amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
 ·magicjack.com
 ·EarthLink
| Anti-competitive
"the anticompetitive practice, which essentially prevents competitors from offering a superior product to Bell's throttled Sympatico service." I don't understand that part of Karl's editorial. If Bell is throttling the bandwidth they retail, how is it anti-competitive if they do the same thing to their wholesale market? They're doing the same thing to others that they do to themselves, right?
Mark |
|
gaforces
United We Stand, Divided We Fall
join:2002-04-07
Santa Cruz, CA | By making it so they cannot provide superior service than Sympatico, like they used to. |
|
Nightshade
Beware the Blue Rabbit
Premium
join:2002-05-26
Salem, OR
edit:
April 23rd, @01:50PM
| reply to amigo_boy
It is anticompetitive because by throttling their wholesale market they are taking away the choice of their resellers to throttle the traffic or not. The fact of the matter is what the ISP resellers buy they own. It shouldn't be up to the wholeseller how the reseller buys and markets their product to the customer. It's all fine and good what bell does to their retail market because the customers have a choice to use their service or not, but when it comes to a wholeseller telling the reseller what is good for the market, then you will run into problems because not all retail markets are the same. That is where a lot of our friends in the north are really getting pissed about.
--
True Happiness Must Come From Within |
|
CableConvert
Premium
join:2003-12-05
Atlanta, GA | reply to amigo_boy
They are using deep packet inspection to throttle traffic from another ISP. This is not their traffic, but that of the ISP. |
|
InMontreal
Throttled
join:2003-07-25
Montreal, QC
·VIF Internet
·AEI Internet
| reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy  :If Bell is throttling the bandwidth they retail That's the thing. They don't.
--
"I unofficially declare Beaver Hunting Season is on!" (© DR_JAYMAHDI) |
|
The Flash
You don't win friends with salad
Premium
join:2002-10-17
Canada | reply to amigo_boy
Bell is throttling a regulated relationship with it's wholesalers... The service the wholesalers buy from Bell is what comes before it becoming the internet. |
|
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·magicjack.com
·EarthLink
| reply to gaforces
said by gaforces :By making it so they cannot provide superior service than Sympatico, like they used to. It still seems like an overstatement to me. If Bell didn't throttle its own service I could understand a claim of anti competition (like MS using unpublished APIs to give itself an edge). But, they're doing the same thing they do to themself.
If they're supposed to provide more to the wholesale market than they do to themself, then *anything* would be anti-competitive. If they don't upgrade to the latest equipment, etc.
Mark |
|
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·magicjack.com
·EarthLink
| reply to InMontreal
said by InMontreal :said by amigo_boy :If Bell is throttling the bandwidth they retail That's the thing. They don't. That's not what Karl's editorial says. "prevents competitors from offering a superior product to Bell's throttled Sympatico service." That's why it didn't sound "anti-competitive."
Mark |
|
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
·DSL EXTREME
·DSL EXTREME
| reply to amigo_boy
I guess you could see it that way...
Forced baseline competition... I.E "We won't allow competitors to have less restrictions than we impose on ourselves", forcing the playing field to the lowest common denominator.
'Real' comptition would allow the competition to make use of their purchased bandwidth, and not compete at the throttled level (ie. sounds more like the days of regulation to me).
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·magicjack.com
·EarthLink
edit:
April 23rd, @02:18PM
| said by en102 :I guess you could see it that way... Forced baseline competition... I.E "We won't allow competitors to have less restrictions than we impose on ourselves", forcing the playing field to the lowest common denominator. 'Real' comptition would allow the competition to make use of their purchased bandwidth, and not compete at the throttled level (ie. sounds more like the days of regulation to me). I agree. The anti-competitive angle may be that Bell is involved in both wholesale and retail. If they weren't involved in retail they'd have more incentive to provide higher bandwidth on an open market (without concern for the effect it would have on their retail activities).
But, a lot of businesses do that. Apple comes to mind. It's almost impossible to find deep discounts on iPods. If Bell is being anti-competitive for forcing its retail interests onto the wholesale market, I think *a lot* of businesses would be guilty of that.
If Bell has an exclusive on Canada's network infrastructure that would make it different than the Apple example. It would be a question of whether it should be a public utility (which could be worse).
Mark |
|
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
·DSL EXTREME
·DSL EXTREME
| reply to The Flash
Exactly...
ISP has its own pipe to the internet, which is currently being underused because of the throttling by Bell Canada at the point where the traffic is collected for both Bell Canada AND other ISP's. Bell believes that since this is part of their infrastructure (i.e. leased wholesale), they can throttle it, along with the competition because its their network, even though its leased out wholesale.
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | reply to amigo_boy
Exactly... when you run and sell both parts of the infrastructure, you're not tempted to make profit off one for the other... you want it all.
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
 ·Comcast
| reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy :It still seems like an overstatement to me. If Bell didn't throttle its own service I could understand a claim of anti competition (like MS using unpublished APIs to give itself an edge). But, they're doing the same thing they do to themself. ... Mark see if this helps:
* the original market = nobody throttles anything, all equal
* next stage = Bell throttles their retail customers for their own (not very good) reasons, but wholesalers do not; wholesalers can use "we do not throttle" for competitive advantage
* terminal stage = Bell throttles everyone, including wholesalers; they have just taken away the ability of wholesalers to offer a better service, which is anti-competitive
fortunately, we don't have this problem in the U.S., as the FCC has destroyed the wholesale market. |
|
MattE
Obama '08
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
 ·Corporate Colocation
| reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy :said by InMontreal :said by amigo_boy :If Bell is throttling the bandwidth they retail That's the thing. They don't. That's not what Karl's editorial says. "prevents competitors from offering a superior product to Bell's throttled Sympatico service." That's why it didn't sound "anti-competitive." Mark A superior product would be a product that is not throttled. Not sure how the dots aren't connecting on this for you.
Here:
Unthrottled Internet > Throttled Internet
Hope that helps. |
|
a333
A hot cup of integrals please
join:2007-06-12
Corona, NY
·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to amigo_boy
it's not so much anti-competitive as ILLEGAL/a breach of contract, since TSI's SLA's with Bell have no mention of p2p throttling, therefore they (Bell) have no right whatsoever to touch TSI's traffic. Over in the US, that'd be akin to Verizon implementing a Sandvine-like throttling technology on my wholesale Gig-E or metro ethernet line, and telling me it's to fulfill 'reasonable network management'. |
|
adisor19
join:2004-10-11
·Videotron
·Look Communications
| reply to InMontreal
said by InMontreal :said by amigo_boy :If Bell is throttling the bandwidth they retail That's the thing. They don't. Umm, ya they do. Sympatico is throttled. That's their "retail".
Adi |
|
adisor19
join:2004-10-11
·Videotron
·Look Communications
| reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy :said by InMontreal :said by amigo_boy :If Bell is throttling the bandwidth they retail That's the thing. They don't. That's not what Karl's editorial says. "prevents competitors from offering a superior product to Bell's throttled Sympatico service." That's why it didn't sound "anti-competitive." Mark Umm, what exactly is not clear here ? Bell Sympatico service is throttled. This is bad. Their wholesale service was not untill recently when Bell decided to throttle it because they saw their Sympatico client close their accounts and move to third party ISPs. Those 3rd party ISPs are no throttled so their service is as bad as Sympatico.
Do you see now the anti-competitive and hair raising move by Bell ?
Adi |
|
crispy
Premium
join:2002-01-12
Oxford, MS | reply to nasadude
Fortunately?  |
|
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southwest
| reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy :I don't understand that part of Karl's editorial. If Bell is throttling the bandwidth they retail, how is it anti-competitive if they do the same thing to their wholesale market? They're doing the same thing to others that they do to themselves, right? Bell began throttling their users. Their users, hated it, and were pissed off, so (rightly so) they left Bell and went to third party competitors like TekSavvy. Bell, faced with a massive loss of customers, decided the way to nip this in the bud was to throttle the last mile they control between the customers and the wholesale ISP's. Result is they made everyone else's ISP service as bad as theirs.... No longer a reason to leave, if they are all throttled the same, eh? Yes, it's VERY anti-competitive.
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!) |
|
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southwest
| reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy :That's not what Karl's editorial says. "prevents competitors from offering a superior product to Bell's throttled Sympatico service." That's why it didn't sound "anti-competitive." Ok think of it like this. Let's say the only grocery store in town is a small, run down dump with high prices, bad service, and poor selection.
You decide you're going to open a much better store in town. Modern, spacious, well lit, huge selection, good prices, friendly service. That's called competition.
So you do it...
... but then your competitors at the old Sleazy-Mart use their influence and power at Town Hall to pass a law that says your store has to be the same exact size, design, carry the same products, and have the same service as theirs. You don't want to, but you have to because they control the laws.
That would be anti-competitive, and while an analogy, it sorta fits what bell is doing to the wholesalers.
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!) |
|
