Redialing mobile 411

Last week's column on the mobile directory assistance movement elicited a lot of reader response. The majority of the responses pointed out an important element of the issue (and a related debate in its own right) that I didn't address--namely, the matter of who pays for the airtime associated with inbound calls generated from a mobile number directory, especially when they're unsolicited. I will tackle that issue--including the industry's ongoing deliberation about calling party pays--in more depth in an upcoming column, but in the meantime I thought I would share some of the reader reaction to the mobile 411 column:

"There are still people like me who have minimal plans that incur airtime charges every time someone calls inbound to my phone. I don't need or want everyone having the ability to find and dial my number because it would skyrocket my monthly bill. I'm not alone in this, as I know plenty of other people that do the same thing. I'm against anything that would raise my bill outside of my personal control.

"Another thing that makes wireless different from wireline is that the subscriber is charged for incoming calls. This fact also argues for privacy of cell phone numbers. Subscribers should only have to incur charges for people from whom they want to receive calls (i.e., those to whom they've given their cell number). It's bad enough that wireline customers get calls from annoying telemarketers (and Great Aunt Tillie)--mobile subscribers shouldn't have to pay to receive these unwanted calls!"

"This looks like another situation where the wireless carriers are trying to have their cake and eat it too. One the one hand, they cry 'foul' when prevented from charging for an unpublished wireless number, but I seriously doubt they'd agree to the alternative that comes to mind: stop charging the called number the usual access charges and minutes. My guess is they'd rather provide number privacy any day."

"I'm not a strong proponent either way, except that it is annoying when you want to call someone who has eliminated their wireline phone and only has a cell phone, and we cannot get the number. On the other side of the coin, I am somewhat surprised that you did not bring out the airtime billing issue. If a wireless directory is established, then we open a whole can of worms of being billed for calls we do not want to receive. I'm sure that has not escaped the carriers' considerations for support of the wireless directory."

"It would be more than wrong for wireless service providers to support directory assistance simply because of the money they could make from fees charged to customers who don't want their numbers included. This wrong would be multiplied if the carriers' contracts caused the consumer to unwittingly opt in by simply signing the contract. These two wrongs would not only never make a right, but could possibly amount to class action against the carriers by consumers.

"If the carriers insist on developing a wireless directory assistance, then the opt-in needs to be clearly stated and evident to the consumer that they are choosing to be included in a wireless directory assistance medium, that inclusion in the medium may significantly increase the number of incoming calls to their wireless device and that increased usage may significantly affect the cost of having service with the carrier. Under absolutely no circumstances whatsoever should the carriers be allowed to charge any fee of any sort in keeping the wireless number private. If anything, the carrier should have to pay the consumer for including their number in a wireless directory assistance program as the carrier is sure to profit from selling their database of wireless numbers to marketing firms."

E-mail me at jmeyers@primediabusiness.com