|
jono181
Member
2012-Jan-27 10:26 am
This is absurdLet's get this charge reversed for him. |
|
Gone Premium Member join:2011-01-24 Fort Erie, ON |
Gone
Premium Member
2012-Jan-27 10:32 am
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
2012-Jan-27 10:52 am
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
2012-Jan-27 10:55 am
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 |
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 |
|
|
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
2012-Jan-27 11:58 am
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 |
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 |
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 F4Whatta Ya Think About Dat? Premium Member join:2004-04-01 Kitchener, ON |
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 |
to CableConvert
not a utility no 3rd party. |
|
25139889 |
to J E F F4
and then people would complain about having to call in to talk to someone about their usage. |
|
|
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. |
|
|
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 |
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 |
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. |
|