The obvious truth about text messaging: you're getting ripped off

C'mon folks, does it really take an in-depth research study to figure this one out? On the whole, per-use SMS rates have doubled from $0.10 to $0.20 in the span of three years, and carriers have shown no shame in pushing messaging packs (the "unlimited" one in particular) in an effort to snag more revenue per user. We already knew that Senator Herb Kohl was looking into the matter, and a new piece in The New York Times clearly explains just how lucrative these bite-sized messages are for carriers. We're told that most consumers simply assume that it's costing operators more each year as the volume of texts sent increases; according to University of Waterloo professor Srinivasan Keshav, "it doesn't cost the carrier much more to transmit a hundred million messages than a million." You see, SMS messages are elusively hidden within the so-called "control channel," which is space already reserved for the operation of the wireless network. So long as messages are kept concise (say, 160 characters or less), they can be sent without any real implication on the channel. Will this epiphany somehow change the way we're being gouged? Tough to say, but don't think for a second that carriers won't figure out another way to nickle-and-dime you if the hand is forced.

[Thanks, Jeevan]

[Amol @ Dec 28th 2008 10:04PM]

Yeah, true story. Is this really some sort of an epiphany?

[Cassini @ Dec 28th 2008 10:31PM]

An epiphany? No, as a matter of fact, it's not. But I know what you mean.

Carriers could easily include unlimited messaging within their unlimited data plans and not charge a penny more. And why not? We're transmitting more data when online and emailing than with a stupid little SMS. But of course, they do nickel and dime like we're still stuck in the early 90's..

The first carrier who offers unlimited messaging as a part of their data plans without charging extra, will get an enormous amount of business, because wireless prices are already completely out of control. AT&T charging $125 USD per month for 900 anytime minutes, unlim. data, and unlim. messaging? Ridiculous.

What else can be said? Wireless carriers suck.

[Mark @ Dec 28th 2008 10:45PM]

Just be happy you're not in Canada.

[jeff @ Dec 28th 2008 10:53PM]

@Cassinni-

Ummm.... sprint does that.... and has been doing it for years.

[Les @ Dec 28th 2008 11:34PM]

I just checked that out. If sprints network wasn't bad I'd switch.
In my area (MD) sprint's network is so bad it's not worth saving 30$/month to switch over.

[dark star @ Dec 29th 2008 8:42AM]

cass,
i believe carriers has been doing unlimited everything for 99 bux.
im looking at Sprint now. its $99 for unlimited everything: voice, data, tv, text......

http://nextelonline.nextel.com/NASApp/onlinestore/en/Action/DisplayPlans?filterString=Individual_Plans_Filter&id12=CHP_PlansTab_Link_IndividualPlans

[GenoMalice @ Dec 29th 2008 12:22AM]

pshh... I wish all I had to pay was $125 for all that... here in Canada we get raped!

Eg.
If your an early iPhone adopter like myself your bill would come up like this
$60 gives you:
250 daytime minutes
unlim. evenings/weekends (after 9pm)
visual voicemail
500mb data
+$30 for:
5.5gigs (6 gig total incl. your original 500mb)
+$15 for:
call display
ultd text messaging
+ 6.95
System access fee
Monthly Bill: $111.95x13% (tax in Ontario)
Total: $126.50

I`d gladly take your $125 plan over mine...

[Chuckles McGee @ Dec 29th 2008 12:59AM]

@Genomalice


Snap, at a 13% sales tax, you're getting raped, cellular carriers aside.

[bokeen @ Dec 29th 2008 1:31AM]

@Cassini:

Hell yes, I agree. With T-Mob, I am dropping $30 for my 'berry data package + enterprise, and it doesn't even include text...an extra ten bones a month. Rubbish.

The good news is that email and BB messenger have really lowered my amount of texts. Either way, it is highway robbery.

[Taylor @ Dec 29th 2008 2:00AM]

Perhaps the problem is that as soon as the carriers decide to make text messaging free across the board, it would go up in huge amounts, and people would start sending essays in their SMSes.

I think paying 11 cents a text will do me.

[Ryback @ Dec 29th 2008 3:14AM]

I didn't know you guys had to pay for receiving text messages. That's just hilarious! Do you have to pay the mail man to deliver your mail too?

Isn't the US all about free market? Stop bending over!

[Kris @ Dec 29th 2008 7:16AM]

@Les, Sprint is "bad" in MD? Are you crazy? I've had Sprint in MD for many _many_ years and I have yet to find a place it didn't work in. My girlfriend has T-Mobile and my other relatives have AT&T and _all_ of them have trouble getting signals in certain areas in MD (typically in the North and West) but my signal remains strong.

Hell Baltimore was one of the first cities with EVDO Rev A.

Sprint's network in MD "sucking" is FUD. Stop stupidly spreading it.

[Shea @ Dec 29th 2008 8:24AM]

I'm on an AT&T family plan which works out quite nicely.
Thing is, unlimited messaging is $19.99 for a single line, or $29.99 for the whole family (up to 5 lines)
Do the math.

And for all the people complaining about contract costs generally:

I'm splitting the bill with 3 other people (family plan), I get unlimited nights and weekends, a pool of 750 minutes per month (rolled over up to 12 months), *unlimited messaging* [instant messaging on AOL, MSN, Yahoo etc, picture/video/audio messaging (any MMS under 300kb per message; over that is 1c per kb...)], unlimited calls to other mobiles, and I use free wi-fi hotspots all over the place so I never pay for data...

Oh, all that sets me back a total of $30 per month (splitting the bill 4 ways, equally)
Go ahead, criticize AT&T for customer service,
but really, I don't believe its possible to beat that price. It was on a contract signed midway through this year, and there are no corporate discounts etc applied to that.

[D.S (Apple) = digtal shit @ Dec 29th 2008 9:30AM]

FUCK CORPERATE AMERICA!!!!

[lieutenantdaily @ Dec 29th 2008 10:44AM]

@Shea

T-Mobile: 700 min, 4 lines, unlimited text (no data cap for MMS), unlimited CALLING on any Wi-Fi network. $30 a month (per line). Say what you want about T-mobile, but you cant beat their prices...

[Eh @ Dec 29th 2008 12:56PM]

Sprint doesnt have unlimited text messaging for free, what the hell are you talking about? It costs an extra $20 for that unless you get one of the plans that specifically say it (which means youre paying extra). Sprint screws you just as bad as anyone else.

[Cassini @ Dec 30th 2008 4:55AM]

@jeff

"Ummm.... sprint does that.... and has been doing it for years."


Ummm.... yeah, jeff, I'm sure they do. But ummm... that's one carrier, not all carriers. And I have no interest in Sprint.

[Danny @ Dec 28th 2008 10:06PM]

I get 500 TM for $0.99 with Sprint. I think that's far from reasonable.

[Akshat @ Dec 29th 2008 2:31AM]

I live in New Delhi (India) and for a package fee of $1 ( ~Rs. 50 ), all my SMSs are free for that month (Vodafone)!

[Samboini @ Dec 29th 2008 4:51AM]

UK here: £25 per month gets me 500 cross network minutes and unlimited texts. Got a free N95 to boot.

[Markarian @ Dec 29th 2008 5:03AM]

I used to work for Verizon, back when per-use messages were 10 cents to send, 2 cents to receive. I hard a lady call me, angry that her daughter had racked up $80 by sending 800 txt messages. I explained to my supervisor that 800 SMS messages had a theoretical maximum bandwidth of 140KB on VZW's network. $80 for 140K of bandwidth is probably more than it cost to send computer data via satellite in the 70s. I asked how this wasn't unconscionable. She shrugged and said "Well, they signed the contract."

[Zuwxiv @ Dec 28th 2008 10:06PM]

My phone company is nickel-and-diming me?! That's simply not possible!

I mean, I'm paying the no-nickel-and-diming fee!

[rndmnme @ Dec 28th 2008 10:21PM]

You know who I feel nickel and dimed by? Our Government.

I mean... we could be spending time looking into people getting ripped off $10-$20.... or you know... fix shit.

Where was all this effort into price gouging research when Gas was $4 a gallon? Whatever, now we get to laugh at OPEC for awhile. It feels good, and we didn't need a gov't to do it... we just needed the economy to collapse.

[Jake Tobak @ Dec 28th 2008 10:26PM]

What a clever segue.

[Knee to the Groin @ Dec 28th 2008 10:31PM]

Your forgetting about the "no nickle-and-diming fee" surcharge. It varies by county...

[aYe aye @ Dec 28th 2008 10:35PM]

"No nickle & diming" is built into all new Blackberries, but I'm on Verizon and they disabled that feature.

But $9.99/mo gets me Vdiming

[dagamer34 @ Dec 29th 2008 1:09AM]

AT&T finds nickels and dimes too cheap. They've moved up to quarters now!

[Brian @ Dec 29th 2008 2:46AM]

@rnd

actually, the price of gas was driven up by speculators due to the conflict in iraq. They were afraid the drilling stations were going to be destroyed, so the companies upped the price. There wasn't ever a crisis, just the appearance of one.

[Testies, Testies, 1, 2... 3? @ Dec 29th 2008 3:05PM]

My personal favorite is the "Waste Disposal Fee"? Anyone else seen that one?

[Baz @ Dec 28th 2008 10:07PM]

This is nothing new. And what's worse is the way these criminal phone companies rip us off is much worse than this, like through $300 early termination fees and "activation" and "hidden" fees that total insane amounts. Someone shut down Verizon, ffs.

[nikster @ Dec 28th 2008 11:44PM]

I agree on the hidden activation, termination, and subsidy fees - there should be laws that put these out in the open so they can't rip you off.

Text messages are a different story. They are charging you what you are willing to pay, not what it costs them. It's a common thing to do, and it happens particularly in markets where there is not much competition.

It might be worth investigating if there is collusion on price but I don't even think they'd need to explicitly conspire, one operator sneakily raises the fees and the others just follow suit.

[Jughead @ Dec 29th 2008 12:25AM]

$175 ETF and it's a free market if you don't want to be a Verizon customer, don't be one.

[dkrift @ Dec 28th 2008 10:07PM]

Slow news day.

[Da Ereeser @ Dec 28th 2008 10:32PM]

OF COURSE news is slow lately! It's SUNDAY during the HOLIDAY season. What did you expect? An iPhone nano update? New product announcement? You came here to find something to read, didn't you? And Darren provided you with something to read, didn't he? And now you know a little bit more, don't you? Here's some news for you: I didn't take a shit today! You should thank Darren for adding another wrinkle to your SMOOTH brain.

[HunterXI @ Dec 28th 2008 10:51PM]

How can 3 words prompt a 76-word response? Maybe you need a drink.

[gkrules @ Dec 28th 2008 11:19PM]

How can 79 words prompt you to count the amount words in his response?
Maybe you need a life.

[Mitch @ Dec 28th 2008 11:42PM]

You do know that there are fantastic programs that count words, right?

[Christian Walters @ Dec 28th 2008 11:42PM]

@gkrules, CONGRATULATION! YOU WIN ONE(1) FREE INTERNETZ!

[Mike C @ Dec 28th 2008 10:08PM]

Cheers to Humanity I say.

I find this appropraite only because I've been out drinking, and on my way back home I gave 57 cents to a homelss man infornt of a high end restaurant. From the depths of this establishment emergeed 2 weomen who light up their cigarettes, and witnessing my paltry donation asked the elderly man:

"Aren't you ashamed?"

and I wonder why i don't want to get out of bed in the morningss.....

[Metkis @ Dec 28th 2008 11:06PM]

I think that's actually a pretty touching story you have there. I actually put it down on a facebook note so I wouldn't forget it. If we had commenter stars like on Gizmodo, I think you'd deserve one.

[Kevlar @ Dec 29th 2008 12:38AM]

I'm all in the spirit of giving, and there are some sad, sad circumstances in life, but I rarely give to homeless people in my neighborhood. There are more worthy causes in this world to donate to.

Many of the homeless people in Vancouver are there because of substance dependence. Without trying to sound high and mighy, they're the only people responsible for the choices they've made to get there. I'm all for donating to organizations that help rehabilitate them, and get them out of the downward spiral of substance abuse, but I cannot, in good conscience give them change on the street. I know that the money I give them will go either to more drugs, or to food because they spent all their other money on drugs. It's a sad reality, and it breaks my heart to turn them down. (Although I rarely have change anyways.)

What really bugs me is when they get persistent. I've had one man refuse to leave until I turned out my pockets and showed him my coin-and-bill-less wallet.

So I'm all for helping the homeless, but I don't think that giving them change will help their situation at all.

[snowenloe @ Dec 29th 2008 4:00AM]

@ Kevlar

I understand where you are coming from. As a former Vancouver resident and lover of B.C. I have given plenty of change to the homeless of Vancouver. I gave and gave until I realized that I kept giving to the same people day after day.

Eventually I found a solution.

One drunken evening in front of The Camby I was asked for a dollar, to which I replied "I was just about to ask you the same thing man."

I used that every time and eventually they learned to leave me alone. The permanent fix may be to just quit frequenting the shit-hole areas of Vancouver (Gastown).

Are we all getting raped by the high cost of text messaging, of course we are.

We just cant do a damn thing about it.

[ThreeDee912 @ Dec 29th 2008 7:04PM]

Spare change? Spare change?

http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/155590/?tag=Change

Sorry, I just had to.

[ScottInFlorida @ Dec 28th 2008 10:11PM]

And why is the Senate "looking into this"?

Hey Senator Kohl, before you start complaining about SMS prices why don't you ask yourself why you are charging so much for tickets to see the pathetic Milwaukee Bucks.

Maybe the Senate needs to start looking into drug use in the NBA or the price to earnings ratio for NBA team owners?

Shut the eff up Congress. Haven't you caused enough pain and suffering?

[Da Ereeser @ Dec 28th 2008 10:23PM]

And what "pain and suffering" would they be causing by looking into why we pay so much for certain things? You're not forced to pay for Bucks tickets, it's YOUR CHOICE to go to the games or not, but we ARE forced to pay per sms or for a messaging package. If Congress wants to help me keep a few dollars in my pocket, especially in the economic situation that we are in now, then I'm all for it.

[thethirdmoose @ Dec 28th 2008 10:28PM]

You could... not send text messages?

[Jake Tobak @ Dec 28th 2008 10:30PM]

Well, you're not FORCED to have a cell phone and even then you're not forced to send text messages.
I couldn't live without a cell phone tbh, but a life without texting wouldn't be the worse thing :P

[Electromodo @ Dec 28th 2008 10:39PM]

@thethirdmoose & @Jake Tobac

We are not enforced to send text messages, right. But when we receive text messages, we STILL GET BILLED (USA, Verizon, $20 a message sent/received).

I can not tell all of my friends to stop sending me text messages. Not only it is unethical, it is simply impossible. So the only choice I have is to pay $0.20/message or get a message bundle for additional $5-up a month. Exactly what TFA is about.

[cesium @ Dec 28th 2008 11:35PM]

Tell your carrier to disable text messaging on your line, problem solved

[SOOPERGOOMAN @ Dec 29th 2008 7:38AM]

It's Congress, they ARE Pain and Suffering.