dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
31165
share rss forum feed


Edgar_man_boy

@rogers.com

Bell appeals CRTC decision

Check this out.....

»www.bce.ca/en/news/releases/corp···111.html


Ikarasu

join:2004-01-09
Port Coquitlam, BC

Haha... I like it. Pretty much threatening to stop upgrading the network, unless they get their way.

If Bell doesn't share access... Then they'd be the only company to offer fiber on an extensive scale, and would have a monopoly. What would stop bell from selling higher speeds for cheaper then their DSL speeds? It'd make pretty much every company go out of business but them...



mlerner
Premium
join:2000-11-25
Nepean, ON
kudos:5
reply to Edgar_man_boy

hahah what a bunch of morons. Basically they're saying they don't want competition, they want to kill it.



AOD
Premium
join:2008-01-24
Etobicoke, ON
kudos:1

1 recommendation

you know this was a bitch move i expected bell to pull. i mean what the fuck? stop upgrading our network if we don't get our own way? this cheeses me i hope the CRTC refuses the appeal


globus999

join:2008-05-15
reply to Edgar_man_boy

I think this is bad. This looks like either Bell's plan "B" or worst, CRTC's/Bell's plan "A"; this is, we won't get you what you want because it would be politically suicidal, however, we will overturn on appeal ... wink... wink....

"Just because you are paranoid, it does not mean there are not out to get you"



otty

join:2008-10-24
Revelstoke, BC

1 edit
reply to AOD

said by AOD:

this cheeses me i hope the CRTC refuses the appeal


Nope they're going straight to the Federal Government on this one. Lets see how high this pro-Bell bias goes!

"BCE Inc. has asked the federal
cabinet..."

"BCE asked the cabinet yesterday to address its request on an urgent basis..."



early squirrel

@vaxination.ca
reply to Edgar_man_boy

thanks for the joke. Needed one this morning !

BCE asked the cabinet yesterday to address its request on an urgent basis
in order to avoid putting a damper on innovation and productivity by
interfering with the very investments needed to foster economic recovery, such
as those being undertaken by Bell and other telecom companies.
If anyone still thought the CRTC was an independant regulator and didn't believe that government would influence CRTC decisions, then the above paragraph should set you straight. This is straight from the BCE press release.

It is very sad to see Bell stoop so low. It is even sadder to know that the Harper-Ignatief coalition will just accept BCE's arguments as fact and not even debate them.

Whether a node (DSLAM) is in a CO or on some street corner should not make any difference on a legal level.

And whether a DSLAM is connected via Fibre, or just two strings (need full duplex !) between 2 tin cans makes no difference.

And the biggest irony is that logically, Bell should want all independants on the newer technology to help pay for it.

The real story here is that Bell is underprovisioning DSLAMS, and it knows it. One way to reduce the loads (and keep some ports available for sympatico customers) is to prevent competitors using the better equipment.

grunze510

join:2009-02-14
Cote Saint-Luc, QC
kudos:1
reply to globus999

Damn these companies like TekSavvy, Velcom, Ebox, and Acanac that try to compete with Bell to provide internet services, let alone good services.

TekSavvy is stifling competition by using THEIR OWN HARDWARE that THEY PAID FOR. They don't deserve to have customers.

I don't think they deserve my $29.95/month anymore.



lukjad007

@lbpsb.qc.ca
reply to Edgar_man_boy

Okay. So, if I understand this correctly, they are saying that monopolies have more creativity. Hmm...



gdogg

join:2006-02-06
39123

Don't worry guys.
Rocky wont' give up


shepd

join:2004-01-17
Kitchener, ON
kudos:1
reply to Edgar_man_boy

There's two edges on this sword. If other ISPs (hint hint!) would get going on building out their own network, a decision in Bell's favour here would also protect them from Bell. Simply start wiring in places where there's money to be made that you know Bell won't wire for a while. Become the new incumbent. When Bell wants to use your network and appeals to the government, simply remind the government of the "BCE Law" and that it will "Stifle innovation by allowing other competitors access". Then hammer the government for a "Other ISP Law" making it law that whoever "fibres up" a house first wins the rights to it and nobody else can even run fibre there! You know, to foster "innovation".

>:-D


darknestgirl

join:2008-08-11
Montreal, QC
Reviews:
·Acanac
·Videotron

1 edit
reply to grunze510

Teksavvy IS not trying to compete with Bell since Bell doesn't want third party provider to give the same speed as them and that's what the CRTC ruling was about they ask Bell to let the third party company to have the same service. And they don't use their own hardware cause if you have a problem with your internet they gonna send a BELL tech to take care of it same for Acanac and other dsl company that use Bell lines.

P.S. i edit my post after reading it again the first sentence wasn't necessary sorry about that


grunze510

join:2009-02-14
Cote Saint-Luc, QC
kudos:1

I understand what the CRTC request was about and that TekSavvy is currently a wholesale provider. But as it is, Bell and TekSavvy are still competitors in a way.

How much longer can Bell keep going on with fake excuses for? Next thing you know, they won't want you to check your email because that requires internet and uses the router's resources which cost money.


Livadia

join:2007-12-18
Canada

1 recommendation

reply to Edgar_man_boy

The problem arises from the fact that Service Providers are also owners of the means for it. (Could you imagine a large trucking company owning all the nation's highways?)

What the Government (or the CRTC) should do is to order a split of those holdings. One company should own the infrastructure, another the service. The infrastructure should be regulated so that everybody could have access to it, but priced reasonably so that it would pay for itself (and future investments). Then let the service providers, who pay equally for equal access, compete on the quality and price of the service.

That should be for all infrastructure that enters into one's house, be it hydro lines, gas lines, cable or phone. I would love to see a number of cable service providers compete rather than splitting the pie among themselves. (I think this is already somehow done with hydro and gas)

(Wasn't this model that Ted Rogers fought so hard against Bell Canada monopoly back in the eighties? I do not know why the cable has not opened up to the competition.)



gdogg

join:2006-02-06
39123

The CRTC should put the copper of canadian networks, which were paid for by tax payer dollars back in the control of the public.

Imagine how often a company like teksavvy would bring us better and faster speeds and new technologies, provided the change.



CanerisErik
Caneris
Premium,VIP
join:2007-10-03
Toronto, ON
kudos:2
reply to Edgar_man_boy

One step forward, two steps back



cold squirrel

@vaxination.ca

On the bright side, the longer Bell delays its new tariffs, the longer we can enjoy current capacity based tariffs.

Remember, the minute CRTC approves Bell's new tariffs, it will be Bell that will be making money, not Teksavvy since Bell will be the one billing for usage.

Also remember that Bell has had its satanic boxes running for over a year now, probably collecting usage information for each and every one of us. And Bell will probably set its new tariffs so that small users would cost ISPs less while big users would end up costing a LOT more.

Many ISPs will support the new tariffs because if their users are not big users, the ISP will benefit from lower Bell costs.

You want to download a movie ? Bell will make sure it gets its cut. This is going back to the Datapac days of billing by the kilopacket. It isn't X.25 that was bad, it was the pricing policies.



TSI Steve
TSI Steve
Premium,VIP
join:2007-01-12
Chatham, ON
reply to Livadia

said by Livadia:

The problem arises from the fact that Service Providers are also owners of the means for it. (Could you imagine a large trucking company owning all the nation's highways?)

What the Government (or the CRTC) should do is to order a split of those holdings. One company should own the infrastructure, another the service. The infrastructure should be regulated so that everybody could have access to it, but priced reasonably so that it would pay for itself (and future investments). Then let the service providers, who pay equally for equal access, compete on the quality and price of the service.

That should be for all infrastructure that enters into one's house, be it hydro lines, gas lines, cable or phone. I would love to see a number of cable service providers compete rather than splitting the pie among themselves. (I think this is already somehow done with hydro and gas)

(Wasn't this model that Ted Rogers fought so hard against Bell Canada monopoly back in the eighties? I do not know why the cable has not opened up to the competition.)

I agree with this model completely.

The main reason is it would drive sales forward.
When the network reaches capacity instead of throttling, which would slow growth they would be encouraged to expand the network to see continued growth.

In my PERSONAL opinion, it's the only model that would work successfully.

However, every option always has draw backs of some kind.

IE. Repair .. who clients should be repaired first?
Should all tickets be taken first come first serve, if so, what about escalations... etc.

Steve


mlerner
Premium
join:2000-11-25
Nepean, ON
kudos:5
reply to darknestgirl

said by darknestgirl:

And they don't use their own hardware cause if you have a problem with your internet they gonna send a BELL tech to take care of it same for Acanac and other dsl company that use Bell lines.
Of course it's going to be a Bell tech because the copper lines are the property of Bell. Even if Acanac or TekSavvy had their own hardware in the CO, the copper line belongs to Bell so they have to repair it.

heynow1232

join:2008-04-16
Canada
reply to Edgar_man_boy

Regardless of what bell offers. If your smart and know your options. Your going to choose Teksavvy, since we know they are always working for us on this subject. Like someone said Rocky isn't going to give up. I would rather them keep their 5 and 6 Meg profiles that are uncapped, unthrottled with MLPPP. Than accept new profiles and end up with bell's crappy caps. But from what I have read Rocky has a tricks plans up his sleeve. I can't wait to find out they are. Screw Bell, their time is starting to run out. It's only a matter of time before Teksavvy becomes the new big/little guy.



gdogg

join:2006-02-06
39123

True heynow123
But, quality , competively priced internet shouldn't be something only available to those who are smart and look at all there options



andyb
Premium
join:2003-05-29
SW Ontario
kudos:1
reply to Edgar_man_boy

Wonder what happens if they don't file new tarrifs by tomorrow like they are supposed to.I could see it being delayed if they filed a dispute with the crtc but they didn't they went to cabinet.As far as I can tell they still have to file by tomorrow unless there is something filed that the crtc hasn't posted.


shepd

join:2004-01-17
Kitchener, ON
kudos:1
reply to heynow1232

said by heynow1232:

Regardless of what bell offers. If your smart and know your options. Your going to choose Teksavvy, since we know they are always working for us on this subject. Like someone said Rocky isn't going to give up. I would rather them keep their 5 and 6 Meg profiles that are uncapped, unthrottled with MLPPP. Than accept new profiles and end up with bell's crappy caps. But from what I have read Rocky has a tricks plans up his sleeve. I can't wait to find out they are. Screw Bell, their time is starting to run out. It's only a matter of time before Teksavvy becomes the new big/little guy.
Trying to keep an old contract with Bell is what killed off iStop. iStop had an old contract with Bell for HSA which had a price low enough they could offer business HSA for $99 a month.

Bell believed they were entitled to "upgrade" the contract to the new pricing level (*much* higher) and iStop fought them. iStop throttled payment to Bell to the old contract price and, according to Bell, racked up millions of dollars in arrears over the several years Bell dragged out the fight. Eventually the house of cards fell, Bell pulled their line for a few days, and the fallout was iStop going bust. I believe shortly before they went bust the CRTC ruled in Bell's favour.

If TSi wants to fight Bell like that, they would do well to talk to Ralph...

shepd

join:2004-01-17
Kitchener, ON
kudos:1
reply to andyb

said by andyb:

Wonder what happens if they don't file new tarrifs by tomorrow like they are supposed to.I could see it being delayed if they filed a dispute with the crtc but they didn't they went to cabinet.As far as I can tell they still have to file by tomorrow unless there is something filed that the crtc hasn't posted.
ISPs can file disputes with the CRTC regarding it. How long did it take the CRTC to rule on DPI? There's your answer.


andyb
Premium
join:2003-05-29
SW Ontario
kudos:1

I know they can file disputes and that it would delay things but as I said they havent filed a dispute with the crtc(I didn't find one) they went above thier heads so they should still be filing new tarrifs.



El Quintron
Resident Mouth Breather
Premium
join:2008-04-28
Etobicoke, ON
kudos:4
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·TekSavvy DSL
reply to Edgar_man_boy

I never really thought Bell would have such a colossal sense of entitlement that they could go above the regulator and ask the government for an audience.

It's like that guy yesterday would kept asking for Rocky directly sheesh.

It's like me as a CSR asking the CEO for a raise...

Irrespective of which the jig is almost up for Bell... and maybe just maybe the best way to deal with them is a death by a thousand cuts.

Rome wasn't destroyed in a day after all.


--
Working to bring you closer to a Bell and Rogers free household.


Helochut

join:2007-10-14
Mississauga, ON
reply to grunze510

said by grunze510:

Damn these companies like TekSavvy, Velcom, Ebox, and Acanac that try to compete with Bell to provide internet services, let alone good services.

TekSavvy is stifling competition by using THEIR OWN HARDWARE that THEY PAID FOR. They don't deserve to have customers.

I don't think they deserve my $29.95/month anymore.
Worst joke ever


sbrook
Premium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
Ottawa
kudos:13
Reviews:
·WIND Mobile
·TekSavvy Cable
reply to Edgar_man_boy

said by "George Cope, President and CEO of BCE and Bell" :

"As in any other competitive industry in Canada, we should be able to
choose who distributes our services and how, be it wholesale, retail, direct
or any other creative form of distribution channel,"
Here's the scary line ... far more scary than the worry about the fttn service being provided to 3rd party sellers ... FTTN dispute would be the thin end of the wedge towards getting rid of ALL wholesale ISPs. It sets the precedent that they can determine if they allow wholesalers, and if they do, what services they can provide. That little "and how" immediately allows for throttling, capping and all manner of other things really fast.


gdogg

join:2006-02-06
39123

4 edits

If I was the CRTC and the CEO of bell said that to me.
I would take bell away from bell and make it a publicly owned corporation immediately

His comments say, we (bell) own the internet in canada and we (bell) will decide what content it contains and we (bell) will decide how that content is distributed.

Monopoly much ... aren't monopolies like bell illegal, since bell has a monopoly over the the dsl market is ontario and so on.



otty

join:2008-10-24
Revelstoke, BC

1 edit
reply to El Quintron

said by El Quintron:

I never really thought Bell would have such a colossal sense of entitlement that they could go above the regulator and ask the government for an audience.
Not to defend Bell (God forbid), but I believe it is actually part of the statutory scheme that CRTC decisions may be appealed to Cabinet, so they are within their rights.

Edit: "12. (1) Within one year after a decision by the Commission, the Governor in Council may, on petition in writing presented to the Governor in Council within ninety days after the decision, or on the Governor in Council's own motion, by order, vary or rescind the decision or refer it back to the Commission for reconsideration of all or a portion of it."

s.12 Telecommunications Act 1993, c. 38

»www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/LEGAL/TELECOM.HTM