TekSavvy → Shell shocked by TSI West price increases and no 300GB plan

You're right in that for customers on the old 300GB DSL plans there's no easy choice especially for those wanting to remain with TSI.

Personally I'm looking to switch to something faster as my DSL line is stuck at 2Mb (weird as it is syncing at 7 but that's a different topic). The Cable 25Mb unlimited would be an easy choice but like what happened back east earlier this year, the extremely high start up/activation costs really makes us stop and think. It's even worse for DSL customers looking at a dry-loop.

With both Shaw and Telus, neither charges for activation or a modem. Plus both have continuously running promos that reduces the monthly costs of the first six months of service (standalone or bundled) to a price that is significantly lower than TSI's price on a comparable service. Given the already small difference in prices between the incumbent and TSI's comparable service after the price update, it would take about 2 years or more for a customer to recognize any savings from signing up with TSI.

While I understand that the activation costs are charged to TSI by the incumbents, in the eyes of customers, the problem is that they incur none of the startup costs with either Shaw or Telus. While the tariffs makes the situation more complicated, the average customer would be hard press to make that consideration.

Which I would have done a long time ago if Telus didn't block ports 21, 80 ,443, which is a big problem for me.

As for Shaw/TSI Cable, even if it was available I still wouldn't touch it. With cable it's always a cable as to whether or not you'll encounter the infamous node congestion, and I have a zero tolerance for congestion. This is why I ditched Shaw years ago at my previous address, after suffering through several months of lost packets, high pings, jitter, and slow speeds during peak hours.

Node congestion should somewhat less of a problem now with DOCSIS 3. Another issue I would worry about with cable is whether TSI would be able to keep up with it's POI capacity in the West. There was quite a bit of capacity issue in this respect (wasn't node) shortly after cable was launched in GVR as TSI got more signups than their infrastructure could handle back then.

But if you really need the unblock access to those ports, you don't have much choice in the residential internet market.

There's a few but tek is better (price/cap wise)...

»lightspeed.ca/personal/a ··· tes.html
»www.incentre.net/content ··· iew/83/2

I guess I'm still lost why you didn't just keep the 300GB tier and not introduce the 75GB. You've always said that people aren't touching their 300GBs for the most part. Leave the bandwidth alone and introduce a $10 to $15 price difference between the 300GB and unlimited. I'm not arguing about price increases, that shit happens, but as I said before, its feast or famine with these plans.Can you enlighten the masses on why you can't get into the rest of Shawville?It kind of sounds like you've given up on Alberta and that your DSL customers will just be a niche base that need static IPs. I'm assuming you're cognitive that your VDSL startup costs are killer dancing around $300 for a residential install.

Is there any means to show the CRTC that their isn't true competition in the West when Telus isn't charging hardware and installation fees nor a band rate for dry loop / naked DSL? Would Telus even consider a free wholesale VDSL install like Bell?You sent the Gabester out and got your equipment spruced up, danke. Is IPv6 available now for the TSI West DSL camp?I had a bad feeling during the whole UBB thing and subsequent decisions that CNOC focused all their energy on the East, Bell and Rogers, and a little Vidéotron mixed in for shits and giggles. Telus really made a smart choice with being under the radar.

You got to get your marketing folks to double and triple check what is being sent out. Unfortunately, we keep calling you guys out on mistakes in the sales literature and emails distributed to the West.

What happened to the open house?

Yeah, I always prefer DSL over cable, but took the plunge ten days prior to the VDSL speed matching announcement since I was able to score a D3 modem from TSI, which I am grateful for. If I would have known that 25Mb DSL was right around the corner, I would have waited. Shaw's whole system (including TSI West Cable) has already taken a dump twice this year. I'm not talking neighborhoods, I'm talking all of the AB and BC hood. Another fun aspect of Shaw is them blocking a TSI modem's stats page during provisioning, so you have zero means to troubleshoot.

How about a little unsolicited market survey: why are we with you?

First I'll mention that for many people the single factor after "does it work" is simply price. And for those same many people, the "does it work" criteria is adequate speed and adequate caps.

For myself and perhaps a good number of your current customers we factor in many additional pieces. So speaking for myself and perhaps others can chime in with their perspective, here's what I look at (in no particular order):

- Does-it-work and price are a given
- DSL. I don't like the uncertainty that comes with the cable technology (cf. node congestion, stop sells, trouble with IP 4&6 assignments, inability to swap out personal hardware without registering the MAC for each device). Except in extraordinary circumstances I won't choose cable nor do I recommend it to others.
- Small company feel. Call it what you want: buy local, support the little guy, down with the 1%, whatever the fashionable phrase is. When a business grows it often (not always) turns stuffy and bureaucratic. No personality; no humanity. Much nicer to do business with a neighbour than a suit.
- Support the Good Guy. Even when actions are unrelated, it all reflects on the company (or personal) image. I, for one, do not like to support or do business with someone (or business) who is involved in dealings that I oppose. I choose not to buy icecream from a man who tortures puppies.
- Tinker-friendly / no artificial limitations. Not have crippled hardware forced upon me. The ability to use my own hardware is preferred. Blocking port 25 is understandable, but should be removed free of charge with a request. Blocking port 80 or others is unjustifiable other than as a price-gouge which immediately creates bad blood. Supporting technologies like IPv6 are bonus points.

So how does Tek rate?

- Tinker-friendly: Yup. Even though I currently have no need for unblocked ports, I still value that it's available. IPv6 has been a long time coming, but even with the delays over the East, it will still be arriving before the majority of ISPs. Until then I've still got my tunnel.

- The Good Guy: On the Good/Evil scale, I think we all agree that Bell is on the far end of the 'E' while Tek, being the primary counterbalance is firmly a 'G'. Yes, others in CNOC also help, but none of them have a presence in the West, so Tek gets full credit when someone here is looking to reward a GoodGuy. Telus is pretty much neutral. Not actively sabotaging, but nor are they actively trying to improve matters. So despite Telus not being Evil like Bell, when comparing a G to an N Tek still wins.

- Small company feel: Certainly was true years ago when I first signed up. You've gone through some growing pains since then, and it's been less than perfect when I had an issue last year. Points for a non-drone human who speaks English natively after a pretty short wait time. Not so great with the "other department" disease that plagues large businesses. "Sorry, you cannot talk with someone from ____ directly. We just write notes in this ticket and they communicate back with more notes. Then I'll call you back and tell you what they said and hope it was complete and clear." The "other department" was escalations in my case. I've seen posts some time ago indicating that you want to blur the line between sales and tech similar to what you had in the past. Full support for that and a good way to stave off the growing company feel. The transparency that you have shown and having the upper management involved in public forums gives major points here.- DSL: You are in a position where you are not married to one technology or the other. Choosing to limit choices on one side because the other is available feels artificial. I understand it's extra work for you to have 3 or 4 choices for caps instead of 1 or 2, but are those savings more than the revenue from customers like me who you would have kept/gained because you win on other points if only there were an option that was not one extreme or the other? (Rhetorical, I know no one has those numbers except perhaps later using hindsight).

I think the real sticking point for myself and others here are the caps. The two extremes with no moderate ground is the wound, but the salt is that after years of "sorry, our traffic counter only works for Bell land", we're told with very short notice to choose one extreme or the other with no information on whether we fit in the low extreme. I know I was well under the original 200GB and come nowhere close to 300GB. But do I fit under 75GB? I have no idea. And it was never even a consideration, so I had not invested the time to track it. Tek, on the other hand, obviously decided to pick caps radically different from the current offerings before announcing it and destroying the current limit. So the traffic meter could have been prioritised so that it would be completed even just 30 days prior to the changeover so that we could have some knowledge of where we stand. The choices combined come across to your existing customers as "Tough ----. Make your choice and pay a fee if you guessed wrong and want to fix it once you have more info."

The choice of pricing w.r.t. caps also seems peculiar. The general consensus with the whole UBB fiasco is that when pricing unlimited (or higher limit) caps, the greater the speed the higher the potential cost. But going from 75GB -> unlimited at 15Mb costs $5 or ~11% while the same 75GB -> unlimited at 6Mb who would be less able to abuse it costs $10 or 33%.

Edit: typo.

I really enjoyed reading your post mactalla. I think Marc doesn't grasp that the Western users never used his company because of price, but for the other reasons you mentioned. Marc, the prices and speeds in the West have always sucked. TSI West DSL users stuck it out even with faster speeds and cheaper prices from the local duopolies (& speed matching in the East) because they dug what you guys are about. It does feel like the West was sh*t on again for its loyalty.

Your 75GB plans make zero sense. Is 300GB going to break the bank, or hell even 200GB that was had around a year ago? My gut tells me that the kind of user you want to attract with that plan (75GB) has never even heard of TekSavvy and probably won't in the future either.

About the fees, how come you (TSI) can cut some slack when people buy modems from TSI, but otherwise it's tough luck.

I feel for you guys, I truly do, but I feel like Marc's hands were tied when it came to 300GB vs Unlimited....from reading his post it looks like for example it being $54.99 for 25meg (which I believe is better than us in the East @ 77.99 for unlimited 25meg), you'd probably have @ 300gig, the price being about $53.99....so for out there it makes no difference from 300gig to Unlimited....

That's what he's saying, he could offer a 300gig between 75 and unlimited but at what he'd have to charge it makes no sense to offer another tier for a simple $1/month difference...So it does make sense.

So yeah, I'm sure all of us in the East would kill for 25meg service unlimited at 54.99....I'd pay 59.99 for unlimited 16 meg service....so maybe I should complain that we're not getting the same love in the East....and that we are probably as always subsidizing the money losing West operation (that's just a theory of mine, much like how the DSL users in the East subsidize the Cable users as well)...

And I think that's what Marc is saying, they've done stuff and that's where they're going to sit, TSI can't be everything to everyone...unfortunately they're now too big to be that, but they do what they can at an affordable price point....so, if you want a Static IP and unblocked ports....TSI West DSL may be for you...but there's a reason why there are not a lot of IISPs....you guys have it pretty good out there with cap usage and pricing overall vs. the incumbents so there's not a lot of wiggle room for the IISPs (and resultant lack of competition in the IISP space out there) to provide an inherent difference for someone to go with TSI, Marketing costs tens of thousands of dollars....Huge costs....and they're just not seeing the uptake to do what they want.

My guess in regards to Alberta is because there's no 1 POI for Shaw and Shaw is probably forcing them to interconnect directly in AB...and that makes no logical sense for TSI due to the distance from say Calgary to Van to backhaul traffic....they just can't see an ROI and I'm sure after all these years they want to see Positive Cash Flow from their business after sinking hundreds of thousands of dollars into it....

Just my 2 cents on the matter.

I don't know about the rest of you guys, but here's my situation: I'm a bit of a geek with a server under the desk, so Telus DSL with their port blocking is not for me. But I don't mind cable, never had any major issues with it with Shaw. Oh, except for one time last summer when I tried to switch to TSI cable using DOCSIS 3.0 modem. What a fiasco! Anyhow, as I said I generally don't mind Shaw but hate their pricing and promotional policy where some customers may get half the price when the others for a year, a some get zilch. That's why I switched to TSI a few months back. Simply - I liked the pricing model, clear and simple. I can care less about "small company", 1%, etc. I kinda like the idea that I'm not paying a duopoly (at least not directly) but it's not the major consideration. Main point was solid pricing for a solid service. Well, no more! After TSI's "happy to announce" email about their "very competitive pricing and bandwidth changes" all I see is that a) they no longer have a competitive offering for me and b) they screwed me royally on the connection fee just a few month back. I still wonder how ISP are allowed to change contract agreements on the fly when if the same were done by cell providers they would be in deep shit. Taking out 300GB limit and increasing pricing more than 35% for almost everybody (I can't imagine any large percentage of TSI users who only needs 75GB/mo) - this is not called "improved offering". It's not even called inflation adjustments. It's called rip-off for BC standards, regardless what Quebec guys are saying. Having said all that I can only conclude that a) TSI lost me forever as a loyal customer, regardless of their future price or service changes. I just can't trust them any longer. b) I'll be reviewing my options for terminating the agreement with them as soon as I can procure any reasonable alternative. And at these prices there are a few. Somebody made a huge mistake here. Hopefully they are able to comprehend this.

Hi mmaxk,

That somebody is me... Have you read what I wrote above?

marc - i think what youre telling us to do is basically go with telus and shaw. which is fine, its your call if you dont want my money. i dont understand why TSI bothered to upgrade the west if all you want to do is drive users to the incumbents anyway.
even light users like myself (i used 46GB a month last month for example) have no option but to go with shaw. the 75GB is too close to what i consume to risk the possibility of going over. no clear guidelines have been posted as to what happens when you go over (huge penalty? what?). if it was lowered to 150GB i would happily stay on with TSI but quite frankly 75GB is way too low and goes too close to my risk threshold. over the last year ive exceeded 75GB at least twice (105GB was my max). i suspect many other "light" users feel the same way. and if i chose the unlimited i would be better off going with shaw as you pointed out.

mactalla,

Thanks for the thoughtful feedback.

I'm still trying to gather my data so I can better respond. I'm really interested in getting to the bottom of it.

So, lets reverse it. Can you give me what you would like to see speed by speed, package by package both dsl and cable.

For cable, the only reason we don't have the entire footprint was due to CRTC activity that put everything on hold.. similarly to on/qc..

for activation.. it's a straight pass through and if you buy a modem we can eat some of these costs on the modem side that's why we offer a rebate. we have to make it up somehow... i agree that these setup costs are brutal. it's worse with bell. but they all stink. The CRTC has a massive rate issue... all the costs are complete BS and really need to be challenged. We need transparency, that's ultimately what will really give you guys choice and competitive prices. For West though, I hate to say it but the prices are already pretty competitive. Although, i need to look at what happens after 6 months/the promos are over.

Zurk, that's not what I'm saying. If you'd like to genuinely help, please read carefully.

Fine. i will give you what i would like to see.
cable :
Basic Cable 1 1M/256kb Unlimited $19.95
Express Cable 7.5 7.5Mb/512Kb Unlimited $29.95
Extreme Cable 25 25Mb/2.5Mb 150GB $39.95
Extreme Cable 25 Unlimited 25Mb/2.5Mb Unlimited $49.95
Modem rental option : $9.95/month for DCM475/DOCSIS3. $4.95/month for SB5101/DOCSIS2.

DSL :
Basic DSL 1 1Mb/1Mb Unlimited $19.95
High Speed DSL 6 6Mb/1Mb 150GB $29.95
High Speed DSL 6 Unlimited 6Mb/1Mb Unlimited $39.95
Express DSL 15 15Mb/1Mb Unlimited $44.95
Extreme DSL 25 25Mb/2Mb 150GB $49.95
Extreme DSL 25 Unlimited 25Mb/2Mb Unlimited $59.95

Going over quota results in the next month bumped up to the unlimited bandwidth package at the same speed.

So does this mean its going ahead again? and attempts/planning are going on for calgary/edmonton/etc for riding on shaw's network. so its just a matter of a waiting game on permits/applications/setup/etc/etc/etc/etc....

We're investigating it. Not sure what we'll do yet. Need to see if there's uptake but also there are many R&V's at the CRTC that could significantly changes things again.

Shaw in particular when asked to provide an aggregated POI model.. they *added* more POIs...

Personally, I'd like to see the 300GB option remain available at a reasonable price difference from unlimited. Many of TSI's more tech savvy (pun intended) customers don't really needed unlimited but do require significantly more than 75GB or even 150GB.

Another suggestion, I know it's a passthrough so I'm not sure how possible it is, TSI should still do something more about the activation fee. When customers shop around the initial startup fees (activation fee, etc.) is starting to act like a giant wall in getting users to sign up. As I've said before, with the monthly price gap between TSI and the incumbents shrinking it's kind of hard to convince potential customers to sign up if TSI requires a ~$200 or more first payment when your competitors doesn't.

Jacking up the high bandwidth option for DSL won't help TSI as it makes that option priced more expensive than the comparative Telus product. And that's not even counting dry-loops.

thats not an issue. that option is for people who want to host websites and other high bandwidth options on DSL which telus blocks. as it is even if it was $50 it would still not be cheaper than telus anyway. the $11 band rate makes every single option more than telus. the only feature TSI has left is unblocked ports. and if people want to host websites or whatever, $60 is hardly a deterrent.
if you just want downloading the 15mbps option is there which is significantly cheaper.

Marc maybe you can cut and paste the new CRTC tariffs that apply to Telus and Shaw, so that the masses know where you are coming from. As far as what's coming down the road from the CRTC, can you enlighten us to what is specifically going to be fought for (by CNOC) with regards to the Western duopolies? Also, do you know how Primus gets away with a flat dry loop fee of $7?

Sure, was just looking at the same thing. For the R&V's, I'll have to look into it.

Telus:
Speed - Tariff
1 17.72
1.5-6 19.25
15 32.75
25 39.51

as for telus usage monitor: I totally agree. it needs to be fixed. we were hoping to have it fixed when we went down to upgrade the equipment but I don't know that it's there yet. I'll have to check on it.

In this day and age of 160 char SMSes and 140 char tweets, someone actually read that essay I wrote! Colour me impressed :)

As indicated in my DSL note, I have little interest in cable. So for me to find it enticing it would need a price point of no more than $20/month. Not feasible and the control freak nature of the cableco would still eat at me. So I'll defer those recommendations to people who consider cable equal/better.

My first recommendation is to treat each technology as though it's your only offering. That is to say, don't choose to forgo a speed/capacity simply because you have something similar on the other side. I've stated that I much prefer DSL but I also have met people who prefer cable. And then there's the people who simply are lacking a choice regardless of their preference. You've acknowledged that currently your cable footprint is quite limited so some don't have that as a choice, and I expect there are still some people who have such lengthy copper loops where DSL is not a reasonable option.

For the DSL plans, I feel there should be a cap somewhere at 150 or above. I feel there should always be some breathing room with the cap, so the only people I would recommend 75GB to are those would rarely use the internet and have few-to-none internet enabled devices. I would never recommend a 75GB plan to anyone who has multiple internet uses in the home, or the potential to try a Netflix trial, or would be computer-savvy enough to rent a movie from iTunes. In my mind a 75GB cap is next to useless. The only justification would be your lowest of the low tier. In the new scheme, that's a 6mbit profile. At 15 or 25 and it looks like a joke. We all discredit the incumbents when they bring out the super-high-speed-with-ultra-low-cap plans. Anyone who wants high speeds will want it for more than 1 day in the month.

Here's my suggestion:

6Mb 75GB $29.99
6Mb 150GB $34.99
6Mb Unlimited $39.99
15Mb 200GB $44.99
15Mb Unlimited $49.99
25Mb 250GB $47.99
25Mb Unlimited $54.99


The only place 75GB is useful is the bottom tier. For 15+Mb don't even bother. I added an option for the 6Mb speed to fill the $10 gap that otherwise looks like a gaping hole. Everywhere else the price increments are really quite small.

Notice I did not change the pricing. You will never beat Telus on price. They have free installation. They give free hardware (but still don't prevent you from using your own). They don't charge overage fees. Sure they state a cap and may bill in the future, but for now the plans are unlimited for all intents and purposes. They do not charge a dry-loop fee. They discount their price for non-dry-loop (bundle discount). They perpetually have promos and are pretty flexible with unofficially extending the promos. Your hands are tied because you've got the tariffs you need to pay. Whereas Telus largely ignores them for themselves which undercuts the wholesalers. This isn't going to change anytime soon, either. Even if you try to have it addressed they will claim that they eat the costs and take a loss. It's not like there are many IISPs around here to help you in that battle, either. Though I admit, having the dry loop fee re-evaluated / abolished would make me very happy. But I've seen how slow and painful CRTC proceedings are and telcos will certainly not let it go without a decade long fight.

Stay competitive, but don't focus on being the cheapest. It ain't gonna happen. Instead, focus on what you do and can offer that the large, slow, departmentalised corporations won't/can't. CS reps who can troubleshoot without a script would go a long way here for "the masses". The biggest complaint I hear is bad customer service from Telus/Shaw. Let word spread that for approximately the same price they can have the same product with superior CS and it won't matter which is marginally cheaper. "I'll pay a premium to not have to deal with $company". Yes, I've heard that phrase. I've also heard "This product/hardware/technology isn't as good, but at least I don't have to deal with $company". Supporting techie features would draw the other crowd would don't generally need CS. When you do roll out IPv6, advertise it on your website. It shows you're a forward looking company who doesn't need to be dragged. In addition, no blocked ports. That seems to be a key point for several people here. But it's not listed as a selling point on your website. And those people are likely running servers, so higher upload is desired. MLPPP accommodates. I know you had it working in the East. I think you also had it supported in the West. But there's no mention on your DSL page. That would also attract your speed demons who want bragging rights. Sure 2x25Mb would be more than double, but it's a speed that literally impossible with Telus.

My 2¢.

right.. there's no point in trying to do anything with the higher speeds...

you're pointing out that the bundle rebate ends up being $15 if you have optic and 15 or 25meg... not $5...

and the same happens with say phone and 6meg.. it ends up being $10 bundle savings.. not $5...

however you slice it the only proposition we have it for unlimited users.. or really light users.. ergo.. the 75gig and unlimited.

mactalla,

I've read everything you've written.

In summary, the 6meg unlimited price is the problem. It should be $35..not $40.

I kind of like that and the margins look like we're not losing money.

If the margins allow you to offer 6Mb/Unlim @ $35 then that would be an excellent offering for everyone here, I think. In fact that would translate to $1 discount + upping the cap for nearly all your existing DSL customers (3Mb customers choose a tradeoff of $5 increase for the speed bump + cap increase, or decrease their cap in exchange for the speed bump; very fair).

75GB cap on the higher tiers still seem odd to me, but at a $5-7 difference I suspect everyone would be happy with unlimited and you simply wouldn't see much/any demand for those two plans.

To repeat, if the only change you make is to lower 6Mb/unlim by $5 I would certainly be very happy and think most if not all of us here would be too.

I'll do a bit more digging next week to see if it all adds up. I spend a few hours this morning, it does appear that it will work.

for the 75gig, It's for those light users who we know don't tax the network much. We want to make sure they feel at home with us too.