Google Voice to Protect Against the DNCL
- Thread starter BillyC
- Start date
Play by the rules, and you'll sleep better at night, and stay out of court.
The majority of T-65's are on the DNCL anyway. You'll have better results taking that list and door knocking it 4-7 months out from their birthday.
- 15,319
I asked a similar question of another who didn't bother to prove anything so I'll ask you.
How many individuals have been in court due to violations of the DNC list? I'm not talking about the spammers who make millions of calls. I'm talking individuals.
1) How many have the feds gone after for a handful of DNC violations and
2) How many have been sued by someone who had his phone "violated?"
I'm not advocating doing anything illegal. Just wondering about how real a risk it is. So far, all I've heard is crickets.
Rick
- 11,995
I don't know of any vendor that charges a different price.
- 1,446
The list cost the same, where I get it. the dnc is just another filter, much like an age or income filter.
Guess I am either not understanding, or failing to communicate.
If the number of unscrubbed names with filtering criteria is 5,000 then how many names (scrubbed for DNC) are left if all other things are equal?
Is it 2,000 names? 200 names?
If the number of available names decreases with DNC scrubbing then you probably have to buy more names to make your numbers.
If someone is going to smile and dial why not use a scrubbed list and minimize the annoyance for those on the other end of the line?
I figure if someone puts their name on the DNC they probably do that for a reason. That would be, they don't want to talk to a salesman.
If the number of unscrubbed names with filtering criteria is 5,000 then how many names (scrubbed for DNC) are left if all other things are equal?
Is it 2,000 names? 200 names?
If the number of available names decreases with DNC scrubbing then you probably have to buy more names to make your numbers.
If someone is going to smile and dial why not use a scrubbed list and minimize the annoyance for those on the other end of the line?
I figure if someone puts their name on the DNC they probably do that for a reason. That would be, they don't want to talk to a salesman.
- 15,319
In California I find that about 8% of people are not on the DNC but that figure is different in states with a lower average IQ. That's based on running counts.
But the cost to pull 1,000 names is no different with or without scrubbing. You will need a larger pool from which to draw. So you might have to use 3 zip codes not one. But you only pay for the list.
I'm still waiting to find proof that someone got sued for making a call to someone on the DNC list. Isn't it amazing that people will post crap they make up? Abraham Lincoln told us not to believe everything we read on the Internet.
Rick
But the cost to pull 1,000 names is no different with or without scrubbing. You will need a larger pool from which to draw. So you might have to use 3 zip codes not one. But you only pay for the list.
I'm still waiting to find proof that someone got sued for making a call to someone on the DNC list. Isn't it amazing that people will post crap they make up? Abraham Lincoln told us not to believe everything we read on the Internet.
Rick
- 1,446
Rick, if I sue you will that make it better? Ok, now I need you to call me, but I cant remember if I put my number on the list. Maybe I put it on there 10 years ago, i dont know.
Rick, I know where you are going with this. The only cases where I have seen an entity sued is when large firms are doing it (the calling). I know there was suit against direct tv a while back.
Some state laws vary from the fed law on no calls, where the state will allow a call only if it is to set up face to face meeting, but if you intend to do a telesale, then it violates both fed and state. Again, this varies by state.
I remember now, I did put my number on the dnc once, but i did it to prevent people with broken english from calling me all the time. If a local guy wants to meet with me to save me money, Im all for it. In fact, i changed auto insurance recently when this exact thing happened. I got better coverage for less money, and Im not suing anybody.
At the same time, I dont see any reason to push the FTC to step up their game...Im fine with it the way it is.
Im sorry I didnt understand your original question.
I just ran a search to give you some hard numbers. I did a t65 search in my home county, for the 6 month period of January to June, birth year 1951.
Total names: 3,063
Records with a phone number: 1,246
Records w phone after DNC scrub: 388
This may vary depending on the source. And several of those numbers may be disconnected. My source is not always that accurate...
So, think thats fairly close to the 8% that rick mentioned.
Last edited:
- 2,632
It is like 31%..............................
Similar threads
