why does Rogers charge for caller ID?
- May 21, 2009
I recently axed all the features from my Rogers cell phone plan. No data plan (internet is a bit of a joke on this Sony Ericsson phone really), no voicemail, no caller ID, no evening and weekends, no texting plans or bundles or value packs or anything like that. Just me, the system access fee, and $25 a month for their cheapest student plan. Honestly the only thing I miss is the caller ID, but what perplexed me a bit was that I was still getting phone number IDs for people when they were texting me, but not from the same people who were calling. So people would call, it would show up as "Unknown" and then they'd text and let me know they called, and their number would show up at that point. I know that texting and phone calls are two different protocols, but aren't we at the point that caller ID is just a standard way of doing things? So I called Rogers to ask them what the scoop was. The representative I talked to was a nice man named Kim. He said "Honestly, I don't know - no one's ever asked why numbers will show up on text messages but not the calls. Maybe it's so that you can text people back." I asked how this doesn't apply to making phone calls (which they make money off of, obviously) and he had no answer for that. He then went on to point out that caller ID doesn't work everywhere and cited the example of Thunder Bay not supporting it.. 15 years ago. It's been a while. He then added that Alabama doesn't support caller ID. Is Alabama's allegedly antiquated phone system really what Rogers plans on standing behind on this issue?
From what I understand, no one charges for caller ID in the US. I understand there is more competition there, but perhaps they understand a couple simple things which go beyond competitiveness and reach towards basic business smarts and understanding of consumer behaviour:
- People use their cell phones more when they know someone has called them ($).
- People do not call people who show up as "Unknown" because it's impossible and it means nothing. (Less usage = less $)
If you still don't think Rogers is missing the mark on this one, consider that it is likely that Rogers is suppressing the phone number unless you pay a fee. Then imagine if your internet service provider (Shaw for me) decided they were going to hide the senders names from all the emails you receive unless you paid them $8 more a month to find out who was sending you email. In the year 2009, it is the exact same thing. Just because caller ID hasn't been around forever doesn't mean that people expect to pay for it in this day and age. We live in a world of connectivity, of identification as a basis for community, and they're still trying to monetize something that actually encourages use of their system. How come we are expected to pay for that?
I understand that there is inherent value in caller ID, which is why Rogers charges for it. I know there is value because I have used it for free on Skype. And I also know I will have it for free from a cell phone provider in the future, whether its Rogers or another provider, because it makes business sense and because its just the way things should be done. I was just tipped off via Facebook that Virgin provides caller ID for free in Canada - thanks Ed. I don't have a lot of attachment to Rogers as I have a very minimal plan, but I think they can do better so I'd like to give them a chance to do so.
How do you feel about being charged for caller ID? Do you think it should be a standard feature (like it is in the US) or do you feel like it's still pretty cutting edge technology and is worth paying extra for? Leave a comment - I'd be interested in reading. Or if you feel like doing a post about it, leave a link in the comments area and I'll check it out.
Comments
The bastards! I'd switch off Rogers if I wasn't in contract.
How about this: Technically Text Messages and Data are the same thing, so why does one have to pay for Text Messaging AND Data?
We really do have the worst cell providers in the world.
Sounds like you are also deeply unsatisfied about the caller ID. Interesting point about the text and data. I had not considered that. So is the contract main reason that you're with Rogers?
Yes, the contract is the only thing keeping me there.... well.... that and the competition doesn't seem much better.
I don't use my phone very much. I'm on a plan without Data, 100 daytime minutes a month, free evenings and weekends, caller id, voicemail, and text messages, and my bills are $49 a month.
It's too bad the 'pay-as-you-go' plans are so loaded with caveats, like minimum usage rates, and minute expiry. Also, you can't use a really good phone on 'Pay-as-you-go'.
dude why are you with Rogers? Such a rip-off. Rogers and Fido are the same thing - Fido uses Rogers' towers and system, but with Fido there's no system access fee, which is what, $5 to $10 a month? more? It's the same thing with better packages...
I'd dump Rogers next chance you get.
I think a lot of people get stuck in their contracts, like me, without realizing just how bad it would be. I'll never take a 'free phone' again.
Some good points! Certainly making caller id an included feature makes business sense. Can't call someone back if you don't know their number!
Here's something from AT&T's wireless page I found on the topic:
"Availability: Caller ID is provided, where available, from the local telephone company. Caller ID works in many of the cities where you may roam. However, these features may not be available in some locations. You may need to contact the local telephone company for more information."
Yeahhhhh that's gonna happen. haha
The cheapest plan I can find between AT&T and Verizon, two of the biggest carriers I can find in the US, start at $39.99/mo. So that might have something to do with it too.
PS - I really like today's pic.
Wow, I've never heard of no caller ID on mobiles, I have the option in the menu but turning it off still shows me the caller, I just pay £25 monthly for 1250 texts/minutes and 1GB decent internet access, all the rest is included as standard (voicemail, custom redirect...), also 40,000 skype minutes and 1GB msn/slingbox/mobiletv each. Shame on Rogers.
Hi,
I would assume that I made the same mistake as most people I speak with in "assuming" that one of our largest carriers is also keeping up with the times in being "competitive", however it was a sorry assumption on my part!
I too would opt out of the Canadian carriers if I were able to sign on with one of the American ones, as they offer a much broader range of products, and at more competitive rates.
Guess it all comes down to what we are willing to put up with, and as Canadians, we continue to earn our reputation...
Then, there is a new kid on the block, "Virgin Mobile", maybe I should give them a call...
Caller ID has been around since the 80s....a quarter century. Telecom devices now have caller id as default. It take more effort to turn it off then it is to leave it alone.
Yet we are still billed for it because of these greedy corps.
You made an interesting point about disclosure. And it make me wonder...emails have id, texts have id, internet has addresses...yet telecom does not we have to pay for that information even though it comes though by default, meaning they are restricting it. You can't even buy telecom equipment without it...period. There is no cost for this technology....it's about as cheap as mp3 players...a couple cents...so paying $8 month for a caller id bundle is extortion...and maybe its time legal action or a complaint with the crtc be proposed.
Don't understand why text messages (150 characters average) cost 15cents while 1 meg of data costs 3cents (about 7000 text messages)
Rogers is obviously restricting the caller ID in order to charge you, I don't believe they would have a significant amount of additional costs in showing the caller ID or not. I have lived in other countries, some of the so called third world, and all things considered Canada has the worst mobile companies. It actually made me angry to see Rogers Financial Statements disclosure for the year 2009, they were showing off their increase in profits, sure they will have their profits increasing while other industries are struggling, they just rip off their clients, and it appears that competition doesn't exist, and is someone regulating these companies? It appears they do whatever they want with their customers.