dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
866

jono181
join:2004-06-05
Toronto, ON

jono181

Member

This is absurd

Let's get this charge reversed for him.

Gone
Premium Member
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON

Gone

Premium Member

said by jono181:

Let's get this charge reversed for him.

There is no $50 maximum on the 30 and 50Mbit plans. Cogeco announced this. It's a legitimate charge as far as Cogeco is concerned.

He needs to get the media involved. This kind of crap is insane.
amungus
Premium Member
join:2004-11-26
America

amungus

Premium Member

I question the use of the word "legitimate" here
No reason for this. It most definitely doesn't cost the carrier that much to transport the data on the customer's behalf..

Less than 1TB/mo? Come on. How much harm is this in the grand scheme of things? Is the customer not supposed to use their bandwidth? Why have a "fast" internet that is practically neutered and unavailable to use?

I hope the customer gets this sorted out. Totally insane to be charged this much for using their service as what will CERTAINLY (and already, quite obviously IS), 'ordinary use.'

ISPs need to wake up to this. It's not going backwards anytime soon, no matter how much they would like to wish for it.

Gone
Premium Member
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON

Gone

Premium Member

said by amungus:

I question the use of the word "legitimate" here

It's legitimate in the sense that this isn't a billing error. They changed their terms as of October 1st to have no $50 maximum on Ultimate 30 and Ultimate 50, so Karl is a bit mixed up in how he worded the original article. My letter, as posted in the article, was for the 14Mbit package which increased from $30 to $50.

As for being legitimate as far as business practices go, fuck no. They're worse than even Bell Canada and Videotron, which would make them the worst ISP in all of Canada as far as UBB goes.

elios
join:2005-11-15
Springfield, MO

elios to Gone

Member

to Gone
no kidding it would only take 24 hours at 50Mbps to blow though 700GB not sure what the cap is in the frist place but if its about he same your looking at 48 hours a month at full speed to rack up a bill like that

that just under 2 hours a day of down loading EASY to hit if your streaming movies and TV

btw at 30Mbps 125GB only takes 11 hours of use you could kill that in a week with a netflix account
at 50 it only takes 6 hours
WTF is the point of speeds like that if your going to blow through it in one night

CableConvert
Premium Member
join:2003-12-05
Atlanta, GA

CableConvert to Gone

Premium Member

to Gone
I think the other question is the reliability of the meter itself. Who knows if it is correct. There is no independent 3rd party monitoring it

Gone
Premium Member
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON

Gone

Premium Member

said by CableConvert:

I think the other question is the reliability of the meter itself. Who knows if it is correct. There is no independent 3rd party monitoring it

Exactly. I'm surprised this hasn't yet gone to court.
amungus
Premium Member
join:2004-11-26
America

amungus to elios

Premium Member

to elios
EXACTLY the metrics that 'they' (any ISP with or considering caps) do NOT want YOU to consider at all.

When placed into a simple set of terms like this, anyone can so easily see how much crap this is that it just isn't funny.

This entire notion of capping needs to be more seriously addressed. Restricting one's use of internet in such a manner is flat out foul.
Rekrul
join:2007-04-21
Milford, CT

Rekrul to amungus

Member

to amungus
said by amungus:

Is the customer not supposed to use their bandwidth?

No, they're not. ISPs believe that you should only use the bandwidth they give you in short bursts, so that your connection is idle 75% of the time.
said by amungus:

Why have a "fast" internet that is practically neutered and unavailable to use?

Because they can charge more for faster speeds. They sucker people in with the promise of fast speeds and then cap the usage to prevent people from truly using it. Or they tack on overage charges knowing that people will quickly burn through their monthly allowance and start racking up extra fees.

J E F F4
Whatta Ya Think About Dat?
Premium Member
join:2004-04-01
Kitchener, ON

J E F F4 to Gone

Premium Member

to Gone
Cogeco makes one appreciate Rogers. That's insane.

Cogeco either needs to cut people off or call them if they are going to far above.
25139889 (banned)
join:2011-10-25
Toledo, OH

25139889 (banned) to CableConvert

Member

to CableConvert
not a utility no 3rd party.
25139889

25139889 (banned) to J E F F4

Member

to J E F F4
and then people would complain about having to call in to talk to someone about their usage.

urbanriot
Premium Member
join:2004-10-18
Canada

urbanriot to J E F F4

Premium Member

to J E F F4
said by J E F F4:

Cogeco either needs to cut people off or call them if they are going to far above.

Yea, they originally did that when they tested the waters for bandwidth... then they decided that charging people to download was a lucrative market, and instituted these excessive download fees.
Warez_Zealot
join:2006-04-19
Vancouver

Warez_Zealot to Rekrul

Member

to Rekrul
said by Rekrul:

said by amungus:

Is the customer not supposed to use their bandwidth?

No, they're not. ISPs believe that you should only use the bandwidth they give you in short bursts, so that your connection is idle 75% of the time.
said by amungus:

Why have a "fast" internet that is practically neutered and unavailable to use?

Because they can charge more for faster speeds. They sucker people in with the promise of fast speeds and then cap the usage to prevent people from truly using it. Or they tack on overage charges knowing that people will quickly burn through their monthly allowance and start racking up extra fees.

Yeah, it's a huge conflict of interest. They can't be the a service provider and own the infrastructure... They want you to keep spending $200/mo on all your services, so it's in their interest to keep your inet bill as high as possible to make up for the lost revenue in all the cable services you don't have but are downloading instead. :/

Anyhow, Canadian ISP's are sketch... My uncle upgraded to Shaw/Mountain Cable Broadband 100. It was all honky-dory until they downgraded his modem to broadband 50.

Luckily I noticed, cause they were going to charge him for bb 100, for the bb50 speeds and bit cap. So that means it was manually provisioned improperly after the upgrade for no reason aside to save Shaw capacity at the bb 100 charge.

These guys are crooks, and it's time the CRTC bust up all these ISP's and make infrastructure and service providers two separate autonomous entities.
Warez_Zealot

Warez_Zealot to jono181

Member

to jono181
said by jono181:

Let's get this charge reversed for him.

Man, I worked for this dirt bag company back in the early 2000's in the store front. They had much more class back then. I worked part time during college, and made a decent amount in commissions.

Now they're pulling this kind of crap like a second rate company.. How they have fallen... I bet they don't even pay the store front sales agents commissions anymore..

I wish their poor customers success, cause this is beyond absurd.

Gone
Premium Member
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON

Gone to Warez_Zealot

Premium Member

to Warez_Zealot
said by Warez_Zealot:

Anyhow, Canadian ISP's are sketch... My uncle upgraded to Shaw/Mountain Cable Broadband 100. It was all honky-dory until they downgraded his modem to broadband 50.

It's worth noting that Shaw 50Mbit service, even at their 100Mbit prices, is still faster and more affordable than anything Cogeco even comes close to offering.