Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Australian Ringtone Club

3 views
Skip to first unread message

Kissing Lettuce

unread,
Aug 22, 2005, 10:41:11 AM8/22/05
to
Has anyone seen that ad on the Net for an Australian Ringtone Club
promising "1 Free Ringtone A Month" and yet to get this wonderful
privilege you have to pay $5 every week that you are signed up to
them. The ad in question has a Australian Flag in the centre and two
negro singers.

No mention in the ad of how you opt out of it either on the ad. They
just ask your mobile no. and carrier. Plus I think this lot were on
the TV only recently because some schmuck felt it was their right
to complain that they got dudded out of money for being stupid enough
to sign up for ringtones.

Gotta wonder though what the percentage of fools are that actually
would sign up for these kind of things.

jg

unread,
Aug 22, 2005, 4:35:13 PM8/22/05
to

"Kissing Lettuce" <sittingb...@internode.on.net> wrote in message
news:4309E407...@internode.on.net...

> Has anyone seen that ad on the Net for an Australian Ringtone Club
> promising "1 Free Ringtone A Month" and yet to get this wonderful
> privilege you have to pay $5 every week that you are signed up to
> them. The ad in question has a Australian Flag in the centre and two
> negro singers.
>
The word "rings a bell" he he. Seriously I heard it somewhere. Not knowing
what it means I guess I'm fairly safe. Totally fed up with "plans" and
"offers" and "$0", and after all the bullshit I don't even know if the fax
would work on a broadband line.


Dean T

unread,
Aug 22, 2005, 8:24:45 PM8/22/05
to

"Kissing Lettuce" <sittingb...@internode.on.net> wrote in message
news:4309E407...@internode.on.net...

Haven't seen it. Got a web link to check it out?


Kissing Lettuce

unread,
Aug 22, 2005, 11:52:55 PM8/22/05
to
Dean T wrote:

Doesn't present itself as a weblink just a java applet asking
for number and carrier and a checkbox to say if you agree
to their service.........

Jeremy Quirke

unread,
Aug 24, 2005, 5:48:59 AM8/24/05
to

"Kissing Lettuce" <sittingb...@internode.on.net> wrote in message
news:4309E407...@internode.on.net...

Sounds like these guys: http://www.ringtonechannel.com, there's an earlier
thread about how someone has accidentally joined me up to the service and
the headache associated with getting my money back.


Kissing Lettuce

unread,
Aug 25, 2005, 1:42:09 AM8/25/05
to
Jeremy Quirke wrote:

Accidentally?????

And did you get your money back?


Jeremy Quirke

unread,
Aug 25, 2005, 5:44:50 AM8/25/05
to

"Kissing Lettuce" <sittingb...@internode.on.net> wrote in message
news:430D5A31...@internode.on.net...

Most likely a typo.

> And did you get your money back?

Yes, today (supposedly).


Kissing Lettuce

unread,
Aug 25, 2005, 10:23:05 AM8/25/05
to
Jeremy Quirke wrote:

Well please keep us posted

How on earth can these companies be allowed
to trade with such bad business practices??

ie: not returning communications to customers
and fobbing them off or outright ignoring complaints

Are they just $1 shelf companies set up by scum?


Anthony Horan

unread,
Aug 25, 2005, 10:59:16 AM8/25/05
to
On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 23:53:05 +0930, Kissing Lettuce wrote:

> Are they just $1 shelf companies set up by scum?

You could say they were smart business people. After all, if there's a huge
market out there that's happy to pay the rip-off price of $4 or $5 or even
more for a bloody *ringtone* - when the actual CD of the whole song sells
for less - then one could argue that some people DESERVE to be ripped off :)

But yes, I am very surprised that more regulation hasn't been brought down
on this dodgy little cottage industry. Ditto for the $5 a minute "call me
now" lines...

Kissing Lettuce

unread,
Aug 25, 2005, 11:48:59 PM8/25/05
to
Anthony Horan wrote:

Amen

Jeremy Quirke

unread,
Aug 27, 2005, 3:51:44 AM8/27/05
to

"Anthony Horan" <anthon...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1smk596vfywom.y64h228r7g3r$.dlg@40tude.net...

> On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 23:53:05 +0930, Kissing Lettuce wrote:
>
>> Are they just $1 shelf companies set up by scum?
>
> You could say they were smart business people. After all, if there's a
> huge
> market out there that's happy to pay the rip-off price of $4 or $5 or even
> more for a bloody *ringtone* - when the actual CD of the whole song sells
> for less - then one could argue that some people DESERVE to be ripped off
> :)

Yes but its not just the 'voluntary' customers getting shafted.. it's the
people who have their number accidentally keyed into a webform (or
deliberately for that matter - I could do this to anyone I dislike and make
them waste their time trying to locate the provider, stop the subscription
and try and get their charges refunded).


Michael

unread,
Aug 27, 2005, 5:19:15 AM8/27/05
to

"Anthony Horan" <anthon...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1smk596vfywom.y64h228r7g3r$.dlg@40tude.net...

Thats a heavily-regulated industry, actually


Kissing Lettuce

unread,
Aug 27, 2005, 6:59:38 AM8/27/05
to
Michael wrote:

Err, How so?

Example of such please

John Henderson

unread,
Aug 28, 2005, 6:59:26 PM8/28/05
to
Jeremy Quirke wrote:

> Yes but its not just the 'voluntary' customers getting
> shafted.. it's the people who have their number accidentally
> keyed into a webform (or deliberately for that matter - I
> could do this to anyone I dislike and make them waste their
> time trying to locate the provider, stop the subscription and
> try and get their charges refunded).

How might this "industry" be regulated so that opt-in
confirmation was required routinely? A confirming SMS from the
subscribing mobile would be a reliable indicator only for
honest providers, because incoming SMSs are relatively easy to
fake. It could work though if penalties for fraudulently
faking confirmation were high enough.

John

Rod Speed

unread,
Aug 28, 2005, 7:47:06 PM8/28/05
to
John Henderson <jhenRem...@talk21.com> wrote
> Jeremy Quirke wrote

>> Yes but its not just the 'voluntary' customers getting
>> shafted.. it's the people who have their number accidentally
>> keyed into a webform (or deliberately for that matter - I
>> could do this to anyone I dislike and make them waste their
>> time trying to locate the provider, stop the subscription and
>> try and get their charges refunded).

> How might this "industry" be regulated so that opt-in confirmation
> was required routinely? A confirming SMS from the subscribing
> mobile would be a reliable indicator only for honest providers,

For all but the flagrantly dishonest, actually.

> because incoming SMSs are relatively easy to fake.
> It could work though if penalties for fraudulently
> faking confirmation were high enough.

Dont need to be that high, just enough of a deterrent
to stop them bothering with that approach.

Its very very unlikely that there is any real dishonesty involved,
its MUCH more likely that its just a stupid entry error or at worst
maliciously signing someone else up for the shit deliberately and
that last isnt going to be caught by any regulation of providers.


John Henderson

unread,
Aug 28, 2005, 8:08:10 PM8/28/05
to
Rod Speed wrote:

Agreed. But I wanted to cover the possibility, seeing that a
lot of people seem to think that a "received" SMS must be
exactly what it says it is.

John

0 new messages