Reviews:
 ·Caneris
4 edits | reply to shepd
Re: Bell appeals CRTC decision said by shepd:They may not even go with caps. They may just flat out charge per MB from megabyte 1. I suppose we'll see... If they do something like that all wholesalers will be dead with in 2 months. Rogers 10meg package with a 100GB cap is only $60 a month (The same I pay for my 2 premium accounts). (Max overcharge is $25 a month)
Rogers doesn't have pppoe overhead like bell does either.
If I go with rogers I may have to live with very inconsistent upload and somewhat inconsistent download speeds but if thats the price I have to pay to continue using my internet the way I want to then I will.
Bell has been getting my and my family's money since 2001 for high speed internet, 2004-2008 for tv on there highest package (Excluding the last 3 months of service when we dropped the package down before canceling). They have had 2 lines of phone service from my family since 2004 and a single lines service pretty much forever.
I don't see how bell can implement usage based billing, TSI pays for the bandwidth to there peers and transit providers.
TSI pays around $21 per customer to bell each month as well as a montly fee for each gigabit link. (7 of them if I recall correctly)
Sending this data across the network costs bell nothing. The only cost that's occurred is on teksavvy's end when its sent off over cogent/peer1/torix
If the wholesalers go south rogers cable will have unquestioned control over the market.
edit: If my grandparents and aunt weren't using bells email I would be getting them to sign up with TSI right now. |
|
| We need to require Bell to lower its HSA tariffs so that we can use HSA instead of the crippled GAS. It is that simple.
Bell isn't goin to start screwing around with HSA because it impacts business customers. |
|
| reply to Edgar_man_boy
Well if wholesalers end up capped. I wonder who will be the first one to put their own equipment in. Yes sure it cost a lot of money but someone is going to have to compete against bell. We can't sit on bell for ever. This would be the only way to stick to bell, since the CRTC won't help us. |
|
| reply to grayfox
The problem with cable is that it (in canada) does not allow servers.
For a small business, services such as Teksavvy's are really important because they do not put an artificial barrier of entry for small business like the big guys do. The big guys charge a hefty premium for business use because they only see large businesses who want to pay more for a Bell branded service. |
|
| reply to heynow123
said by heynow123:Well if wholesalers end up capped. I wonder who will be the first one to put their own equipment in. Yes sure it cost a lot of money but someone is going to have to compete against bell. We can't sit on bell for ever. This would be the only way to stick to bell, since the CRTC won't help us. I predict the first will MNSi... oh wait... that happened already in 2001. |
|
| Who's MNSi? I haven't heard of them before?  |
|
 CanerisErikCanerisPremium,VIP
join:2007-10-03
Toronto, ON
kudos:2 | said by heynow123:Who's MNSi? I haven't heard of them before? MNSi is HeadSpinning's baby  |
|
1 edit | reply to Edgar_man_boy
Well before these caps get put in place. I'm going to get all of my downloads done  |
|
 IgnitePremium,VIP
join:2004-03-18
UK | reply to Edgar_man_boy
I'm not that up on the regulatory environment in Canada, but is there any issue with CRTC doing to BCE what was threatened to both NTT in Japan and BT in the UK and enforcing a separation of the infrastructure controlling department from the wholesale and retail?
End of the day all incumbents have 3 departments:
Infrastructure who maintain the COs, the loops, etc.
Wholesale who take services from infrastructure en masse and sell to other retailers - this is who TekSavvy would be purchasing from if there's such a separation at BCE, which there bloody well should be.
Retail who sell the Wholesale products to end users.
Why do I get the feeling you have none of this so BCE just violate all other potential retailers and wholesalers with preferential treatment to themselves?
Is there anything stopping the Canadian Government from enforcing mandatory separation, if not structurally then at least operationally, of the departments?
Says the guy who comes from the country where the regulator just said that our ILEC can bumfsck other operators for as much as it wants when wholesaling the largely obsolete NGN but there we go. |
|
Reviews:
 ·TekSavvy Cable
| said by Ignite:I'm not that up on the regulatory environment in Canada, but is there any issue with CRTC doing to BCE what was threatened to both NTT in Japan and BT in the UK and enforcing a separation of the infrastructure controlling department from the wholesale and retail? This separation is already supposed to exist, but in the end it's the same company and this is what we end up with.
--
Taylor Byrnes
www.taylorbyrnes.org |
|
| reply to Edgar_man_boy
The realty is that unless things change bell is going to get just what they wish.
Why don't others set out their own fiber..well for the same reasons.
Bell controls the people that would normally let this happen so the other guys never get the go ahead to do so.
Its now not a question of if its a question of when this is going to happen.
Only a major change in the crtc or government is going to change this . |
|
| reply to heynow123
said by heynow123:Well if bell wins we should all go back to dial up. Yes it's slow as hell but least it would be unlimited. Hell you can even get free dial up.
Unfortunately this may be the only course of action for a lot of us. I wont go to rogers. And I wont go back to Bell and be MONITORED by them. Dial up it is, as I wont shell out 40 bucks a month for a paltry 60 gigs. 300 gigs would be more realistic but I know some power users (as few as they are) that go higher.
Bell should be broken up by the government into pieces, similar to the way Nazi Germany was broken up after WWII. |
|
Reviews:
·Caneris
3 edits | reply to SME squirrel
said by SME squirrel :
The problem with cable is that it (in canada) does not allow servers.
For a small business, services such as Teksavvy's are really important because they do not put an artificial barrier of entry for small business like the big guys do. The big guys charge a hefty premium for business use because they only see large businesses who want to pay more for a Bell branded service.
Well looks like I will be on adsl forever then.
If the cap is 60gig per line I will just get third adsl connection.
If its less I will have get a vps or something, or colocate one of the 1U's.
edit: As long as we get at least 60GB with a MAX overcharge limit thats a reasonable price I can survive even without another line.
The MAX overcharge is the real issue with UBB for me. If I need to do 220GB in a month I want to be sure I can do it without my wallet getting emptied and me not being able to afford to buy food and school expenses. |
|
| reply to heynow123
said by heynow123:Who's MNSi? I haven't heard of them before? »www.mnsi.net |
|
 GuspazGuspazPremium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:16 | reply to Edgar_man_boy
Yeah, I guess that if UBB really does go through, it will pretty much force wholesalers to put in their own DSLAMs (although I still think that a non-profit co-operative installing the DSLAMs for multiple wholesalers is the way to go).
I mean, first we've got throttling. Now we've got UBB. Companies like TekSavvy would lose many of their customers if suddenly all they had was a 60GB Premium service and they had to get rid of 200GB and Unlimited customers.
The only thing that might save them as a company would be that existing users at 5mbit would probably be grandfathered. But then what happens if you have some trouble with your line and Bell fixes it? Will they switch you over to UBB? |
|
|
|
 gdogg
join:2006-02-06
39123 | Don't hope for the best case scenario is my motto.
You will only be disappointed.
Think the worst, so your not disappointed later. |
|
| reply to Guspaz
Why would TekSavvy lose customers if EVERYBODY is doing UBB? |
|
 otty
join:2008-10-24
Revelstoke, BC
4 edits | Well if they had a 60GB cap I would have to seriously consider Rogers with a higher cap and a max overage fee (not to mention higher speeds). I believe you effectively get unlimited 10mbps for $85, or 7mbps for $72. I don't really need the speed, but I can't deal with a 60GB cap. If the overage fees are like Bell's it would certainly end up being cheaper to pay $72 for unlimited.
EDIT: and while they may not lose customers they would certainly not gain many. There would be little to distinguish their service from Bells and thus little incentive to switch. |
|
Reviews:
·Colbanet
| reply to HeadSpinning
said by HeadSpinning:Why would TekSavvy lose customers if EVERYBODY is doing UBB? If companies who put equipment in COs, like Colba.net, are immune from UBB, then TSI'll likely lose me at least. I dunno about others. |
|
gdogg
join:2006-02-06
39123
2 edits | Does putting equipment in co's really mean they're immune though or they stuck by their contacts with bell, since no smaller ISP can just put equipment in all the CO's at once, all across their entire coverage area's, due to not being bell, making all the money. |
|
