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

Forget Portability. Don't Charge For LL Access!

Discussion in 'alt.cellular.verizon' started by Real Estate Agent, Sep 11, 2003.

  1. "CK" wrote:
    > CHICAGO, Sept 10 (Reuters) - Verizon Wireless, the largest U.S. wireless
    > telephone company, on Wednesday challenged its competitors to stop

    fighting
    > a new government rule that would allow consumers to keep their phone

    numbers
    > when switching wireless services.


    I am far more concerned over the note in my most recent invoice. It said
    local phone companies are going to stop routing calls to cell phones for
    free, in favor of picking up some long distance revenue. In other words,
    the "wide area access" we have enjoyed in the past is about to end.

    Since cellular service began in my area, callers in Durham, Chapel Hill,
    Raleigh, and many other towns could reach cellular numbers as if they were
    local calls. This, even though four different landline companies serve
    portions of the region.

    Now, as I understand it, phone companies have the right to treat these as
    Long Distance service. Although I have an 800 number with AT&T, I have not
    been successful in getting it to ring a cell number; they tell me it must go
    to a landline.

    I'm getting ready to call AT&T, again. In my business, I'd rather pick up
    the cost of the call than having potential clients pay the bill.

    -Paul-
     



    › See More: Forget Portability. Don't Charge For LL Access!
  2. Bill Radio

    Bill Radio Guest

    Paul,
    I've had several 800 #'s from different carriers (currently TTI) and
    I've been able to forward them to wherever I want. My fax machine (a
    virtual phone line), my wireless phone, my ISP, Mom's house, whatever.
    And i'm only paying .055/min. w/no additional monthly charges.

    Time to dump AT&T. And you CAN take your existing 800 number with you
    to the new carrier!


    -Bill Radio

    Western U.S. Wireless Reviews & Ratings:
    http://www.MountainWireless.com


    "Real Estate Agent" <spamblockCaryRealtor@nc.rr.com>
    >
    > Now, as I understand it, phone companies have the right to treat these as
    > Long Distance service. Although I have an 800 number with AT&T, I have not
    > been successful in getting it to ring a cell number; they tell me it must go
    > to a landline.
    >
    > I'm getting ready to call AT&T, again. In my business, I'd rather pick up
    > the cost of the call than having potential clients pay the bill.








    [posted via phonescoop.com]
     
  3. Mike

    Mike Guest

    On Thu, 11 Sep 2003 22:31:07 GMT, "Real Estate Agent"
    <spamblockCaryRealtor@nc.rr.com> wrote:

    >Now, as I understand it, phone companies have the right to treat these as
    >Long Distance service. Although I have an 800 number with AT&T, I have not
    >been successful in getting it to ring a cell number; they tell me it must go
    >to a landline.


    Check this out:

    http://www.kall8.com/

    You can get a toll-free number for as little as $2 a month, and
    6.9c/min. for incoming calls. It rings fine to a cell phone... I've
    had mine actually going there for over a year.

    If you want easier to remember numbers, need an "800" area code as
    opposed to 866/877/888, or need a vanity number, it costs extra,
    perhaps as much as $25/mo. I have a relatively easy to remember
    number with the luck of the draw and only pay $2.

    Mike
     
  4. On Thu, 11 Sep 2003 22:31:07 GMT, "Real Estate Agent"
    <spamblockCaryRealtor@nc.rr.com> wrote:

    >Since cellular service began in my area, callers in Durham, Chapel Hill,
    >Raleigh, and many other towns could reach cellular numbers as if they were
    >local calls. This, even though four different landline companies serve
    >portions of the region.


    You gotta love the wacky combination of BellSouth, ex-GTE Verizon
    landline, Sprint Local, and Mebtel (I assume they're the fourth
    landline company you're referring to)... ;)

    >Now, as I understand it, phone companies have the right to treat these as
    >Long Distance service. Although I have an 800 number with AT&T, I have not


    What that means is if you have a Raleigh number, it'll still be local
    to Raleigh but not Durham, not that it'll be LD from *everywhere*. In
    some places, such as Denver and Atlanta, this has no impact at all,
    but in others, such as the Triangle, it has a major impact. :(

    >been successful in getting it to ring a cell number; they tell me it must go
    >to a landline.


    For some reason AT&T is the only carrier I know of that pulls this
    crap, and they do it *consistently*. Carriers that do *not* whine
    about pointing 8xx numbers at cell phones:

    - Kall8 - www.kall8.com
    - TelCan - www.telcan.net
    - PNG - www.powernetglobal.com (their plans are sold mainly via
    independent agents and rate comparison sites; for "only" 800 service
    try www.whosells800.com)

    -SC
    --
    Stanley Cline -- sc1 at roamer1 dot org -- http://www.roamer1.org/
    ....
    "Never put off until tomorrow what you can do today. There might
    be a law against it by that time." -/usr/games/fortune
     
  5. p lane

    p lane Guest

    I have had an 800 # to a cel phone for years, go to and independant
    seller, probably better price too.

    "Real Estate Agent" <spamblockCaryRealtor@nc.rr.com> wrote in article
    <LI68b.20252$ip5.1564386@twister.southeast.rr.com>:
    >
    > "CK" wrote:
    > > CHICAGO, Sept 10 (Reuters) - Verizon Wireless, the largest U.S. wireless
    > > telephone company, on Wednesday challenged its competitors to stop

    > fighting
    > > a new government rule that would allow consumers to keep their phone

    > numbers
    > > when switching wireless services.

    >
    > I am far more concerned over the note in my most recent invoice. It said
    > local phone companies are going to stop routing calls to cell phones for
    > free, in favor of picking up some long distance revenue. In other words,
    > the "wide area access" we have enjoyed in the past is about to end.
    >
    > Since cellular service began in my area, callers in Durham, Chapel Hill,
    > Raleigh, and many other towns could reach cellular numbers as if they were
    > local calls. This, even though four different landline companies serve
    > portions of the region.
    >
    > Now, as I understand it, phone companies have the right to treat these as
    > Long Distance service. Although I have an 800 number with AT&T, I have not
    > been successful in getting it to ring a cell number; they tell me it must go
    > to a landline.
    >
    > I'm getting ready to call AT&T, again. In my business, I'd rather pick up
    > the cost of the call than having potential clients pay the bill.
    >
    > -Paul-
    >
    >
    >


    [posted via phonescoop.com]
     
  6. William Bray

    William Bray Guest

    As land lines are loosing business to cell lines do you think this is
    their way of getting that lost revenue back? Does this effect same area
    codes or has this simply gone to the same extent as what land lines
    currently do to any none-local area code?
    Worse yet. Do you think wirless will go the same way- charging long
    distance to talk to a land line?

    "Real Estate Agent" <spamblockCaryRealtor@nc.rr.com> wrote in article
    <LI68b.20252$ip5.1564386@twister.southeast.rr.com>:
    >
    > "CK" wrote:
    > > CHICAGO, Sept 10 (Reuters) - Verizon Wireless, the largest U.S. wireless
    > > telephone company, on Wednesday challenged its competitors to stop

    > fighting
    > > a new government rule that would allow consumers to keep their phone

    > numbers
    > > when switching wireless services.

    >
    > I am far more concerned over the note in my most recent invoice. It said
    > local phone companies are going to stop routing calls to cell phones for
    > free, in favor of picking up some long distance revenue. In other words,
    > the "wide area access" we have enjoyed in the past is about to end.
    >
    > Since cellular service began in my area, callers in Durham, Chapel Hill,
    > Raleigh, and many other towns could reach cellular numbers as if they were
    > local calls. This, even though four different landline companies serve
    > portions of the region.
    >
    > Now, as I understand it, phone companies have the right to treat these as
    > Long Distance service. Although I have an 800 number with AT&T, I have not
    > been successful in getting it to ring a cell number; they tell me it must go
    > to a landline.
    >
    > I'm getting ready to call AT&T, again. In my business, I'd rather pick up
    > the cost of the call than having potential clients pay the bill.
    >
    > -Paul-
    >
    >
    >


    [posted via phonescoop.com]
     
  7. About Dakota

    About Dakota Guest

    William Bray wrote:
    > As land lines are loosing business to cell lines do you think this is
    > their way of getting that lost revenue back? Does this effect same area
    > codes or has this simply gone to the same extent as what land lines
    > currently do to any none-local area code?
    > Worse yet. Do you think wirless will go the same way- charging long
    > distance to talk to a land line?


    No, I don't think they will. One of the greatest advantages to having a
    wireless phone is the plans. Most plans allow for toll free calling to
    any U.S. phone number. If they start charging for calls to landlines,
    I'm switching back to landline, then I won't be bound to a contract a
    logo-covered noose of the wireless companies.



    > "Real Estate Agent" <spamblockCaryRealtor@nc.rr.com> wrote in article
    > <LI68b.20252$ip5.1564386@twister.southeast.rr.com>:
    >
    >>"CK" wrote:
    >>
    >>>CHICAGO, Sept 10 (Reuters) - Verizon Wireless, the largest U.S. wireless
    >>>telephone company, on Wednesday challenged its competitors to stop

    >>
    >>fighting
    >>
    >>>a new government rule that would allow consumers to keep their phone

    >>
    >>numbers
    >>
    >>>when switching wireless services.

    >>
    >>I am far more concerned over the note in my most recent invoice. It said
    >>local phone companies are going to stop routing calls to cell phones for
    >>free, in favor of picking up some long distance revenue. In other words,
    >>the "wide area access" we have enjoyed in the past is about to end.
    >>
    >>Since cellular service began in my area, callers in Durham, Chapel Hill,
    >>Raleigh, and many other towns could reach cellular numbers as if they were
    >>local calls. This, even though four different landline companies serve
    >>portions of the region.
    >>
    >>Now, as I understand it, phone companies have the right to treat these as
    >>Long Distance service. Although I have an 800 number with AT&T, I have not
    >>been successful in getting it to ring a cell number; they tell me it must go
    >>to a landline.
    >>
    >>I'm getting ready to call AT&T, again. In my business, I'd rather pick up
    >>the cost of the call than having potential clients pay the bill.
    >>
    >>-Paul-
    >>
    >>
    >>

    >
    >
    > [posted via phonescoop.com]
     
  8. I do not fucken see how any states utilities commission would approve
    any shit where you call a cell you get fucken charged a fee, hell, I do
    not even beleive that the FCC will fucken go for some shit like that.

    Cletis.

    About Dakota <glaeske@yifan.net> wrote in article
    <3F61571F.7060508@yifan.net>:
    >
    >
    > William Bray wrote:
    > > As land lines are loosing business to cell lines do you think this is
    > > their way of getting that lost revenue back? Does this effect same area
    > > codes or has this simply gone to the same extent as what land lines
    > > currently do to any none-local area code?
    > > Worse yet. Do you think wirless will go the same way- charging long
    > > distance to talk to a land line?

    >
    > No, I don't think they will. One of the greatest advantages to having a
    > wireless phone is the plans. Most plans allow for toll free calling to
    > any U.S. phone number. If they start charging for calls to landlines,
    > I'm switching back to landline, then I won't be bound to a contract a
    > logo-covered noose of the wireless companies.
    >
    >
    >
    > > "Real Estate Agent" <spamblockCaryRealtor@nc.rr.com> wrote in article
    > > <LI68b.20252$ip5.1564386@twister.southeast.rr.com>:
    > >
    > >>"CK" wrote:
    > >>
    > >>>CHICAGO, Sept 10 (Reuters) - Verizon Wireless, the largest U.S. wireless
    > >>>telephone company, on Wednesday challenged its competitors to stop
    > >>
    > >>fighting
    > >>
    > >>>a new government rule that would allow consumers to keep their phone
    > >>
    > >>numbers
    > >>
    > >>>when switching wireless services.
    > >>
    > >>I am far more concerned over the note in my most recent invoice. It said
    > >>local phone companies are going to stop routing calls to cell phones for
    > >>free, in favor of picking up some long distance revenue. In other words,
    > >>the "wide area access" we have enjoyed in the past is about to end.
    > >>
    > >>Since cellular service began in my area, callers in Durham, Chapel Hill,
    > >>Raleigh, and many other towns could reach cellular numbers as if they were
    > >>local calls. This, even though four different landline companies serve
    > >>portions of the region.
    > >>
    > >>Now, as I understand it, phone companies have the right to treat these as
    > >>Long Distance service. Although I have an 800 number with AT&T, I have not
    > >>been successful in getting it to ring a cell number; they tell me it must go
    > >>to a landline.
    > >>
    > >>I'm getting ready to call AT&T, again. In my business, I'd rather pick up
    > >>the cost of the call than having potential clients pay the bill.
    > >>
    > >>-Paul-
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>

    > >
    > >
    > > [posted via phonescoop.com]

    >


    [posted via phonescoop.com]
     
  9. David L

    David L Guest

    Stanley Cline <sc1-news@roamer1.org> wrote in article
    <8h52mvcsc808n7aj287h353p7gruf6ejbl@4ax.com>:
    >
    > For some reason AT&T is the only carrier I know of that pulls this
    > crap, and they do it *consistently*. Carriers that do *not* whine
    > about pointing 8xx numbers at cell phones:
    >
    >


    (snip)


    It's been a while, but I distinctly remember a protracted wrestling
    match to move some 800 numbers from ATT to another carrier.
    Delays, extra confirmations and continued billing after switching.

    It was important to call ATT billing department and tell them to stop
    billing, even though the numbers were moved!

    -
    David

    [posted via phonescoop.com]
     
  10. "Perkins, Cletis" ...
    > I do not fucken see how any states utilities commission would approve
    > any shit where you call a cell you get fucken charged a fee, hell, I do
    > not even beleive that the FCC will fucken go for some shit like that.
    >


    You're right, of course. That could never happen--anywhere in the world! No
    government would support such a stupid idea.

    [No flames, please. Of course I know about Europe--grin.]
     
  11. "About Dakota" <glaeske@yifan.net> wrote in message
    news:3F61571F.7060508@yifan.net...
    >
    >
    > William Bray wrote:
    > > As land lines are loosing business to cell lines do you think this is
    > > their way of getting that lost revenue back? Does this effect same area
    > > codes or has this simply gone to the same extent as what land lines
    > > currently do to any none-local area code?
    > > Worse yet. Do you think wirless will go the same way- charging long
    > > distance to talk to a land line?

    >
    > No, I don't think they will. One of the greatest advantages to having a
    > wireless phone is the plans. Most plans allow for toll free calling to
    > any U.S. phone number. If they start charging for calls to landlines,
    > I'm switching back to landline, then I won't be bound to a contract a
    > logo-covered noose of the wireless companies.
    >


    This isn't about charging calls to landlines. It is about taking a cell
    phone number and making it local. Often, calls from landlines in an area
    where it would normally be [local] long distance to call the area code a
    cell phone resides in, get routed for free to cell phones and the cellular
    companies have picked up the tab for this. They may no longer do this. So,
    many people in these towns have cell phones that were "local toll free
    calls" and will no longer be.

    Tom Veldhouse
     
  12. On Fri, 12 Sep 2003 05:49:44 -0000, noemail@cletis.com (Perkins,
    Cletis) wrote:

    >I do not fucken see how any states utilities commission would approve
    >any shit where you call a cell you get fucken charged a fee, hell, I do
    >not even beleive that the FCC will fucken go for some shit like that.


    Ever heard of something called a "rate center?" If an exchange is not
    within a rate center they get charged toll. The LECs up til this time
    have given cellular providers a free ride. The free ride is about to
    end.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    To send an email reply send to
    GSMthemobilestandard (@) yahoo.com
     
  13. "Perkins, Cletis" <noemail@cletis.com> wrote in message
    news:vm2njo24p0l65d@corp.supernews.com...
    > I do not fucken see how any states utilities commission would approve
    > any shit where you call a cell you get fucken charged a fee, hell, I do
    > not even beleive that the FCC will fucken go for some shit like that.
    >
    > Cletis.
    >


    Is it possible that this polite request to clean up your language might be
    heeded?

    Thanks!

    Tom Veldhouse
     
  14. "Perkins, Cletis" <noemail@cletis.com> wrote in message
    news:vm2njo24p0l65d@corp.supernews.com...
    > I do not fucken see how any states utilities commission would approve
    > any shit where you call a cell you get fucken charged a fee, hell, I do
    > not even beleive that the FCC will fucken go for some shit like that.
    >
    > Cletis.
    >


    It is not about being charged a fee for calling a cell phone. It is simply
    that you are being charged the long distance cost (often calls in the same
    area code are long distance) for calling the cell phone that, before, used
    to be waived (or rather, paid for by the cellphone providers). Essentially,
    calling a given area code is [local] long distance, but if that number
    happens to belong to a cell phone the cell phone company picked up the tab
    so the call would be free to the caller. This was done at the telco and
    reimbursed later.

    Tom Veldhouse
     
  15. Thomas T. Veldhouse <veldy71@yahoo.com> wrote:

    > This isn't about charging calls to landlines. It is about taking a cell
    > phone number and making it local. Often, calls from landlines in an area
    > where it would normally be [local] long distance to call the area code a
    > cell phone resides in, get routed for free to cell phones and the cellular
    > companies have picked up the tab for this. They may no longer do this. So
    > many people in these towns have cell phones that were "local toll free
    > calls" and will no longer be.


    Medina, Ohio is one. Calls to four Cleveland VZW exchanges in area code
    216 are no longer local.

    Of course, Cleveland has _never_ been a toll-free call from Medina
    anyhow (via landline), so this move should not surprise anyone.

    --
    JustThe.net Internet & Multimedia Services
    22674 Motnocab Road * Apple Valley, CA 92307-1950
    Steve Sobol, Proprietor
    888.480.4NET (4638) * 248.724.4NET * sjsobol@JustThe.net
     
  16. Clay

    Clay Guest

    Another option is http://www.accxx.com There is no montly fee and its only
    4.9 cents per minute. You can have as many 800 numbers as you want. I
    currently have 2 and one rings my cell.
     
  17. sorry, I recken I get carried away, I will try to say feck instead of
    fuck from now on.

    Cletis.

    "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <veldy71@yahoo.com> wrote in article
    <3f61d4af$0$42056$a1866201@newsreader.visi.com>:
    >
    > "Perkins, Cletis" <noemail@cletis.com> wrote in message
    > news:vm2njo24p0l65d@corp.supernews.com...
    > > I do not fucken see how any states utilities commission would approve
    > > any shit where you call a cell you get fucken charged a fee, hell, I do
    > > not even beleive that the FCC will fucken go for some shit like that.
    > >
    > > Cletis.
    > >

    >
    > Is it possible that this polite request to clean up your language might be
    > heeded?
    >
    > Thanks!
    >
    > Tom Veldhouse
    >
    >


    [posted via phonescoop.com]
     
  18. On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 03:23:57 -0000, noemail@cletis.com (Perkins,
    Cletis) wrote:

    >sorry, I recken I get carried away, I will try to say feck instead of
    >fuck from now on.


    Did you ever see the movie Johnny Dangerously? If not, you're a
    fargin' bastage.
     
  19. On Fri, 12 Sep 2003 17:37:34 -0600, "Clay" <john@doe.com> wrote:

    >Another option is http://www.accxx.com There is no montly fee and its only
    >4.9 cents per minute. You can have as many 800 numbers as you want. I
    >currently have 2 and one rings my cell.


    Their international rates are nothing to write home to mom about e.g.
    49 cents/minute to call mobile phones in the UK.

    Gorillamobile <http://gorillamobile.com> on the other hand is 4
    cents/minute for domestic, 5 cents/minute to Canada, 8 cents/minute to
    call the UK (which is 1.5 cents/minute more than accxx) or 25
    cents/minute to call mobile phones in the UK which is almost half of
    the rate that accxx charges.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    To send an email reply send to
    GSMthemobilestandard (@) yahoo.com
     
  20. Clay

    Clay Guest

    I thought the topic was inbound 800 service??


    "Group Special Mobile" <look@signature_to.reply> wrote in message
    news:mqc6mvc2nke9hh5u2sv6lgts5pntvaorm8@4ax.com...
    > On Fri, 12 Sep 2003 17:37:34 -0600, "Clay" <john@doe.com> wrote:
    >
    > >Another option is http://www.accxx.com There is no montly fee and its

    only
    > >4.9 cents per minute. You can have as many 800 numbers as you want. I
    > >currently have 2 and one rings my cell.

    >
    > Their international rates are nothing to write home to mom about e.g.
    > 49 cents/minute to call mobile phones in the UK.
    >
    > Gorillamobile <http://gorillamobile.com> on the other hand is 4
    > cents/minute for domestic, 5 cents/minute to Canada, 8 cents/minute to
    > call the UK (which is 1.5 cents/minute more than accxx) or 25
    > cents/minute to call mobile phones in the UK which is almost half of
    > the rate that accxx charges.
    >
    > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    > To send an email reply send to
    > GSMthemobilestandard (@) yahoo.com
     

Welcome to VerizonForums!

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


Forgot your password?