What's new
  • Please do not post any links until you have 3 posts as they will automatically be rejected to prevent SPAM. Many words are also blocked due to being used in SPAM Messages. Thanks!

CRTC Rules in UBB Dispute: Speeds to be Billed, Not Amount Downloaded [Globe]

chrisk

Folding Captain
Joined
Jul 12, 2008
Messages
7,541
Location
GTA, Ontario
Well, this was something I did not see coming exactly:
On Tuesday, the CRTC released a decision rejecting Bell’s revised proposal that would see a smaller provider charged for the aggregate total of data used by all its customers. The CRTC instead introduced a pricing model that would see smaller providers pay for the total capacity they need, but not the volume of data downloaded.

...
The decision reinforces – in principle, at least – the idea that smaller, independent providers could no longer continue to offer, at least at the same price, the unlimited downloading plans that made them popular with consumers.
“Rates are going up,” said Bill Sandiford, president of Telnet Communications and of the Canadian Network Operators Consortium, an industry group for smaller providers.

...
Given the complexity of new rate charges, many industry experts were still examining the material after the CRTC released its decision late Tuesday afternoon.
Source: CRTC unveils compromise for usage-based billing - The Globe and Mail

I don't like anything that will drive up my internet bill. I don't mind paying for what I use, if the costs are justifiable. I am not entitled to bandwidth. Will have to see how these costs come down to us I guess.
 

frontier204

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 2, 2008
Messages
1,352
Location
ON, Canada
The deal looks like it will heavily favour throttling if it's bits/second billed charged. As you noted however, it will still mean higher costs passed to customers if providers are allowed to overprice their services unchecked - whether the price tag is placed on total "bandwidth" or the U/D speeds.
 

chrisk

Folding Captain
Joined
Jul 12, 2008
Messages
7,541
Location
GTA, Ontario
What what people were saying on the teksavvy section of dslreports, the model is good, but the pricing is way out of wack.
Yep there is a price that the CRTC allows the big ISPs to charge. From what I have read on DSL Reports, the majority of customers will be billed anywhere from $5 to $15 extra per month for their current service (if a company like Teksavvy is to stay profitable).
 

AkG

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2007
Messages
5,283
That, is a slap in the face.

Not compared to a $300 or more increase, THAT would have been a slap in the face and have killed off all but rogers and bell. This way is not optimal (crtc should have been more strict on price increases) but I doubt anyone will leave over 5 or ten bucks more a month. I know for damn near unlimited AND great TS I'd not care a toss and stick with 'em.

YMMV
 

JMCD

Well-known member
Joined
May 26, 2008
Messages
1,437
Location
London
This is a good way of doing it, very fair. However the price scheme on the 100mbps/1gbps links is awful.
 

Masteroderus

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2011
Messages
641
Location
Edmonton
I think that in light of profit margins for Canada's major ISPs this is completely unwarranted.

Incrementalism is intended to appeal to rational people, to disarm them, and to dissuade from the critical issues and invalid axioms that a price hike is based upon.

Profits are up for Bell, Shaw and Telus. Don't take my word for it, check the web, financial information is well documented and available for the public.

This is big business lobbying for big business. It benefits no one but big business so why is it in anyone's interest (except Ma Bell) to hike the rate for small isps? I could see this being reasonable IFF (if and only if) Bell, Shaw and Telus were taking losses for extended periods of time.

The CRTC is supposed to act in a way that benefits the Canadian people. This hurts local businesses, the epitome of "the Canadian people" with respect to internet service providers.

Another indicator that this is a bad decision is it is in-elegant, and inconsistent with past rulings.

The best weapon people have in their arsenals is the ability to think critically. Ask why. Follow the money.

If you are unhappy with the decision, I urge you to write to the Honourable James Moore, minister of Canadian heritage, as he is the minister "in charge" of the CRTC.
 

Twitter

Top