O Canada! > Canadian > Canadian Broadband > CNOC Files w/ CRTC Against Rogers

reply to TakeOffEh

Re: CNOC Files w/ CRTC Against Rogers

Someone in IRC asked me to create an easier to follow timeline of everything, because the CRTC's site really sucks, and cuz this thread bounced a bit between the 2 proceedings.

So here's the full timeline with links, and a bit of a summary:
»dl.dropbox.com/u/9038867/Rogers/CRTC.html
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP

I have a good feeling.

Karma is definitely on the side of CNOC

First the prez of CNOC gets struck by lightning and lived to tell about it
»Prez of CNOC Hit by Lightening

and now he just got in a car accident which totaled his car on the 401 and he's still chugging away.

Both heaven and hell doesn't want this guy. Guess he's stuck in CRTC purgatory.

I'm glad CNOC made reference to your filing and more or less copied it. I'm pretty sure it would have went ignored, as they always have in the past.

CNOC and JF made sure it didn't.

But then again, we have seen over the years how CNOC, CAIP, and JF referenced blatant lies people have pointed out and the CRTC ignored it anyhow. *shrug*

I'm also kind of surprised that PIAC or the consumers union didn't bother with this one (equal access). But then again Since Anthony Hemond left the consumers union I find they aren't the same, or as involved or as vocal.

You did good. +1 to you. Let's wait and see how (if) the CRTC acknowledges it.

reply to Anon

Re: CNOC Files w/ CRTC Against Rogers

Any word on Roger's response today?

Rogers doesn't have to file til 8pm EST.

I haven't received anything from JF today - he's been forwarding me everything as I'm not on any of the established email lists.
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP

If you has signed up for UBB stuff you would get everything still.I get everything for this rogers tariff too from that.Well except from CNOC who seem incapable of sending to anyone but the CRTC

I didn't sign up during the UBB process to get the filings
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP

reply to resa1983
6. This argument ignores the fact that 18, 28 and 32 Mbps speed services will remain in the market for existing retail and TPIA end-users and that 25, 35 and 45 Mbps are new speeds.

This is irrelevant. Their customers are getting it as a speed upgrade and so should wholesale customers. The "grandfathered" speeds are only there for non-doc-3 modem users who haven't spent the money to upgrade their modems yet. THAT IS ALL.

But Rogers this as not a speed upgrade at all (which is indeed what it is per their marketing material and ad-injections to their own customers, as Rssa pointed out):
7. ... “determines that if a cable carrier introduces a new retail Internet service speed, it is to file, at the same time, proposed revisions to its TPIA tariff to include this new speed offering, with a supporting cost study.”

In other words, Rogers is pretending the old tiers are their as an old offering instead of what it actually is, a grace period for people to upgrade to Doc-3 modems. In other words, they are still claiming it's not a speed upgrade as their marketing material clearly shows.

What a joke.

Then Rogers goes on to state that the cost increases because it's Doc-3 pricing and not Doc-2. But they again negate to mention their own customers are not getting the cost increase. They are instead getting a "free upgrade". Then they again play this as saying CNOC is trying to pretend Doc-3 costing doesn't exist.

Then Rogers mentions the new costs are based on policy 703, but negates to mention these prices are all over-priced and on revue.

In other words Rogers is saying, "Hurry force the over-priced costs on wholesale before they get knocked down so we can have a competitive advantage for a few months before changes occur".

In #13, Rogers then states the flawed 703 costs that will be re-reviewed, are correct and states we have already proved Doc-3 prices are higher. Yet again negates to say they are giving it free to their own customers.

LOL Then Rogers states CNOC lives in denial. LOL

Rogers then states in a round about way that previous price hikes Rogers customers got were applied to these upgrades so customers already paid for it and indeed paying for it now.

So what does this mean? Rogers just stated that Doc-2 customers (their own customers) should be applying to the CCTS because they are paying for a Doc-3 modem with Doc-3 speeds yet don't have it. Too bad for them. Can of worms there... Where is the Consumers Union when you need them?

Rogers then goes on playing the system in regards to the flawed 703 policy and what was stated there with flawed costs.

The who thing is a game.

Man, what a circle of bullshit.