Re: Texts should be free

Thank you for taking the time to respond to my string, I do mean that -even though I will get into some Cynicism as we go along here. Let's do some math, and maybe we can make some sense out of the numbers here that we are talking about.

Ok, sooo - a text is 140 bytes (let's assume I use all characters). And let's use your example and  say I sent 25,000 texts in any given month. I would have transmitted the following....

3,500,000 .......... bytes   or

3,417.96875 .... kilobytes  or

3.3378601074 megabytes    or

0.003259629  gigabytes 

Now let's break that down against the data plans available right now - because after all, a text is data, right? I think we agree on that.... eveything is data, its a digital world --- 1 and 0's.  And those texts go through servers, just like data and voice, and yes they do have costs associated with the upkeep.  But I also think it's fair to say it's probably easier to route a 140byte text message, as opposed to a voice call or data stream.  Agree? Let's assume you have the 2 GB data plan for $30 plan that is out right now. That would come out to $15 Per GB, simple math, right? I would hope Verizon isn't losing money on this deal, I have to assume they are coving there costs. So let's assume Verizon is making a profit at $15 Per 1 GB.

Here is where the math gets a little mind boggling, so stick with me....

$15 (Cost Per GB) / 0.003259 GB (25,000 texts) = $4,602.63 Per GB . So we effectively pay $4,602 per GB for Text and $15 per GB for data. Maybe the text servers are made of Solid Gold?

Here's another intriguing way of looking at it. A 1 minute phone call takes up more data than 600 text messages. So in my case (I have a life), I text at the most 300 messages per month, the equivalent of a 30 second phone call. Now, I would argue very strongly that there is a lot more technology and it is much more difficult to transmit a real time voice conversation vs. a text message with no quality assurance.

Yet another way to comprehend this… if I text 600 messages in a month (remember, the equivalent of a 1 minute phone calls worth of data) and I am not in a text plan, and I am charged $0.20 per text, which works out to be $120. Or if I have no life, and I text 25,000 messages (41 minute voice call) I would be charged $5,000. Not bad for 0.0032 GB. What a bargain. Those servers apparently are tough to maintain. Would you pay $120 for a one minute phone call?… sure you would, if your mom was on the moon!

I do appreciate the Verizon answer, and that's what you should say of course, it sounds good when you read it, but let's really ask ourselves who we are kidding here. I gave you a concrete example of what we are talking about, these are the real numbers.

I am a Microsoft Engineer, I have a background in Cisco routing and was a designer of Wide Area Networks for AT&T, I have a clue. And if Verizon had a clue about networking, which they do, they would prioritize the text message as being 3rd. 1st would be voice - you want a good clear conversation, 2nd would be data, and 3rd would be the text message (not crucial that it gets there a few milliseconds late). So the text gets the back seat on the data hihgway, but somehow gets charged at a the unbelievabley highest rate to deliver??

Some call it “market” and “what the market will bear”, “the going rate”, “cost of servers” etc… I see it another way – it’s flat out USURIOUS, and is a display of the enormous market power that a few carriers wield when banded together.

Thank you for taking the time to hear me out, nothing will be done about this and I realize that. We are bent over the barrel and we are taking our medicine like we should….

Now take into consideration the text is charged coming and going....mind blowing. Double my numbers above. You are now in Redonkulous land. ¡Bienvenido!

0 Likes