Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
T-Mobile PAYG terms and conditions
8 views
Skip to first unread message
Basil Jet
May 23, 2012, 2:38:11 AM5/23/12
to
"You must make a connection action at least once every 180 days. If you
do not your SIM will be disconnected from the network and you will not
be able to use the service at all. You will lose your mobile phone
number. Any credit on your account at the time of such disconnection
will be forfeited."
What constitutes a "connection action"? Merely switching the phone on in
a place where there is network coverage, or would I have to make a call
or send a text?
TIA.
Woody
May 23, 2012, 3:19:55 AM5/23/12
to
"Basil Jet" <jo...@journeyflow.spamspam.com> wrote in message
news:4fbc85d4$0$12258$5b6a...@news.zen.co.uk...
A connection action is usually classed as a chargeable event or a
top-up. Some providers in the past have accepted any activity -
i.e. receiving calls - as showing the number is still alive, but
these days it is more often that it has to be something that
affects the balance on the account. Usually the cheapest method
is to send a text. Someone else will doubtless reply that Virgin
rarely cuts anyone off for low/no use, and in most cases (bar it
would seem T-Mob) if you call them within a month or so they will
reactivate your number and reinstate the credit.
I suspect that this is something that has crept into the UK
market as a result of how providers - all of which bar Vodafone
are owned outside the UK - operate elsewhere where markets are
not so competitive. Some years ago I looked around whilst on
holiday to see what was available. In Germany there were very few
PAYG and no SIM only deals; France had/has a lot of PAYG but the
time restrictions were and still are much more draconian than
here and for most the only activity to keep the number alive is a
top-up; Belgium and Italy didn't have PAYG at all which meant
that in most instances if you were a UK PAYG customer you could
not use your phone there as their systems could not handle PAYG.
Things have improved immensely over the last few years largely
due to the state sell-offs of operators having greatly expanded
competition (e.g. D1 in Germany is now T-Mob, and Itineris in
France ws taken over by Orange,) but generally IMO the European
market is nothing like as advanced as ours but as it is bigger
and that is where the owners live then we must put up with their
operational practices.
--
Woody
harrogate three at ntlworld dot com
news:4fbc85d4$0$12258$5b6a...@news.zen.co.uk...
top-up. Some providers in the past have accepted any activity -
i.e. receiving calls - as showing the number is still alive, but
these days it is more often that it has to be something that
affects the balance on the account. Usually the cheapest method
is to send a text. Someone else will doubtless reply that Virgin
rarely cuts anyone off for low/no use, and in most cases (bar it
would seem T-Mob) if you call them within a month or so they will
reactivate your number and reinstate the credit.
I suspect that this is something that has crept into the UK
market as a result of how providers - all of which bar Vodafone
are owned outside the UK - operate elsewhere where markets are
not so competitive. Some years ago I looked around whilst on
holiday to see what was available. In Germany there were very few
PAYG and no SIM only deals; France had/has a lot of PAYG but the
time restrictions were and still are much more draconian than
here and for most the only activity to keep the number alive is a
top-up; Belgium and Italy didn't have PAYG at all which meant
that in most instances if you were a UK PAYG customer you could
not use your phone there as their systems could not handle PAYG.
Things have improved immensely over the last few years largely
due to the state sell-offs of operators having greatly expanded
competition (e.g. D1 in Germany is now T-Mob, and Itineris in
France ws taken over by Orange,) but generally IMO the European
market is nothing like as advanced as ours but as it is bigger
and that is where the owners live then we must put up with their
operational practices.
--
Woody
harrogate three at ntlworld dot com
Roland Perry
May 23, 2012, 4:07:50 AM5/23/12
to
In message <uc0vr.399632$Od1.3...@fx32.am4>, at 08:19:55 on Wed, 23
May 2012, Woody <harro...@ntlworld.spam.com> remarked:
high turnover of SIMs, each of which has a phone number and a billing
account tied to it. Both cost money to maintain.
Once upon a time I used to chuckle at people who carried two phones
around, but nowadays I have four phones which I could describe as being
in reasonably frequent use, plus three PAYG SIMs I've never used because
they were "Free" with phone upgrades, four data SIMs and three overseas
ones which I presume are all dead by now. And maybe another three UK
ones that have expired.
I don't think I really *need* 16 phone numbers, but to some extent they
have brought this upon themselves by the "confusion pricing" which means
it's impossible to select a "one plan fits all" SIM.
I noted that the most recent PAYG SIM I got (�1 at ASDA) said it had to
be activated by Sept2012, not sure if that means "put in a phone and
switched on", or "topped up for the first time" though. And I have to
"make or receive a chargeable call" [not clear if SMS and data count as
a "call", but they ought to in terms of definitions within telecoms
regs] every six months.
I've not seen a "sell|activate by" date on a SIM before, although some
top-up cards have a date typically 10yrs ahead when they 'expire',
whatever that means.
--
Roland Perry
May 2012, Woody <harro...@ntlworld.spam.com> remarked:
>A connection action is usually classed as a chargeable event or a
>top-up. Some providers in the past have accepted any activity -
>i.e. receiving calls - as showing the number is still alive, but
>these days it is more often that it has to be something that
>affects the balance on the account. Usually the cheapest method
>is to send a text. Someone else will doubtless reply that Virgin
>rarely cuts anyone off for low/no use, and in most cases (bar it
>would seem T-Mob) if you call them within a month or so they will
>reactivate your number and reinstate the credit.
>
>I suspect that this is something that has crept into the UK
>market as a result of how providers - all of which bar Vodafone
>are owned outside the UK - operate elsewhere where markets are
>not so competitive.
And one of the symptoms of the competitiveness of the UK market is a
>top-up. Some providers in the past have accepted any activity -
>i.e. receiving calls - as showing the number is still alive, but
>these days it is more often that it has to be something that
>affects the balance on the account. Usually the cheapest method
>is to send a text. Someone else will doubtless reply that Virgin
>rarely cuts anyone off for low/no use, and in most cases (bar it
>would seem T-Mob) if you call them within a month or so they will
>reactivate your number and reinstate the credit.
>
>I suspect that this is something that has crept into the UK
>market as a result of how providers - all of which bar Vodafone
>are owned outside the UK - operate elsewhere where markets are
>not so competitive.
high turnover of SIMs, each of which has a phone number and a billing
account tied to it. Both cost money to maintain.
Once upon a time I used to chuckle at people who carried two phones
around, but nowadays I have four phones which I could describe as being
in reasonably frequent use, plus three PAYG SIMs I've never used because
they were "Free" with phone upgrades, four data SIMs and three overseas
ones which I presume are all dead by now. And maybe another three UK
ones that have expired.
I don't think I really *need* 16 phone numbers, but to some extent they
have brought this upon themselves by the "confusion pricing" which means
it's impossible to select a "one plan fits all" SIM.
I noted that the most recent PAYG SIM I got (�1 at ASDA) said it had to
be activated by Sept2012, not sure if that means "put in a phone and
switched on", or "topped up for the first time" though. And I have to
"make or receive a chargeable call" [not clear if SMS and data count as
a "call", but they ought to in terms of definitions within telecoms
regs] every six months.
I've not seen a "sell|activate by" date on a SIM before, although some
top-up cards have a date typically 10yrs ahead when they 'expire',
whatever that means.
--
Roland Perry
Someone Somewhere
May 23, 2012, 4:19:19 AM5/23/12
to
subscribers provisioned on their network and that Ofcom (or whoever they
are these days) are pushing operators hard to keep their number
utilisation up?
The only benefit to the network for not de-provisioning after a period
is that it improves their subscriber figures, but given this has all
been standardised on 90 or 180 days since last use then there is no gain.
PeeGee
May 23, 2012, 4:41:03 AM5/23/12
to
On 23/05/12 08:19, Woody wrote:
> "Basil Jet"<jo...@journeyflow.spamspam.com> wrote in message
> news:4fbc85d4$0$12258$5b6a...@news.zen.co.uk...
>>
>> "You must make a connection action at least once every 180
>> days. If you do not your SIM will be disconnected from the
>> network and you will not be able to use the service at all. You
>> will lose your mobile phone number. Any credit on your account
>> at the time of such disconnection will be forfeited."
>>
>> What constitutes a "connection action"? Merely switching the
>> phone on in a place where there is network coverage, or would I
>> have to make a call or send a text?
>>
>> TIA.
>>
>
>
> A connection action is usually classed as a chargeable event or a
> top-up. Some providers in the past have accepted any activity -
> i.e. receiving calls - as showing the number is still alive, but
> these days it is more often that it has to be something that
> affects the balance on the account. Usually the cheapest method
> is to send a text.
>
> [snip]
> "Basil Jet"<jo...@journeyflow.spamspam.com> wrote in message
> news:4fbc85d4$0$12258$5b6a...@news.zen.co.uk...
>>
>> "You must make a connection action at least once every 180
>> days. If you do not your SIM will be disconnected from the
>> network and you will not be able to use the service at all. You
>> will lose your mobile phone number. Any credit on your account
>> at the time of such disconnection will be forfeited."
>>
>> What constitutes a "connection action"? Merely switching the
>> phone on in a place where there is network coverage, or would I
>> have to make a call or send a text?
>>
>> TIA.
>>
>
>
> A connection action is usually classed as a chargeable event or a
> top-up. Some providers in the past have accepted any activity -
> i.e. receiving calls - as showing the number is still alive, but
> these days it is more often that it has to be something that
> affects the balance on the account. Usually the cheapest method
> is to send a text.
>
Or, sometimes, a landline call, though I prefer e-mail account access
(chargeable) at 1p a throw :-)
--
PeeGee
"Nothing should be able to load itself onto a computer without the
knowledge or consent of the computer user. Software should also be able
to be removed from a computer easily."
Peter Cullen, Microsoft Chief Privacy Strategist (Computing 18 Aug 05)
Woody
May 23, 2012, 2:42:56 PM5/23/12
to
"PeeGee" <trie...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:SpSdnah9evY9PyHS...@brightview.co.uk...
Except that that assumes that you have a smart phone. For just an
ordinary bog-standard phone that makes calls and sends texts the
latter is the cheapest option.
news:SpSdnah9evY9PyHS...@brightview.co.uk...
ordinary bog-standard phone that makes calls and sends texts the
latter is the cheapest option.
T i m
May 23, 2012, 7:31:41 PM5/23/12
to
On Wed, 23 May 2012 08:19:55 +0100, "Woody"
<harro...@ntlworld.spam.com> wrote:
>"Basil Jet" <jo...@journeyflow.spamspam.com> wrote in message
>news:4fbc85d4$0$12258$5b6a...@news.zen.co.uk...
>>
>> "You must make a connection action at least once every 180
>> days. If you do not your SIM will be disconnected from the
>> network and you will not be able to use the service at all. You
>> will lose your mobile phone number. Any credit on your account
>> at the time of such disconnection will be forfeited."
>>
>> What constitutes a "connection action"? Merely switching the
>> phone on in a place where there is network coverage, or would I
>> have to make a call or send a text?
>>
>> TIA.
>>
>
>
>A connection action is usually classed as a chargeable event or a
>top-up. Some providers in the past have accepted any activity -
>i.e. receiving calls - as showing the number is still alive, but
>these days it is more often that it has to be something that
>affects the balance on the account. Usually the cheapest method
>is to send a text. Someone else will doubtless reply that Virgin
>rarely cuts anyone off for low/no use, and in most cases (bar it
>would seem T-Mob) if you call them within a month or so they will
>reactivate your number and reinstate the credit.
This just happened to me and T-Mob cust service said stage one (as
<harro...@ntlworld.spam.com> wrote:
>"Basil Jet" <jo...@journeyflow.spamspam.com> wrote in message
>news:4fbc85d4$0$12258$5b6a...@news.zen.co.uk...
>>
>> "You must make a connection action at least once every 180
>> days. If you do not your SIM will be disconnected from the
>> network and you will not be able to use the service at all. You
>> will lose your mobile phone number. Any credit on your account
>> at the time of such disconnection will be forfeited."
>>
>> What constitutes a "connection action"? Merely switching the
>> phone on in a place where there is network coverage, or would I
>> have to make a call or send a text?
>>
>> TIA.
>>
>
>
>A connection action is usually classed as a chargeable event or a
>top-up. Some providers in the past have accepted any activity -
>i.e. receiving calls - as showing the number is still alive, but
>these days it is more often that it has to be something that
>affects the balance on the account. Usually the cheapest method
>is to send a text. Someone else will doubtless reply that Virgin
>rarely cuts anyone off for low/no use, and in most cases (bar it
>would seem T-Mob) if you call them within a month or so they will
>reactivate your number and reinstate the credit.
mentioned elsewhere) was 180 days and then (I can't remember the words
/ action for the next bit but ... ) after 270 days, if stage one
wasn't sorted then the SIM would be cancelled and the number recycled.
180 Days sounds like a reasonable time but that's a few times now I've
lost a SIM / credit because of it.
I'm going to set something in Kalender now .. ;-)
Cheers, T i m
PeeGee
May 24, 2012, 5:38:06 AM5/24/12
to
> Except that that assumes that you have a smart phone. For just an
> ordinary bog-standard phone that makes calls and sends texts the
> latter is the cheapest option.
>
>
Perhaps I was too specific. T-mobile WAP is 0.73p per kB over GPRS and
> ordinary bog-standard phone that makes calls and sends texts the
> latter is the cheapest option.
>
>
IIRC my old BTCellnet "brick" (otherwise known as Motorola M2288) could
handle that (definitely WAP, probably GPRS). Just a matter of not
exceeding 1kB (though 6kB is less than a "text appeal" text from 6 June).
Mark
May 24, 2012, 6:49:40 AM5/24/12
to
automatically deactivate the SIM and number.
I used to use a mobile phone only for emergencies but now I do use it
regularly.
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) If a man stands in a forest and no woman is around
(")_(") is he still wrong?
Someone Somewhere
May 24, 2012, 11:07:03 AM5/24/12
to
figures) that it costs them an awful lot more than the price of a single
call to keep a SIM card on the network.
The other thing is, from an accounting point of view, I guess they can't
actually count any credit as revenue until it is spent or becomes
unspendable. If you have �10 and they have no idea if you have gone
away or are just keeping a mobile for emergencies then it will take an
awful lot of months at 10p every three for them to recognise that �10
even when you have no intention of ever using the phone. Hence they ask
you to make some proactive action to confirm that you still intend to
keep the SIM card live.
As with all things with mobile networks, particularly in the UK, is
there is a lack of transparency over what they need and why and what
things actually cost.
Mark
May 24, 2012, 12:10:54 PM5/24/12
to
On Thu, 24 May 2012 16:07:03 +0100, Someone Somewhere
refund it if it's not all used!
>As with all things with mobile networks, particularly in the UK, is
>there is a lack of transparency over what they need and why and what
>things actually cost.
Quite.
<nnt...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 24/05/2012 11:49, Mark wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 May 2012 09:19:19 +0100, Someone Somewhere
>> <nnt...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Or it could be as simple as the fact it costs the operator money to keep
>>> subscribers provisioned on their network and that Ofcom (or whoever they
>>> are these days) are pushing operators hard to keep their number
>>> utilisation up?
>>
>> Personally I'd rather they charged me the price of a call than
>> automatically deactivate the SIM and number.
>>
>> I used to use a mobile phone only for emergencies but now I do use it
>> regularly.
>
>I'm led to believe (although only the operators would have access to the
>figures) that it costs them an awful lot more than the price of a single
>call to keep a SIM card on the network.
>
>The other thing is, from an accounting point of view, I guess they can't
>actually count any credit as revenue until it is spent or becomes
>unspendable. If you have £10 and they have no idea if you have gone
>away or are just keeping a mobile for emergencies then it will take an
>awful lot of months at 10p every three for them to recognise that £10
>even when you have no intention of ever using the phone. Hence they ask
>you to make some proactive action to confirm that you still intend to
>keep the SIM card live.
AFAIK they have the money as soon as you top-up. I'd like to see them
>On 24/05/2012 11:49, Mark wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 May 2012 09:19:19 +0100, Someone Somewhere
>> <nnt...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Or it could be as simple as the fact it costs the operator money to keep
>>> subscribers provisioned on their network and that Ofcom (or whoever they
>>> are these days) are pushing operators hard to keep their number
>>> utilisation up?
>>
>> Personally I'd rather they charged me the price of a call than
>> automatically deactivate the SIM and number.
>>
>> I used to use a mobile phone only for emergencies but now I do use it
>> regularly.
>
>I'm led to believe (although only the operators would have access to the
>figures) that it costs them an awful lot more than the price of a single
>call to keep a SIM card on the network.
>
>The other thing is, from an accounting point of view, I guess they can't
>actually count any credit as revenue until it is spent or becomes
>unspendable. If you have £10 and they have no idea if you have gone
>away or are just keeping a mobile for emergencies then it will take an
>awful lot of months at 10p every three for them to recognise that £10
>even when you have no intention of ever using the phone. Hence they ask
>you to make some proactive action to confirm that you still intend to
>keep the SIM card live.
refund it if it's not all used!
>As with all things with mobile networks, particularly in the UK, is
>there is a lack of transparency over what they need and why and what
>things actually cost.
Message has been deleted
alexd
May 27, 2012, 4:27:24 PM5/27/12
to
Roland Perry (for it is he) wrote:
> I don't think I really *need* 16 phone numbers, but to some extent they
> have brought this upon themselves by the "confusion pricing" which means
> it's impossible to select a "one plan fits all" SIM.
Something which I hear too often from friends and family whenever I ask them
> I don't think I really *need* 16 phone numbers, but to some extent they
> have brought this upon themselves by the "confusion pricing" which means
> it's impossible to select a "one plan fits all" SIM.
"but why have you changed your mobile number?" is "because they said I
couldn't keep my old number". I guess number portability is too much effort
for too little return as far as mobile sellers are concerned.
Maybe phone numbers should have a £10 returnable deposit. That might stop
them being wasted.
--
<http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) (UnSoEs...@ale.cx)
21:23:09 up 136 days, 23:55, 6 users, load average: 0.08, 0.11, 0.42
Qua illic est reprehendit, illic est a vindicatum
Message has been deleted
Roland Perry
May 28, 2012, 2:20:02 AM5/28/12
to
In message <1774478.l...@ale.cx>, at 21:27:24 on Sun, 27 May 2012,
alexd <trof...@hotmail.com> remarked:
another. The difficulty is finding one SIM that has decent pricing for
(eg) voice and tethered data simultaneously.
--
Roland Perry
alexd <trof...@hotmail.com> remarked:
>> I don't think I really *need* 16 phone numbers, but to some extent they
>> have brought this upon themselves by the "confusion pricing" which means
>> it's impossible to select a "one plan fits all" SIM.
>
>Something which I hear too often from friends and family whenever I ask them
>"but why have you changed your mobile number?" is "because they said I
>couldn't keep my old number". I guess number portability is too much effort
>for too little return as far as mobile sellers are concerned.
I've had no problem porting my voice number from one mobile company to
>> have brought this upon themselves by the "confusion pricing" which means
>> it's impossible to select a "one plan fits all" SIM.
>
>Something which I hear too often from friends and family whenever I ask them
>"but why have you changed your mobile number?" is "because they said I
>couldn't keep my old number". I guess number portability is too much effort
>for too little return as far as mobile sellers are concerned.
another. The difficulty is finding one SIM that has decent pricing for
(eg) voice and tethered data simultaneously.
--
Roland Perry
Message has been deleted
Roland Perry
May 28, 2012, 3:25:49 AM5/28/12
to
In message <vl66s7941v5m5m4m1...@4ax.com>, at 07:28:56 on
Mon, 28 May 2012, Peter <occassional...@nospam.co.uk> remarked:
>impossible :)
Made even harder by trying to resolve things like "free Virgin-Virgin
minutes" with "free use of Openzone with O2".
>It gets even better if you want reasonable deals on EU roaming data,
>or any roaming data.
I've given up on roaming data for now, and use either wifi or a local
SIM (done that three times now).
--
Roland Perry
Mon, 28 May 2012, Peter <occassional...@nospam.co.uk> remarked:
>>>> I don't think I really *need* 16 phone numbers, but to some extent they
>>>> have brought this upon themselves by the "confusion pricing" which means
>>>> it's impossible to select a "one plan fits all" SIM.
>>>
>>>Something which I hear too often from friends and family whenever I ask them
>>>"but why have you changed your mobile number?" is "because they said I
>>>couldn't keep my old number". I guess number portability is too much effort
>>>for too little return as far as mobile sellers are concerned.
>>
>>I've had no problem porting my voice number from one mobile company to
>>another. The difficulty is finding one SIM that has decent pricing for
>>(eg) voice and tethered data simultaneously.
>
>Depending on your definition of "decent" that will always be
>>>> have brought this upon themselves by the "confusion pricing" which means
>>>> it's impossible to select a "one plan fits all" SIM.
>>>
>>>Something which I hear too often from friends and family whenever I ask them
>>>"but why have you changed your mobile number?" is "because they said I
>>>couldn't keep my old number". I guess number portability is too much effort
>>>for too little return as far as mobile sellers are concerned.
>>
>>I've had no problem porting my voice number from one mobile company to
>>another. The difficulty is finding one SIM that has decent pricing for
>>(eg) voice and tethered data simultaneously.
>
>impossible :)
Made even harder by trying to resolve things like "free Virgin-Virgin
minutes" with "free use of Openzone with O2".
>It gets even better if you want reasonable deals on EU roaming data,
>or any roaming data.
I've given up on roaming data for now, and use either wifi or a local
SIM (done that three times now).
--
Roland Perry
Mark
May 28, 2012, 4:25:46 AM5/28/12
to
On Sun, 27 May 2012 10:13:20 +0100, Peter
<occassional...@nospam.co.uk> wrote:
>
>Mark <i...@dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid> wrote
>aimed initially at the Arab market and run by Arabs, have done.
>
>They used to confiscate any unused credit after X days, where X
>depended on how big a topup you did, with a $180 (IIRC) topup lasting
>12 months which was the longest possible.
>
>Now they just remove $37 (IIRC) from your PAYG balance every year :)
>
>It is a lot better.
I wouldn't like this (if they took all your credit). If you used the
phone for emergencies you may still find it doesn't work when you need
it.
<occassional...@nospam.co.uk> wrote:
>
>Mark <i...@dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid> wrote
>
>>Personally I'd rather they charged me the price of a call than
>>automatically deactivate the SIM and number.
>
>Oddly enough this is what Thuraya, the "cheap" satellite phone network
>>Personally I'd rather they charged me the price of a call than
>>automatically deactivate the SIM and number.
>
>aimed initially at the Arab market and run by Arabs, have done.
>
>They used to confiscate any unused credit after X days, where X
>depended on how big a topup you did, with a $180 (IIRC) topup lasting
>12 months which was the longest possible.
>
>Now they just remove $37 (IIRC) from your PAYG balance every year :)
>
>It is a lot better.
I wouldn't like this (if they took all your credit). If you used the
phone for emergencies you may still find it doesn't work when you need
it.
Mark
May 28, 2012, 4:24:21 AM5/28/12
to
On Mon, 28 May 2012 07:20:02 +0100, Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk>
wrote:
I, too, haven't had any problem with porting numbers but I'd imagine
it does go wrong frequently.
The problem, for me, is not finding a good deal as such but they are
so specific. Therefore if they change anything or your usage changes
even slightly the deal may no longer be the best.
wrote:
it does go wrong frequently.
The problem, for me, is not finding a good deal as such but they are
so specific. Therefore if they change anything or your usage changes
even slightly the deal may no longer be the best.
Mark Scott
May 28, 2012, 4:37:28 AM5/28/12
to
On Mon, 28 May 2012 08:25:49 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:
> I've given up on roaming data for now, and use either wifi or a local
> SIM (done that three times now).
Me too - I draw the line at being asked to pay literally orders of
> I've given up on roaming data for now, and use either wifi or a local
> SIM (done that three times now).
magnitude more per MB than a local subscriber would. I appreciate that
there are administrative costs associated with cross-border and inter-
company billing, but typical roaming data prices are simply taking the
piss.
Buying a local PAYG SIM (for anything longer than a day-trip) almost
always turns out to be much cheaper than being shafted by roaming data
charges.
Theo Markettos
May 28, 2012, 6:47:00 AM5/28/12
to
Mark <i...@dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid> wrote:
> On Sun, 27 May 2012 10:13:20 +0100, Peter
> <occassional...@nospam.co.uk> wrote:
> >They used to confiscate any unused credit after X days, where X
> >depended on how big a topup you did, with a $180 (IIRC) topup lasting
> >12 months which was the longest possible.
> >
> >Now they just remove $37 (IIRC) from your PAYG balance every year :)
>
> On Sun, 27 May 2012 10:13:20 +0100, Peter
> <occassional...@nospam.co.uk> wrote:
> >They used to confiscate any unused credit after X days, where X
> >depended on how big a topup you did, with a $180 (IIRC) topup lasting
> >12 months which was the longest possible.
> >
> >Now they just remove $37 (IIRC) from your PAYG balance every year :)
>
> I wouldn't like this (if they took all your credit). If you used the
> phone for emergencies you may still find it doesn't work when you need
> it.
TBH $37/year is pretty cheap for a satphone. It would get you about 30 mins
> phone for emergencies you may still find it doesn't work when you need
> it.
of calls, so it's like having a PAYG mobile with £3 on it. If you're using
a satphone for serious emergencies you're probably going to want to do some
'annual servicing' on it (checking it still works, battery charged etc) so
checking the balance isn't too onerous. Better to have the balance slowly
trickle away than miss a deadline and all vanish.
The only problem is the high price of the handsets :(
Theo
Mark
May 28, 2012, 8:33:27 AM5/28/12
to
On 28 May 2012 11:47:00 +0100 (BST), Theo Markettos
most people consider.
>Better to have the balance slowly
>trickle away than miss a deadline and all vanish.
Which is what I said above ;-)
<theom...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>Mark <i...@dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid> wrote:
>> On Sun, 27 May 2012 10:13:20 +0100, Peter
>> <occassional...@nospam.co.uk> wrote:
>> >They used to confiscate any unused credit after X days, where X
>> >depended on how big a topup you did, with a $180 (IIRC) topup lasting
>> >12 months which was the longest possible.
>> >
>> >Now they just remove $37 (IIRC) from your PAYG balance every year :)
>>
>> I wouldn't like this (if they took all your credit). If you used the
>> phone for emergencies you may still find it doesn't work when you need
>> it.
>
>TBH $37/year is pretty cheap for a satphone. It would get you about 30 mins
>of calls, so it's like having a PAYG mobile with £3 on it. If you're using
>a satphone for serious emergencies you're probably going to want to do some
>'annual servicing' on it (checking it still works, battery charged etc) so
>checking the balance isn't too onerous.
Agreed. Although I would have thought a GSM PAYG phone would be what
>Mark <i...@dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid> wrote:
>> On Sun, 27 May 2012 10:13:20 +0100, Peter
>> <occassional...@nospam.co.uk> wrote:
>> >They used to confiscate any unused credit after X days, where X
>> >depended on how big a topup you did, with a $180 (IIRC) topup lasting
>> >12 months which was the longest possible.
>> >
>> >Now they just remove $37 (IIRC) from your PAYG balance every year :)
>>
>> I wouldn't like this (if they took all your credit). If you used the
>> phone for emergencies you may still find it doesn't work when you need
>> it.
>
>TBH $37/year is pretty cheap for a satphone. It would get you about 30 mins
>of calls, so it's like having a PAYG mobile with £3 on it. If you're using
>a satphone for serious emergencies you're probably going to want to do some
>'annual servicing' on it (checking it still works, battery charged etc) so
>checking the balance isn't too onerous.
most people consider.
>Better to have the balance slowly
>trickle away than miss a deadline and all vanish.
Theo Markettos
May 28, 2012, 4:06:24 PM5/28/12
to
BTW, one interesting thing about Thuraya is that you can send free SMS to
their satphones via a web page
https://sms.thuraya.com/
A little bit of scriptery might be a handy way of getting a low-bandwidth
data feed to almost anywhere in the eastern hemisphere (eg weather warnings
on the ocean, status alerts to in-the-sticks field personnel, remote
equipment control, etc).
Theo
Message has been deleted
jfaret...@gmail.com
May 29, 2012, 8:58:14 AM5/29/12
to
Hi, your 4 phones are they all on same network>contract??
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Someone Somewhere
May 29, 2012, 9:24:45 AM5/29/12
to
On 29/05/2012 14:02, Peter wrote:
>
> Mark Scott<mylast...@talk21.com> wrote
> True, but you have to weigh up the hassle of going to a phone shop
> (which in Greece is 1-2hrs with your passport etc just to buy a PAYG
> SIM) against just using your phone SIM for a little bit of email.
>
> Obviously for any serious data you want to buy a local data SIM.
I don't understand why the phone companies can't have a vending machine
at arrivals in the airport that sells data-only SIM cards - when I'm
abroad I frequently don't need calls and SMS but it would be nice to
check mail and look at the odd web page.
They could do a really simple offer like it worked for a period of a
week with cheap ADSL like speeds (512Kb or so, to prevent streaming) -
no tariff choices, no top up, just stick a 10EU note (or whetever) in
the machine, get a SIM card and off you go.
Yes - there's the complication of registration and so on, but do you
have to register to go to an internet cafe?
>
> Mark Scott<mylast...@talk21.com> wrote
> (which in Greece is 1-2hrs with your passport etc just to buy a PAYG
> SIM) against just using your phone SIM for a little bit of email.
>
> Obviously for any serious data you want to buy a local data SIM.
I don't understand why the phone companies can't have a vending machine
at arrivals in the airport that sells data-only SIM cards - when I'm
abroad I frequently don't need calls and SMS but it would be nice to
check mail and look at the odd web page.
They could do a really simple offer like it worked for a period of a
week with cheap ADSL like speeds (512Kb or so, to prevent streaming) -
no tariff choices, no top up, just stick a 10EU note (or whetever) in
the machine, get a SIM card and off you go.
Yes - there's the complication of registration and so on, but do you
have to register to go to an internet cafe?
Roland Perry
May 29, 2012, 9:30:53 AM5/29/12
to
In message <o4i9s7hhi4ethu8hu...@4ax.com>, at 14:02:32 on
Tue, 29 May 2012, Peter <occassional...@nospam.co.uk> remarked:
weeks) and most of a day tracking one down in Brussels (I was there for
a week).
>Obviously for any serious data you want to buy a local data SIM.
--
Roland Perry
Tue, 29 May 2012, Peter <occassional...@nospam.co.uk> remarked:
>>Buying a local PAYG SIM (for anything longer than a day-trip) almost
>>always turns out to be much cheaper than being shafted by roaming data
>>charges.
>
>>always turns out to be much cheaper than being shafted by roaming data
>>charges.
>
>True, but you have to weigh up the hassle of going to a phone shop
>(which in Greece is 1-2hrs with your passport etc just to buy a PAYG
>SIM) against just using your phone SIM for a little bit of email.
I know, it took me two days to get one in India (I was there for 2
>(which in Greece is 1-2hrs with your passport etc just to buy a PAYG
>SIM) against just using your phone SIM for a little bit of email.
weeks) and most of a day tracking one down in Brussels (I was there for
a week).
>Obviously for any serious data you want to buy a local data SIM.
Roland Perry
Message has been deleted
Roy Brown
May 30, 2012, 5:59:57 PM5/30/12
to
In message <qpucs7duo1ipbhhf0...@4ax.com>, Peter
<occassional...@nospam.co.uk> writing at 20:57:44 in his/her
local time opines:-
>Someone Somewhere <nnt...@gmail.com> wrote
>>I don't understand why the phone companies can't have a vending machine
>>at arrivals in the airport that sells data-only SIM cards - when I'm
>>abroad I frequently don't need calls and SMS but it would be nice to
>>check mail and look at the odd web page.
>They could if they were smart, but AFAICT Greece forces registration
>to keep a lid on small businesses that run out of the back of a van
>with a *PAYG* mobile # on the side and don't exist officially, pay no
>tax, etc.
>Some other countries also force registration... don't recall which.
>France maybe?
Spain.
Madrid bombing.
'Nuff said?
>Orange UK did but gave up after a while.
--
Roy Brown 'Have nothing in your houses that you do not know to be
Kelmscott Ltd useful, or believe to be beautiful' William Morris
<occassional...@nospam.co.uk> writing at 20:57:44 in his/her
local time opines:-
>Someone Somewhere <nnt...@gmail.com> wrote
>>I don't understand why the phone companies can't have a vending machine
>>at arrivals in the airport that sells data-only SIM cards - when I'm
>>abroad I frequently don't need calls and SMS but it would be nice to
>>check mail and look at the odd web page.
>to keep a lid on small businesses that run out of the back of a van
>with a *PAYG* mobile # on the side and don't exist officially, pay no
>tax, etc.
>Some other countries also force registration... don't recall which.
>France maybe?
Spain.
Madrid bombing.
'Nuff said?
>Orange UK did but gave up after a while.
--
Roy Brown 'Have nothing in your houses that you do not know to be
Kelmscott Ltd useful, or believe to be beautiful' William Morris
Message has been deleted
Roy Brown
May 31, 2012, 1:51:16 PM5/31/12
to
In message <uj9fs7pt8l2lb8kai...@4ax.com>, Peter
<occassional...@nospam.co.uk> writing at 18:14:09 in his/her
local time opines:-
>Roy Brown <Roy_now_fre...@acanthus.demon.co.uk> wrote
>>Spain.
>>Madrid bombing.
>>'Nuff said?
>Oh yes that will make all the difference.
>Next time the bombers will buy their SIMs at a street market :)
And you have how much personal knowledge of obtaining mobile phones
and/or SIMs in Spain, exactly?
>What a load of dickheads these people are. It's like the Italian taxes
>on the super rich's boats, and the super rich just move their boats to
>France...... or Croatia.
I doubt you could get a mobile and/or SIM at a street market in Spain.
But it would certainly be possible to bring them in from abroad, though
not perhaps without attracting attention, unless you were a fully
international conspiracy.
Theft is probably the preferred option......
<occassional...@nospam.co.uk> writing at 18:14:09 in his/her
local time opines:-
>Roy Brown <Roy_now_fre...@acanthus.demon.co.uk> wrote
>>Spain.
>>Madrid bombing.
>>'Nuff said?
>Next time the bombers will buy their SIMs at a street market :)
And you have how much personal knowledge of obtaining mobile phones
and/or SIMs in Spain, exactly?
>What a load of dickheads these people are. It's like the Italian taxes
>on the super rich's boats, and the super rich just move their boats to
>France...... or Croatia.
I doubt you could get a mobile and/or SIM at a street market in Spain.
But it would certainly be possible to bring them in from abroad, though
not perhaps without attracting attention, unless you were a fully
international conspiracy.
Theft is probably the preferred option......
Mark
Jun 1, 2012, 4:09:24 AM6/1/12
to
On Thu, 31 May 2012 18:14:09 +0100, Peter
<occassional...@nospam.co.uk> wrote:
>
>Roy Brown <Roy_now_fre...@acanthus.demon.co.uk> wrote
inconvenience the law abiding.
<occassional...@nospam.co.uk> wrote:
>
>Roy Brown <Roy_now_fre...@acanthus.demon.co.uk> wrote
>
>>Spain.
>>
>>Madrid bombing.
>>
>>'Nuff said?
>
>>Spain.
>>
>>Madrid bombing.
>>
>>'Nuff said?
>
>Oh yes that will make all the difference.
>
>Next time the bombers will buy their SIMs at a street market :)
Yes. Another pointless rule - one that has no effect except to
>
>Next time the bombers will buy their SIMs at a street market :)
inconvenience the law abiding.
alexd
Jun 5, 2012, 4:45:07 PM6/5/12
to
Mark (for it is he) wrote:
> Another pointless rule - one that has no effect except to inconvenience
> the law abiding.
You misunderstand entirely. The point is at the very least to give the
> Another pointless rule - one that has no effect except to inconvenience
> the law abiding.
/appearance/ of doing something.
21:44:14 up 146 days, 16 min, 6 users, load average: 0.63, 0.56, 0.45
0 new messages