Does Anyone Know the REAL Roaming Costs Incurred by Carriers?

[petkow]

Originally Posted by snidely

what do they really pay ATT or T-M when a customer of theirs roams here?

Well, consider what T-Mobile Germany pays when a customer of theirs uses T-Mobile USA? At the end of the day they are both owned by Deutsche Telekom!

Truth is roaming rates are very complex, and based on a lot on factors including reciprocity. However there is a huge difference between what the customer pays and what the network may have to give up as a result of that customer roaming. Roaming is still a huge cash cow to the networks... and nothing they want to get rid of in a hurry! Those who pay less still pay enough! Your 29c "grandfathered" rates still make a profit as do my termination fees when I roam within Europe on a fixed plan from Telfonica/o2 with so called "free incoming".

It is all the more like blatant profiteering when "roaming" costs are incurred across networks that are ultimately owned by the same company. In the parts of the world were people frequently travel around in, a lot of brands are ultimately owned by some huge companies like Vodafone, Telefonica, Telenor, TeliaSonera, T-Mobile, Orange etc.

Of course the EU is sick to the teeth of what they say was nothing more than a money-making rip-off, and after networks refused to self-regulate they stepped in to set caps! Of course, the networks went crazy, saying they would need to increase costs on ordinary domestic calls, and monthly access fees to cover their costs. It is a very sour and controversial issue here, but at the end of the day, the customer has benefitted somewhat. However, let's not forget how much these networks had to pay to the same governments who are now regulating them. Vodafone UK for example paid almost 6 billion pounds to the UK government for their share of the 3G spectrum!!!

Anyhow, international regulation of this type can only occur in something as bizarre as the EU. These things cannot really occur across the world!

[bbob]

Originally Posted by petkow

Anyhow, international regulation of this type can only occur in something as bizarre as the EU. These things cannot really occur across the world!

Dont'forget in the 70 the usa splitt the telcom company because they became to dominant. When you look outside the eu you can find many countries that have rates far lower than in europe. Why is calling a eu mobile number still so expensive. I think it's good there is regulation.

I agree that companies had to pay big money to the goverments to get a 3g gsm license. Sure they have to earn this back. But what if these same govements would have given away these licences or at far lower prices. Do you really think rates would have been lower.
Please also note that many of these companies have made billions in loss to write off these purchases. The billions of loss can be compensated with future profits. So this way goverments are also paying for these losses.

[rggoldie]

Originally Posted by petkow

Well, consider what T-Mobile Germany pays when a customer of theirs uses T-Mobile USA? At the end of the day they are both owned by Deutsche Telekom!

In Australia, for example, I can roam with Three in Europe and pay much less if I am on a Three network in the country I am in. For example, data costs 50c/MB in Italy if I am on Three Italy and around $20/MB if I am on a different network.

Rupert

[MATHA531]

Originally Posted by rggoldie

In Australia, for example, I can roam with Three in Europe and pay much less if I am on a Three network in the country I am in. For example, data costs 50c/MB in Italy if I am on Three Italy and around $20/MB if I am on a different network.

Rupert

3 did that as well for some of its European customers but as I think I have read, it's ending that.

Also, Australia is a poor example as the way mobiles operate is more or less on the European model (caller pays the entire freight) than the North American model (you pay for air time whether sending or receiving).

Also a factor in all this is that gsm (I know it's a 2g technology and is slowly becoming outdated but it will be around for a while longer) is far from the predominant technology used in the USA. The largest carrier, by far, is Verizon which is not gsm. AT%T (originally Cingular of course) is a fairly recent convert to gsm. Only T Mobile has been gsm from the start. We also have had to put up with the added inconvenience of the different gsm frequencies here as opposed to the rest of the world although again quad band technology has for the most part resolved that problem (although there are still people walking around with tri bands, say 850, 1800, 1900 who run into trouble in a country such as Croatia which is predominantly 900)

Although I would like to believe otherwise, we're still a ways away from the concept of one universal phone number to use cell phone technology globally at affordable rates.