dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
14
share rss forum feed


Davesnothere
No-BHELL-ity DOES have its Advantages
Premium
join:2009-06-15
START Today!
kudos:7

1 edit
reply to Davesnothere

Primus' Comments about Bell's R&V

 
Primus is basically taking the same view as CNOC and MTS did - that Bell's R&V does not meet the qualifications of an R&V, since its contents are merely a restatement of arguments made prior to the CRTC's 2011-703 decision.

Although they take 17 pages to say it, their summary at the outset is pretty clear :

quote:
6. For example, while Bell may not agree with the Commission's determinations to exclude network developing and conditioning costs incurred prior to July 2011, Bell's disagreement does not cast doubt on the application of an established basic costing principle by the Commission.

Similarly, while Bell may not agree with the results of the adjustment, the Commission fully and appropriately acted within its discretion in making the adjustments to the capital unit costs.

Nor does Bell's disagreement bring into question the appropriateness of adjustments made by the Commission that are consistent with those made in other proceedings, such as the utilization of a 10 year study period and the consideration of other ILEC costs in setting DSLAM labour costs.

7. It is also clear that Bell’s R&V application also relies on arguments that are largely facsimiles of the arguments put forward in the process that led to TRP 2011-703.

Accordingly, the adjustments disputed by Bell received full and explicit consideration in that proceeding.

8. Accordingly, for all of the reasons set out herein, Primus requests that the Commission deny Bell’s R&V application in its entirety.



elwoodblues
Elwood Blues
Premium
join:2006-08-30
Somewhere in
kudos:2

But does MTS golf as well as Mirko? That's far more important.



Davesnothere
No-BHELL-ity DOES have its Advantages
Premium
join:2009-06-15
START Today!
kudos:7

1 edit
reply to Davesnothere

Primus - More Highlights about Bell's R&V

 
The Primus legal department definitely took this one seriously, picking apart Bell's R&V app line-by-line, quoting dozens of past CRTC proceedings and submissions where Bell has corporately contradicted themself (compared to what they currently seem to want), and taking this process even further than CNOC did, which was quite far in itself.

If I was taking on Bell in a courtroom environment, I absolutely would want that/those lawyer(s) on my team.

Some other highlights are paragraph 14, and then 17 thru 20 or further, beginning "Bell also makes disingenuous assertions...."

And paragraph 46 is a superb zinger :

quote:
46. Bell's real complaint appears to be that their 'detailed cost information' was not compelling enough to be accepted by the Commission. (MY emphasis)

 
Bell sounds rather like an whining child to me.


Ott_Cable

@teksavvy.com

May be if the detailed costing were all in ####, then someone else e.g. the other telco/cableco or even CNOC could have help them out. Bell is so insecure.



Davesnothere
No-BHELL-ity DOES have its Advantages
Premium
join:2009-06-15
START Today!
kudos:7

said by Ott_Cable :

May be if the detailed costing were....

 
Huh ?

Did you not mean "were not" ?


Ott_Cable

@teksavvy.com

Yeah. It was meant to be "weren't".

One of the draw back of being anon is no editing... That's also something I am trying to force myself not to do as otherwise I would edit a lot.



Davesnothere
No-BHELL-ity DOES have its Advantages
Premium
join:2009-06-15
START Today!
kudos:7

1 edit

said by Ott_Cable :

One of the draw back of being anon is no editing....

 
Another is that I could not IM/PM you about it.

But, registering is still an option.

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

said by Davesnothere:

Some other highlights are paragraph 14, and then 17 thru 20 or further, beginning "Bell also makes disingenuous assertions...."

Call it what it is, rather than couching it in euphemism - THEY'RE F!CKING LYING!!


Davesnothere
No-BHELL-ity DOES have its Advantages
Premium
join:2009-06-15
START Today!
kudos:7

said by MaynardKrebs:

Call it what it is, rather than couching it in euphemism - THEY'RE F!CKING LYING!!

 
Yeah, but what if one day the lawyer who wrote the paragraph ends up working for Mirko's team, or if B$ELL buys Primus, or some other permutational variation of subordinate/superior relationship happens between the 2 companies or some of their depts ?

It's like when a lawyer/politician says "My learned colleague...."


Ott_Cable

@teksavvy.com

>It's like when a lawyer/politician says "My learned colleague...."

Both of these "professions" are hated by the common folks, so may be that's the only time they get to be addressed in a polite manner?

Lawyers are hired guns. Off the clock, those guys might even went to the same law schools or worked together previously or best buddies for all we know.