03 February 2011

Funny how the big telecoms...

...never offer to reduce the amount I pay for my crappy rural dialup...
internet caps

The fact that smaller providers could offer unlimited accounts has likely acted as a competitive check on the market and helped keep prices from rising.
Seems like a good thing to me.


Chris said...

Every now and then CRTC issues a ruling that betrays its supposed "independence" from the telcos.

They set the prices and CRTC keeps out competition. Shouldn't this whole set up be subject to RICO or the not so catchy Canadian version: "Organized Crime and Law Enforcement Act"... [OCLEA?]

Oh that's right... complete protection for prosecution because of public employee pension investments in these companies... whose bright idea was that??

Michele said...

Charging based on usage seems so logical.

Dial-up should obviously be cheapest and people who stream movies all day long while playing online games should pay more than people who just read e-mail and a few blogs.

Chris said...


If that's the case, then it should all be pay-as-you-go... but its not like that at all. Bell and Rogers set the rates and set caps.

The point of the CRTC 'ruling' is that Bell and Rogers do not want let Canadians have an alternative to their structure.

Right now Bell and Rogers must sell block time to other providers at a discount. But now they want to dictate how those other providers resell that time.... in an effort to limit choice.

Believe me, you want these choices. Right now you may not use the internet very much. But within a few years, the alternative to cable and satellite TV will be internet based. Bell and Rogers do not like that idea at all.