ultracat
join:2008-01-30
Toronto, ON
 ·TELUS
·Bell Sympatico
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| reply to laff at bell
Re: Bell's upcoming plans for Wholesalers!
said by laff at bell :said by j3richo  :this is unbelievable, there can be absolutely no doubt that they are trying to destroy wholesalers, They want all the wholesaler to be no better than them. hence less competitition, less loss. Teksavvy/CAIP going to fight this or what? Are you actually asking that? Rocky's entire livelihood is at stake. Bell is trying to wipe him and other small ISPs off the map completely. Of course they will fight them.
Edit: Of course WE will fight them. Bell may have more money but the small ISPs have all those pissed off customers backing them and not Bell. We can and will make a lot of noise, just as we've been doing with the throttling issue. IMO Bell's stupidest move is to be relentlessly attacking small business to the point that the general public is now becoming aware. Dumb move if you ask me. |
|
R0CKY
TSI Rocky
Premium,VIP
join:2005-05-19
Chatham, ON
2 edits | We've not always been in the spotlight since March 14th, but we've been fighting our asses off since knowing about this.
You should see an additional filing from us shortly to add to the CAIP filing... Was filed a day or so ago now.
From there you can bank on further action to ensure things get treated fairly over the coming months. TekSavvy currently has a very strong relationship with its clients and we intend on keeping it that way! WE WILL DO WHAT IS RIGHT... ALWAYS!
--
TSI Rocky - TekSavvy Solutions Inc. |
|
SALAMANCA
join:2008-06-07
Toronto, ON
| reply to ultracat
As I see it, Bell wants to be the Gate Keeper of the Internet, as does Rogers. Bell will limit your ability of what you can and cannot do on the Internet, at the same time drain your bank account in the process.
Bell is slowly destroying the competition. This is Bell's goal. In essence, throwing the competition out of the garden of Eden and securing an iron gate around the premises wherein access is denied only to her own. |
|
j3richo
join:2007-12-08
Gatineau, QC | reply to R0CKY
I hope the ISPs do more than just rely on the CRTC to make the right decision on this, multiple lawsuits maybe required. IMO this issue is even more important than the throttling. |
|
Capharnaum
join:2006-06-19
Montreal, QC
| said by j3richo :I hope the ISPs do more than just rely on the CRTC to make the right decision on this, multiple lawsuits maybe required. IMO this issue is even more important than the throttling. This issue and the throttling are the same. It's about competition.
CAIP should make it clear to the CRTC that they are there to spawn competition on the internet market. They aren't outsourced sales office for Sympatico, which is what Bell is trying to do with them.
I think it's very dangerous to have only two "internet" gatekeepers on a territory. Some conservatives think it's healthy competition, but it's bollocks. There needs to be at least 4-5 choices for true competition. Just like the competition has been killed in the cellular industry with the take-out of Fido by Rogers.
In the end, I hope Bell will be forced to sell Sympatico and just take care of the backbone. That would be the best that could happen. Well they could just disappear and leave their network to a better management but that's not going to happen. |
|
R0CKY
TSI Rocky
Premium,VIP
join:2005-05-19
Chatham, ON
1 edit | reply to j3richo
said by j3richo :I hope the ISPs do more than just rely on the CRTC to make the right decision on this, multiple lawsuits maybe required. IMO this issue is even more important than the throttling. The problem with the lawsuit idea is funds.... You're talking about a company that can literally run us dry.
We're doing it through the CRTC with CAIP (and a little on our own as will be seen shortly), the various organizations, Lobbying (We are officially doing this now), and you, the people. As obscure the last portion is, it's also very powerful if harnessed. Many larger companies are starting to see what the bigs are lining up to do and aren't taking it, so that combined with the customers, something good should come of this.
Rocky
--
TSI Rocky - TekSavvy Solutions Inc. |
|
Quake110
join:2003-12-20
Ottawa, ON
·Velcom
| Rocky, I didn't have the time to read all the thread but I have a fairly good idea of what's happening by Paul's response
»Re: Acanac
What do you recommend that we do? I'm grateful that you're fighting a fight for us but what should the average joes like us do to help you? |
|
An_Onymous
@teksavvy.com
| Smaller ISP got to group together. Form a corporation and get an IPO. Start connecting downtown apartment buildings one at a time to newer technologies like vdsl and higher speeds that Bell has yet to offer. Time to remove Bell's potential market a building at time. Get the cheaper and bigger slices of a pie first. Let them worry about building the more expensive remotes.
Wiring apartments are far easier than getting your own remotes. Go after the cheaper installations first. Apartments do not need right of ways and is sheltered with power coming from the building itself.
My apartment building is near enough the CO that Bell would not bother building remotes here, but the wired distance is so far that I can't even get a 3M connection. It is tall enough and unobstructed view to multiple of large apartments in the area, so should be able to service other buildings with line of sight technologies like lasers/wireless. |
|
DKS
Damn Kidney Stones
Premium,ExMod 2002
join:2001-03-22
Owen Sound, ON
clubs:
·Bell Sympatico
| reply to SALAMANCA
said by SALAMANCA :As I see it, Bell wants to be the Gate Keeper of the Internet, as does Rogers. Bell will limit your ability of what you can and cannot do on the Internet, at the same time drain your bank account in the process. The internet is not property owned in common. It is privately owned property linked together by other privately owned companies. When things are privately owned, the owners have the right to set the rules. Like it or not, that is reality. And those privately owned companies are responsible, not to you or to me, but solely to their shareholders and to the regulatory authorities.
--
Need-based health care not greed-based health care. |
|
beamer69
join:2007-05-10
Burnaby, BC
| said by DKS :The internet is not property owned in common. It is privately owned property linked together by other privately owned companies. When things are privately owned, the owners have the right to set the rules. Like it or not, that is reality. And those privately owned companies are responsible, not to you or to me, but solely to their shareholders and to the regulatory authorities. True in some ways. Rogers/Fido is a large company and the only GSM provider in Canada. Didn't stop the public from creating change when they came out with crap data plans for the iphone.
Below quote from this site »www.ruinediphone.com
quote:
Thank You
We had over 60,000 people fill out our petition to bring down the prices of the data plan on the Apple iPhone 3G offered by Rogers.
At 4:21pm July 14, 2008 the online petition was delivered in hard copy to Rogers Headquarters and it was received by Rogers Security. The total scrubbed list was 57,086.
Can I suggest domains that are available:
RUINEDADSL.COM is available!
BELLRUNINSDSL.COM is available!
STOPBELL.COM is available!
STOPBELLCANADA.COM is available! |
|
nanook
Premium,MVM
join:2007-12-02
·Bell Sympatico
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| reply to DKS
said by DKS :The internet is not property owned in common. It is privately owned property linked together by other privately owned companies. When things are privately owned, the owners have the right to set the rules. Like it or not, that is reality. And those privately owned companies are responsible, not to you or to me, but solely to their shareholders and to the regulatory authorities. When the same situation arose in the past, with roads, railways, telephone lines, television broadcast and cable distribution, and other utilities, the government stepped in to act in the public interest by regulating the new industry. That may well happen soon with the Internet as people become increasingly dependent on it and increasingly vulnerable to oppression by the incumbent oligopoly carriers.
Bell did well when the bulk of their business was regulated POTS. As the unregulated part of their business has become an increasingly larger percentage of total revenues they've demonstrated that they cannot compete in such free markets. Moves like Bell's throttling and now the latest capping announcement will only serve to bring these issues to the public's (and Ottawa's) attention. This could be a calculated move by Bell to force regulation of the Internet. In that sort of scenario Bell would be guaranteed a certain rate of return. IOW as they spent money on infrastructure they would be allowed to pass the costs on to consumers along with a modest, but regulated rate of profit. That model worked for POTS. Perhaps they believe they can make it work for Internet.
P.S. Although this applies more to the US than Canada, the Internet was originally developed using only public funds and was run by a combination of academia and government. That too may give the government a rationale for "repossessing" its investments. |
|
ancodia
join:2006-07-10
 ·Cogeco Cable
1 edit | reply to R0CKY
Is there some high-level disgruntled Bell manager hell bent on ensuring everyone in Canada hates Bell? I can't think of any company so determined to destroy itself (though Telus does give it a good effort). What other company shows such disdain for its current and potential customers? Bell Canada vs everyone! Good business plan! The only silver lining to this is that when a company needs to resort to nickel & diming its customers at the expense of its public image it's usually a company near death. Eventually it will run out of people to replace the churn, and I think that is starting to happen, hence the draconian (desperate) measures taking place.
|
|
DrZEUS
join:2004-01-13
Mississauga, ON
1 edit | ^^ The only people who won't give a crap are Bell customers. Why would they get all upset over Bell's strategies for how they handle wholesalers? It is us who are the haters...most Bell customers don't even know what's going on. |
|
ancodia
join:2006-07-10
·Cogeco Cable
| I dont know anyone who doesnt have a complaint about Bell, be it the touch-tone fee added to their Bill, or their system access fees, or horror stories from calling support .. the list is endless. I think some people tolerate it because they are too lazy to switch, don't know of an alternative or are simply content with poor service. Like I said, Bell will run out of people to replace the churn (example : look at the net customer gains for Expressvu). I suspect their managment thinks they can make changes now, let everyone complain, and a couple years down the road everyone will forget and go back to Bell as a customer. I think their management underestimates the level of disgust for their company. |
|
Maynard G Krebs
@teksavvy.com
| reply to R0CKY
said by R0CKY :The problem with the lawsuit idea is funds.... You're talking about a company that can literally run us dry. We're doing it through the CRTC with CAIP (and a little on our own as will be seen shortly), the various organizations, Lobbying (We are officially doing this now), and you, the people. As obscure the last portion is, it's also very powerful if harnessed. Many larger companies are starting to see what the bigs are lining up to do and aren't taking it, so that combined with the customers, something good should come of this. I suggested that this would be the case with Bell and their lawyers. Time for you to consider a merger with another ISP to 'bulk-up' and have more resources available for all the battles to come.
You really should be looking at finding a way to install your own aggregation links in major cities. This way you can reap the economies of scale of having lots of potential customers, ie. the cream, and let Bell suck a hind one servicing the high cost rural customers.
Talk with Cogeco and ask them how much they'd charge. 100:1 that they have fibre running past the front door of just about every Bell CO in Toronto. Ask them how much a tap into their fibre and a remote would cost in Forest Hill or Rosedale. I could probably get all my neighbours to signup for FTTH if the cost was under $100/month. If Rogers can make money even while paying Bell fees to string cable on their poles, so can you. |
|
globus999
join:2008-05-15
| reply to R0CKY
said by R0CKY : and you, the people. As obscure the last portion is, it's also very powerful if harnessed. Many larger companies are starting to see what the bigs are lining up to do and aren't taking it, so that combined with the customers, something good should come of this. Rocky Rocky,
I said this at the beginning of this mess and I will repeat it again. The BIGGEST ally ISPs can possibly have is their customer base.
Problem is, most ISPs won't get off their collective butts. They NEED to become activists if they want to save their business. Mind you, many ISP owners would just be OK with being mini-Bell's... which is *very* sad.
Other than Tek ALL other ISPs have been VERY conspicuous by their absence.
They need to understand that they ABSOLUTELY MUST get their customers outraged by this BS. They ABSOLUTELY HAVE to start communicating with their users. It is the only way. I don't see ANY other option.... Problem is... if we take their so-called "actions" up to this day as a sample of things to come... we are doomed.... 
Let me repeat this again. Ranting in this forum will get us nowere. The CRTC is clearly garbage. Lawsuit? Nobody has a decade and a billion $$$ to fight Bell. Noseree... we NEED customer outrage. WE, the USERS, CAN'T get to the people, BUT ISPs CAN!
The ball is in their court. Plain and simple. |
|
theninjasqua
join:2007-09-26
Oakville, ON | reply to R0CKY
The CBC is now reporting on this...
»www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2008···?ref=rss
--
-theninjasquad |
|
alien presence
@telus.net
| Good thing it's lunch-time here. I got the attention of a large number of people in the office when I let out a huge guffaw, inhaled part of my sandwich and then choked and gasped for air upon reading this in the CBC article:
"Bell says the high-speed internet market is highly competitive and regulated rules of access are therefore no longer necessary."
We now know what the first letter of the name "Bell" stands for and it ain't beaver. It is a material often found on the ground behind a large male cow. |
|
En Enfer
This account has been compromised
join:2003-07-25
Montreal, QC
·VIF Internet
| reply to R0CKY
"The only good news is that it will not affect current clients. So as long as you don't change ISP's you can keep your current unlimited connection. Bell proposes to start shadow billing in October and usage based billing in Jan of 2009."
That part scares me. We all know bell likes to disconnect wholesale customer's lines randomly "by mistake", consequently trying to sell their interior wiring plan before sending out a bell technician to your home who will try to sale-pitch "if you had pathetico, you wouldn't be experiencing this problem" and then reconnect you at the DSLAM, where at this point you will lose your grandfathered unlimited connection.
If their evil plan goes well, one by one, they'll be able to switch all wholesale customer to a 60Gb cap.
--
"I unofficially declare Beaver Hunting Season is on!" (© DR_JAYMAHDI) |
|
EUS
Kill cancer
Premium
join:2002-09-10
Montreal, QC
clubs: | reply to R0CKY
Grandfather clauses routinely get shoved aside/changed. |
|
