CRTC and usage-based billing: The internet is now officially dead

[Spinsah]

Yes and yes.

Leonard (Len) Katz
LEONARD (LEN) KATZ was appointed Vice-Chairman, Telecommunications, on October 12, 2007.
He joined the Commission in 2005 as Executive Director, Telecommunications, before assuming his most recent position of Executive Director, Broadcasting and Telecommunications. Mr. Katz has over 30 years of experience working in the private sector. From 2002 to 2005, he was President and Chief Operating Officer of Digimerge Technologies Inc., a distribution company supplying digital security products and services throughout North America.
Prior to assuming those responsibilities, he spent 17 years within the Rogers Group of Companies, where he held various positions in the regulatory, intercarrier services and business development fields of wireless and cable services. This experience led to the position of President, Rogers Business Solutions, which he occupied until 2001. From 1974 to 1985, he acted in increasingly senior capacities at Bell Canada, including as Assistant Director of Policy Development and Regulatory Affairs.
Mr. Katz has been involved in numerous industry and not-for-profit initiatives, including Founder and Chairman of the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association Clearinghouse for wireless carriers. He holds an MBA degree from McGill University and a B.Sc. (Honours Statistics) from Sir George Williams (Concordia) University.
His term ends on October 11, 2012.

[lobo]

Alex, mostly the latter of your statement.

Lobo

[pig-pen]

Originally Posted by Spinsah

The claims are only unsubstantiated insofar as Bell and Rogers will not open their books to show actual costs of their bandwidth delivery. Given the data that exists from other ISPs from around the world, and the independent wholesalers here in Canada like Teksavvy, I think these are informed market tested estimates.

Agreed - you have to dig deep into their books to really know their cost structures. Then you necessarily get into discussions about marginal vs. fully allocated costing and cross-subsidization between business units – all subjects that are really important to the issue but cause eyes to glaze over.

If I read it correctly, the CRTC decision says that the carrier’s rates are market-based. Therefore the service is deemed competitive and should not be subject to regulation. If it is being marked up at 100x its “cost” as some suggest, then I would see that as a problem. It cannot be competitive at those levels. If the CRTC decision is flawed in this area, we need to have another look into this matter.

[glych t.anomaly]

Teksavvy - $40.69/mnth for 200GB Bandwidth = $.20/GB

Rogers - $79.08/mnth for 125GbB Bandwidth = $.63/GB

thats for the 25MB down 1MB up service for Rogers, and the 15MB down 512kb up service, that actually is more like 25down 1up when you test it.

Triple the cost for 60% of the allowed Bandwidth Cap, and its $1.25/GB up to i believe 50GB ....

* shakes head *

mutherfuckers. so i would basically be paying almost DOUBLE just to have shittier service. And thats IF they ever get the bill actually correct.

What is Bell like compared to Rogers?

Cost and service wise? Anyone?

[jai]

[praktik]

Originally Posted by alexd

Who makes up the CRTC anyways? Political appointees? Retired executives from Bell, Rogers, and Telus?

Umm Bureaucracy.


There's things to love and hate about it, like all bureaucracies. While it has a heavy hand, and decides for industry sometimes - it can act as a countervailing force against concentrated corporate power sometimes.

[alexd]

Originally Posted by praktik

it can act as a countervailing force against concentrated corporate power sometimes.

I wonder if there are any examples of the CRTC acting like that....

[workdowntown]

Fucking CRTC and their shitty decision-making!

I wonder if the 'apathetic internet generation' will actually protest this in the streets or if this will just be allowed to come to pass?

This will affect content-creators as well, all those kids with soundcloud, vimeo etc who upload their high bitrate content, HD video and all will be limited now by their ability to pay for the bandwidth.

All those apps and widgets that 'phone home' constantly like email notifiers etc will be sipping away at your usage all day long.

Win win for Rogers/Bell I'm sure. Totally fucked for their customers who have no options outside of the main providers and their resellers who will have to raise their costs too.

[pig-pen]

Originally Posted by alexd

Who makes up the CRTC anyways? Political appointees? Retired executives from Bell, Rogers, and Telus?

There have been accusations that the CRTC members are biased because of their background working for the big telcos. There is NO evidence to support these accusations. For one thing, they have to swear an oath of office. Just as importantly, they are appointed because their telco background is essential in understanding the complexities of the industry and to ensure the commission doesn’t make expensive blunders because of lack of background and understanding of the issues.

Doesn’t mean mistakes don’t happen though.

[Subsonic Chronic]

Originally Posted by pig-pen

For one thing, they have to swear an oath of office.

Oh, I guess we've got nothing to worry about then. Case closed!

[praktik]

Originally Posted by alexd

I wonder if there are any examples of the CRTC acting like that....

Broadcasting Decisions | CRTC

Have a go and confirm your suspicion or revise it!

Thats the handy thing about evidence, and public departments that need to publish all their shit.

[workdowntown]

Maybe a protest by farmville hooked grandmas jonesing to harvest their crops will convince them that this is a terrible idea?

BLUE RINSE POWER!

[pig-pen]

Originally Posted by Subsonic Chronic

Oh, I guess we've got nothing to worry about then. Case closed!

ha! I figured someone would pick this up. It's easy to cast a skeptical stone at this, but in practice its pretty powerful.

[praktik]

Originally Posted by pig-pen

ha! I figured someone would pick this up. It's easy to cast a skeptical stone at this, but in practice its pretty powerful.

I agree. One of the things I love about Canada is how deeply entrenched the public service ethos is.

We have only to look down south at what happens after decades of treating the government - and all government workers - like parasites. The Reagan hollowing out of the public sector basically screwed the idea of public service for good.

But up here we still have that honourable ideal of serving the public and common good permeating our bureaucracies, and we should be thankful for that.

[Spinsah]

Well said.

Unfortunately, in the case of the CRTC, they have failed to protect Canadians. Even half a decade ago I would have gone to great lengths to defended the council, but now, I feel they have outlived their use and should be disbanded.

[pig-pen]

I don’t think we need to throw the baby out just yet. We just need to recognise failure when it happens, learn from it and move on. De-regulation of the telecommunications sector has been a living experiment for twenty years. There have been successes and failures. Trying to find that sweet spot between facilitating market competition where a natural market exists and retaining price regulation where it is needed is not easy. And all of this is against a backdrop of rapidly changing technology, pushy legislators, and a market that needs fast answers to gnarly problems. The good news is the failures can be undone.

[Hi i'm God]

So these ex-president guys from bell and rogers don't hold pensions or stock options from their long term employers that directly benefit from how profitable those companies are?

[Hi i'm God]

[Eclectic]

Originally Posted by Spinsah

This article pegs the delivery cost of a gigabyte of bandwidth at less than a penny.

CRTC petitioned to stop usage-based billing as Netflix doubts Canadian future | FP Tech Desk | Financial Post

Rocky the CEO of Teksavvy claims it costs Bell at the most $0.02 to deliver a GB and I think since he's purchasing bandwidth from them, he has a pretty good idea.

The problem I see with that statement is that yes, it may cost that to provide bandwidth but what about all the infrastructure costs? Techs to service the lines? Tech Support to deal with those "My computer has viruses!" people?

There are a lot more costs to supplying speeds than just the bandwidth itself.

[Vincent Vega]

Originally Posted by Spinsah

I think 300 GB a month for your average "power user" is a decent estimate. Where it gets tricky is households, especially those with teens. Let's say the whole family watches a bunch of Netflicks, and the kids spend a lot of time on YouTube as well as paid downloads of games from Steam and games purchased and downloaded from the PS3 network. That could add up to 300 GB right there. Of course, this is just the type of emergent media purchasing paradigms that Bell/Rogers want to stop.

Spence, I just ran that tool that was posted earlier in the thread by Hollywood. This one:

Broadband Download Usage / Bandwidth Limit Calculator

I input what I considered to be an incredible amount of internet usage. Some highlights:

- 50 hours surfing per week
- 50 tracks per week
- 50 hours of video per week
- 8 movies per month
- 10 hours gaming per week

Let's assume the calculator is accurate. With what I entered, I only hit 24GB in a month.

Anyone who is doubling, tripling or quadrupling these levels to get even in the neighbourhood of what you call a "power user".....up to 300GB, I mean, holy shit. My first honest sentiment is that anyone even close to these levels in the first place needs to seriously re-examine their life. But that's just me.

So assuming even 25GB becomes the "cut off." Dude, help me understand why this should be considered such a crisis? I mean, honestly, how much time can one human being possibly spend stuck on their computer downloading the entire planet every month?

Let's put business practices and pricing of goods/services aside for a minute. First help me understand this one, because right now I can't see it.

[Eclectic]

Exactly Vincent.

I'm a "medium user" and I just checked with my ISP and I haven't even come close to 60GBs this month.

[Hi i'm God]

Originally Posted by Eclectic

The problem I see with that statement is that yes, it may cost that to provide bandwidth but what about all the infrastructure costs? Techs to service the lines? Tech Support to deal with those "My computer has viruses!" people?

There are a lot more costs to supplying speeds than just the bandwidth itself.

Your already paying to deal with tech support or it's included in your existing package. Infrastructure is old and not being updated and heavily subsisted through taxes.

[Spinsah]

Sure, and those should be covered under subscription/delivery costs like they are with hydro. It also bears mentioning that a lot of the infrastructure in place was funded in large part by the public purse

[pig-pen]

Originally Posted by Hi i'm God

So these ex-president guys from bell and rogers don't hold pensions or stock options from their long term employers that directly benefit from how profitable those companies are?

The commissioners are forbidden from having a financial interest in ANY of the entities affected by their proceedings, whether it is a small ISP or a large telco.

[Bernnie Federko]

Here's the fear: That the ISP's won't lower the monthly for the 90% of ppl who don't even come close to their cap. But the flip of that is, they'll rape the so called bandwidth hogs (read: remaining 10%).

oh teh horrorz

[Hi i'm God]

You can't hog something that you pay for. Pay for unlimited bandwidth *gasp* receive unlimited bandwidth.