Something on your mind? Want to give us feedback on something in particular or everything in general? Tell us how we are doing!
#64646 by southsound
Tue Sep 14, 2010 8:38 am
oomaok wrote:I am done with ooma. I am too stupid to be able to handle these 'normal' fee tricks.

I think you are being way to hard on yourself - and on ooma. When I had Qwest phone service my plan rate was $29.99 per month - but my bill was always about $8.00 more. Why? Because of all the additional fees and taxes that Qwest added. If I asked the customer service person what the total cost would be they could never tell me exactly. And when I dropped back to basic service, my $13.50 per month bill became over $21.00. Fees and taxes are a common part of telecommunications costs - and even when you buy a calling card, many times they don't tell you about the connection fee except in the very small print on the back. Why couldn't they do it in the same size font as the 700 MINUTES on the front?

To try to answer your question about what would happen after you use your 1000 minutes on the plan, here is how I read it. Remember that I am just a fellow user like yourself. I'll use the rate to China as an example.

From the website: Calls over plan minutes, and calls to destinations not covered by the plan, are billed at Ooma's standard low rates. The rates displayed do not include a mandated 18% Federal Universal Service Fund (FUSF) fee. The regular connection fee of 3.9¢ is waived for subscribers of any of our International Plans.

Cost of a 10 minute call:
10 x .02 = .20 plus the FUSF fee of .20 x .18 = .036 for a total of .236 cents. I don't know if they round to .24 cents or not, but since you are a subscriber to their 1000 minute plan, there is no connection fee. Just about 24 cents for a 10 minute call.

Cost of a 20 minute call:
20 x .02 = .40 plus the FUSF fee of .40 x .18 = .072 for a total of .472 cents. I don't know if they round to .47 cents or not, but since you are a subscriber to their 1000 minute plan, there is no connection fee. Just about 47 cents for a 20 minute call.

If you were not an international bundle subscriber your calls would be more expensive:

Cost of a 10 minute call:
10 x .025 = .25 plus the FUSF fee of .25 x .18 = .045 for a total of .295 cents plus the .039 connection fee. Just about 34 cents for a 10 minute call.
#64648 by lbmofo
Tue Sep 14, 2010 8:53 am
oomaok wrote:Epxo123 was right. ooma is making stupid trick here. Why do we as customer care what is FUSF fee. Ooma should just tell Epxo123 10.2 cent instead of $0.088 cents + FUSF. Should we care FUSF when we use pre-paid phone card? No, we do not. Do we care FUSF when we use skype? No, we do not. Do we care FUSF when we use G-talk? No, we do not. Now you know why Epxo123 and I are cheated by ooma.

BTW, can anyone tell me what is the exact rate for international calls based on this pape:
https://www.ooma.com/products/international-rates

So basic question is what will happen after using up 1000 minutes if I buy Basic->1000minutes /$9.99 a month. Am I too stupid to find out it at this page? Can those talents in this forum tell?

I am done with ooma. I am too stupid to be able to handle these 'normal' fee tricks.

Whether you sign up to one of the International bundles or not, the FUSF tax will always be there.
This may help: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=9033&p=64232#p63245
#64685 by nn5i
Tue Sep 14, 2010 6:05 pm
Hmmm -- I'm a pretty articulate user of English, and a pretty fluent reader too -- and I think I would have read that price statement as the OP did. Placing the statement about what is called here the FUSF fee immediately before the undifferentiated statement about the 3.9 cents makes the second of these sentences look as if it were intended as clarification of the first.

But that doesn't indicate evil intent. Rather, it seems to me that it indicates only that whoever wrote that text isn't a particularly skillful writer of English. Not surprising; good tech writers are hard to find. Certainly this one is a much clearer expositor than the OP is, eh?

Had I been that OP, I would have concluded that the Ooma did a poor job of explaining, but I wouldn't have assumed they intended it so. Would anyone really go to such lengths to chisel you out of two bits? Naah, it's clearly a failure, but almost certainly an honest failure.
#64693 by lbmofo
Tue Sep 14, 2010 8:17 pm
nn5i wrote:Hmmm -- I'm a pretty articulate user of English, and a pretty fluent reader too -- and I think I would have read that price statement as the OP did. Placing the statement about what is called here the FUSF fee immediately before the undifferentiated statement about the 3.9 cents makes the second of these sentences look as if it were intended as clarification of the first.

But that doesn't indicate evil intent. Rather, it seems to me that it indicates only that whoever wrote that text isn't a particularly skillful writer of English. Not surprising; good tech writers are hard to find. Certainly this one is a much clearer expositor than the OP is, eh?

Had I been that OP, I would have concluded that the Ooma did a poor job of explaining, but I wouldn't have assumed they intended it so. Would anyone really go to such lengths to chisel you out of two bits? Naah, it's clearly a failure, but almost certainly an honest failure.

This is a moot point now.

This was then:

southsound wrote: Listed international calling rates do not include a mandated Federal Universal Service Fund (FUSF) fee. A 3.9¢ connection fee applies to all calls. This fee is waived for subscribers of our International Bundle.


This is now:

https://www.ooma.com/products/international-rates


Calls over plan minutes, and calls to destinations not covered by the plan, are billed at Ooma's standard low rates. The monthly price above does not include a mandated 18% Federal Universal Service Fund (FUSF) fee. The regular connection fee of 3.9¢ is waived for subscribers of any of our International Plans.

Calls over plan minutes, and calls to destinations not covered by the plan, are billed at Ooma's standard low rates. The rates displayed do not include a mandated 18% Federal Universal Service Fund (FUSF) fee. The regular connection fee of 3.9¢ is waived for subscribers of any of our International Plans.
#64694 by lbmofo
Tue Sep 14, 2010 10:12 pm
oomaok wrote:Epxo123 was right. ooma is making stupid trick here. Why do we as customer care what is FUSF fee. Ooma should just tell Epxo123 10.2 cent instead of $0.088 cents + FUSF. Should we care FUSF when we use pre-paid phone card? No, we do not. Do we care FUSF when we use skype? No, we do not. Do we care FUSF when we use G-talk? No, we do not. Now you know why Epxo123 and I are cheated by ooma.

"Cheated" is a crock of bull. Ooma makes it clear what international call FUSF is in % and if you weren't aware, then that's because you didn't read like you were supposed to. Not "cheated."

With Skype, Vonage, Comcast Digital Voice, and other VoIP international calls, there are FUSF or similar taxes. Google is one of the rare ones that include tax in their rates. With calling cards, there are worse things such as expiration and maintenance fees.
#64983 by scg
Sat Sep 18, 2010 6:50 am
I agree the presentation is less than ideal for those of us who are too lazy to do the math. The examples above are good. I would like to see Ooma incorporate a few examples into their rate info page. For those who only make a few international calls a year, and others who make a lot, Ooma's options fill both needs. This sure beats paying for another VoIP plan which includes $5.00 of "free" international calling. Over the past three years, I've paid out $7 more per month than Ooma's $10/mo with Premier and have only used at most $1.50 worth of calls during any month.
#65012 by nn5i
Sat Sep 18, 2010 4:45 pm
lbmofo wrote:"Cheated" is a crock of bull. Ooma makes it clear what international call FUSF is in %

Yes, they make it clearer now, but you fail to note that they have changed the wording of the notice. When the OP read the notice he complains of, it was much less clear. Another post, very nearly two hours earlier than yours, gives the old and the new wording. Had you read that post, I think you would not have made yours.
#65014 by southsound
Sat Sep 18, 2010 5:37 pm
nn5i wrote:Had you read that post, I think you would not have made yours.

Actually, I think he probably did and would. You see, he added the proper description of the value of the OP's arguement when he said, '"Cheated" is a crock of bull.'

lbmofo is always more than fair, very helpful, and a definite asset to the forum. Even when some old gator or raccoon takes offence at an inept poster's question, he usually steps in with a great and humble answer. To dis him for calling it like it is would be an injustice.

And just so nobody gets bent out of shape, you're my bud too, Carl. Group Hug!! :P
#65016 by lbmofo
Sat Sep 18, 2010 6:08 pm
Thanks SouthSound for the kind words.

nn5i, that post 2 hours before mine was mine too? :)

In any case, "cheated" got me going a bit because it is such a strong word. Prior to the latest update, there was room for misunderstanding but with certainty, Ooma did not intend to cheat folks.

It is all good. Enjoy the rest of the weekend folks. I really wish my Huskies didn't get spanked today; u see, Sat is down the drain for me. Hoping for a better mood tomorrow with some help from the Hawks.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests