Is UM the best for this...

prion · 13-07-2007, 17:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by andy

They get a proportion of the incoming call fees, but I really don't think they are behind the increases in the tariffs to these numbers

The increase is obvious in the case of UM. Why do you say you do not think they are behind? Is it more rational that most carriers targeted UM for some reason and increased their rates?

MATHA531 · 13-07-2007, 18:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by prion

The increase is obvious in the case of UM. Why do you say you do not think they are behind? Is it more rational that most carriers targeted UM for some reason and increased their rates?

Frankly, I think that's one of the reasons. The existance of UM and the ability to make reasonably priced calls to it was an early stage in the fight against high roaming fees which was the bread and butter for many operators.

IMHO and in all due respect.

herkdrvr · **Cheap Calls to +423 -** 14-07-2007, 12:21

Just a note, my wife calls me on my UM number via 3uTelecom. It's $.109 US and is oddly cheaper then calling to a Travelsim # ($.169). Much better then using the regular land line, and even cheaper then Vonage. Go figure.

	(#3)
herkdrvr (Offline) Member Advanced Member Posts: 50 Join Date: 20 Sep 2005 Country:	Cheap Calls to +423 - 14-07-2007, 12:21 Just a note, my wife calls me on my UM number via 3uTelecom. It's $.109 US and is oddly cheaper then calling to a Travelsim # ($.169). Much better then using the regular land line, and even cheaper then Vonage. Go figure.