dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
11884
share rss forum feed


hm

@videotron.ca
reply to hm

Day 3. Live Stream

Commissioner Molnar has asked the same question to almost everyone, and the question tends to stump everyone.

Paraphrase: "How can we measure that the code is working"?

Most everyone replies with: By the number of complaints.

Going by memory the past couple of days, either she (Ms. Molnar) or the CRTC chair said this is not a good way.

So, who here has an idea on how else they can measure the usefulness of the new code?



hm

@videotron.ca
reply to MaynardKrebs

Yesterday Rogers stated that w/o a phone subsidy your plan price only drops 5-10$. I checked my wifes Rogers bill (with her permission, of course) and after the contract period it dropped by 24$. Not 5 or 10. Rogers lied again.
===

Hm, Diversity Canada is bringing up info on some Class Action which seems to be against Bell Canada.

She is arguing Prov laws need to be maintained, and is stating (paraphrase) that it's too late for them to run to the CRTC after all this time to only have fed laws apply now that laws are starting to protect people from their vulture like preying on people.

Damn. I like here. I'd buy her a glass of wine.

She provided proof that Bell is screwing people (affidavit from a class action) about Bell giving people two expiry dates on pre-paid balances.

I wasn't aware of this class-action.

BONUS POINT: ...And she is wearing a Bell Canada T-shirt while saying all this!

She rox!


KC7

join:2006-11-08
Ottawa, ON

Thanks for the blow by blow.


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

said by hm :

Yesterday Rogers stated that w/o a phone subsidy your plan price only drops 5-10$. I checked my wifes Rogers bill (with her permission, of course) and after the contract period it dropped by 24$. Not 5 or 10. Rogers lied again.

$24 per month or per ANNUM?
Which phone did she have?

My issue with BYOD plans is that the prices need to be posted so that consumers can make a decision as to whether it makes most sense for them to either buy the phone outright and do BYOD plans, or to go with the subsidized pricing plans.

The other reason why pricing both ways needs to be priced is so the carriers can't under-value the subsidy, thus pushing the price of the BYOD plans up. I have some easy to implement ideas on how this can be done so that there is transparency, and fairness to both consumers & carriers.

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

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

Natalie MacDonald (Eastlink) was just testifying about roaming & real-time costing availability. The problem I see with her testimony is that she's a VP Regulatory Affairs (ie. a lawyer) talking to a bunch of CRTC commissioners (mostly lawyers) - neither of which know much about the technical matters involved in actually making real-time or near-time data available to consumers. As such I'm not optimistic that this matter will ever be properly addressed from a regulatory (code of conduct) basis.

Name & shame is actually a good idea.
That's what sites like epinions.com sort of do.

I can't see why the CRTC commissioner (Stephen Simpson) didn't phrase the question "Do you as a consumer of goods & services yourself, for all types of products, see the value of others opinions & publicity of customer service issues people have with supplies? If so, why do you oppose the suggestion here?"


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

The acquisition of a new phone should NOT constitute a new (or renewal) contract. The phone should be financed separately from the cellular services provided.


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

They should stop allowing the use of the word SUBSIDY - the correct expression should be CONSUMER FINANCING


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

Anyone got a link to the Eastlink document?


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

Here's a link to Eastlink's upcoming cellular service
»www.eastlink.ca/wireless.aspx


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

I like these Eastlink people and their company approach.


icemasta

join:2013-01-22
reply to hm

Eastlink can't order the phones unlocked? I always assumed the carrier ordered them locked for their own advantage.


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

said by icemasta:

Eastlink can't order the phones unlocked? I always assumed the carrier would wish to lock the phones.

ALL phones sold in Hong Kong are legally required to be sold completely unlocked - including iPhone. Honk Kong has a population of about 7.5 million people.

Interestingly, the iPhone costs exactly the same in Hong Kong as it does here (locked).

icemasta

join:2013-01-22

1 edit

I realize in some countries they are required to be sold unlocked, but the response from Eastlink of saying they basically have no option to the question whether or not they can order unlocked phones seemed weird.



hm

@videotron.ca
reply to hm

Re: Day 3. Live Stream

Eastlink (Bragg):

Not much they have added. They stated only one fed code should apply and not Prov Consumer Protection laws. Basically because it's easier for them and nothing else.

Very weak.

Eastlink is happy with the CCTS only putting out a simple, non-in-depth, yearly report that hides most of the info that you and I would find useful as consumers in a situation looking for help and/or recourse.

Eastlink stated that any material change should void your contract, contrary to what Rogers stated.

Paraphrased: Stated the consumer bought something and entered a contract expecting what they bought. Not material changes.

It should be noted, rate ($) changes are a material change.

Didn't notice anything else not already stated.

Eastlink wasn't as anal and full of lies & BS like the CWTA and Rogers. Not bad... Surprised me. They deserve a point. They seem customer focused (aside from their weak argument of opposing consumer protection laws to make their lives easier).

Mobilicity is up after lunch (1:00 or 1:30). This one should be good.



hm

@videotron.ca
reply to MaynardKrebs

said by MaynardKrebs:

$24 per month or per ANNUM?

24/month
Will read rest of your post when I get back... foot out the door.


Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:23

1 edit
reply to MaynardKrebs

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

said by MaynardKrebs:

ALL phones sold in Hong Kong are legally required to be sold completely unlocked - including iPhone. Honk Kong has a population of about 7.5 million people.

Interestingly, the iPhone costs exactly the same in Hong Kong as it does here (locked).

I looked into that. The largest carrier on Hong Kong, with 4.25 million customers, does not carry the iPhone. The second largest carrier, Three, with 3.51 million customers, does carry it. They offer a discount only if you get their "Pair Up" subscription (whatever that is), and the discount is $43 CAD on a 16GB price of $655 CAD (roughly the same as the full US price of $649 USD)

In other words, the unlocked iPhone is sold at more or less full price in Hong Kong, just like it is here (all iPhones sold directly from Apple in Canada are unlocked).

Interestingly, Three does have various options where you pay part of the cost of the phone up-front, and pay the rest in monthly payments. Either way you'll pay the full cost of the phone, just partially delayed in some cases.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org

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

All Lyons (Mobilicity) has to say is, "We agree on notifications. We already do it, so if the CRTC writes it into the Code we already comply. The Big 3 will have to do work in this regard."


icemasta

join:2013-01-22

Liking this commissioners (sorry never caught her name) questions to Mobilicity.


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

The CRTC commissioner asking about data limits doesn't get it.



hm

@videotron.ca
reply to icemasta

said by icemasta:

Liking this commissioners (sorry never caught her name) questions to Mobilicity.

Great questions.

Great replies by Mobilicity (who support tow levels of law and said they would just apply the strictest level of the two).

I wish I could get them here! This hearing sold me on them.

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

Given the testimony the new entrants have given vs. the incumbent testimony, I would hope that the CRTC now realizes that it is the new entrants are providing customer friendly service and good value propositions.

The logical extension of this is to break up the incumbents into not only their verticals, but to also split them laterally, ie. Bell cellular gets hived off from BCE and then Bell cellular gets split into 2-3 national carriers, each smaller and each competing with all the other 'new' entrants.

That way all companies are new entrants and must offer superior deals and customer service.



hm

@videotron.ca
reply to MaynardKrebs

said by MaynardKrebs:

The acquisition of a new phone should NOT constitute a new (or renewal) contract. The phone should be financed separately from the cellular services provided.

Agreed. And you should be able to buy a debranded phone from anywhere to work with anyone of your choosing.

But the way Rogers, and the CWTA are going, it would be a consumer apocalypse.


hm

@videotron.ca
reply to MaynardKrebs

Well that was a power-packed Q&A period.

The only situation with them is how they interpret the law should a Quebec by their service in Ottawa. Or rather, how they stated they want to interpret the law.

But with their offerings and the way the offer it I can't see them having issues. The only issue I can see is a warranty one. But I could be wrong. Haven't thought it out...

Summary on contracts, Prov Consumer Protection laws versus Fed laws, and competition:

They are in favour of "the highest level of Consumer Protection available". That is, they support both the fed and prov codes/laws.

Paraphrased: This protection also serves smaller start-ups as well since people are not screwed to one of the big carriers for years.

Paraphrased: Not being lock or screwed to a bad contract = Beneficial for a competitive market place to thrive that serves the consumer.


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

Dennis Hogarth, arguably a sophisticated customer, got screwed by the lack of coherent & accurate information at the point-of-sale. And he sort of danced around the dismal quality of point-of-sale personnel.

A LOT of the problems can be database-driven by having customers answering a few questions at point-of-purchase, ie.
max # of texts/month
max. overage $ for texts
max. overage. minutes
max overage voice $
etc....

All this ties into the real-time control of the customer bill.


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

said by hm :

[
But the way Rogers, and the CWTA are going, it would be a consumer apocalypse.

Hopefully it would include a lots of walking Rogers executive zombies we can pick off with assault rifles and flamethrowers.

Hey CSIS/RCMP - that's all tongue-in-cheek - just in case you're looking.


hm

@videotron.ca
reply to MaynardKrebs

Up next: Consumers Council of Canada

JF mentioned something where he might be called to talk earlier than expected (this afternoon), so he took off to his jail cell to do final touches on his presentation.


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

1 edit
reply to hm

Once the CRTC realizes that there are two deals happening when a consumer finances a phone & a plan, ie.

a) a phone financing
b) a plan

Customer can then choose the term to finance the phone and separately choose the term of service.



hm

@videotron.ca

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.


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

Manufacturer sets SRP, and then any retailer can buy them to sell at any price they like - just like HP does with printers, Samsung does with TV's



andyb
Premium
join:2003-05-29
SW Ontario
kudos:1
reply to hm

Bell is doing Presentation today.Will answer questions tomorrow