| This is nothing more than a cash grab After seeing that memo posted by ottawa gal it is clear that the whole purpose of this move was to increase bell's bottom line by strategically and methodically curtailing competition. The tactics employed are to create this fake belief that capacity is running out and that caps have to be put in place in addition to charging more for over usage. this is probably the work of some VP who has to improve the numbers in his dept. and is just a scheme to artificially create a new avenue to charge people. This is highly devious form Bell, and I cannot believe that this could be allowed to go on in a western economy where the rules of fairness and competition are of the utmost importance. Give it some time and the competition bureau will put them back in their place. |
|
 RaptorNot a Dumptruck
join:2001-10-21
London, ON | The worst part is our tax dollars went out to help build their infrastructure. |
|
|
|
 DKSDamn Kidney StonesPremium,ExMod 2002
join:2001-03-22
Owen Sound, ON
kudos:2
 ·Bell Sympatico
| said by Raptor:The worst part is our tax dollars went out to help build their infrastructure. Got any evidence of that? Last I heard, Bell (BCE) was a publicly traded company with shareholders who financed their network through the normal commercial channels. Read their annual report. It's all there.
--
Need-based health care not greed-based health care. |
|
RaptorNot a Dumptruck
join:2001-10-21
London, ON | »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_Canada
A little help from Big Brother:
"With a government-granted monopoly on Canadian long-distance telephone service...."
"The three prairie provinces ... formed provincial utility services, investing to develop proper telephone services throughout those provinces"
"Between 1980 and 1997, the federal government fully deregulated the telecommunications industry and Bell Canada's monopoly ended."
The first and third point show how the government protected the company from competition making them what they are today.
The second, allbeit and rather old fact, shows that in some instances the company was given cash by the Fed to rollout in lesser served areas.
So I guess it's not so much like the Fed said "here's a billion dollars to go make a nice copper network", but the protection, intent and support of the government is there.
Considering they were given free reign to build the empire for the better part of the 20th century, you'd think they remember where they came from instead of stifling customer choice and the improvement of Canadian telephony/broadband. It's bad business. But cut throat tactics and bad faith are overlooked in this day and age for the dollar, aren't they?
--
....where's my fiber? |
|
 GimliPremium
join:2006-01-03
l5a2o4
 ·TekSavvy Cable
·TekSavvy DSL
| said by Raptor:» en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_CanadaA little help from Big Brother:
"With a government-granted monopoly on Canadian long-distance telephone service...." "The three prairie provinces ... formed provincial utility services, investing to develop proper telephone services throughout those provinces" "Between 1980 and 1997, the federal government fully deregulated the telecommunications industry and Bell Canada's monopoly ended."
The first and third point show how the government protected the company from competition making them what they are today. The second, allbeit and rather old fact, shows that in some instances the company was given cash by the Fed to rollout in lesser served areas. So I guess it's not so much like the Fed said "here's a billion dollars to go make a nice copper network", but the protection, intent and support of the government is there. Considering they were given free reign to build the empire for the better part of the 20th century, you'd think they remember where they came from instead of stifling customer choice and the improvement of Canadian telephony/broadband. It's bad business. But cut throat tactics and bad faith are overlooked in this day and age for the dollar, aren't they? I dont like bell, but you shouldn't be knocking them building the infrastructure. Bell paid for it, not the governement. THe Government saw the Absolute critical need for an infastructure to be built, and they had no means of doing so. In comes Bell, they do it, but when you are spending Billions and Billions of dollars to create an infastructure that will reach the most rural of canadians as well as the most congested of inner cities, you are gonna need some concessions / tax shelters / advantages to try and recoup some money.
We needed it - Bell took the risk and put up the money.
The profited from it while suffering the CRTC thumb press.
Mind you, with what is happening today.... CRTC regualtion is looking pretty good, give Ted Rogers a little taste of his own medicine......
Ted Rogers :
we are going to provide this service @ this cost.....
CRTC :
no you are not - we are changing your products and only allowing you to charge so much - if you dont like it, stop providing the service ( reasonable profit as opposed to no profit) Will will base your charges based on reasonable profit margins we approve rather than on your whim to make you stock price rise. |
|
DKSDamn Kidney StonesPremium,ExMod 2002
join:2001-03-22
Owen Sound, ON
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Bell Sympatico
| reply to Raptor
said by Raptor:The first and third point show how the government protected the company from competition making them what they are today. The second, allbeit and rather old fact, shows that in some instances the company was given cash by the Fed to rollout in lesser served areas. That has historically been the pattern for this country. It goes all the way back to the original European explorers. The Hudson Bay Company was given the right to harvest furs in most of Canada. The Crown gave them that right. They took the risks and made the profits. The same was true with telephones, television, radio, cellular telephones, satellite TV and just about anything else that was federally regulated. It's how we do it in Canada.
Giving a specific company the singular right to conduct specific business within a geographic territory is not "government aid" or "using taxpayer dollars". It is a structured form of business. For a good summary of how this works in Canada, read Ted Rogers' biography, "High Wire Act". It's not always pretty nor perfect, but, like much of this country, it works.
--
Need-based health care not greed-based health care. |
|
 root9
join:2005-04-08
Kitchener, ON | reply to Gimli
Wrong! .. Canadians paid for it, built it via small companies, then Bell stole it from them. Please read history of telephone in Canada.
So Bell is ours, as Canadians, and Bell should be disbanded and given back to small companies who can do a much better job of providing services  |
|
