dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
7
share rss forum feed

koreyb
Open the Canadian Market NOW

join:2005-01-08
East York, ON
Reviews:
·VMedia
·Rogers Hi-Speed
reply to 34764170

Re: Rogers worried?

said by 34764170:

said by snark:

Actually, there's a VERY good justification to the caps. Rogers and Bell both derive a SUBSTANTIAL portion of all their earnings from selling TV channel packages (either through cable or sattelite). The caps have decreased every year since Netflix came to Canada.

That is especially not justification. These companies make a lot of profit from Internet service alone.

I agree Brad.. Doesn't take much homework to see the true cost vs profit. They could offer it unlimited less than TSI's cap prices and still make money.

snark

join:2013-04-05
canada
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable

said by koreyb:

said by 34764170:

said by snark:

Actually, there's a VERY good justification to the caps. Rogers and Bell both derive a SUBSTANTIAL portion of all their earnings from selling TV channel packages (either through cable or sattelite). The caps have decreased every year since Netflix came to Canada.

That is especially not justification. These companies make a lot of profit from Internet service alone.

I agree Brad.. Doesn't take much homework to see the true cost vs profit. They could offer it unlimited less than TSI's cap prices and still make money.

JESUS man, how naive are you? You think Rogers and Bell are interested in providing the best internet service they can while "still making money" as you put it? SHIT no, man. They are interested in MAKING AS MUCH MONEY AS POSSIBLE for as long as possible, by spending as little as possible, and making it as hard as possible for others to compete and force this to change.

And although we're all internet-centric here, obviously since this is an internet nerd super-forum, what Rogers and Bell make off internet packages is chicken feed compared to their cable/sattelite TV packages. They make money off both ends, charging customers for massive packages even if they only want one channel in there, and charging shitty channels money to be forced into packages. The average cable TV bill is over 100 dollars a month, and you can easily go over 250 a month if you start getting everything you want. Like I said, the internet is chicken feed. With the exception of the handful of internet nerds that hang out here, most people balk at an internet bill of over 40 bucks or so, and even that is pushing it with most people. And that's while thinking it's perfectly natural to pay well over 100 bucks a month for cable TV.


dillyhammer
START me up
Premium
join:2010-01-09
Scarborough, ON
kudos:10
Reviews:
·WIND Mobile
·Start Communicat..

1 recommendation

You forgot to mention that a small number of major corporations own the vast majority of the telecom sector end to end - they own the teams, the stadiums, they own the channels, the broadcasting infrastructure, they own the distribution system, the last mile, and multiple connections into virtually every home in the country: they own it all. Soon there will be only 2.

And we have a regulator that thinks ALL of this is ok and tells us this is how a market system works.

Political douchebaggery at it's finest.

Mike
--
Cogeco - The New UBB Devil -»[Burloak] Usage Based Billing Nightmare
Cogeco UBB, No Modem Required - »[Niagara] 40gb of "usage" while the modem is unplugged



BTC Kevin

join:2011-10-01
Nepean, ON
kudos:1

said by dillyhammer:

You forgot to mention that a small number of major corporations own the vast majority of the telecom sector end to end - they own the teams, the stadiums, they own the channels, the broadcasting infrastructure, they own the distribution system, the last mile, and multiple connections into virtually every home in the country: they own it all. Soon there will be only 2.

And we have a regulator that thinks ALL of this is ok and tells us this is how a market system works.

Political douchebaggery at it's finest.

Mike

»cif.cira.ca/ is a great place to voice concerns regarding regulatory and frame work of Canadian Internet. I meet many great Industry and Government Reps at CIF this year in Ottawa. And many know something is wrong and needs to be re-worked. They want ideas on what the consumers want to see happen. so voice ideas about the future of Canadian Internet.

koreyb
Open the Canadian Market NOW

join:2005-01-08
East York, ON
Reviews:
·VMedia
·Rogers Hi-Speed
reply to snark

said by snark:

JESUS man, how naive are you? You think Rogers and Bell are interested in providing the best internet service they can while "still making money" as you put it? SHIT no, man. They are interested in MAKING AS MUCH MONEY AS POSSIBLE for as long as possible, by spending as little as possible, and making it as hard as possible for others to compete and force this to change.

And although we're all internet-centric here, obviously since this is an internet nerd super-forum, what Rogers and Bell make off internet packages is chicken feed compared to their cable/sattelite TV packages. They make money off both ends, charging customers for massive packages even if they only want one channel in there, and charging shitty channels money to be forced into packages. The average cable TV bill is over 100 dollars a month, and you can easily go over 250 a month if you start getting everything you want. Like I said, the internet is chicken feed. With the exception of the handful of internet nerds that hang out here, most people balk at an internet bill of over 40 bucks or so, and even that is pushing it with most people. And that's while thinking it's perfectly natural to pay well over 100 bucks a month for cable TV.

You missed my point completely Snark. I was pointing out the fact that Rogers and Bell made the hugest fuss over having to cap internet less than a year ago, and all of a sudden after they got told NO, they can offer it, and still make a profit, which was exactly the opposite what they tried to say to the CRTC.

Canadian's are too passive which I know is the issue... IF Canadian's got actually MAD about something for once, they could have pushed ROGERS and Bell down. Instead we just pay the bill and do nothing.. I don't blame ROGERS or BELL, I blame the Canadian public. I know many non-geeks who complain about their bill from Rogers and Bell, but again do nothing to fix the issue. They blow over their cap always cause they have netflix or some teens in the house. It's up to us as Canadian's to demand better...not just sit back and keep paying the bill.. There are choices. Unless we vote with our wallets on mass, nothing will change. If they did this in the USA, they would have been out of business because people there are not afraid to get mad, and vote with their wallet. It's time Canada.


fishwilly

@teksavvy.com

The company installing and maintaining the infrastructure should not be allowed to sell to the general public......Their only job should be to upgrade and maintain the network. Only then will we see fair competition and better quality/speeds on par with other countries. As long as the big telcos are in the CRTC's back pockets bend over and take it....



TwiztedZero
Nine Zero Burp Nine Six
Premium
join:2011-03-31
Toronto, ON
kudos:5

said by fishwilly :

As long as the big telcos are in the CRTC's back pockets bend over and take it....

Did you mean "As long as the CRTC is in the back pockets of the big telco's" ?

Just thought I'd point that out. Its just an alternate and liklier POV.
--
----|- From the mind located in the shadows of infinity -|----
Nine.Zero.Burp.Nine.Six
Twitter = Twizted Zero
Chat = irc.teksavvy.ca

snark

join:2013-04-05
canada
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
reply to fishwilly

said by fishwilly :

The company installing and maintaining the infrastructure should not be allowed to sell to the general public

An alternative point of view. No company should be allowed to OWN critical infrastructure. Period. Full stop.

Can you imagine if all roads were owned by one or two private companies? No? How about water pipes? Electricity wires? All hospitals in the country?

There absolutely is a place for private enterprise in our country. Absolutely. But the OWNERSHIP of critical infrastructure is not one of them.

JMJimmy

join:2008-07-23
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL

Well said snark. While I agree 100% with this, there is one problem with the argument: You would never get Dialup vs Cable vs DSL etc - you'd get 1 type of wire and the incentive to upgrade it would be minimal.

The key really is that unless you want overbuild (each company in the market laying their own wires to every location) you need a single technology that can be deployed everywhere. Fibre is it (for now) but there isn't the political will to invest in a single "utility" to deploy the infrastructure for others to operate on. BCE has too much power and controls too many jobs for that to ever happen.


The Mongoose

join:2010-01-05
Toronto, ON
reply to snark

said by snark:

said by fishwilly :

The company installing and maintaining the infrastructure should not be allowed to sell to the general public

An alternative point of view. No company should be allowed to OWN critical infrastructure. Period. Full stop.

Can you imagine if all roads were owned by one or two private companies? No? How about water pipes? Electricity wires? All hospitals in the country?

There absolutely is a place for private enterprise in our country. Absolutely. But the OWNERSHIP of critical infrastructure is not one of them.

Wow. The only thing I can think of worse than the infrastructure being owned by Bell and Rogers is the infrastructure being owned by the government.

"Coming soon, cable internet repairs as timely and cost-effective as road repairs and subway service! Now performed entirely by government unions!"

No thanks. I despise Rogers and Bell but would fight with every spare minute and dollar I have to keep them in charge if the alternative was the government.

koreyb
Open the Canadian Market NOW

join:2005-01-08
East York, ON
Reviews:
·VMedia
·Rogers Hi-Speed

said by The Mongoose:

said by snark:

said by fishwilly :

The company installing and maintaining the infrastructure should not be allowed to sell to the general public

An alternative point of view. No company should be allowed to OWN critical infrastructure. Period. Full stop.

Can you imagine if all roads were owned by one or two private companies? No? How about water pipes? Electricity wires? All hospitals in the country?

There absolutely is a place for private enterprise in our country. Absolutely. But the OWNERSHIP of critical infrastructure is not one of them.

Wow. The only thing I can think of worse than the infrastructure being owned by Bell and Rogers is the infrastructure being owned by the government.

"Coming soon, cable internet repairs as timely and cost-effective as road repairs and subway service! Now performed entirely by government unions!"

No thanks. I despise Rogers and Bell but would fight with every spare minute and dollar I have to keep them in charge if the alternative was the government.

It depends who is managing and what they are.. If the GOV being LOCAL, PROV or Federal, and it was only DARK FIBRE, It wouldn't be an issue. I personally feel local governments should be installing dark fibre like water pipes and sewage, to each lot. Have a central location, and every company connects to the fibre line for each of their customers. It would avoid having 25000 lines down the road by many different companies, and be more cost effective. Each company would pay for the rights to use it, which would cover any required work. The gov's responsibility would end with the wire. That's it.

The Mongoose

join:2010-01-05
Toronto, ON

That would be more reasonable than long-term ownership, to be sure.


InvalidError

join:2008-02-03
kudos:5
reply to koreyb

said by koreyb:

It depends who is managing and what they are.. If the GOV being LOCAL, PROV or Federal, and it was only DARK FIBRE, It wouldn't be an issue. I personally feel local governments should be installing dark fibre like water pipes and sewage, to each lot.

Sewers, water and streets are municipal jurisdiction.

If you look at Montreal which is falling behind on waterworks and sewer maintenance resulting in street floods from bursting water mains and street collapses from soil washing down the sewers, I seriously doubt you would want the city to manage dark fiber on top of that when they are not even managing to properly maintain absolutely critical infrastructure.

snark

join:2013-04-05
canada
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
reply to The Mongoose

said by The Mongoose:

said by snark:

said by fishwilly :

The company installing and maintaining the infrastructure should not be allowed to sell to the general public

An alternative point of view. No company should be allowed to OWN critical infrastructure. Period. Full stop.

Can you imagine if all roads were owned by one or two private companies? No? How about water pipes? Electricity wires? All hospitals in the country?

There absolutely is a place for private enterprise in our country. Absolutely. But the OWNERSHIP of critical infrastructure is not one of them.

Wow. The only thing I can think of worse than the infrastructure being owned by Bell and Rogers is the infrastructure being owned by the government.

"Coming soon, cable internet repairs as timely and cost-effective as road repairs and subway service! Now performed entirely by government unions!"

No thanks. I despise Rogers and Bell but would fight with every spare minute and dollar I have to keep them in charge if the alternative was the government.

We're just going to have to disagree then. ALL local roads in Canada are owned by either the provincial or municipal government. Have you had any serious problems with those? No? How about water pipes, owned by the city? No? Electrical wires? Are you being overcharged for electricity? Here in Toronto we're paying some of the lowest rates in the world and I can't remember the last time the electricity got cut for longer than 2 or 3 minutes. Perfect example in Toronto: the wires and transformers and all that crap are owned by the government (or one of its crown corporations) but if you want you can sign up with a third party electricity provider. Same with natural gas. Same with goddamn everything except for internet service.

snark

join:2013-04-05
canada
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
reply to InvalidError

said by InvalidError:

If you look at Montreal which is falling behind on waterworks and sewer maintenance resulting in street floods from bursting water mains and street collapses from soil washing down the sewers, I seriously doubt you would want the city to manage dark fiber on top of that when they are not even managing to properly maintain absolutely critical infrastructure.

For every failure of government you can cite I can cite 10 failures of private enterprise in providing the service they're responsible for. This line of reasoning is going nowhere. If you're so anti-government perhaps you can move to someplace where people like you run the show, so our desire to build our country together doesn't interfere with your irrational fears of "the man". Lots of countries in the African continent are run with no practical interference from governments, and corporations run the show. Good luck getting running water over there.

blaznazn224

join:2010-09-10
Scarborough, ON

yeah, the government is better in charge than private corperations. The only potential downsides are the annoying unions, but they are absolutely necessary, otherwise Canada will end up like the rathole that is the USA. All jobs shipped to china/india, and the remaining jobs low paying. Everyone on welfare, nobody able to afford healthcare. What a BS system they have. We need to fight to take back essential services away from corporate control. The government represents the population, corporations represent a few people.

One example I can think of is the toll route 407. It brings in billions of $$ every year in revenue, sadly 40% of the company is owned by a company in spain. Mike Harris, the infamous premier of ontario back then practically gave the highway away for free AFTER it was built by taxpayer $$. Im sure he now lives in a very nice house with a benz sitting in his driveway. Paid for by corporate spain.



corster
Premium
join:2002-02-23
Gatineau, QC

said by blaznazn224:

One example I can think of is the toll route 407. It brings in billions of $$ every year in revenue, sadly 40% of the company is owned by a company in spain. Mike Harris, the infamous premier of ontario back then practically gave the highway away for free AFTER it was built by taxpayer $$.

He didn't give it away for free, it doesn't bring in billions of dollars in revenue each year, and 407 International has widened and expanded the highway far in excess of what MTO would have done. But that's ok, continue with your hyperbole instead of looking up the actual facts.

blaznazn224

join:2010-09-10
Scarborough, ON

$743 million in revenue for 2012, net income of $175 million. 2014 will likely be the $billion$ year. I think privitization is a good thing in some cases, since the government is incompetent and politics prevent them from doing whats necessary to turn a profit, however the contract the government signed for the 407 was ridiculous, and so onesided favoring the corporation over the public. It was even made confidential by the harris government so the public wouldn't be able to interfere. The government stated that the corporation was only allowed to raise the rates by 3% plus inflation, however its gone up 400% since 1999 because of a clause in the contract, the government aren't allowed to build a competing highway anywhere near the 407 for that time period. On top of that the lease is for 99 years, with the investment for the highway already paid off in 9 years....damn, if that isn't a gold mine, I don't know what is.


34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON
reply to The Mongoose

said by The Mongoose:

No thanks. I despise Rogers and Bell but would fight with every spare minute and dollar I have to keep them in charge if the alternative was the government.

So we are royally screwed either way. I think having it in private hands is better but the current regulations are all screwed up. The amount of regulation and how things are regulated is what needs fixing.