1. Welcome to Verizon Forums - the unofficial Verizon community! Have a question about Verizon? Click HERE to get started.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Expecting Cell Phone Forums? We recently moved Verizon specific content to VerizonForums.com. If you previously had an account on CPF, it has been transferred!
    Dismiss Notice

Voice Mail checking... is it an IN-Network call?

Discussion in 'alt.cellular.verizon' started by Xxxxx, Feb 14, 2004.

  1. Scott Nelson

    Scott Nelson Guest

    No way man! That would be too easy.

    \paranoid mode=on

    No, no! That's just what they would be expecting us to do!

    \paranoid mode=off


    ;-)

    Scotty


    "Steven J Sobol" <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote in message
    news:DvCdneV0QKoffLLdRVn-hA@lmi.net...
    > Peter Pan <Marcs1102NOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote:
    >
    > > Not sure who was being talked about, but it sounds like what I had heard

    and
    > > written about. In the message I wrote, the first part was exactly what

    you
    > > said Steve, but there was a second part to the sentence (about a side
    > > effect), that if you call a mobile phone and it goes to VM, you would be
    > > charged regular rates instead of M2M.

    >
    > Ah, ok. Has anyone called Verizon CS to confirm if this is the case or

    not?
    >
    > > Basically, I was told that if you make a call, and the receiver is a

    verizon
    > > mobile device, it will be M2M, but if it is another companies cellphone

    or a
    > > non mobile device (like VM or a home or companies answering machine) you

    are
    > > gonna get charged regular rates.

    >
    > That makes sense, of course.
    >
    > --
    > JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA
    > Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) /

    sjsobol@JustThe.net
    > PGP: C57E 8B25 F994 D6D0 5F6B B961 EA08 9410 E3AE 35ED
    >
     



    › See More: Voice Mail checking... is it an IN-Network call?
  2. plane

    plane Guest

    "John R. Copeland" <jcopelan@columbus.rRr.com> wrote in message news:<XvOXb.10065$g95.9055@fe3.columbus.rr.com>...
    > I'll believe that only when I see it.
    > ---JRC---
    >
    > "Peter Pan" <Marcs1102NOSPAM@Hotmail.com> wrote in message
    > news:c0n8vs$19if98$1@ID-190045.news.uni-berlin.de...
    > >
    > >......., side effect, call a mobile phone, it's busy, you get
    > > sent to voice mail, and are charged regular airtime rates since you

    > are no
    > > longer talking to a mobile device.
    > >


    Verizons web page says that In network calls can be made to **any
    verizon customer**----Well if you are a customer, and you call your
    own numb
     
  3. plane

    plane Guest

    Steven J Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote in message news:<eMadnTbl36hJUbLdRVn-sw@lmi.net>...
    > jeff <eunicep@ruralramp.net> wrote:
    >
    > > Whoa! You're saying that if I call another VZW user on Mobile to Mobile /
    > > In-Network, and the lazy bum doesn't pick up the phone then suddenly I'm
    > > charged for handing up on his voice mail greeting, but I'm not charged for
    > > talking to them for an hour?! That is stupid!

    >
    > No, he's saying calls to your own phone to check voicemail will no longer be
    > mobile to mobile in markets that were previously billing those calls as M2M.


    As i had posted earlier, this new m2m stuff is idiotic; the note on
    the statement did not address the voicemail hand off thing, which I
    doubt; but another thought i had was, that the verizon webpage says"
    call free to *any* verizon customer". If I call my own number, am i
    not a verizon customer, and by the defintion of the word *any*
    --can't I call my self free.

    Either verizon, or me, is having trouble with the english language....
     
  4. Mike

    Mike Guest

    On 15 Feb 2004 17:52:30 -0800, plane@usa.com (plane) wrote:

    >As i had posted earlier, this new m2m stuff is idiotic; the note on
    >the statement did not address the voicemail hand off thing, which I
    >doubt; but another thought i had was, that the verizon webpage says"
    >call free to *any* verizon customer". If I call my own number, am i
    >not a verizon customer, and by the defintion of the word *any*
    >--can't I call my self free.


    Well, that's just semantics. If you really "wanted to call yourself
    free", you could simply put down the handset and talk without
    Verizon's intervention! ;)

    >Either verizon, or me, is having trouble with the english language....


    Calling your own number for voicemail is not "calling yourself". And
    here in Ohio, it's never been a M2M call, anyway.

    Mike
     
  5. David S

    David S Guest

    On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 16:31:55 GMT, "Mike" <m.j.markovicNOSPAM@att.net> chose
    to add this to the great equation of life, the universe, and everything:

    >I thought if you dialed your cell phone # from your cell phone (instead of
    >*86) it counts as M2M/IN-Network???


    That has been my experience. However, people are claiming that it will soon
    no longer work that way.

    --
    David Streeter, "an internet god" -- Dave Barry
    http://home.att.net/~dwstreeter
    Remove the naughty bit from my address to reply
    Expect a train on ANY track at ANY time.
    "I stand by all the misstatements that I've made." - Dan Quayle to Sam
    Donaldson, 8/17/89
     
  6. David S

    David S Guest

    On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 21:28:51 -0500, Mike <inundated9@yahoo.com> chose to
    add this to the great equation of life, the universe, and everything:

    >Calling your own number for voicemail is not "calling yourself". And
    >here in Ohio, it's never been a M2M call, anyway.


    But in Chicago, it is M2M (dialing your own number, not *86). If that's
    changing, it sucks. I only know three other people who have VZW and I never
    call them.

    --
    David Streeter, "an internet god" -- Dave Barry
    http://home.att.net/~dwstreeter
    Remove the naughty bit from my address to reply
    Expect a train on ANY track at ANY time.
    "Here I am 70 years old and the girls -- 18-, 19-, 20-years-old -- are
    going nuts, jumping up and down and screaming. It was better than Viagra.
    Not that I've tried Viagra." - Singer Andy Williams on the reaction he got
    from British fans recently.
     
  7. CharlesH

    CharlesH Guest

    In article <DvCdneV0QKoffLLdRVn-hA@lmi.net>,
    Steven J Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote:
    >Peter Pan <Marcs1102NOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote:
    >
    >> Not sure who was being talked about, but it sounds like what I had heard and
    >> written about. In the message I wrote, the first part was exactly what you
    >> said Steve, but there was a second part to the sentence (about a side
    >> effect), that if you call a mobile phone and it goes to VM, you would be
    >> charged regular rates instead of M2M.

    >
    >Ah, ok. Has anyone called Verizon CS to confirm if this is the case or not?
    >
    >> Basically, I was told that if you make a call, and the receiver is a verizon
    >> mobile device, it will be M2M, but if it is another companies cellphone or a
    >> non mobile device (like VM or a home or companies answering machine) you are
    >> gonna get charged regular rates.


    But if I am in-network, and call a VZW number, but they are currently
    roaming, will it still be a MTM ("In-Network") call for me? It will be
    roaming for them. The way MTM "used" to work (I thought) is that both
    phones had to be physically "in network" for anyone to get MTM (being
    a cheap call for them to handle, since it never left their network).

    The exact wording on the Web page in my area says "Talk to any Verizon
    Wireless customer anytime without using any of your allowance minutes
    from within the IN-Network Coverage Area".
     
  8. Peter Pan

    Peter Pan Guest

    "CharlesH" <hoch@exemplary.invalid> wrote in message
    news:c0tu8o02hn5@enews2.newsguy.com...
    > In article <DvCdneV0QKoffLLdRVn-hA@lmi.net>,
    > Steven J Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote:
    > >Peter Pan <Marcs1102NOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote:
    > >
    > >> Not sure who was being talked about, but it sounds like what I had

    heard and
    > >> written about. In the message I wrote, the first part was exactly what

    you
    > >> said Steve, but there was a second part to the sentence (about a side
    > >> effect), that if you call a mobile phone and it goes to VM, you would

    be
    > >> charged regular rates instead of M2M.

    > >
    > >Ah, ok. Has anyone called Verizon CS to confirm if this is the case or

    not?
    > >
    > >> Basically, I was told that if you make a call, and the receiver is a

    verizon
    > >> mobile device, it will be M2M, but if it is another companies cellphone

    or a
    > >> non mobile device (like VM or a home or companies answering machine)

    you are
    > >> gonna get charged regular rates.

    >
    > But if I am in-network, and call a VZW number, but they are currently
    > roaming, will it still be a MTM ("In-Network") call for me? It will be
    > roaming for them. The way MTM "used" to work (I thought) is that both
    > phones had to be physically "in network" for anyone to get MTM (being
    > a cheap call for them to handle, since it never left their network).
    >
    > The exact wording on the Web page in my area says "Talk to any Verizon
    > Wireless customer anytime without using any of your allowance minutes
    > from within the IN-Network Coverage Area".
    >


    That's the way it works, and the text you posted says it exactly. Note no
    commas etc. Admittedly it doesn't make it clear that BOTH phones have to be
    in the in-network area, but hey, what can you expect from people writing
    ads? of COURSE they are gonna mislead you. :)
     
  9. CharlesH

    CharlesH Guest

    In article <c0u561$1cnhje$1@ID-190045.news.uni-berlin.de>,
    Peter Pan <Marcs1102NOSPAM@Hotmail.com> wrote:
    >
    >"CharlesH" <hoch@exemplary.invalid> wrote in message
    >news:c0tu8o02hn5@enews2.newsguy.com...
    >> But if I am in-network, and call a VZW number, but they are currently
    >> roaming, will it still be a MTM ("In-Network") call for me? It will be
    >> roaming for them. The way MTM "used" to work (I thought) is that both
    >> phones had to be physically "in network" for anyone to get MTM (being
    >> a cheap call for them to handle, since it never left their network).
    >>
    >> The exact wording on the Web page in my area says "Talk to any Verizon
    >> Wireless customer anytime without using any of your allowance minutes
    >> from within the IN-Network Coverage Area".

    >
    >That's the way it works, and the text you posted says it exactly. Note no
    >commas etc. Admittedly it doesn't make it clear that BOTH phones have to be
    >in the in-network area, but hey, what can you expect from people writing
    >ads? of COURSE they are gonna mislead you. :)


    WHICH is the way it works? The wording on the Web page says "to any
    Verizon Wireless customer" ... "from within the IN-Network Coverage Area".
    It doesn't say that the "to" customer is IN-Network, just that they
    are a VZW customer.
     
  10. Peter Pan

    Peter Pan Guest

    "CharlesH" <hoch@exemplary.invalid> wrote in message
    news:c0uhi90c97@enews3.newsguy.com...
    > In article <c0u561$1cnhje$1@ID-190045.news.uni-berlin.de>,
    > Peter Pan <Marcs1102NOSPAM@Hotmail.com> wrote:
    > >
    > >"CharlesH" <hoch@exemplary.invalid> wrote in message
    > >news:c0tu8o02hn5@enews2.newsguy.com...
    > >> But if I am in-network, and call a VZW number, but they are currently
    > >> roaming, will it still be a MTM ("In-Network") call for me? It will be
    > >> roaming for them. The way MTM "used" to work (I thought) is that both
    > >> phones had to be physically "in network" for anyone to get MTM (being
    > >> a cheap call for them to handle, since it never left their network).
    > >>
    > >> The exact wording on the Web page in my area says "Talk to any Verizon
    > >> Wireless customer anytime without using any of your allowance minutes
    > >> from within the IN-Network Coverage Area".

    > >
    > >That's the way it works, and the text you posted says it exactly. Note no
    > >commas etc. Admittedly it doesn't make it clear that BOTH phones have to

    be
    > >in the in-network area, but hey, what can you expect from people writing
    > >ads? of COURSE they are gonna mislead you. :)

    >
    > WHICH is the way it works? The wording on the Web page says "to any
    > Verizon Wireless customer" ... "from within the IN-Network Coverage Area".
    > It doesn't say that the "to" customer is IN-Network, just that they
    > are a VZW customer.
    >


    Unfortunately, the statement doesn't say anything about the caller and the
    callee, but they both have to be in-network, both have to have their phones
    on, and neither can be busy (otherwise it goes to voice mail and in the
    future, VM will not be classed as M2M).
    If you happen to be a legal beagle, or have good eyes or a magnifying glass
    the following is in the middle of details: Calls outside the America's
    Choice Network are $.69/min.
     
  11. Mike

    Mike Guest

    On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 20:07:15 -0800, "Peter Pan"
    <Marcs1102NOSPAM@Hotmail.com> wrote:

    >Unfortunately, the statement doesn't say anything about the caller and the
    >callee, but they both have to be in-network, both have to have their phones
    >on, and neither can be busy (otherwise it goes to voice mail and in the
    >future, VM will not be classed as M2M).


    I don't know where you're getting this...as far as I'm aware, whoever
    of the two is on network will be "In-Network".

    i.e.

    If you're on the VZW network and you call another VZW customer, and
    they answer, it doesn't matter if they're on the VZW network or not
    (since VZW obviously knows they're a customer). THEY, out of network,
    will be charged minutes or roaming fees if they aren't on an Extended
    Network partner. YOU will be "In-Network" (VZW obviously knows
    this). YOUR part of the call billing is cheap for them.

    If you are "In-Network" and your VZW buddy calls you, even if he or
    she is roaming, you still use "In-Network" time, assuming the caller
    ID goes through. They'll be charged minutes or roaming fees. Again,
    your part of the billing is cheap for VZW, since you're on their
    network and towers.

    If I'm wrong on this, please provide evidence.

    Mike
     
  12. Hank Fung

    Hank Fung Guest

    In article <7eqdnXxce-NXHbPdRVn2tA@comcast.com>,
    Dan Albrich <junkmail@shaney.uoregon.edui> wrote:
    >This is another one of those issues that varies by location/market. Here in
    >Oregon,
    >we have always been charged airtime for calls made to voicemail. There has
    >never been mobile-to-mobile/in-network billing for calls to your own number,
    >*86, or even the local VM backdoor. I've tried them all over the years,
    > and all have caused me to be billed peak or off-peak by calling period.
    >


    Voice mail was always M2M in the Bay Area.

    As for the voice mail thing, I wonder if you can check someone else's
    voice mail under mobile to mobile. Sure, you can't dial yourself, but
    if you have a family plan, then you could use someone else's phone in the
    family to call your phone and check the voicemail. Or, is it now
    not mobile-to-mobile to dial ANYONE if they don't pick up the phone?

    >- The old airtouch VM system in my area allowed all users to have a large
    >number of long messages, several types of greetings (which you could swap in
    >and out), paging, and a really cool outcalling feature where the system
    >would call you at any number you specified anytime you had a message
    >waiting. Each feature could be customized by day of the week and time of
    >day. i.e. Enable outcalling for M-F 8am-5pm and not otherwise. You could
    >also call in to VM, and turn each feature on or off yourself.


    I do miss the 45 day save function on the voice mail.

    Right now, GSM is finally starting to mature in my area, so that will
    be an option to look into when my contract is up for renewal.

    --
    Hank Fung fungus@ocf.berkeley.edu
     
  13. On 2004-02-16 13:23:57 -0800, David S <dwstreeter@spamisnaughty.att.net> said:

    >> Calling your own number for voicemail is not "calling yourself". And
    >> here in Ohio, it's never been a M2M call, anyway.

    >
    > But in Chicago, it is M2M (dialing your own number, not *86)


    Here in the SF market, *86, dialing your own number, AND dialing a
    local backdoor (which isn't mobile but has a Verizon Wireless NPA-NXX
    prefix) have all up until this point been M2M.
     
  14. Mike

    Mike Guest

    On Fri, 05 Mar 2004 22:44:56 GMT, Michael Kincaid
    <kz7yy3z02@sneakemail.com> wrote:

    >On 2004-02-16 13:23:57 -0800, David S <dwstreeter@spamisnaughty.att.net> said:
    >
    >>> Calling your own number for voicemail is not "calling yourself". And
    >>> here in Ohio, it's never been a M2M call, anyway.

    >>
    >> But in Chicago, it is M2M (dialing your own number, not *86)

    >
    >Here in the SF market, *86, dialing your own number, AND dialing a
    >local backdoor (which isn't mobile but has a Verizon Wireless NPA-NXX
    >prefix) have all up until this point been M2M.


    Yes, I know this.

    My point was that there are significant areas of VZW territory - at
    very least my home area of Ohio and its associated billing market of
    Michigan, and the Los Angeles basin, where voicemail retrieval has
    never been taken out of M2M minutes. Period. No matter which number
    you dialed.

    And in all the brochures, contract explanations and everything else
    I've ever seen from VZW, they've made it clear that their intent is to
    charge airtime for VM retrieval from the handset. Anything else is
    just a switch/billing glitch they are only now getting around to
    "fixing". AFAIK, VZW has *never* promised M2M minutes for VM
    retrieval, aside from some E-Mails printed here which explained that
    you could do it in those markets. Their brochures never pointed out
    "hey, if you call your own number to pick up your voicemail, it'll be
    out of M2M minutes!"

    Yes, it'd be cool if VM retrieval would be out of M2M/In-Network
    allotments (unlimited in the promotion I signed up for). But... it
    isn't. And in April, those of us in Ohio, Michigan and the Los
    Angeles market will pay just as much for VM retrieval as we always
    have.
     

Welcome to VerizonForums!

Unfortunately you can't reply until you log in or sign up.


Forgot your password?