dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
11925
share rss forum feed


piacLUVSbell

@videotron.ca
reply to MaynardKrebs

Re: The New Wireless Code Hearings. Live Stream @ 9-am

Bell wants Fed to superceede all provincial codes and Consumer Protection laws. It's just too hard for the consumer. It would cause a consumer apacolipse.

They give some bullshit examples. Instead of addressing it as province specific to where a person lives. They stated a Quebec person may get confused and expect Nova Scotia laws to apply to them. And Bell wouldn't know what Provincial law should apply to a Quebec person, they may apply a Nova Scotia law to a Quebec person.

Total nonsense on every level.


hm

@videotron.ca
reply to MaynardKrebs
F) is an important one. In many cases with different brands, the branded-firmware prevents updates and thus functionality. Story is always the same. The world get the updates except for Canada.

MaynardKrebs
Heave Steve, for the good of the country
Premium
join:2009-06-17
kudos:4
reply to hm
said by hm :

The problem with that is that the likes of Bell, Rogers and Telus inflate the phone cost.

If you look at their websites where you can outright buy the phone, they mark it up by about 200$ more if you don't take a contract.

In other words, they punish you monetarily if you don't buy their 3 year contract.

CRTC would have to enforce cost, otherwise Bell, Rogers and Telus will continue to collude in keeping handsets artificially high.

Mobilicity made some reference to this.

For example, Bell has a huge market and a very big advantage when it comes to market share and buying power. They may get handsets at 400$ while smaller mobilicity gets them at 600$.

Yet Bell will turn around and sell that handset for 800$ if you don't buy a contract.

Mobilicity clearly stated they are screwing people since they can control all prices.

How would you control that when they manipulate market costs like this?

This is just one problem with the big 3. They artificially increase prices and control the market.

While you would maybe prefer a contract, I wouldn't. I would buy it outright. But then I get screwed paying 200$ more.

I agree with you.
But what if the market was opened up to sales something along the lines of this UK site:
»www.carphonewarehouse.com/mobile···_NEXUS_4
This is but one of many independent retailers/sales agents - jut like Future Shop/Best Buy, Wireless Wave, etc.... here.

Look at the deals link and you'll see that not only can you buy the phone outright, but that you can pay different amounts monthly over a 2-year term depending on the plan you subscribe to.

Since this phone is unlocked and will work on any carrier, the carriers then have to provide not only good plans but also deals on the handset in order to win your business. The carriers lower the monthly cost of the phone when you opt for a more expensive plan. In current Canadian carrier parlance, the carrier is now 'subsidizing' the phone cost more aggressively the more you spend with them - which is the way it should be.....unlike the bastardized "market" the Big 3 run in Canada.


elwoodblues
Elwood Blues
Premium
join:2006-08-30
Somewhere in
kudos:2
reply to hm
I have not had the time to listen to the hearings.
Can anyone post some Mp3's similar to the UBB hearings.


andyb
Premium
join:2003-05-29
SW Ontario
kudos:1
They have the video up on cpac till noon yesterday under "specials" in the video selection

Dunlop

join:2011-07-13
kudos:2
reply to hm
While I would be pissed to have my consumer rights as a quebecker eroded I almost would like to see the political backlash of what would happen here :P


shrug

@videotron.ca
said by Dunlop:

While I would be pissed to have my consumer rights as a quebecker eroded I almost would like to see the political backlash of what would happen here :P

After hearing what I heard, I'm all for a separate Quebec CRTC as was threatened before, a few times. Can't get much worse than what it already is anyhow.

-Companies fighting to taking protection rights away from us.
-a CRTC and fed gov who would allow it
-Retard CRTC chairs who rules in favour of lies.
-Wire-tapping communications.
-CRTC supporting high costs, and anything else to pry money from someones wallet.
-A competition bureau who doesn't foster competition.
-Industry Canada who doesn't foster innovation or new business models.

The whole lot of them are more crooked than the players in the construction corruption inquiry going on now.

We can do better. I say frig them. Go it alone. And I would support it.

Let's be honest here. Even if it doesn't happen, Bell, Rogers, and their lover PIAC, will likely run to cabinet or court.

I say frig the whole lot of them. We can do better. And instead of the hundreds of millions going to the CRTC, it would stay here.

*shrug*


Shrug

@videotron.ca
reply to Dunlop
said by Dunlop:

While I would be pissed to have my consumer rights as a quebecker eroded I almost would like to see the political backlash of what would happen here :P

I'm almost afraid of what they are going to ask JF tomorrow. The chair and commissioner Poirier (the french lady) have been asking direct or pointed questions about this. They know JF is a Kaybecker. I wonder if they are going to put him on the spot? Wonder if JF will answer or not if put on the spot.

JF (the bloke) might be responsible for Quebec separation!

Now that would make a great headline. Wonder if JF could ever skate on the Rideau Canal again in safety?

Tomorrow and Friday are going to be power-packed questions and presentations.

I hope to hell JF doesn't do anything gay like bring the CRTC chair a heart shaped box of chocolate He is quite the character.

LostTheGame

join:2012-11-24
Ottawa, ON
reply to indeedy
CCTS is only a dispute mediator; all the decisions rendered are on the website


mlerner
Premium
join:2000-11-25
Nepean, ON
kudos:5
reply to hm
We haven't even seen the final decision. It's a little premature to bash the CRTC on a decision that isn't anywhere near final yet. For all you know, they could merge the provincial laws with the code.


elwoodblues
Elwood Blues
Premium
join:2006-08-30
Somewhere in
kudos:2
reply to andyb
Thanks Andy

icemasta

join:2013-01-22
reply to hm
What a shrill Bell is...

"A vast majority of our customers choose 3 year contract and not 1 and 2."
Ya I wonder why no one picked 1 and 2 years when on a $500 no contract phone, 1 year term price was $450 and 2 year term was $400 and then 3 years is $0.

Wish some of these commissioners had a proper understanding of the Canadian mobile industry so carriers can be called out on their tactics.

MaynardKrebs
Heave Steve, for the good of the country
Premium
join:2009-06-17
kudos:4
reply to hm
Bell: The real benefit to consumer of 3-year contracts is that you get to use HUGE amounts of lube!!

RicHSAD

join:2003-07-16
Vaudreuil-Dorion, QC
reply to icemasta
So much bullshit.

MaynardKrebs
Heave Steve, for the good of the country
Premium
join:2009-06-17
kudos:4
reply to hm
I just back from a meeting..... can anyone summarize questions/answers so far.

icemasta

join:2013-01-22
The commissioner is asking the right questions about 3 year contracts should be a shorter, the questionable inflated no contract pricing, and Bell's previous broken up ETF (data subsidy and voice subsidy fee).

She's asking the right questions, but I wish she would push harder since she just agrees with little force about the BS Bell says.

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

She's asking the right questions, but I wish she would push harder since she just agrees with little force about the BS Bell says.

Molnar typically comes across that way. She's smart.

MaynardKrebs
Heave Steve, for the good of the country
Premium
join:2009-06-17
kudos:4
reply to hm
I don't buy Bel's assertion that they can't figure out who got a 'subsidy' and how much.

MaynardKrebs
Heave Steve, for the good of the country
Premium
join:2009-06-17
kudos:4
reply to hm
Oh Candace.... Bell's 'voluntarily' offering to do gives the CRTC NO teeth in enforcement since it's only a voluntary undertaking. It has to be MANDATORY.

Smart...maybe not so much...

MaynardKrebs
Heave Steve, for the good of the country
Premium
join:2009-06-17
kudos:4
reply to hm
Bell wants to use 0.5pt. type on a document pinned to the Archimedes crater on the moon, and then say "See, up there? That's where your comparison/personal statement is."


hm

@videotron.ca
reply to icemasta
Wade Oosterman, one of the Bell guys sitting there, was involved in a small consumer backlash people bought some samsung phone and the Bell branded firmware prevented all samsung updates while the rest of the world got them.

People couldn't use Gmail and a host of other online sites.

Ellen Roseman of the Toronto Star got involved, and they said they fixed everything. But they never did. They lied to each of their customers + Ellen Roseman.

Quebec's Consumer Union then got involved. I don't recall what happened, but a class action was starting.

This is when Bell Canada closed their own online forum at Bell.ca due to the shear number of people who went there to complain. They couldn't keep up banning people from their forum for complaining, so they closed it.

People were stuck with a non-functioning "smart-phone" and stuck in a contract.

All this because of Bell branded firmware that locked people & updates out. As MaynardKrebs more or less stated, Firmware branding is the same as a lock. Even worse, it affects functionality.


hm

@videotron.ca
reply to icemasta
said by icemasta:

She's asking the right questions, but I wish she would push harder since she just agrees with little force about the BS Bell says.

JF will make sure they don't get away with it. Just you wait till he gets to speak.

Prepare your popcorn!

icemasta

join:2013-01-22
I hope so.

It's tough watching the amount of garbage Bell is saying and not being able to personally argue back at them.

@hm

I wouldn't put it past Bell to use that tactic.

MaynardKrebs
Heave Steve, for the good of the country
Premium
join:2009-06-17
kudos:4
reply to hm
Tabs: If it's this hard to explain then it only can have come from an incumbent.

MaynardKrebs
Heave Steve, for the good of the country
Premium
join:2009-06-17
kudos:4
reply to hm
Q. If a customer fulfills their 36 month term and then rolls over onto month-to-month and own their own phone, why doesn't Bell give the customer a 10% plan discount?

A: Bell screws its customers all the time, contract or not.

icemasta

join:2013-01-22
Q. If a customer fulfills their 36 month term and then rolls over onto month-to-month and own their own phone, why doesn't Bell give the customer a 10% plan discount?

A. Wade Oosterman - It's not related at all....

WTF
This is why I hate Bell.


mazhurg
Premium
join:2004-05-02
Brighton, ON
reply to hm
Unlimited is unlimited unless....

Talk about twisting the angels on the pinhead....


hm

@videotron.ca
said by mazhurg:

Unlimited is unlimited unless....

Talk about twisting the angels on the pinhead....

Unlimited is unlimited. Except when it's not unlimited per fair use terms. So if we say it's unlimited, it truly is unlimited. Well, except when someone uses unlimited because that would be abuse. But it's unlimited. Yes.

Sounds like one of their contracts...

icemasta

join:2013-01-22
reply to mazhurg
"I work in the industry but don't know what a byte is..."

I agree all management might not and does not know every little detail about the industry but not knowing the very basics of the mobile industry that they work in is surprising.


mazhurg
Premium
join:2004-05-02
Brighton, ON
Reviews:
·MTS
reply to hm
My Name is Ma Bell. I offer you the following services: Rip your left arm, or rip your right arm so we offer only what the customer wants.

For proof, see how many half armed users out there? That they complain for the loss of their arm is minor, to be glossed over.