Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
 ·Colbanet
1 edit | reply to bellsucksbigtime
Re: Bell Canada sued by independent dealers
The lawsuits claim over $200-million in damages, demand that Bell honour its current agreements, and seek the right to sell products from competitors like Telus, Rogers and new entrants in the mobile-phone business. Sorry, if you want to put the "Bell" name on your store, there's no way you should be selling competitors products. Bell stores are presented to customers as being Bell, and for an Espace Bell to want to sell Rogers services is stupid.
If that's the sort of thing the dealers think, that Bell stores should be allowed to sell Rogers products, then I can't help but wonder if the rest of their lawsuit has merit. |
|
Candoo3
join:2005-01-24
·TekSavvy Solutions..
1 edit | From the drift of the article, it would seem that Bell isn't honouring it's contracts with their indy sellers. I would tend to think that the indies must be on commission sales. Tied exclusively to Bell, it becomes a little bit hard to put food in your mouth, when the hand that feeds you, is giving it away to someone else. Perhaps what they have in mind, is that IF [they can PROVE] BELL has broken the terms of their contracts, the indies can escape from under Bell's thumb, less the Bell sign, to be more competitive. |
|
BryceS
join:2007-09-17
Waterloo, ON
| reply to Guspaz
said by Guspaz  :The lawsuits claim over $200-million in damages, demand that Bell honour its current agreements, and seek the right to sell products from competitors like Telus, Rogers and new entrants in the mobile-phone business. Sorry, if you want to put the "Bell" name on your store, there's no way you should be selling competitors products. Bell stores are presented to customers as being Bell, and for an Espace Bell to want to sell Rogers services is stupid. If that's the sort of thing the dealers think, that Bell stores should be allowed to sell Rogers products, then I can't help but wonder if the rest of their lawsuit has merit. Not all Bell Distribution Inc. Dealers sell under the Bell World name.
eg. Bob's Cellular |
|
koreyb
join:2005-01-08
Etobicoke, ON
 ·Primus Talkbroadband
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| reply to Guspaz
said by Guspaz :The lawsuits claim over $200-million in damages, demand that Bell honour its current agreements, and seek the right to sell products from competitors like Telus, Rogers and new entrants in the mobile-phone business. Sorry, if you want to put the "Bell" name on your store, there's no way you should be selling competitors products. Bell stores are presented to customers as being Bell, and for an Espace Bell to want to sell Rogers services is stupid. If that's the sort of thing the dealers think, that Bell stores should be allowed to sell Rogers products, then I can't help but wonder if the rest of their lawsuit has merit. I think this is more directed for stores like Telephone booth etc. |
|
nanook
Premium,MVM
join:2007-12-02
·Bell Sympatico
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| said by koreyb :I think this is more directed for stores like Telephone booth etc. There seem to be at least 5 types of retailers who sell BellER phones:
1. Bell World, BellER-owned
2. Bell World, privately-owned
3. non-BW but exclusively-BellER, e.g. BAKA
4. independent, non-exclusive, e.g. Telephone Booth
5. independent, non-exclusive, not dedicated to wireless, e.g. Future Shop.
Presumably the terms and conditions between BellER and each of these varies. For example, BAKA's store fronts have a lot of BM signage which presumably BellER pays for in exchange for exclusivity. Presumably that tradeoff is set out in the contracts between them and so BellER would probably be justified to object if suddenly BAKA stores started to sell Rogers phones.
OTOH, since outfits like Telephone Booth are clearly not exclusively BellER dealers, BellER has no grounds to object if they want to sell non-BellER phones. |
|
An_Onymous
@teksavvy.com
| >There seem to be at least 5 types of retailers who sell BellER phones:
>3. non-BW but exclusively-BellER, e.g. BAKA
»www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=baka
baka
2. In Japanese, it means something along the term of "idiot" or "fool" In Tagalog (australian-filipino language), it means "cow".
Poor choice of naming a company in the internet age. Someone really need to do google search before registering a business website.
May be Bell has looked up the meaning and is treating them accordingly.  |
|
infamouskid
join:2007-01-24
North York, ON | there is no direct translation.
but to me it can be used as shit! or fuck! |
|
