| [ Homephone] NEW Bell CRTC demand. You can't leave our phone ser »www.p2pnet.net/story/18549
Bell wants it so that when you cancel your phone service you have to call in and check with Bell first before doing so.
Tell Bell first: new Bell Canada demand
In an arrogant move reminiscent of Verizon in the US, and which was struck down by the Federal Communications Commission, it wants the CRTC to order customers who don’t like its service to first check with Bell before moving on.
Currently, all anyone who wants to go elsewhere has to do is: call the competition and their phone number is ported away from Bell.
But Bell wants unhappy punters to call it first, “Giving Bell the opportunity to lower cost and offer incentive to keep the customer,” says Ottawa Gal, going on »»»
For the forgoing reasons the Companies request that the Commission remove from TSPs the authority to act on the end-users’ behalf in order to cancel local and long-distance services with their existing TSP during the customer transfer process. The authority to cancel service on end-users’ behalf is no longer warranted, continuing to mandate this authority is detrimental to customers’ interests, is an unnecessary hindrance to competition and is contrary to the Policy Direction.”
If the CRTC caves in to Bell, it’ll clearly show all Canadians whose interests it’s protecting - and it isn’t those of the consumers.
More at the above URL.
Now you can't leave Bell without first getting permission from them! LOL |
|
 DeadpoolGo Sens GoPremium,VIP
join:2001-03-29
Canada
kudos:17 | Re: [ Homephone] NEW Bell CRTC demand. You can't leave our phone This wouldn't only "benefit" Bell, but every Telco in Canada.
So Bell wants at least one chance to keep the customer before they leave for the competition - what's wrong with that?
There's nothing stopping that customer from still cancelling either. And if they continue to cancel anyhow, at least it will tell Bell why instead of just losing the customer and never knowing the reason why the left (ie: price, service, etc...).
--
Disclaimer: If I express an opinion, it is my own opinion, not that of Bell or its related companies. |
|
| after emily jump threw how many hoops and levels of retention then threats till you give up and stay |
|
| reply to Deadpool
No it wouldn't "benifit every Telco in Canada."
Bell is the largest and is losing the largest amount.
Bell is trying to stop it.
Figured you would try and "spin" this.
All this does is give Bell another chance to stop losing, no one else.
When someone calls a competitor, they already made up their mind. What Bell wants is not only win-back that they already do now, but also they want to try and tell the customer how sorry they are for over-charging them and whatever else.
Also, We all know how Bell purposely fucks everything up when you call and cancel something. Right nhow they aren't doing this with the competition. If this is forced, trust me, there will be additional purposely made fuckups's to try and prevent you from leaving.
Its not competitive at all and not in the consumers favour AT ALL.
It only favours Bell. No one else.
Its a block to try and stop the "hemorrhage" they have and put road blocks in place to prevent an easy transition.
|
|
| reply to edendolf
Bell is hoping a 3 hour wait on hold will be enough to make people give up and leave things as they already are.
Bell must be bleeding customers for this to be an issue. |
|
DeadpoolGo Sens GoPremium,VIP
join:2001-03-29
Canada
kudos:17 | reply to ah spin guy
The CRTC regulates all the Telco's in Canada, so yes, it would benefit all of them.
And this has nothing to do with winback's, this has to do with retention.
And if the customer was leaving because of price, and Bell offers a better price to stay, how is that bad for the consumer?
And then Telus, Rogers, Videotron, etc...will all be able to do it too.
--
Disclaimer: If I express an opinion, it is my own opinion, not that of Bell or its related companies. |
|
|
|
| Bell has a chance now. Right now. But they don't take it.
They run you down and rape your pocket till you finally had enough.
Now after you had enough, they want to play the sorry card to try and change your mind.
If someone is leaving they already made up their mind..
This will hurt the competition and small competition. |
|
 zong
join:2005-07-21
Scarborough, ON | reply to Deadpool
Hate to say it, but this is nothing more than Bell attempting one last lock-in to a contract at a lower price.
Yes, they will give a lower price.
On a contract/term/whatever you call it.
By the time the consumer has made up their mind to search out, talk to, and sign up for a third party - there is nothing at this point to say to Bell any longer. Do I want to sit on hold with Emily and some call centre agent whom I can barely understand to cancel, only to be prodded with some retention offer. No! That's a complete waste of my time when my mind is already made up.
If Bell wants to "retain" customers, they need to be proactive. I don't care how big of a hurdle this is for them, they need to reach out and offer lower prices (without contracts mind you).
If the CRTC allows this, they need to be abolished. They will have made themselves even more irrelevant and will have shown themselves to be in the pockets of business, not the consumer - which is who they are supposed to be there protecting. |
|
| reply to edendolf
So what Bell is saying is that they are not giving the customers the best price available unless they threaten to leave. If everyone calls and says they are leaving as a ploy to get a better price then Bell customers service wait times are going to go through the roof. |
|
Reviews:
 ·TekSavvy DSL
| reply to Deadpool
said by Deadpool:This wouldn't only "benefit" Bell, but every Telco in Canada. So Bell wants at least one chance to keep the customer before they leave for the competition - what's wrong with that? There's nothing stopping that customer from still cancelling either. And if they continue to cancel anyhow, at least it will tell Bell why instead of just losing the customer and never knowing the reason why the left (ie: price, service, etc...). Are you kidding me?
Bell has had many, many, many chances to make right, treat their customers proper but they don;t give a shit.
Now they want me to have to spend an extra 30-40min trying to get a hold of some monkey at bell to tell them I cancel.
Not a chance!
The reason a lot of people ar leaving bell in the first place is the poor customer service and the fact that it takes 30min to even speak to someone, and then another 20min for them to actually do anything for you.
I am so glad I don't have to call in every f'n month and get them to fix their mistakes. I ecstatic when I found out to transfer my phone I din;t even have to talk to anyone at bell. |
|
DeadpoolGo Sens GoPremium,VIP
join:2001-03-29
Canada
kudos:17 | reply to zong
said by zong:If Bell wants to "retain" customers, they need to be proactive. I don't care how big of a hurdle this is for them, they need to reach out and offer lower prices (without contracts mind you). Easier said then done. Some areas are still under regulation, yet consumers in those areas are free to go with a VoIP provider at a fraction of the cost.
How does Bell offer a cheaper price in those cases? They can't.
As for un-regulated areas, who do they benchmark against in regards to pricing? Take 'MagicJack', for example. Uber cheap, but so is the quality.
Much easier said then done.
It's easy for you to say "I don't care", since you don't have to come up with the solution.
--
Disclaimer: If I express an opinion, it is my own opinion, not that of Bell or its related companies. |
|
| said by Deadpool:said by zong:If Bell wants to "retain" customers, they need to be proactive. I don't care how big of a hurdle this is for them, they need to reach out and offer lower prices (without contracts mind you). Easier said then done. Some areas are still under regulation, yet consumers in those areas are free to go with a VoIP provider at a fraction of the cost. How does Bell offer a cheaper price in those cases? They can't. As for un-regulated areas, who do they benchmark against in regards to pricing? Take 'MagicJack', for example. Uber cheap, but so is the quality. Much easier said then done. It's easy for you to say "I don't care", since you don't have to come up with the solution. Since when is it the customers responsibility to come up with "the solution"?? |
|
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
| said by johnboy105:said by Deadpool:said by zong:If Bell wants to "retain" customers, they need to be proactive. I don't care how big of a hurdle this is for them, they need to reach out and offer lower prices (without contracts mind you). Easier said then done. Some areas are still under regulation, yet consumers in those areas are free to go with a VoIP provider at a fraction of the cost. How does Bell offer a cheaper price in those cases? They can't. As for un-regulated areas, who do they benchmark against in regards to pricing? Take 'MagicJack', for example. Uber cheap, but so is the quality. Much easier said then done. It's easy for you to say "I don't care", since you don't have to come up with the solution. Since when is it the customers responsibility to come up with "the solution"?? hahhaha my thoughts exactly. What a joke. |
|
| reply to edendolf
"under Bell's proposal, the old phone company won't let you leave if there is an outstanding billing dispute, whether from a contract, a bundle or just plain errors. I'm not sure how this proposal enhances consumer welfare. I think that the ability for consumers to walk away is an important leveling of the balance of power in consumers dealing with big companies."
Its not simply calling and saying you will cancel.
There is more buried in the CRTC Doc.
Don't let the spin doctors try and fool you or play one over on you here. |
|
| reply to edendolf
classic bell can't win, change the rules.
here's a thought treat them right and they wouldn't leave
other telcos don't need this deadpool. you're beating a dead horse, give up. |
|
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
| reply to more coming out
said by more coming out :
"under Bell's proposal, the old phone company won't let you leave if there is an outstanding billing dispute, whether from a contract, a bundle or just plain errors. I'm not sure how this proposal enhances consumer welfare. I think that the ability for consumers to walk away is an important leveling of the balance of power in consumers dealing with big companies."
Its not simply calling and saying you will cancel.
There is more buried in the CRTC Doc.
Don't let the spin doctors try and fool you or play one over on you here.
"just plane errors"??? WOW!
Try and defend that one Deadpool.
Bell is constantly making billing errors, and now they want you to be forced to stick with them when they make those errors. Who do they think they are? |
|
zong
join:2005-07-21
Scarborough, ON | reply to Deadpool
Hey Deadpool, normally you and I agree but I'm going to have to disagree with your assessment.
In this case... apples to oranges.
If Bell thinks rate INCREASES for items such as LD, Mini Messaging Bundles, etc can all be "advised" to the consumer by a small print single line on your OneBill or as a pamphlet added into the mailer, then there is no reason why they couldn't add a line to OneBill or even a mailer advising of the possibility of a rate DECREASE the same way.
Seriously. They do it already now, and it's proven for rate increases and the same exact system that is in place now could be used for notification! Even as simple as "Bell wants your business, call us to see what we can do for you if you are thinking of changing providers - and we promise not to tie you into a contract"
Do not try and confuse the issue like you just did. DO NOT try and sideline it - the issue is they don't want third party providers to have the authority to initiate a switch. Price is really just an excuse.
Whether the end user is switching to VOIP (at a far cheaper rate, you are correct and Bell cannot compete with that - but VOIP is not a 1FL) or to say Tek or Yak for resold 1FL (which by the way, is far cheaper than bell for any additive service offering on top of the regular line rate)... it should make no difference.
Additionally, Bell should not be allowed to use scare tactics when people call like they have done in the past for 3rd party providers. I know for a fact they tried to "scare me" into thinking that DSL through my current provider (which I haven't mentioned by name in this post and I won't mention) would be worse than with Sympatico! Classic! I knew better, but most wouldn't.
Either way... they can increase prices by small print on bills and inserts, they sure as hell can decrease or notify customers of their options the same way. No excuses. |
|
| reply to DjEclipse
How many Billing disputes are in THIS VERY FORUM?
How many fictitious termination fee's are in THIS VERY FORUM?
How many billing errors are in THIS VERY FORUM?
After deadpool counted them all over the course of 4 years to come up with any meanigfull stats on the less than 1% of users who use this forum, you will get an idea how this new CRTC filing will go if the CRTC allows it.
Screwed, double screwed, then triple screwed. Courtesy of Bell Canada who just wants too look out for your welfare. |
|
peterboroPremium
join:2006-11-03
Peterborough, ON | reply to Deadpool
Bell Canada, Hugo Chávez of the north. At least he won the referendum. |
|
HoboJ
join:2008-03-27
Carrying Place, ON
kudos:1 | reply to spin it baby
I'll let all my friends and family know to switch from bell before it gets stupidly difficult thanks to this. |
|
