18185 and 1899 Connection Fee increase from 16 January

Bob Eager

On Tue, 16 Jan 2007 17:14:50 UTC, Tricky < â–� @ â–� > wrote:

> On 16 Jan 2007 13:10:52 GMT, Bob Eager wrote:
>
> >With BT, you have enough trouble working out what the current tariff
> >actually means
>
> With Finarea depending on who you ring and where they are, you have to
> check through all the myriad of "competing" flavours of the company

That's up to me. I don't find it onerous.

You stick with BT...that's fine.
--
Bob Eager
begin 123 a new life...take up Extreme Ironing!

Arky

My theory about Finerea method of working.

I reckon it's privately owned by a handful of individuals who don't
like paying tax.

So they set up dozens of companies in the way we know.

This gives them the flexibility to mess around with ideas, confuse the
public into submission and they pay less tax as each "company" only
exhibits a modest profit.

In Switzerland, corporate tax rates rises with profit -

" The basic federal tax rate is 3.63% of taxable profits with an
additional percentage based on a formula which relates trading profits
to net worth (i.e. capital and reserves). The maximum rate of 9.8% is
arrived at if profits exceed 23.15% of net worth.

Cantonal tax rates vary between 17% and 35% and like the federal tax
are progressive, using a scale based on the relationship of profits to
net worth"

Victor Delta

"Theo Markettos" <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote in message
news:eXo*TnVAr@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk...
> Carefully disguised as an offer, no less, and giving just over seven hours
> notice. Though it does seem to suggest that international calls will
> remain
> at a connection fee of 4p.

OMG - You were absolutely right after all! 4p for international calls and 5p
for UK calls. I can hardly believe it!

V

andy

Tricky wrote:
> On 16 Jan 2007 13:10:52 GMT, Bob Eager wrote:
>
> >With BT, you have enough trouble working out what the current tariff
> >actually means
>
> With Finarea depending on who you ring and where they are, you have to
> check through all the myriad of "competing" flavours of the company to
> work out which one gives you the best deal today for your call. You
> also have to hope that they haven't "forgotten" to tell you about
> yesterday's price change or that they've suddenly started charging for
> engaged tones or some similar new trick without warning. In any case
> there might be tomorrow's new "flavour" offering you yet some other
> combination of tariffs.

This is almost a duplicate of your earlier post

You don't have to do any of that; as someone already said, you can
choose one of their brands and know that you'll be most of the way to
the cheapest possible overall bills

If it's winding you up as much as it sounds, especiallly about the
imaginary bits, give it up and go back to BT

Tricky

On 16 Jan 2007 11:49:43 -0800, andy wrote:

>If it's winding you up as much as it sounds, especiallly about the
>imaginary bits, give it up and go back to BT

Where did I say I was with BT or thinking of going back to BT?

NoNeedToKnow

On 17 Jan 2007, Tricky < Þ @ Þ > wrote:

>On 16 Jan 2007 19:49, andy wrote:
>
>>If it's winding you up as much as it sounds, especiallly about the
>>imaginary bits, give it up and go back to BT
>
>Where did I say I was with BT or thinking of going back to BT?

Nowhere, but you're clearly showing how pi$$ed off you are with the
service from 18185/1899/18866/whatever that anyone could be forgiven
for thinking that you'd find fault with all other services out there!

Tricky

On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 03:53:37 +0000, NoNeedToKnow wrote:

>Nowhere, but you're clearly showing how pi$$ed off you are with the
>service from 18185/1899/18866/whatever that anyone could be forgiven
>for thinking that you'd find fault with all other services out there!

Unlike you I use £ rather than $.

Bob Eager

On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 08:09:23 UTC, Tricky < â–� @ â–� > wrote:

> On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 03:53:37 +0000, NoNeedToKnow wrote:
>
> >Nowhere, but you're clearly showing how pi$$ed off you are with the
> >service from 18185/1899/18866/whatever that anyone could be forgiven
> >for thinking that you'd find fault with all other services out there!
>
> Unlike you I use £ rather than $.

Which seems to be avoiding the issue. Anyway, a $ is better at
representing an 'S', whereas a £ is better as an 'L'.
--
Bob Eager
begin 123 a new life...take up Extreme Ironing!

Mark Carver

Tricky wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Jan 2007 23:09:36 -0000, Victor Delta wrote:
>
>> Still 2ppm to mobiles at weekends on 18185...
>
> That was yesterday. Is it still the same today.... and what about
> tomorrow?

So what about tomorrow ? I take it you don't drive a car ?



--
Mark
Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply.

Tricky

On Sun, 21 Jan 2007 11:03:51 +0000, Mark Carver wrote:

>So what about tomorrow ? I take it you don't drive a car ?

I drive a bus, but tomorrow is my day off.