| Caps reduced to offer you more value! Your caps reduced for your own good because they were far far far too generous..... » www.shaw.ca/cmsShawCA/Templates/···NT=GuestExcept for lite it got a 2 gig upgrade which was well worth the 25 extreme teir lost and the 75 warp lost and 150 nitro lost. Congrats sheeple we did it we let them have their way with us bhell/robbers style... |
|
 pfakPremium
join:2002-12-29
Vancouver, BC | Lite 13GB -> 15GB ($2/GB overages)
High Speed 75GB ($2/GB overages)
Xtreme 125GB -> 100GB ($1/GB overages)
Warp 250GB -> 175GB ($1/GB overages)
Nitro 500GB -> 350GB ($1/GB overages) |
|
| said by pfak:Lite 13GB -> 15GB ($2/GB overages)
High Speed 75GB ($2/GB overages)
Xtreme 125GB -> 100GB ($1/GB overages)
Warp 250GB -> 175GB ($1/GB overages)
Nitro 500GB -> 350GB ($1/GB overages)
wt*..............
I'm done with this company. |
|
| reply to Merin
This annoys me. I didn't receive any note from Shaw saying they lowered the caps. I do like my 7.5 connection but it's getting harder to stay, especially with the pricing.
Just a quick comparison for bandwidth:
SHAW
High Speed - 60 GB/month (7.5mbps)
High Speed Extreme - 100 GB/month (15mbps)
High Speed Warp - 175 GB/month (50mbps)
TELUS:
High Speed - 75 GB/month (~6.0mbps)
High Speed Turbo - 125 GB/month (~15mbps)
Optik High Speed™ - 125 GB/month (~15mbps)
Optik High Speed Turbo™ - 250 GB/month (~25mbps) |
|
| reply to pfak
said by pfak:Lite 13GB -> 15GB ($2/GB overages)
High Speed 75GB ($2/GB overages)
Xtreme 125GB -> 100GB ($1/GB overages)
Warp 250GB -> 175GB ($1/GB overages)
Nitro 500GB -> 350GB ($1/GB overages)
You know what the real knife in the back is?
Shaw just increased the price of our bills this past year and at same time increased allowed caps. Now they are taking it back?
They use to call this something, and I agree, the term is not politically correct for a reason.
So I will leave it as this, Shaw Is Scum!!! |
|
| Just turn around, and run people. Run far, far away from this terrible company. And take as many people as possible with you! Go, NOW! |
|
| reply to Merin
When I left telus, I never thought I'd go back, but all of a sudden, they are being all reasonable, at least compared to the new public enemy #1 here. |
|
ErikRP
join:2004-11-06
Winnipeg, MB Reviews:
 ·Shaw
| reply to Merin
Okay, like a few others have said I wasn't close to hitting my cap so I wasn't too worried about going over, but cutting back the cap?
Starting to look into alternatives. Sadly here in Manitoba there aren't a lot of other options.
I hope Shaw catches hell for this. |
|
| reply to Merin
I'm looking at Telus now. |
|
| reply to ErikRP
there
is
MTS |
|
dbarron
join:2000-01-03
Vancouver, BC | reply to Merin
Wow, that's incredibly sneaky. I'm going to take a good look at Telus now. |
|
| reply to Merin
Ok, so I called Shaw to ask / complain about the changes. I was told:
- They were happy I've been with Shaw for as many years as I have been
- The bandwidth increase was a trial thing and was not intended to be permanent
- Shaw has no interest in trying to compete with Telus for pricing, bandwidth etc after losing a number of customers to Telus.
- Shaw won't be offering those cheap deals for new clients anymore.
- Shaw is only charging EDMONTON users that go over the bandwidth limits as a trial before screwing all Shaw users
- The rep told me 18% of their users are over the caps where I thought the industry average was much less
- Shaw has no plans on reducing what they charge even though Telus' offerings (up to 15mbps for internet, as well as TV) are cheaper and offer more bandwidth/channels.
Is it just me or is Shaw becoming what Telus used to be?
The agent I was talking to also said to use the Contact Us > Feedback option on Shaw.ca to submit feedback regarding their changes. I wonder if enough people complain if Shaw will change their mind? |
|
|
|
| said by nss_tech:- The rep told me 18% of their users are over the caps where I thought the industry average was much less
...
The agent I was talking to also said to use the Contact Us > Feedback option on Shaw.ca to submit feedback regarding their changes. I wonder if enough people complain if Shaw will change their mind?
I expect the answer to that question can be summed up as follows:
1. Take the total number of Shaw Internet subscribers
2. Take 18% of the value of (1.)
3. Imagine getting an extra $5 to $50 from each of (2.) per month.
So, sure, they lose a bunch of people, and a lot of good-will. But the return promises to be significant, and they know traffic needs are only going to up. Lower caps and establish juicy overage charge now, and as the remaining 80% start using more data, there is extra below-the-line dollars from them too. A way to increase income without raising adjusting prices.
The total of all the negative feedback on this forum was met with lower caps. Any complaints that are not accompanied with a cancellation of service will go straight to null.
(But it is really not about money). |
|
| Id like to know how greatly reducing the caps is gonna accomplish anything other then making more people hit these pathetic jokes of caps and pay insane overage fees that have 0 relation to the cost of the service. |
|
AJ102
join:2005-03-22
Vancouver, BC | reply to Merin
I'm sure Shaw feels that this reduction won't be a problem for most of their users, and it is being done solely to preserve quality of service on their network. (Or to translate into English, we're scared to death that Netflix will undermine our inflated TV pricing.)
I'm disgusted. Down with Shaw! |
|
ErikRP
join:2004-11-06
Winnipeg, MB Reviews:
·Shaw
| reply to sasktelboy
said by sasktelboy :there
is
MTS
Having 1 alternative doesn't really count as a lot of choice, at least not in my book. After MTS the list of major players shrinks significantly.
Btw, you should see about swapping your "enter" key for a spacebar. It's kind of annoying. |
|
TheMGPremium
join:2007-09-04
Canada
kudos:1 | reply to Merin
I guess they are feeling threatened by NetFlix and other internet based video just like Bhell and Robbers.
Unfortunately that's what you get when the same company also provides TV service. Lowering caps is a more subtle way of discouraging people from dropping TV services and going to internet TV. They would love to just block such internet TV services outright but the uproar this would cause would hurt them. |
|
vanDSLuserfrom Vancouver 2010Premium
join:2004-07-28
White Rock, BC Reviews:
·Shaw
| Why of course. It's why it's time for BC Hydro (who owns a lot of infrastructure) to run some FTTH as part of the smart grid rollout. Marginal cost to do proper ISP services can't be that that much higher and it gives then a new revenue stream off of an otherwise sunk cost. |
|
| Based on the bhell/robbers model we have about 3-6 months before we have 50-60 gig caps since that is good enough for the average consumer in the digital age or so they would like us to think. |
|
| said by Merin :Based on the bhell/robbers model we have about 3-6 months before we have 50-60 gig caps since that is good enough for the average consumer in the digital age or so they would like us to think.
It's not a matter of being good enough, or whatever rhetoric shaw is tossing at you. Shaw stated that they need to control your downloading behavior in its' filing to the CRTC.
"Control your behavior".
Just as they stated to the CRTC on public record that they need to throttle so people can gamble on the gov casino website without getting lagged.
Now you know. |
|
