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."