dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
17
share rss forum feed

resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10
reply to AOD

Re: CNOC Files w/ CRTC Against Rogers

Yup. I'm just finishing my submission - I have a few great people proofing for me since my writing usually sucks fairly badly.
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP



TOPDAWG
Premium
join:2005-04-27
Midland, ON
kudos:3
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL

said by resa1983:

Yup. I'm just finishing my submission - I have a few great people proofing for me since my writing usually sucks fairly badly.

HA yeah I'm god awful at the writing skills too. thank god for spell check on a browser.

resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10

JF tweeted the following 2 hrs ago (formatted for easier reading):

#CRTC schedule for Rogers TN28:
Tue: comments on rates.
Fri: CNOC reply for its Part1 on TN28.
Tue-27, Rogers replies on TN28 rate comment.
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP


resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10

Bell submitted a response in .doc format. I pdf'd it for easier posting here.

Rogers's response is up on the site now as well.

They've also linked Rogers' TN28, 29 & 30 as "Related Links" for the Part 1.

My .zip however isn't showing up under TN28, 29 & 30 for some odd reason...
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP


elwoodblues
Elwood Blues
Premium
join:2006-08-30
Somewhere in
kudos:2

They agree with Robbers, why am I not shocked.



Fn Dummies

@videotron.ca
reply to resa1983

This Philippe Gauvin (Senior Counsel- Regulatory Law and Policy) guy from Bell isn't too bright is he?

In the Companies' view, the approach taken by Rogers with respect to prorating existing TPIA rates in order to determine rates for these new speeds is entirely appropriate. Such an approach allows both wholesale and retail customers to benefit from the swift introduction of new speed options without the untimely delays associated with performing additional cost studies.

If most all of TSI's customers are on non-aggregated and Rogers is giving the speed only to aggregated, how does someone "benefit from the swift introduction of new speed options without the untimely delays "?

Are all TPIA resellers supposed to just magically move to aggregated w/ no need to worry about the costs of their non-aggregated links? Rogers will just say, "ok don't pay for those, it's alright we understand"?

Are both customers and TPIA resellers just supposed to accept a cost increase? What about all the people who will remain on the grandfathered speeds because they don't want the price increase or going out to buy a new doc-3 modem?

Well I guess everyone will just accept it all as is. Bell just said so. *head-slap*

I'm heading out to buy a box of crackerjacks so I can get the Regulatory Law degree surprise in the box too.

Basically Bell is stating, "fuck the speed-match policy. We are backing Rogers into twisting what it actually says. Screw the people. Mo money for us."


resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10

1 edit
reply to elwoodblues

My filing isn't on the TN pages, but is showing on the CNOC Part 1 Application page.

Just sent off an email inquiring about that - whether its an oversight, or whether I missed a deadline (due to no deadlines being posted publicly). And if I missed a deadline to please take my submission into account for the TN filings as well as the Part 1 Application.

I really don't like how you can't find what you're looking for on the CRTC's website - missing things, some things hard-copy only, not being able to make direct comments via the website - forcing a user who has a comment about the proceedings (but doesn't know all participants) to agree to send their comments to all participants, but doesn't provide a bloody list of all participants.

Its freakin ridiculous.

--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP



Yeeep

@videotron.ca

said by resa1983:

Its freakin ridiculous.

That is our great CRTC. Pretty shitty, eh?

resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10

said by Yeeep :

said by resa1983:

Its freakin ridiculous.

That is our great CRTC. Pretty shitty, eh?

I think I remember them saying they were working on a rewrite of the site. Hopefully, it will actually work properly once its up.
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP

resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10

Got an email back. My submission will count for all 4 files. As well, got the pdf file confirming tonight's deadline for filing comments to Rogers' TNs.

As uploaded.
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP

MaynardKrebs
Heave Steve, for the good of the country
Premium
join:2009-06-17
kudos:4

said by resa1983:

Got an email back. My submission will count for all 4 files. As well, got the pdf file confirming tonight's deadline for filing comments to Rogers' TNs.

I noticed that the CRTC included everyone's e-mail addresses in their reply letter, but I was surprised to see that Bell wasn't using their 'regulationsucks@bell.ca' address for this submission.

resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10

They're still 'separate' issues. The TN they want to deal only with the pricing, while with the CNOC Part 1 they want to deal with whether non-agg gets it. I assume the decision for all will come out with the CRTC's order to revise TN28-30.
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP


resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10

Click for full size
downloadTN2829Addendum.pdf 56,413 bytes
Added the following .pdf file to my revised submission to make it crystal clear these are not 'new' tiers, but upgrades.
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP


i LOLd

@videotron.ca
reply to resa1983

Resa, seems to me Rogers got away with another lie.

As you are finding out, the CRTC doesn't care Bell or Rogers say one thing and do another. Or lie through their teeth. Their is no honour nor integrity at this Canadian government institution.

See:
»Re: CNOC Files w/ CRTC Against Rogers

However, I think it would be funny if someone pushed the issue and directly asked the CRTC chair why they accept the lies as is while ignoring what is actually happening.


resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10

New JF submission for TN28-30. Haven't read it yet.
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP


hm

@videotron.ca

said by resa1983:

New JF submission for TN28-30. Haven't read it yet.

Basically JF is stating this:

Point #1:
1) The CRTC is giving preference to Rogers over Bell in allowing a cost increase for the speed tiers. The commission already stated that Bell is to give the same speed upgrades at no cost. So if the CRTC allows Rogers to increase costs Bell can & will file an undue preference and demand the same.

This in turn will also justify Bell increasing rates for no reason.

In addition the CRTC will disregard & toss out previous policy.

Also, JF points out the lies you caught them in which the CRTC is once again ignoring.

Ramifications:
Both resellers and customers of resellers will be getting price increases.

Summary:
if the CRTC allows this a an of worms will be opened for price hikes across the board for everything. Be prepared for price hikes to your 3rd party internet provider. Both cable and DSL for each miniscule 1-meg increase.

In addition to the raising of rates for all 3rd party internet service, Bell and rogers will undercut price since the CRTC is allowing & putting price hikes in stone for resellers but not for the incumbents, Bell, Rogers et al.

Simply put, the CRTC is tossing out speed match policies and also creating new pricing policies.

+1 JF!

It's pretty clear Bell is going to jump on the band-wagon. And if the CRTC refuses then Bell can state the CRTC is giving Rogers a competitive advantage.

However, the CRTC already said Cable-co costs are more than DSL in a previous ruling. So this is the only wiggle room I see for both CNOC and the CRTC to use to disapprove a Bell rate hike. And this one point may be weak.

CNOC turn in this chess match.

Ressa went ignored.

resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10

I wouldn't say ignored. I'd say someone who is much more experienced than I, read my submission, took information I gathered, and put it into a submission the CRTC would take much more seriously and accept.

Curious how they're going to try to wiggle out of these not being upgrades, instead of new packages like they stated though.

--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP



hm

@videotron.ca

said by resa1983:

I wouldn't say ignored. I'd say someone who is much more experienced than I, read my submission, took information I gathered, and put it into a submission the CRTC would take much more seriously and accept.

No Resa. Your submission should should be taken equally as serious as JF's submission or Bell's submission.

Don't put yourself down or even think that you are less important or less serious.

You did well. You showed and brought up Rogers lies that both CNOC and JF missed at first chance. The Harper governments CRTC *chose* to ignore you.

I hope you now explore how to file an access to Information request to see all the info that was used to judge this case. I would also hope JF does as well.

I've never done one so i'm access to Information dumb. But I'm sure JF would help you if you asked him. Or maybe someone else here who has experience in it.

Then you can post it for all to see.

You did very well and are also seeing how for years people have been screaming and the CRTC just ignores everyone except for Bell and Rogers. Even when they are blatantly lying through their teeth and everyone knows it (yet the Harper CRTC chooses to pretend it doesn't exist).