dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
4410
share rss forum feed

bt

join:2009-02-26
canada
kudos:1
reply to 34764170

Re: Outrage(going over cap)

said by 34764170:

said by bt:

and what retention deals you can get

Anyone that relies on retention deals deserves to get triple raped by Rogers.

Classy.

What's your beef with someone saving money, anyways?

JAC70

join:2008-10-20
canada

said by bt:

said by 34764170:

said by bt:

and what retention deals you can get

Anyone that relies on retention deals deserves to get triple raped by Rogers.

Classy.
What's your beef with someone saving money, anyways?

Someone's bitter that they don't have the negotiating skills to get a deal.

34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON
reply to skyangry

I'd rather deal with a company that gives decent pricing from the beginning instead of having to play stupid games. You guys probably didn't think about that because that would be too logical.



TOPDAWG
Premium
join:2005-04-27
Midland, ON
kudos:3

guess what in some areas you can't get the other guys. that is all there is to it.


bt

join:2009-02-26
canada
kudos:1
reply to 34764170

said by 34764170:

I'd rather deal with a company that gives decent pricing from the beginning instead of having to play stupid games.

Nothing wrong with that.

But apparently you also wish ill upon anyone who would rather play games if it means they spend less. You seem to take the thought of someone not having your exact priorities pretty personally. For some people, the bottom line is, well, the bottom line and they don't care at all about any form of corporate loyalty (or corporate spite). You probably didn't think about that because it wouldn't be emotional enough.

said by 34764170:

You guys probably didn't think about that because that would be too logical.

Perhaps you should have tried using some basic observation skills before posting that. (hint: look to the left of this post for a clue about how you're wrong in that assumption)

JAC70

join:2008-10-20
canada
reply to 34764170

said by 34764170:

I'd rather deal with a company that gives decent pricing from the beginning instead of having to play stupid games. You guys probably didn't think about that because that would be too logical.

Teksavvy isn't available in my area, and from what I hear, they're not exactly reliable these days. Bell is not even worth consdering, because they're Bell. So I negotiate the best deal with Rogers I possibly can. In return, I get faster, more stable service than you, a cap I can manage (most months) and the price I pay for performance is the cost of the service.

Your logical arguments are hampered by a lack of information.

Samgee

join:2010-08-02
canada
kudos:2

said by JAC70:

In return, I get faster, more stable service

Over my years with Rogers I actually had more downtime and worse congestion/throttling than I ever have in my 2+ years with Acanac. The only reason they are able to currently offer higher speeds is because they are violating the CRTC speed matching rulings.

34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON
reply to JAC70

said by JAC70:

Teksavvy isn't available in my area, and from what I hear, they're not exactly reliable these days. Bell is not even worth consdering, because they're Bell. So I negotiate the best deal with Rogers I possibly can. In return, I get faster, more stable service than you, a cap I can manage (most months) and the price I pay for performance is the cost of the service.

Your logical arguments are hampered by a lack of information.

Rogers is not worth considering either. They're worse than Bell. You don't have a more stable service and faster means nothing to me with such pathetic caps. Caps make the connection unusable for me.

34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON
reply to bt

said by bt:

Perhaps you should have tried using some basic observation skills before posting that. (hint: look to the left of this post for a clue about how you're wrong in that assumption)

My comment was about Rogers not Start you genius.

bt

join:2009-02-26
canada
kudos:1
reply to 34764170

said by 34764170:

They're worse than Bell.

That's a matter of opinion.

said by 34764170:

You don't have a more stable service

Depends on the area. Some people absolutely do have a more stable service with Rogers than they would with Bell.

said by 34764170:

and faster means nothing to me with such pathetic caps. Caps make the connection unusable for me.

That's you. Don't be so foolish as to think that applies to everyone else as well. Many, many people stay comfortably under the Rogers caps without having to even try to do so. To those people, your issues with the Rogers caps mean absolutely nothing at all.

said by 34764170:

said by bt:

Perhaps you should have tried using some basic observation skills before posting that. (hint: look to the left of this post for a clue about how you're wrong in that assumption)

My comment was about Rogers not Start you genius.

I know which company your comment was about. What you missed, genius, was the point. I'm with a company that gives decent pricing from the beginning instead of having to play games. Yet according to you, I "probably didn't think about that".


EMM

@rogers.com

Few years ago, you were able to play a little game with Rogers, Switch to a higher tier near the end of the billing cycle to get increased cap, and only pay a pro-rated fee.
Not sure if they wised up to that but, now, I believe they do charge a hefty downgrade or upgrade fee. You USED to be able to do it manually on the website.
Just have to make sure you have one of the up-to-date (garbage) D3 modems they want you to have now.
I'm currently stuck in the 60GB cap package due to a refusal to trade in a D2 modem for a D3 and cost increase.



angrysky

@dsl4u.ca
reply to skyangry

I have had enough so like alot of people suggested I'm going with teksavvy...I've also decided to cancel every single one of my services with rogers and never look back.I would understand if I'm a power user
doing 1tb a month but I have never went over the limit before other then that 1 month and they want to penny and dim me?


Makaveli998

join:2002-04-23

2 edits
reply to JAC70

said by JAC70:

Someone's bitter that they don't have the negotiating skills to get a deal.

Agreed.

I talked them into giving me 55% off my internet for the next 2 years.

I was on a grandfathered SB5100 modem with the old extreme package and really had no where to go interms of speed upgrades. So I told them I was looking to switch to teksavvy. My major complaints were the $200 purchase cost for the docsis 3.0 gateways while I can get a modem from teksavvy for $100. And the 300GB cap that rogers doesn't offer. Plus my tenture at rogers has been many years and I have wireless and TV.

Helps to be a former rogers employee so you have to know how to talk to them on the phone don't ever waste your time with first level support.

JAC70

join:2008-10-20
canada
reply to 34764170

said by 34764170:

Rogers is not worth considering either. They're worse than Bell. You don't have a more stable service and faster means nothing to me with such pathetic caps. Caps make the connection unusable for me.

Rogers worse than Bell? Sorry, kid, but no. And unless you're a Bell customer with actual FTTH, my 150/10 connection is likely faster and more stable than yours.

Low caps you can argue, but then Teksavvy just sold out their customers didn't they? They won't be around long when that hits the mainstream media.

bt

join:2009-02-26
canada
kudos:1

said by JAC70:

Low caps you can argue, but then Teksavvy just sold out their customers didn't they?

Yep, sold them out. By requiring a court order and giving notice to the customers beforehand about the proceedings so the actual parties could fight to keep the court order from being issued themselves if they deemed fit...

JAC70

join:2008-10-20
canada

said by bt:

Yep, sold them out. By requiring a court order and giving notice to the customers beforehand about the proceedings so the actual parties could fight to keep the court order from being issued themselves if they deemed fit...

Sold them out by not opposing the motion. TekSavvy may not be responsible for its users' defence against infringement lawsuits, but it is responsible for protecting its users' privacy, especially from a copyright troll like Voltage.

Samgee

join:2010-08-02
canada
kudos:2

said by JAC70:

Sold them out by not opposing the motion. TekSavvy may not be responsible for its users' defence against infringement lawsuits, but it is responsible for protecting its users' privacy, especially from a copyright troll like Voltage.

Go join the conversations in their forums so you can educate yourself on what's happening. The court will decide if the information needs to be released, Teksavvy has already said they will not give it otherwise.

JAC70

join:2008-10-20
canada

said by Samgee:

Go join the conversations in their forums so you can educate yourself on what's happening. The court will decide if the information needs to be released, Teksavvy has already said they will not give it otherwise.

TSI Marc stated it pretty clearly in "Why we are not opposing motion on Monday." If the motion passes, they will give it up without a fight.

As opposed to Shaw and Telus, who successfully fought off a similar request from BMG in 2004.

bt

join:2009-02-26
canada
kudos:1

said by JAC70:

TSI Marc stated it pretty clearly in "Why we are not opposing motion on Monday." If the motion passes, they will give it up without a fight.

If the motion passes, that means any and all ways to fight it have already failed. The only thing Teksavvy could do at that point to fight it would put them on the wrong side of the law, putting the company at risk.


TypeS

join:2012-12-17
London, ON
kudos:1
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
reply to JAC70

said by JAC70:

said by Samgee:

Go join the conversations in their forums so you can educate yourself on what's happening. The court will decide if the information needs to be released, Teksavvy has already said they will not give it otherwise.

TSI Marc stated it pretty clearly in "Why we are not opposing motion on Monday." If the motion passes, they will give it up without a fight.

As opposed to Shaw and Telus, who successfully fought off a similar request from BMG in 2004.

What happened in 2004 and what's happening now are separated by almost a decade and the laws have also changed. Get off your illusionary high horse already. I honestly doubt any TPIA provider (TekSavvy, Start, Accanac, Distributel, etc) would want to dump hundreds of thousands, if not millions, into defending privacy when their civil groups and lobbyists already fighting that fight.

And again, almost a decade later, the big 3 communications companies are no longer just providing the medium to deliver content, they own the content creators and broadcasting networks, if you think they'd take the same stance again now, think again.

As for discussion about Rogers & caps, I believe Rogers actually is marginally more stable then going with 3rd party cable internet provider, since they will give you priority when something happens on your line. Not to mention its easier to get a tech out to your home for any repairs. If you can wrangle out a deal what saves the same or more that a 3rd party provider would, hey why not. I personally tried to negotiate what I could before I left rogers but I wasn't willing to pay $100 for mid tier service. I also had better pings in games when I was on Rogers cable internet. It's very much YMMV.

Kane Hart

join:2012-11-17
Reviews:
·Rogers Hi-Speed
reply to yyzlhr

said by yyzlhr:

You feel ripped off because you signed up with a company that offers a capped service and you got charged for overusage?!?

Shaw does not offer a cap 15 years ago when I signed up.... And a lot of people stuck in places that don't have the so called Resellers...
Expand your moderator at work