🚀 go-pugleaf

nobody@nospam.pacbell.net (Bill Z.) wrote in 
news:87prcatjk6.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net:

> John Blutarsky <bluto@faber.com> writes:
> 
>> nobody@nospam.pacbell.net (Bill Z.) wrote in
>> news:87bpnupvp2.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net: 
>>
>>> John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> writes:
>>> 
>>>> On Wed, 08 Jul 2009 16:37:12 -0700, nobody@nospam.pacbell.net (Bill
>>>> Z.) wrote in <87eisqeogn.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net>:
>>>>
>>>>>John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, 08 Jul 2009 15:42:33 -0700, nobody@nospam.pacbell.net (Bill
>>>>>> Z.) wrote in <87ocruajae.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>It is simply not a free market.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is simply is a free market.  Evidence abounds.
>>>>>
>>>>>Not true - the high price of text messages being a prime example.
>>>>
>>>> Unfortunately for your thesis, that alone is not evidence of
>>>> anything, any more than expensive bottled water is evidence of no
>>>> free market for water.
>>> 
>>> Not true when they are charging 20 cents for something that costs them
>>> an estimated 0.3 cents.  The "free market" is obiviously not working.
>>> The question is why.
>>> 
>>> It's not like people are paying a premium to buy a status symbol.
>>> 
>>
>> So your assertion is that markup alone dictates whether or not a free 
>> market exists?
> 
> When you get that kind of "markup" on a commodity and no competition
> driving the price down, it is pretty damn obvious.
> 
> 
> 
> 

Actually, I don't think it is.  There is a fairly wide spread of offerings 
between carriers, with as much as a $50 spread in "unlimited" offers 
between postapiad and prepaid phones.  I noticed that Boost offers 
unliminted texting for a dollar a day only for the days where you text.  

It looks like there is all kinds of competitive pricing in the industry.  
It sounds like you might simply have an issue with  a company profiting 
from consumer use of a finite service.