3g.
2 year contract tho…
Comment by Roberto — March 9, 2009 @ 2:05 pm
Using two dimensional shapes to represent the cost is very deceiving. Yall should use 1D!
Comment by Anonymous — March 9, 2009 @ 2:06 pm
Text messages are sent over a portion of the cellular framework that is part of the framework and when not in use, 0ed out. So text messages don’t cost the company ANY bandwidth…..
Comment by jmndos — March 9, 2009 @ 2:17 pm
Your information on the price of unlimited Blackberry data on the AT&T network is incorrect. 5gb unlimited Blackberry data (without Tethering) is $30. 5gb unlimited BB data with 200 messages is $35. Tethering is an additonal $30 on any plan for access to a less-public APN which in theory grants better speeds. Not being an AT&T customer (just a peon) I can’t speak for the speed increase by having the tethering plan on the account. Just thought i’d update your information.
Comment by Tom — March 9, 2009 @ 2:32 pm
The data costs should actually be .6 cents per MB, but what’s an order of magnitude between friends?
That would make cell data only about 22x more expensive than 250GB capped Comcast. (but really only $30 vs $55)
Comment by dougmwpsu — March 9, 2009 @ 2:34 pm
This is also why I do not own a cell phone. You are all being raked over the coals and smiling about it.
Comment by Ritchcraft — March 9, 2009 @ 2:58 pm
Cellular South, a regional company in the southeast USA has an unlimited voice and texting plan for around $50, and piggy backs of the Verizon network when roaming. A great plan for those who live in that area.
Comment by Wayne Edwards — March 9, 2009 @ 3:04 pm
i think in the first graph, the 300min plan should not be included in comparison b/c it makes it seem like tmobile charges more per/min
Comment by Andrew Choi — March 9, 2009 @ 3:06 pm
This is exactly why Apple has not released an integrated iChat for the iPhone despite all the good sense it would make from a user-experience point of view: They would kill the cash cow!
Comment by David Gómez-Rosado — March 9, 2009 @ 3:41 pm
if you don’t understand the network you can’t understand the economics. a byte over SMS doesn’t cost the same as a byte over your home DSL for a reason — and it’s not rape by the telcos this time.
Comment by Anonymous — March 9, 2009 @ 3:43 pm
Well, over here in the socialist democracy of Sweden were state monopolies are in place with the biggest operator being, thats right, owned by the government, I pay $6 a month to call for free to 50% of the nation and 7 cents a minute to the rest. Oh and I get 3,000 sms and 3,000 mms for free a month to whomever I wish to send it. That plan is put in place by the government company Telia Sonera and is called Max 25 (look it up if you wish)
Oh and I get to surf unlimited on the web with my cell for a maximum fee of $1 a day. (7,2mbits)
Did I mention we are socialist?
As a reporter from the Economist put it; “Sweden is the closest thing to a communist state in the western world” :-)
Oh and there are no such thing as roaming charges or long distance calls within Sweden
Comment by Oscar Wolf — March 9, 2009 @ 4:30 pm
I don’t getr it. only idiots buy something that expensive. I don’t own one and i think people who buy every apple product just because its new and they want to show off are douches.
Comment by Stuart hannig — March 9, 2009 @ 4:34 pm
To everyone making statements such as ‘text messages don’t cost the company ANY bandwidth/cost’, you’re misinformed. There are costs associated with text messaging. Cell sites have a limited number of control channels. These are the frequencies that are used to setup voice calls. In basic terms, mobile devices contact the cell site on the control channel to get details on what frequency to use to make the voice call, the encryption key to use, etc etc. Text messages are sent using these control channels. Now, if a lot of people are sending text messages, there is a chance that all of these control channels will be in use. I’m sure everyone has received the ‘Call Failed’ message when trying to make a phone call - I’m sure you’ve even wondered why your call failed when you had full bars displayed on your signal strength indicator on your phone, this is probably the reason. So while yes, text messages themselves are not large, cell companies have to increase the number of cells to ensure service is available to everyone, even if the cell sites themselves can handle more voice calls, but has only run out of control channels…
Now, with that being said, prices being charged still are still far too high, but price comparisons like this do not really paint the real picture.
Comment by Kyle — March 9, 2009 @ 4:50 pm
Those carriers employee over 750,000 people.
I’m sure they should lower there prices so we can make america hurt some more.
Comment by Former Emp of ATT — March 9, 2009 @ 4:58 pm
It’s not price gauging if you pay it. You can easily refuse to use their services - don’t blame the company for raping you up the ass after you tell them they can.
Comment by lewis — March 9, 2009 @ 5:37 pm
I am not saying i enjoy being raped by phone companies, the prices ARE ridiculous, but when you send a text message it DOES tie up one of the pipes that would be otherwise used for voice call connections. so saying sms texts cost them next to nothing isnt accurate.
Comment by jared — March 9, 2009 @ 5:51 pm
I work for a major cellco & text is NOT FREE. It is outsourced to a third party which must be paid for. Granted there is profit in texting, but it isn’t just as if you should be charged data rates for it. It’s a completely different service. If you have a data plan & don’t want to pay for text then goto any free site to send texts and use your data plan. Minutes come from the sky too, but isn’t it fair to pay more for MORE minutes/service?
Comment by Brett — March 9, 2009 @ 6:37 pm
These prices are insane.
Comment by Allie — March 9, 2009 @ 6:42 pm
@jared: I am not saying i enjoy being raped by phone companies, the prices ARE ridiculous, but when you send a text message it DOES tie up one of the pipes that would be otherwise used for voice call connections. so saying sms texts cost them next to nothing isnt accurate.
That’s nonsense. Please read up on the GSM spec and implementation. Text messages are *not* sent in voice channels, but in the ‘maintenance’ channel that goes along with them, which is also used for lower-level communication between your handset and your carrier - e.g. the data that keeps your cell phone clock up to date, and that allows the handing over of your phone between cell towers. So, yes, text messages cost the operator practically zero to send/receive.
Comment by ward — March 9, 2009 @ 6:48 pm
Yeah, but what can we do :(
Comment by frank aguilar — March 9, 2009 @ 7:06 pm
Competition would probably put a strain on these current plans, HOWEVER, the trick is that these major corporations own a lot of the towers and pipelines used to hold the cell infrastructure together.
So even if a company (like Google) attempted to enter the ring with better prices, they may be eaten alive by the prices that Verizon/AT&T/T-Mobile/Sprint charge THEM to make use of their networks for subscribers.
Just a thought that’s always floated in the back of my mind.
Comment by ZCBrown — March 9, 2009 @ 7:23 pm
The data for SMS isn’t nearly accurate because your dealing in different scales of data.
SMS uses a seperate delivery system that is forward and reverse acknoledged .. while it uses unused bandwidth on the paging channel ,. it’s not an infinite resource. The cell companies have to augment their SS7 signaling and allocate additional paging channel resources to allow SMS traffic on the networks.
What your implying is that there is somehow a magical unused T1 sitting in the air wherever you are, if only they made it available.
I can pretty much guarantee if somebody tried transferring a meg worth of data through SMS, the provider would shut down their service as abusive, even on an unlimited plan .. considering that’s 8333 separate transactions per meg and many times that amount of signalling between the SMSC, MSC, tower and handset.
Comment by insider — March 9, 2009 @ 7:57 pm
Well Oligopolies have kinked demand curves (relatively low decline to a point, then a sudden drop). And the mobile phone market is a natural oligopoly. Yea the prices suck, but this article isn’t giving any new information, the most valuable part of this piece was the infographic, which is a great way to compare prices!!
Comment by robby — March 9, 2009 @ 8:18 pm
Let’s not forget about the pesky taxes/surcharges/fees they constantly tack on that drive the plan 15% or more higher than the advertised plan price. I once called my carrier and asked to explain one of the fees and the rep told me to contact my city or state. I asked her they should know if they are charging for the fee.
Comment by elpepe — March 9, 2009 @ 8:40 pm
@Varuka_Salt: Too bad Metro PCS isn’t available everywhere. Sometimes even where they are available you can’t get a signal. I’ll give them credit for their rapid expansion, but until I cant talk on the highway no matter where I am, I won’t be investing $119 for a horrible phone.
Comment by Randy — March 10, 2009 @ 12:52 am
Edit: “until I can”
Comment by Randy — March 10, 2009 @ 12:53 am
If you’re unhappy with your phone bill, just get someone on the phone and bitch and moan until they cut it in half. That’s what customer service is all about.
Comment by Off-White Hat — March 10, 2009 @ 2:09 am
I use TracFone and I end up paying just over 7 cents a minute with no monthly/yearly charges whatsoever. It might not be the best option for some one who spends a lot of time chatting, but most of my calls are under 15 minutes each, with maybe one or two calls a week going over this. So for me it works out great. I’ve been doing it this way for 6 years now and I don’t miss the monthly plan setup at all. The only real downside I can see is that if I lose my phone I’m screwed. They won’t refund the minutes.
Comment by Larry Fisher — March 10, 2009 @ 2:30 am
This is a tough and inequitable situation in North America but consider how much worse it is for the economically disadvantaged in developing countries. SMSes are potentially the most affordable form of communication yet mobile operators collude in charging 10 times their cost for an SMS.
Time for a change. http://manypossibilities.net/2009/02/a-modest-proposal-the-1-cent-sms/
Comment by Steve Song — March 10, 2009 @ 3:05 am
The whole SMS situation in this country sucks. It’s a lousy service compared to email yet we pay for it, and even when we receive messages, something that’s only happening in the US.
But in the defense of mobile carriers, SMS isn’t a big deal, nor it’s as fashionable in this country as in other countries like Venezuela… why? Because calling is almost free on a cellphone. Outside this country mobile calls are extremely expensive, and there are cultures of ringing people, or performing calls under 1 minute since some carriers will charge you the first minute, some will charge you by the second and it’s very expensive. They offer free SMS, or very cheap SMS plans, receiving SMS is free, so people are texting all the time, calling is only reserved for special ocassions.
Here you just call and there’s no long distance, that’s what I like about carriers in the US.
Comment by Gubatron — March 10, 2009 @ 3:54 am
BillShrink: I work for an ISP that offers a wireless 1-3 Mb/S connection for $29/$39 a month uncapped, we rely upon building towers just as the cell phone companies do, and use Motorola equipment that operates on an RF frequency just as you have stated. I feel you have far too much pity for these companies, their prices are outrageous.
Comment by parkers — March 10, 2009 @ 5:46 am
oops, I meant that towards Mike– Thought the authors name was on top!
Comment by parkers — March 10, 2009 @ 5:48 am
http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/business/Your-Cell-Phone-Plan-Probably-Costs-You-3-Per-Minute.html
Check out this article. A new statistic to know what an average customer pays at the end of the day, all said and done, black and white.
Comment by Manohar Siluvaimuthu — March 10, 2009 @ 11:06 am
Wow, that’s bonkers
Comment by Timothy — March 10, 2009 @ 11:48 am
I pay $100 per year. I can make and receive all the calls I need to.
Too many people appear to constantly be away from the people they need to converse with. Maybe you need to either stop talking so much or get closer. Or both.
Comment by rcw — March 10, 2009 @ 12:01 pm
Very informative article. For anyone saying that this comparison is invalid for whatever reason, i pose the following question:
What justification is there to charge $0.75/MB voice and $90.00+/MB text?
Comment by Jizmak — March 11, 2009 @ 11:01 am
Great illustrations. Very good example of technical communication. These telcos aren’t even available in my are but I enjoyed the article just for the graphs.
Comment by Brian — March 14, 2009 @ 9:56 am
@anonymous in sweden - I’d rather pay more for my cell phone bill than have my government buying people’s votes with cheap/free goods and services paid for by deficit financing.
Socialism is not a sustainable model. Hugo Chavez is about to find that out.
Comment by toastyaroma — March 19, 2009 @ 11:37 am
I took up the challenge for you to help find me a better cell plan, and I got back a plan that could save me over $200 - except it’s the exact plan I’m already on! I don’t understand where I’m already missing the savings.
Please don’t spam me to death now.
Comment by C — March 28, 2009 @ 6:59 pm
Folks! You are missing the point here. Remember, take it for granted that Life Isn’t Fair to everyone, BUT it is your job to make it More Fair for You. Research & Nego- tiation (when U have leverage: B4 purchase) is the key. Like futurich post on 3/9 above, I took the insiders deal with Sprint & it worx great for me. Earlier this month I ported my land line/home phone no. to Tracfone in protest of a $3.95/mo ERC (Energy Recovery Charge ie pure BS) my carrier started assessing in 7/08 without any warning. BTW I’ve got a complaint in w/State Communications Commission for the local carrier’s blatant failure to conform to regs. but the state is a front of red tape to continue allowing it… In any event, you’ve just got to do your homework (or take advantage of the knowledge from those who already have) & take your power back. Just like when you’re in a car show room being worked over by salestaff to buy a car, remember you’ve got the power to say NO DEAL and walk out! Use it in great frequency & don’t let lack of patience show. Call back until you find a rep. who’ll give you what you ask for/expect. Don’t get nasty, just stay firm and use NO & hang up when you need to. When it gets you what you’re thrilled with (or even just well satisfied) you shouldn’t worry about how other customers are not getting as good a deal - afterall, they may not feel they’re being screwed!
Comment by Big Al — March 29, 2009 @ 6:30 am
Big Al, you couldn’t have put it any clearer. You are so right about that. We Americans need to become better, more informed consumers. We consume a lot in this country, so it only makes sense for us to make sure that we educate ourselves on the things we consume, i.e.: where they’re made, how much we’re REALLY paying (from conception to manufacturing to end-usage to disposal) and how reliable the product is. Frankly, as citizens, it is our duty. This article is definitely a start. Thanks for posting it.
Comment by Rog in Miami Gardens — April 22, 2009 @ 8:27 pm
Consumer cellular - I have two lines 100 minutes 35/month. No contract. More minutes cost more of course but 100 is all my wife and I need.
Comment by Mark — April 30, 2009 @ 9:07 pm
Also when comparing cost of network operations to the United States and other countries, try to keep in mind the massive differences of population density. US is a lot more spread out, costing more in transport and leasing fees for all the cell towers. Other note, what happened to Sprint on this chart? Are they dead yet?
Comment by karlos — May 18, 2009 @ 8:36 pm
@Rog I agree, we need more informed consumers. We also need consumers to RTFM on their handsets. Supporting customer care centers drive up costs on plans. Users call customer care for more simple to handle issues than other countries, issues that they could solve if they read the phone, checked user forums, or paid attention. Sprint actually refunded customers due to excessive calls to care.
Comment by karlos — May 18, 2009 @ 8:42 pm
Wow.. there is MOST DEFINATELY a cost that goes along with text messaging.
1) The price of the bandwidth from the cell site to the switch location. Is that free?? You want someone to blame for high prices of cell phones?? Blame the people who provide the bandwitdth (t1’s, DS3’s, OC3’s and above). These are the LIONS share of the costs, and they are controlled by a small few companies. Who? Hmmm.. AT&T, Verizon and Sprint are the 3 largest providers of these circuits. So they control the costs of the circuits for almost ALL of the wireless industry. And they all (except for 1 major US carrier) also have a wireless unit of their business. The costs are rolled downhill, like in every other business out there. Except 3 of them are creating the costs to begin with. And they have their associated costs as well.
2) The price of the equipment in the switch locations to decode it, and re-route it to the end receiver. If that receiver happens to be across the friggin globe, that is A LOT of space to cover. Thus, a LOT of bandwidth across the country. Do you see a pattern developing?
3) Cost of the cell sites. Those aren’t free.
4) Cost of the leases for the cell sites. Are you going to let someone plant a tower in your back yard for free? Neither am I.
5) Cost of the permitting for city/county/state…
…and the list goes on and on.
Do you see where this is going? All this has to be in place for you to make one stupid “LOL” text on your phone. Yes, the bandwidth is already there for the cell site but to say it doesn’t cost anything is, at best, rediculous.
FLAME ON!
Comment by Wirelessdude — May 26, 2009 @ 2:28 pm
just a question, why wasn’t Sprint or Boost included? Boost’s $50 unlimited plan includes tax!
Comment by Stephen — June 11, 2009 @ 5:18 pm
So is there a better explanation of why MetroPCS, Cricket and Boost aren’t included in Billshrink? I mean they are in the top 25 NFL markets in the country so distribution is pretty wide, like nationwide right?
Comment by Big Diddy — June 13, 2009 @ 3:37 pm
What about US Cellular? It’s ridiculous what they charge, and they seem to have a monopoly on my calling area… I am looking into switching to another carrier if I can find one. I am out here on the prairie…
Comment by Michelle — June 29, 2009 @ 12:59 pm
Some of you people arent mking any sense. Text messaging cost the company more money. idoesnt makes sense a phone call requires a dedicated connection between the two parties and consumes more bandwidth. A sms message is it at most 250 character long at most they are sent very infrequently thus some channel reuse can occur. They are just raping the hell out of you guys. It seems that it would be a better vale to get a smart phone and a data plan and use aim. rather than have all 3 options. Also cell phone towers dont have the upkeep costs associated with land lines. just think if there something going wrong with the land lines they have to send someone out to check out a large port of the infrastructure they have worry about replacing poles, trenching if they have to its a whole lot more involved. spring att nextel verizon they are taking advantage of every one by having the plans i ay everyone should just stop using phone data all together. verizon even blocs features such as wifi and gps that is built into the phones tell me that isnt a dick move.
Comment by thedarkprincedc — July 8, 2009 @ 1:33 pm