
How one man turns annoying cold calls into cash - schrofer
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23869462
======
robobenjie
There are two things to like here: 1) No one like solicitation calls and its
nice to see someone stick it to them and 2) he is shifting the economics to be
more representative of the costs to all parties. There is a cost to the person
being called (being annoyed, interrupted etc) and by charging that cost to the
caller only callers who still have a positive return will call. The price to
make a call now more accurately represents the resources it consumes to the
calls should get both more infrequent and higher quality.

~~~
mathattack
I was trying to figure out the economics... 10p - Is that roughly 15 cents? I
assume that's a per minute charge. So he gets 60 minutes/hour * 15
cents/minute * 1 dollar/100 cents = 9 dollars per hour talking on the phone?

It seems a correct cost - probably a little more that the fellow on the other
end of the line, but he's the one with the money. It also seems very cost-
ineffective unless he's a minimum wage employee or very lonely.

~~~
sebnukem2
Well, his first goal was to reduce the number of unsolicited calls, so it is
very effective. The fact that he makes little money on the side is just the
cherry on the cake.

~~~
dredmorbius
Right.

Factor in the reduced interruption cost of receiving 10-20 fewer calls/month
into the cost/benefit calculation. That's one less interruption per 2-3 days.

------
tezza
Don't forget the ever reliable counter-script to use against them:

[http://egbg.home.xs4all.nl/counterscript.html](http://egbg.home.xs4all.nl/counterscript.html)

FWIW I've set up some disposable number like this guy via Flextel.

If ever I've been looking for a new contract I put a disposable number on my
CV. When I get a contract, i disconnect and they cannot call again

~~~
dredmorbius
And what's the point of that?

Particularly when there are much more effective scripts to use, such as asking
where your number came from, and requesting the TM not contact you and pass
that request upstream.

Or get a call-blocking app/service / Google Voice number (not that I care to
feed Google any more personal data).

~~~
jpatokal
Because it's hilarious to hear random telemarketers describe their favorite
brand of toothpaste? And the kicker is the last bit:

"Do you have a problem answering questions from a stranger on the telephone?"

------
jdee
Back in the day when 0898 numbers existed in the UK you could make £1.50 per
minute.

I knew a guy who made a LOT of cash by hooking one up to a fax machine and
then calling window companies and telling them "I'm about to go into a meeting
where we are going to decide which windows to buy for a skyscraper we are
building, please can you fax me your brochure immediately". He then gave them
the 0898 number to fax the 200 page brochure to...

~~~
nwh
I'll bite.

With the original story there's some feeling of comeuppance, and it's not
really a huge financial burden on the company making thousands of calls a day.

In your story—illegalities aside—they're just being a complete asshole.

~~~
jdee
Agreed. I didn't suggest otherwise. I'm just recounting a similar story about
premium rate numbers in the UK.

------
biot
See also
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_pumping](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_pumping)
which has involved companies like FreeConference.com, Google Voice, and others
who route calls through rural carriers using standard long distance area
codes. Through a quirk of the 1996 Telecom Act (since fixed), the rural
carriers were able to charge access fees of up to 20 cents a minute. The
carriers had revenue sharing agreements with the companies driving the calls.
Multiply this by thousands of callers, where everything is handled over VoIP
by a rack of servers and it was quite lucrative.

More reading:
[https://www.google.com/search?q=free+conference+termination+...](https://www.google.com/search?q=free+conference+termination+fees)

~~~
gonzo
If you actually read the first link, you'd see that Google Voice won't connect
to exchanges where "traffic pumping" occurs.

[http://googlepublicpolicy.blogspot.com/2009/10/sex-
conferenc...](http://googlepublicpolicy.blogspot.com/2009/10/sex-conference-
calls-and-outdated-fcc.html)

AT&T filed a complaint against Google for this behavior (and lost).

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_pumping#Role_in_disput...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_pumping#Role_in_dispute_between_AT.26T_and_Google)

------
programminggeek
This reminds me of how direct response companies would send out envelopes with
pre-paid postage on them for return mail and people would fill them with
pennies so that the companies had to pay a lot more in return postage.

It's funny how clever people can be when they are annoyed by something.

~~~
tonyedgecombe
I have wrapped a brick in a reply paid envelope from a very annoying direct
mail company.

~~~
ErsatzVerkehr
The official USPS policy is that such mail is just thrown in the trash:

[http://pe.usps.com/text/csr/PS-086.htm](http://pe.usps.com/text/csr/PS-086.htm)

Here is some other coverage:

[http://consumerist.com/2007/11/01/update-taping-pre-paid-
bus...](http://consumerist.com/2007/11/01/update-taping-pre-paid-business-
reply-envelopes-to-packages-does-not-work/)

[http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/566/can-i-mail-a-
br...](http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/566/can-i-mail-a-brick-back-
to-a-junk-mail-firm-using-the-business-reply-envelope)

~~~
icelancer
USPS is complicit in delivering junk mail, so it's fair game.

~~~
larrys
Junk mail keeps the cost of other mail down. Not to mention a whole industry
and jobs are linked to it. And it works if it didn't the junk mailers would
stop mailing.

~~~
pwg
Actually, at least in the U.S., the regular first class postage rates
subsidize the junk mailings. That is one part of the reason why the USPS is
bleeding red ink. First class mail is way down (due to electronic bill pay and
email and other internet systems) and they no longer have the cash cow that
was first class mail to utilize to subsidize the junk mail delivery.

~~~
ErsatzVerkehr
I thought it was the other way around. Can you cite a source?

~~~
pwg
Title: Junk Mail's Endless Summer URL: [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/todd-
paglia/junk-mails-endless...](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/todd-paglia/junk-
mails-endless-summer_b_201928.html) Quote: "Our standard postage subsidizes
junk mail. "

Title: Why Do We Subsidize Junk Mail? URL:
[http://shuthimup.mitzenmacher.net/?p=252](http://shuthimup.mitzenmacher.net/?p=252)
Quote: "So why do we pay 45 cents to mail a first-class letter while direct-
mail advertisers pay only 18.5 cents? Can you say “crony capitalism?” Can you
say “union busting?” This amounts to nothing more than a very costly subsidy
given to the direct-mail industry, at the expense of first-class mailers,"

Title: Snail Mail Spam Subsidies Stuttering Towards A Stop URL:
[http://blogs.the-american-
interest.com/wrm/2011/09/08/snail-...](http://blogs.the-american-
interest.com/wrm/2011/09/08/snail-mail-spam-subsidies-stuttering-towards-a-
stop/) Quote: "the USPS loses billions of dollars each year so that
advertisers can send out billions of pieces of spam at below market costs."

------
alanctgardner2
For all the people saying this should be applied to email, it already has been
(sort of) with LinkedIn's InMail. Basically, premium accounts for recruiters
et al. get a limited number of InMails every month. If they want more, it
costs something like $10 each. The trick is that the mail doesn't count unless
you actually reply to them.

The end-game is that I politely reply to every recruiter who contacts me that
I'm not interested. I don't make any money, but at least there's a downside
for them to spam a bunch of unrelated accounts.

~~~
jacalata
Not quite - if this was the same, then LinkedIn members could set a fee for
recruiters to contact them and /they/ would receive the $10. However, this
system is interesting - I should go reply to all those recruiters.

------
patio11
Little hack which happens to be true in my case and is 100% effective: "Thanks
$NAME. I appreciate where you're coming from since I used to work in a call
center myself. Good luck." "Oh, thanks, $TERMINATE_CALL_SCRIPT."

~~~
Casseres
I used to work retail. Occasionally we would get telemarketer calls, I would
just tell them, "We are a retail store, please stop calling us." It works as
far as I can tell.

------
wnevets
>Because he works from home, Mr Beaumont has been able to increase his revenue
by keeping cold callers talking - asking for more details about their
services.

This where I started to dislike this guy. A deterrent to cold calls is great
but tricking the other party to stay on the line is fraud if you ask me.

~~~
enraged_camel
You may want to look up the definition of "fraud."

~~~
wnevets
fraud noun 1\. wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial
or personal gain.

~~~
delinka
As long as he's previously disclosed the fees involved with calling him, he's
within the law. If the lackey who works for the would be vendor knows nothing
about the fees, that's not his problem because the company had been informed.

~~~
wnevets
He may be within the law however I doubt at the start of the call he tells the
lackey that he has zero indent on purchasing the product/service and just
wants to keep the lackey on the line.

To me that is a wrongful deception intended to result in financial gain.

~~~
Dylan16807
That's not fraud. Let's look at the _full_ definition.

    
    
        1. a representation of an existing fact;
        2. its materiality;
        3. its falsity;
        4. the speaker's knowledge of its falsity;
        5. the speaker's intent that it shall be acted upon by the plaintiff;
        6. the plaintiff's ignorance of its falsity;
        7. the plaintiff's reliance on the truth of the representation;
        8. the plaintiff's right to rely upon it; and
        9. consequent damages suffered by the plaintiff.
    

The idea of this being 'fraud' dies at the very first point. He would have to
outright lie to the salespeople, though explicit or strong implicit action, to
say that he was planning to buy the product. The normal expectation on a cold
call is that the person listening was not planning to buy at the point of
contact, and will only buy if they are very convinced.

(Yes this is the US definition but it makes it much clearer what kind of
threshold you need to throw around criminal words.)

~~~
wnevets
you do realize that you can commit(or be a) fraud without it being criminal,
right? In fact the definition I posted was 100% copied and pasted.

[https://www.google.com/#q=%22non+criminal+fraud%22](https://www.google.com/#q=%22non+criminal+fraud%22)

------
mistercow
>Because he works from home, Mr Beaumont has been able to increase his revenue
by keeping cold callers talking - asking for more details about their
services.

For less than $7/hour? I mean, I guess it's really easy money, and it would be
great for the unemployed, but to me, 9 minutes of my free time (or worse,
since he works from home, his work time) is worth more than a dollar.

~~~
aroch
In fairness, I could vaguely mumble at the phone without being overly
distracted from my work

~~~
mistercow
You'd need to pay enough attention not to agree to anything.

~~~
muyuu
"Tell me more about X" then leave the phone on the table. They take
surprisingly long to hang up.

~~~
cpeterso
I had a summer job as a telemarketer and learned some of the inside tricks.
They maintain two "call back later" lists. If no one answers the phone, the
number is put on a "call back next week" list. If someone answers but says
they're not interested, their number is put on a "call back in six months"
list. If the person is very rude, some telemarketers would put the number on
the "call back next week" list just to annoy the person. So the lesson is
don't be rude.

~~~
muyuu
It's not quite the lesson if you're making money on simply leaving the phone
on the table while you go about your stuff.

------
jacquesm
I'm having a serious 'now why didn't I think of that?' moment here. Brilliant
:)

------
lessnonymous
I think all business-to-consumer calls should be charged a premium rate that's
passed on to the consumer in question as a credit off their next bill.

Rather than telling this guy he's rorting the system, we MAKE this the system.

------
callmeed
If only there was a way to do something similar with email. My "premium"
@yahoo.com account would make a killing off everyone's newsletters and drip
campaigns.

~~~
DennisP
That's been proposed from time to time. If everybody charged a dime to accept
an email, you could email back and forth with your friends at no net cost, but
spammers would be out of business.

~~~
spudlyo
Or alternately make the sender do something computationally expensive before
their email can be accepted.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof-of-
work_system](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof-of-work_system)

~~~
eli
The problem is the bad guys have botnets. They're already not really paying
for their CPU time.

~~~
alcari
If you require proof of work equal to, say, 3 "average modern CPU core
seconds", they're still not going to send you spam because they could've sent
spam to a few hundred other people in the meantime. It may not be costing them
money directly, but it is a cost measured in a finite resource.

~~~
eli
Fundamentally, the system is always going to hurt the honest people running
e.g. a developer mailing list harder than spammers who can take advantage of
stealing other people's resources.

~~~
throwaway0897
The developer mailing list can digitally sign their messages with PGP, and all
the recipients can add that PGP key to their whitelist. Whitelisted senders
don't have to pay or do proof-of-work.

~~~
eli
Historically "just make everyone use PGP" has been a major issue.

------
valgaze
Ian Ayres from Yale had a paper with similar ideas and they quoted a court
case at the beginning that reads:

"[T]he right of every person ‘to be let alone’ must be placed in the scales
with the right of others to communicate.” - Rowan v. Post Office Department,
397 U.S. 728, 736 (1970)

[http://islandia.law.yale.edu/ayres/mprivacy.pdf](http://islandia.law.yale.edu/ayres/mprivacy.pdf)

------
jwr
Actually, this makes a lot of sense, and I don't see why the use of premium
numbers should be restricted. Why not make it part of a business model?

I should be able to get a number that costs extra to call. My time is valuable
and anyone calling me should think twice whether the call is worth his money.
And I don't mean just telemarketers — anyone. Getting my immediate attention
should not be free or cheap, it should be expensive.

I am willing to share profits with my telco. I think telcos should make this a
standard offering and let any number be switched to a premium one, with cost
per minute set by the user. To avoid unexpected charges and subsequent
problems they should play a recording while connecting (before actually
charging for the connection), warning about the costs and explaining that
holding will ring my phone and start accumulating charges.

If there was a telco offering that kind of service, I'd switch in a heartbeat.

~~~
vidarh
The use of premium numbers are heavily regulated because they are subject to a
_lot_ of scams. The main consideration is that the caller needs to be aware of
the cost, and there needs to be a mechanism to handle complaints. I think the
regulator is exaggerating here - "eveyone" knows that 0871 numbers are charged
at a higher rate, and as long as he is prepared to answer complaints and
doesn't try to misrepresent the costs, he should be in the clear. For genuine
companies it should not be a big deal - after all they happily call cellphones
all the time.

Now, if he was using 070 numbers it'd be dicier. 070 numbers are notorious -
they're basically "follow me" numbers that can be rerouted wherever you want.
Except they cost 40p per minute, which means there's whole armies of women
paid to hang out on chatlines and dating sites and drop 070 numbers to people
because people confuse them with cellphone numbers (07x where x is 4 or above,
though there are some other services like pagers too in that range). In fact,
the last time I saw a "genuine" 070 number was in 2000 or so.

As for your proposed service: While you can't keep your number, in the UK you
can certainly set up your own 09 number at 25p (I think) up 150p per minute,
or 07 number at 40p, or the 0871 at 10p. The 09 numbers must play a recording,
and most 0871 numbers will also play recordings to be on the safe side. I
think that's the closest you will get - in the UK the regulator will not allow
premium charges outside of the designated ranges not just because of confusion
but also because if you can have premium rates everywhere, then automated
blocking of premium rate numbers becomes problematic - you'd have to create an
API or something to check the rate, and have everyone who wants to block
premium rate numbers update their PBX's, and then it's far simpler to just
keep the numbering plan.

------
squozzer
Glad to see someone fulfilling my dream -- I called it "the money moat".

I submitted an idea like this to my previous job (phone company) -- it was not
popular (what a surprise.)

Apparently toll-free solicitation calling is considered a sacred right in the
US. Your inclinations be damned.

------
larrys
There is a probably an idea in here somewhere for businesses that receive many
wrong numbers (as we do).

When someone calls and is a wrong number (they sometimes launch into an entire
diatribe as if it's the first time we've gotten a wrong number like that (it's
not)) we should give them a pay number to call where someone will not only
listen to them but direct them to the correct place.

We've done a version of this will misdirected emails. We would email back a
paragraph stating they are writing to the wrong place and include a list of
paid links to the place they should really be contacting instead of us.

------
iuguy
There's an opportunity here for a startup to provide premium DIDs for people
to give out that forwards to their number and provides all the info necessary
to comply with the codes.

------
mmayberry
90% of my calls are robo calls where its just silence on the other end. Whats
stopping me from answering the phone when one of the bots calls and never
hanging up?

------
yason
Uh, is it that common, really? Where do the companies they get his number?

I don't live in the UK but I get maybe one unsolicited call per year.

I don't know why really: I'm not on any do not call lists or anything. When I
get that yearly-in-the-average call of mine, I just ask if they're selling
something and then tell them I never buy anything from a phone marketer which
kind of leaves them hanging and soon hanging up.

~~~
estel
I don't receive 30 a month as the guy in this article does, but absolutely get
one or two a week (usually from recruiters or people "from Microsoft" who've
spotted an issue with my computer).

~~~
philbarr
The calls I get always say they're from "Windows".

"You mean Microsoft?"

"No, Windows"

"Microsoft Windows?"

"Yes"

"So you're from Microsoft then?"

"No, Windows"

"You know this might be a more convincing scam if you didn't try to make out
you're my operating system?"

...and so on...

------
lladoog
On Flextel you can set 0871 numbers up to a menu, which means that auto-
diallers just hang up, but real people can get through.

They don't pay as much money though, but some 0871 numbers are free.

I think you can also set a divert on anonymous caller (number withheld)

You might be able to set two numbers to transfer to each other endlessly,
unless the right pair of menu numbers is pressed.

------
Toenex
What I find surprising is that the telemarketing systems don't appear to be
filtering out the dialling of 0871 numbers.

------
usaphp
Can we have the same solution for email address? Say you have to pay money in
order to email me, that might get rid of spam!

~~~
gknoy
I believe people have talked about something similar, namely requiring
cryptographic operations which are relatively cheap (time, electricity cost)
to do for one email at a time, but which would make it infeasible for bulk
mailing spam.

~~~
9ac345a5509a
One such system is Hashcash [0], there is an extension for Thunderbird [1]
which uses it.

The only thing is that legitimate mass emails (think mailing lists) will be
delayed as well, unless some sort of exception is added.

    
    
      [0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hashcash
    
      [1] http://pennypost.sourceforge.net/PennyPost

~~~
fryguy
I think the standard solution for the mailing lists is the "subscription"
email pays the hashcash, but has an automated way to whitelist the email upon
receipt.

------
prawojaz
Spam filters are long overdue on phones. Thankfully where I live now someone
has made an app that automatically filters out telemarketers.

It uses a crowdsourced list. Firs I set it to only warn my when of thus
telemarketers called, but it worked so well that I now just block them
automatically. Haven’t had to talk to a telemarketer in 4 month :)

------
ohwp
In the Netherlands we have a Don't Call Me List ([https://www.bel-me-
niet.nl/](https://www.bel-me-niet.nl/) (call-me-not)). When you subscribe to
the list it's illegal for companies to call you (for advertisement). Works
very well.

~~~
jrockway
We have this in the US, but companies use it to find people to call and hope
you don't actually report them.

~~~
rob_mccann
We have a service in the UK called TPS which is voluntary to adhere to.
Companies use it as a telephone directory here too.

------
oneeyedpigeon
I'd be interested in the number of legitimate calls he gets to his landline.
At some point, it's probably more worthwhile saving the cost of said landline
and directing all his contacts to a mobile number / email address.

------
xedarius
I think this is brilliant, and if I could charge people £10 a minute for
ringing my landline I would. What I don't understand is why the phone agency
is recommending that people don't follow his approach ... why exactly?

------
merraksh
10p/minute, or 6 GBP per hour, is probably good enough money if you are on
minimum salary (but then you don't work from home like this guy) or
unemployed. I don't think it makes sense otherwise.

~~~
vidarh
It's 7p/minute after the cut, and 6 pounds per hour is already below minimum
wage (assuming he's 21 or over, there's lower minimums for 18-21 and below 18)

------
nivertech
Scroll down after the comment textarea:

 _" If you are happy to be contacted by a BBC journalist please leave a
telephone number that we can contact you on."_

Leave your pay phone number ;)

------
suyash
Great protection against Recruiters in Silicon Valley!

~~~
rjd
One of my friends did this in London. Except he was a recruiter and was
floating fake CVs to cause other recruiters to ring him. He eventually got
chased down over fraud charges but nothing every ever eventuated in a legal
sense (as far as Im aware).

~~~
ChuckMcM
I would love to see TV advertisements for premium numbers for recruiters to
call, I can see the ad copy now ... "Want to talk to a hot hot prospect? Maybe
someone who not only can program in .NET but they are an open source GOD? They
hit all the right buzzwords on their CV? They not only went to the right
school but they are school chums with the CEO of the company you're working
for! Call 1-976-NERD-4-HIRE and get some hot candidate talk now."

------
nonchalance
Incidentally, this is similar to the free fax numbers (taking advantage of the
regulatory fees that are set by the area code)

------
argumentum
Only one question: does this exist in the US?

~~~
cowsandmilk
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premium-
rate_telephone_number#U...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premium-
rate_telephone_number#United_States_and_Canada)

------
capex
I can see a phone company offering you-pay-me-to-call as their core service
coming up soon.

------
crashoverdrive
I feel this is a microcosm for our society today. Particularly in America.
"Let's find a way to manipulate people into giving me money for doing nothing"

As a hardcore coder, a workaholic, and someone who came from rags to riches, I
find this kind of behavior deplorable

~~~
icebraining
I'm assuming you're talking about the telemarketers.

------
codecrusade
This is the future. Thinking how to build a service around this.

------
hcarvalhoalves
True hacking.

~~~
runarb
Phreaking

