Paying only for incoming calls/SMS -- why?

[answermeplease]

Where I'm from, we pay regardless of whether we initiated the call/SMS. While the Thai system saves me money, I am wondering why it is so. For such a commodity service, I would expect that the business practices are monolithic throughout the world.

How did this manner of telecommunication charges come to be? Are the neighboring countries all like this?

I have search all over the Internet and Wikipedia to no avail. Please help alleviate my curiosity.

[Upnotover]

Same as in the UK (assuming you meant paying only for outgoing calls/sms)

Edited March 18, 2015 by Upnotover

[answermeplease]

Okay, then I should be asking why we pay for both incoming and outgoing in the US.

Same as in the UK (assuming you meant paying only for outgoing calls/sms)

[Crossy]

I suspect that it's only the US where one pays for incoming calls.

http://www.quora.com/Why-do-US-carriers-charge-for-incoming-calls-and-text-messages

[Jeffrey346]

US carriers are greedy. They get both the caller and the receiver.

[dotpoom]

Okay, then I should be asking why we pay for both incoming and outgoing in the US.

Same as in the UK (assuming you meant paying only for outgoing calls/sms)

I'm from Europe so don't know anything about the USA. But if what you say is true that means every call is paid for twice....once by the person making the call and the second time by the person receiving the call. That sounds very strange.

The nearest think to that I have experienced was when I would go abroad on holidays. If a person from home called me on my usual mobile No. when I was in a different country I would have to pay for the call.

[GinBoy2]

Difference in the two models is this.

In the US model to call a mobile number costs the same as calling any landline. The 'charge' to the recipient is that it uses their plan minutes.

In the EU model the recipient doesn't pay, but OMG the caller certainly does. Calling a mobile number vs a landline number is outrageous.

Here are the Skype rates for US & UK calls which in the UK clearly show the difference in cost of calling landline vs mobile. The US mobile & landline are the same:

Pay As You Go - United Kingdom

Calling - per minute¹

United Kingdom²

1,7 cents

United Kingdom - London²

1,7 cents

United Kingdom - Mobile - Hutchison3G

7,4 cents

United Kingdom - Mobile - O2

7,4 cents

United Kingdom - Mobile - Orange

7,4 cents

United Kingdom - Mobile - Others

7,4 cents

United Kingdom - Mobile - T-Mobile

7,4 cents

United Kingdom - Mobile - Vodafone

7,4 cents

Pay As You Go - United States

Calling - per minute¹

United States

1,7 cents

United States - Alaska

1,7 cents

United States - Hawaii

1,7 cents

United States - Toll Free²

€0,00

Edited March 18, 2015 by GinBoy2

[mango66]

Okay, then I should be asking why we pay for both incoming and outgoing in the US.

Same as in the UK (assuming you meant paying only for outgoing calls/sms)

I'm from Europe so don't know anything about the USA. But if what you say is true that means every call is paid for twice....once by the person making the call and the second time by the person receiving the call. That sounds very strange.

The nearest think to that I have experienced was when I would go abroad on holidays. If a person from home called me on my usual mobile No. when I was in a different country I would have to pay for the call.

No, You not pay for all, when you are abroad - means you are in roaming ;

The caller pays in your country like he call you as you in your home country,

You pay the part from your home country to your current cuntry !!

when you call back to your home country, you pay all, the receiver pay nothing ( in EU !! )

in thai you pay only if you call in same network,

when you call to another ( for example from AIS to DTAC ) you pay more,

but dont know if than the receiver in the other network also have to pay ; i guess not;

just send some one an sms and he should check balance before and after !1 and you know it !!

[Suradit69]

I would expect that the business practices are monolithic throughout the world.

Monolithic??

You mean why isn't everything just like it is in America? It's a big world Dorothy. Corporate America is not the gold standard by which everyone longs to operate.

Okay, then I should be asking why we pay for both incoming and outgoing in the US.

Maybe you should pose that question on America Visa rather than expecting people on Thai Visa to fathom American business practices.

Edited March 18, 2015 by Suradit69

[fxe1200]

I suspect that it's only the US where one pays for incoming calls.

http://www.quora.com/Why-do-US-carriers-charge-for-incoming-calls-and-text-messages

Phone calls and text messages in the U.S. are are being send to the NSA first, for further examination and storage. Then these messages, calls will be forwarded to the original recipient. The financial burden for the NSA would be too high, as the NSA ist collecting 128 Gigabyte per minute (including data). Therefore the U.S. customer is charged for incomingcalls and messages.

[TheKnave]

In the US you are charged for 'airtime', regardless of who initiated the call/SMS. Good business model, if you own a telco...

Suradit: can you ever resist being a dick? Jeez...

[jacko45k]

Since I have no control (or very little) over incoming calls and texts I believe it to be correct the way Thailand and thee UK does it.

Where you are from OP has an unfair system.

What about all those damned unsolicited adverts.

Edited March 18, 2015 by jacko45k

[muratremix]

In singapore you also pay for incoming calls. That is plain stupid. If you don't have enough balance, you'll miss calls even if they are life-or-death important? Why we carry these phones if we can't be reached 7/24 as in emergencies?!

[GinBoy2]

In singapore you also pay for incoming calls. That is plain stupid. If you don't have enough balance, you'll miss calls even if they are life-or-death important? Why we carry these phones if we can't be reached 7/24 as in emergencies?!

Why is a mobile phone service any different than a regular landline? Emergency or not, don't pay your bill, no dialtone no incoming calls either. I kinda think the phone company doesn't really care if your house is burning down and you can't call the Fire Dept, because you haven't paid your bills.

[muratremix]

In singapore you also pay for incoming calls. That is plain stupid. If you don't have enough balance, you'll miss calls even if they are life-or-death important? Why we carry these phones if we can't be reached 7/24 as in emergencies?!

Why is a mobile phone service any different than a regular landline? Emergency or not, don't pay your bill, no dialtone no incoming calls either. I kinda think the phone company doesn't really care if your house is burning down and you can't call the Fire Dept, because you haven't paid your bills.

In a regular landline service you don't pay for incoming calls, you pay a fixed service rate (or a minimum rate monthly).

You can't compare apples to bananas.

You pay when you call, you pay when you receive a call and the other party also pays some money to call you, thats crazy.