dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
uniqs
75

TSI Marc
Premium Member
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON

TSI Marc to LastDon

Premium Member

to LastDon

Re: All This UBB , Usage based BS was such a waste

said by LastDon:

said by TSI Marc:

How's this for coincidence: »www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/decisions.htm

Oh oh what did they file for? more price increases on you guys?

Sort of... It's the continuation to the UBB stuff... We now call it CBB.. Capacity based billing... Essentially our costs are going to change across the board... We deal with 7 incumbents and all of them may change on us in one shot.
LastDon
join:2002-08-13

LastDon

Member

You guys in theory or maybe not in theory but
in reality use this new "unlimited" offering to your advantage no?

Could the CNOC and others not file some new filing with the crtc ?

On a side note, I am just a customer and have been following this saga like most of us from day 1. It truly pisses me off that they go around and start offering shi..t like this when just months / a year ago they were making customers worried about costs and usage.

f'ing arssoles.

TSI Marc
Premium Member
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON

TSI Marc

Premium Member

Not much we can do about their retal offerings... Earlier this year bell started totally undercutting us on business DSL. Their retail was lower than our costs.

I'm totally with you. My blood just boils when I think of all the shit we've been put through.

elwoodblues
Elwood Blues
Premium Member
join:2006-08-30
Somewhere in

elwoodblues

Premium Member

said by TSI Marc:

Not much we can do about their retal offerings... Earlier this year bell started totally undercutting us on business DSL. Their retail was lower than our costs.

I'm totally with you. My blood just boils when I think of all the shit we've been put through.

That's predatory pricing, regulatory issues aside, that's illegal Air Canada has been bitchslapped a few times because of that.

Send this to your lawyers

Section 78(1)(i) of the Competition Act prohibits companies from the selling products at unreasonably low prices which is either designed to facilitate, or has the effect of, eliminating competition or a competitor.

Now if that doesn't sound like what Bell is doing, tell me what is?

TSI Marc
Premium Member
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON

TSI Marc

Premium Member

That does sound like a bitchslap waitin' to happen.
MaynardKrebs
We did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17

1 recommendation

MaynardKrebs to TSI Marc

Premium Member

to TSI Marc
said by TSI Marc:

Not much we can do about their retal offerings... Earlier this year bell started totally undercutting us on business DSL. Their retail was lower than our costs.

I'm totally with you. My blood just boils when I think of all the shit we've been put through.

CNOC sues the government for $9B, buys own fleet of F-35's to deal with incumbents.
MaynardKrebs

MaynardKrebs to TSI Marc

Premium Member

to TSI Marc
said by TSI Marc:

Not much we can do about their retal offerings... Earlier this year bell started totally undercutting us on business DSL. Their retail was lower than our costs.

Did you call the Competition Bureau?

BACONATOR26
Premium Member
join:2000-11-25
Nepean, ON

BACONATOR26

Premium Member

said by MaynardKrebs:

said by TSI Marc:

Not much we can do about their retal offerings... Earlier this year bell started totally undercutting us on business DSL. Their retail was lower than our costs.

Did you call the Competition Bureau?

The Competition Bureau would then say call the CRTC.

elwoodblues
Elwood Blues
Premium Member
join:2006-08-30
Somewhere in

elwoodblues

Premium Member

said by BACONATOR26:

said by MaynardKrebs:

said by TSI Marc:

Not much we can do about their retal offerings... Earlier this year bell started totally undercutting us on business DSL. Their retail was lower than our costs.

Did you call the Competition Bureau?

The Competition Bureau would then say call the CRTC.

I don't think so, Air Canada falls under Transport Canada's purview yet the competition bureau went after them.

BACONATOR26
Premium Member
join:2000-11-25
Nepean, ON

BACONATOR26

Premium Member

said by elwoodblues:

I don't think so, Air Canada falls under Transport Canada's purview yet the competition bureau went after them.

Not saying it's not in their jurisdiction but the Competition Bureau seems to like to bounce all telecom issues back to the CRTC.

Gone
Premium Member
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON

Gone

Premium Member

said by BACONATOR26:

Not saying it's not in their jurisdiction but the Competition Bureau seems to like to bounce all telecom issues back to the CRTC.

The only time they can legitimately do that is if it's an issue of regulated consumer pricing. Internet pricing for the end-consumer isn't regulated.

elwoodblues
Elwood Blues
Premium Member
join:2006-08-30
Somewhere in

elwoodblues

Premium Member

Neither are air fares, but selling air fares below your cost in order to drive out the competition is.

So in the case of Bell selling business DSL for less then wholesale, it could be considered predatory pricing.

Bottom line, it has ZERO do with regulation, but how you compete in the marketplace.
MaynardKrebs
We did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17

MaynardKrebs to Gone

Premium Member

to Gone
said by Gone:

said by BACONATOR26:

Not saying it's not in their jurisdiction but the Competition Bureau seems to like to bounce all telecom issues back to the CRTC.

The only time they can legitimately do that is if it's an issue of regulated consumer pricing. Internet pricing for the end-consumer isn't regulated.

In this instance it isn't about price, it's about anti-competitive BEHAVIOR.

Gone
Premium Member
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON

Gone

Premium Member

Behavior has to be demonstrated, and the most obvious way it is demonstrated is through predatory pricing.

dillyhammer
START me up
Premium Member
join:2010-01-09
Scarborough, ON

dillyhammer to MaynardKrebs

Premium Member

to MaynardKrebs
said by MaynardKrebs:

In this instance it isn't about price, it's about anti-competitive BEHAVIOR.

That's it, in a nutshell.

I guess the only real issue is, is there some company that has been wronged by this behaviour with big enough balls to actually do something about it.

Somehow (from what I've seen so far anyway) I don't think so.

Mike

BACONATOR26
Premium Member
join:2000-11-25
Nepean, ON

BACONATOR26 to Gone

Premium Member

to Gone
If the Comp Bureau hasn't cracked down on the incumbents price fixing on each others plans then good luck getting them to crack down on predatory pricing.

Gone
Premium Member
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON

Gone

Premium Member

said by BACONATOR26:

If the Comp Bureau hasn't cracked down on the incumbents price fixing on each others plans then good luck getting them to crack down on predatory pricing.

Pretty much. I was merely pointing out that they can't simply refer the issue to the CRTC, because the CRTC doesn't have jurisdiction on the issue.

elwoodblues
Elwood Blues
Premium Member
join:2006-08-30
Somewhere in

elwoodblues to BACONATOR26

Premium Member

to BACONATOR26
said by BACONATOR26:

If the Comp Bureau hasn't cracked down on the incumbents price fixing on each others plans then good luck getting them to crack down on predatory pricing.

But it's not "price fixing", it's "Competitive Symmetry" LOL

hm
@videotron.ca

hm to MaynardKrebs

Anon

to MaynardKrebs
said by MaynardKrebs:

In this instance it isn't about price, it's about anti-competitive BEHAVIOR.

Wasn't there a similar case that hit the competition bureau from BC?

Wasn't it Shaw Versus Nova (or something like this) and that issue is in this forum.

Nova offered Insane fast internet for something like 20$, so shaw came in and offered internet well below reasonable prices. 9$ to steal those customers.

Then it hit the competition bureau... Don't recall what happened after that.

Quick search show it was a company called NOVUS (not nova).

Some of it is here:
»Shaw Predatory Pricing in Novus Territory
hm

hm

Anon

said by hm :

said by MaynardKrebs:

In this instance it isn't about price, it's about anti-competitive BEHAVIOR.

Wasn't there a similar case that hit the competition bureau from BC?

Some of it is here:
»Shaw Predatory Pricing in Novus Territory

Just to follow up...
It was tossed out of court as non-anti-competitive.
»www.ipvancouverblog.com/ ··· st-shaw/

Then Shaw sued Novus for defamation... heh (I think Karl Bode covered this comical series of events and our dysfunctional laws).

Then there was that little Fibre project Marc and Rocky started, I recall them launching it some place in Ontario at good prices, so one of the cable companies dropped their prices to under-cut them for that small foot print. I don't recall the specifics of this one, Marc would have to reply.

So in this case of business internet, I have zero doubts that a competition bureau complaint would result in nothing except for teksavvy being sued by Bell Canada

BACONATOR26
Premium Member
join:2000-11-25
Nepean, ON

BACONATOR26

Premium Member

Proved my point, Comp Bureau or anyone else for that matter will not crack down on it. A court case is just a slap on the wrist.

And as much as Bell would like to get rid of TekSavvy, the irony is they've also said they need wholesale customers, so I'm not sure they would ever sue TekSavvy but then you never know.

hm
@videotron.ca

hm

Anon

said by BACONATOR26:

Proved my point

What it also proves is that there is no competition in Canada. Resale or wholesale is a bandaid, and a failure. Wholesale was just something to try and kick start (or pretend there was) competition. Even KvF stated this. His words were, "It's a failure".

When faced with *true* competition, prices drop from 50$/month to 9.95$/month (unlimited 200-meg speed. As was the case with Novus).

You have to keep in mind that Teksavvay, as with all resellers & wholesalers, are not *true* competition. It's just a phenomena placed there by force by the CRTC to give people a minor choice. Nothing else.

True competition would see 2 cable companies in the same area. All we have is 1 cable and 1 DSL. And Keep in mind Rogers and I believe it was shaw divided up a section of Ontario so as not to compete.

Status quo, collusion, price fixing, no-compete pacts = Happy share holders + Money in political party coffers.

It's actually no different than the construction corruption hearings going on in Quebec with the percentage of the money funneled to the political parties.

I'll be dead before a hearing like this for telecom ever happens. But it's no different, and one day it will happen.

TSI Marc
Premium Member
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON

TSI Marc

Premium Member

said by hm :

said by BACONATOR26:

Proved my point

What it also proves is that there is no competition in Canada. Resale or wholesale is a bandaid, and a failure. Wholesale was just something to try and kick start (or pretend there was) competition. Even KvF stated this. His words were, "It's a failure".

When faced with *true* competition, prices drop from 50$/month to 9.95$/month (unlimited 200-meg speed. As was the case with Novus).

You have to keep in mind that TekSavvy, as with all resellers & wholesalers, are not *true* competition. It's just a phenomena placed there by force by the CRTC to give people a minor choice. Nothing else.

True competition would see 2 cable companies in the same area. All we have is 1 cable and 1 DSL. And Keep in mind Rogers and I believe it was shaw divided up a section of Ontario so as not to compete.

Status quo, collusion, price fixing, no-compete pacts = Happy share holders + Money in political party coffers.

It's actually no different than the construction corruption hearings going on in Quebec with the percentage of the money funneled to the political parties.

I'll be dead before a hearing like this for telecom ever happens. But it's no different, and one day it will happen.

hum. so... when you talk about true competition.. text books point to 5 or more.

the idea that 5 or more would lay a wire to all homes does not exist anywhere in the world. It's like asking for a unicorn for Christmas.

It's not something they tried. Wholesale is the *only* way to have any competition at all.

BACONATOR26
Premium Member
join:2000-11-25
Nepean, ON

BACONATOR26 to hm

Premium Member

to hm
It's not really a failure if three of the big ISPs are now offering unlimited options in advance of new wholesale rates. Seems like they're afraid of the 'failed' indies.

Nagilum
Premium Member
join:2012-08-15
Kitchener, ON

Nagilum to TSI Marc

Premium Member

to TSI Marc
I know it's a pipe dream, but I would rather see full functional separation. Have the municipalities put in and maintain their own fiber networks. These networks could then be used by any ISP on equal terms, giving customers true choice and, more practically, only a single connection to their homes. The ISPs paying for access to utilize these network should offset the cost of maintaining it (hopefully at least).

BACONATOR26
Premium Member
join:2000-11-25
Nepean, ON

BACONATOR26

Premium Member

Yup, not going to happen now. Bell could never achieve functional separation as all of their engineering, marketing, operations and support is all grouped in one. At one point there was a support group along with the business office in Ottawa and Bell Nexxia which handled the wholesale side. Their technical side is now heavily involved in their own operations.

Plus the municipalities and hydro companies which are supposed to by law support a theoretical third wire just put up a lot of red tape and give preference to the incumbents.

hm
@videotron.ca

hm to TSI Marc

Anon

to TSI Marc
said by TSI Marc:

said by hm :

said by BACONATOR26:

Proved my point

What it also proves is that there is no competition in Canada. Resale or wholesale is a bandaid, and a failure. Wholesale was just something to try and kick start (or pretend there was) competition. Even KvF stated this. His words were, "It's a failure".

When faced with *true* competition, prices drop from 50$/month to 9.95$/month (unlimited 200-meg speed. As was the case with Novus).

You have to keep in mind that TekSavvy, as with all resellers & wholesalers, are not *true* competition. It's just a phenomena placed there by force by the CRTC to give people a minor choice. Nothing else.

True competition would see 2 cable companies in the same area. All we have is 1 cable and 1 DSL. And Keep in mind Rogers and I believe it was shaw divided up a section of Ontario so as not to compete.

Status quo, collusion, price fixing, no-compete pacts = Happy share holders + Money in political party coffers.

It's actually no different than the construction corruption hearings going on in Quebec with the percentage of the money funneled to the political parties.

I'll be dead before a hearing like this for telecom ever happens. But it's no different, and one day it will happen.


hum. so... when you talk about true competition.. text books point to 5 or more.

the idea that 5 or more would lay a wire to all homes does not exist anywhere in the world. It's like asking for a unicorn for Christmas.

It's not something they tried. Wholesale is the *only* way to have any competition at all.

I'm not sure what you are trying to say.

5 or more wouldn't happen here.

The argument of passing 3 different cables is as weak as the argument that Canada is to vast to supply proper service to everyone.

You yourself saw what true competition did to your fibre project (which wasn't a resale as far as I know). Rocky spoke about it and the price drop from the competition.

It's no different than the Shaw & Telus territory that saw Novas move in and prices dropped to $9.95 from about 50$. Then both of them started competing for the customer for 10$ internet with crazy speeds.

Do you think that could ever happen in Ontario and Quebec with the pseudo competition created by the CRTC that we have now?

I'm not sure what you are getting at or trying to state, but I doubt we would see 5 players in any one given area. Money isn't there, and one or two out of the 5 would go bankrupt (even the CRTC stated we will likely see one go bankrupt or sold anyhow). But, that is part of competition and part of who supplies the better competing product (or value).

When wholesale was first forced by the CRTC it was so that it could grow to become more, but it never did. Nothing ever materialized from it, as the CRTC stated. They called it a failure.

Maybe a failure from their own myopic view of wholesale becoming more due to costs. Or the control the incumbent has to prevent competition (or both). Who knows.. Either way the only competition we have now is as you stated. Wholesale. But costs are controlled. You can't really and truly compete. You get what the regulator will give you and that's the extent of it. And you innovate your given and mandated business model based on that. You could never get into a price war like Novus and Shaw for the customer when Bell, Rogers, videotron, telus and cogeco control your costs. Just like this case here where Bell under-cut you for business internet. You can't compete, as you stated.
hm

hm to BACONATOR26

Anon

to BACONATOR26
said by BACONATOR26:

It's not really a failure if three of the big ISPs are now offering unlimited options in advance of new wholesale rates. Seems like they're afraid of the 'failed' indies.

It not competition either. This whole thing is "created" by the regulator. It's fabricated, just like you would fabricate a widget. In this case the fabricating unit is wholesale. Really no different. It's a forced thing. A created thing.

sbrook
Mod
join:2001-12-14
Ottawa

sbrook to Nagilum

Mod

to Nagilum
All the municipal fibre networks that I'm aware of sold themselves out of the business.

Gone
Premium Member
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON

Gone to hm

Premium Member

to hm
said by hm :

It not competition either. This whole thing is "created" by the regulator. It's fabricated, just like you would fabricate a widget. In this case the fabricating unit is wholesale. Really no different. It's a forced thing. A created thing.

Considering that the regulator created the monopoly in the first place, it's only fair that they create the competition as well.