|
|
Silicon Beach Australia |
I've heard Distribute IT have a good price offshore deal hooked up. The ZA connection was merely speculative, but I'm told they have about a 1/7th purchasing power exchange rate, yet first world infrastructure for interconnects, so they are worth looking at.
There could be much better deals out there; but sub 5c/message isn't unheard of (although the preparedness of some networks to receive messages from these networks isn't as solid as paying 20c or so through an AU gateway)
Geoff
My idea is to have a user controlled system where you limit the number of
SMS's you get per week, funding out of a PayPal subscription. If you want
50, then set 50. If I could get a $0.10 gateway going that would be a fairly
minor cost for most people. The main use I see would be for DM's anything
else is too high volume to be viable.
Michael Specht
Principal Consultant
Phone: +61 3 9017 1865 | Mobile: 0418 212 041 | Skype: mspecht
Email: mich...@inspecht.com.au Web: inspecht.com.au
-----Original Message-----
From: silicon-beach-australia@googlegroups.com
[mailto:silicon-beach-australia@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of silky
Sent: Thursday, 14 August 2008 10:12 PM
To: silicon-beach-australia@googlegroups.com
Subject: [SiliconBeach] Re: New project idea: Bringing back Twitter SMS
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 10:09 PM, Elias Bizannes
<elias.bizan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Let's not forget, you can only opt into the programme which I think is the
> point being missed.
not at all being missed; of course the system would be opt-in. but you
need to opt-out if you get too many messages. you don't control who
sends you messages [directly]. what i mean is you don't *initiate* it
(unlike the typical cost of sending an sms; you sent it, of course it
cost you money).
> No one is forcing you to pay to use twitter; but you
> have an option to use a service that satisfies your twitter addiciton, but
> also helps a greater cause. ersonally, I am willing to pay to receive
SMS's
> from Twitter. A 55 cent message times a few dozen is not a big deal on my
> phone bill, given the value I get from twitter.
not at all disagreeing people won't use it. i'm just highlghting what
will happen in the community at large, and the sort of backlash you'll
see.
> Ivo's startup is one of any gateways we could use, I just know about his
in
> detail. And yes, I made two [2]'s - apologies for the confusion.
> So Geoff, your analysis is more or less right. However it's the user that
> pays, because they are the ones that want the benefit. You can choose to
use
> the service, not forced to.
--
noon silky
http://www.themonkeynet.com/armada/