"polygonum" wrote in message
...
On 05/12/2012 13:10, Theo Markettos wrote:
In uk.d-i-y polygonum wrote:
Can someone explain to me why BT think it necessary to impose such silly
requirements? Especially if they can be fulfilled by all sorts of
workarounds. Don't we usually expect to pay more if we use something
more - rather than (as it appears) pay more if we don't use enough of
it?

Because BT make most of their profit on calls, therefore they want you to
make some. They want to discourage you from having a line you only use
to
receive calls, or just for ADSL, and so if you don't use the line you pay
more to make up for what revenue they didn't get from call charges.

This is why telcos love talking about how many pennies you save on line
rental (eg Virgin's 'free' phone line) but fail to mention how expensive
their calls are... (32p/min to Three mobiles on Virgin).

Theo


Can see what you mean if it is a vanilla line. But if the tariff is one
where the calls are not charged... ?

--
Rod

IIRC, Rod, BT were challenged over their original scheme - where the calls
must be chargeable, as in you actually render some money to BT. Their fudge
was to hold onto the word chargeable but accept that if the call was within
the bundle definition of an exempted call then whilst it would be free to
you it would be classified as chargeable. I guess that it is similar to
HMRC having two classes of VAT - one called VAT-exempt and the other called
zero-rated ;-}}

I'm on the basic, weekend bundle and just pay the Annual Line Saver rental.
Like the OP, I've noted the change to monthly and just have to remember to
make a connecting call to an 0845 Bank or a Building Society twice a month
rather than six times a quarter - on Saturday or Sunday.

Pathetic - init!

PA