Free Newsletter
Raketu runs at Skype with cheaper VoIP rates
Offering cheaper calls is Raketu's hook to attract paying Skype users. The company announced today that its rates are up to 65 percent lower than Skype's, "perfect for consumers and businesses alike" claims the press release.
Raketu said prices on a 10-minute call to the U.S. through Skype would cost 28.5 cents, while using Raketu would only cost a customer 10 cents. Making a 10-minute call to a mobile phone in London through Skype would be billed at $2.69, while Raketu says its service will cost around $1.89.
The company is also promoting a plan for 1000 minutes of unlimited calling to its free calling zones, including locations to more than 46 countries around the world, for only $2.95; unlimited calling is only $9.95 per month, according to the press release, but it's listed at $7.95 on the website. And there's also a kitchen sink of other options including reselling minutes if you're a retailer, various widgets for the web, click to call and others.
Pitching cheaper calls - assuming you can dig through Raketu's website and decipher the language to understand exactly what you might pay - isn't exactly what we'd call a "social networking" feature or a big differentiator in the marketplace. And the company is selling so many different things that it is cluttering its messaging.
For more:
- Raketu press release
Related articles
Fear the Skype
Nimbuzz, mig33 work to differentiate out of mobile VoIP pack ...
Comments
Some of Raketu users are age 70+, for example ME! I do not have problem to figure out how to use Raketu - as the fierce VoIP writer does. The fact is for every 1 hour call to London mobile phone you save $6 with Raketu over Skype. Let me ask you a question: what social networking has to do with this article?
Raketu makes a deal on its home page about social networking features. That messaging seems to have been tossed for the expendiant of "We're cheaper."
I am using FreeCall in Spain, and I think is the cheaper service.
Can you say me other better?.



SHARE
WITH:
Comments (3) | Post a comment