I am currently using the .co.uk service as they provided free sms texts,
but charged 1p per min for uk landline calls wheresas the .com chaged
for texts but calls were free (up to 300 min per week).Now I notice that
they have now started charging 3p for texts, so the .com service is
cheaper overall.
How come the same company has such different rates?

"Ian Pawson"  wrote in message 
news:fk8vuc$9i0$1@registered.motzarella.org...
>I am currently using the .co.uk service as they provided free sms texts,
> but charged 1p per min for uk landline calls wheresas the .com chaged
> for texts but calls were free (up to 300 min per week).Now I notice that
> they have now started charging 3p for texts, so the .com service is
> cheaper overall.
> How come the same company has such different rates?


Hi,


I think the idea is, across countless (at least 15+), "same company" brands, 
to have multiple combinations of free and paid for destinations and 
services, to best cover all angles and make most revenue from a given 
customer base (as well as offering some other ancillary benefits - marketing 
performance evaluation, r&d, testing and rolling out of new and different 
services, etc.).


Best wishes,



News Reader

"Ian Pawson"  wrote in message 
news:fk8vuc$9i0$1@registered.motzarella.org...
>I am currently using the .co.uk service as they provided free sms texts,
> but charged 1p per min for uk landline calls wheresas the .com chaged
> for texts but calls were free (up to 300 min per week).Now I notice that
> they have now started charging 3p for texts, so the .com service is
> cheaper overall.
> How come the same company has such different rates?

I switched making o/g calls from .co.uk to .com some time ago
when I noticed the cheaper UK mobile rates.
I don't profess to understand the Betamax business model, I'm
just glad they are on the scene.
-- 
Graham

%Profound_observation%