News   Nov 28, 2024
Wallace Emerson Community Centre Growing Beside Galleria on the Park
 312     0 
News   Nov 28, 2024
27-Storey Tower on Queen West Proposed North of Future King-Liberty GO
 730     2 
News   Nov 28, 2024
Drone Flights Capture Sub-Grade Construction at Cielo Condos
 653     0 

Telecoms in Canada

Jonny5 said:
Do you plan to use it? One thing I noticed is a general offering of stuff to customers who don't really need it as a marketing gesture. I got "free global texting for six months to help you in these unprecedented times" totally unsolicited from Freedom, which I'm sure they looked at my account and saw I have almost never in six years called or sent text messages outside of Canada and have no reason to do so.
Click to expand...

Yes, but to an outsider a decent assumption may be that the service was never used because of the cost involved. I never phoned internationally until Fido gave me a preferred rate on international calls. Now I'm on the phone to Australia a couple times a week.
 
CRTC to keep wholesale internet rates steady while reviewing decision to slash prices

Tuesday, September 29, 2020

Bell Canada and several cable companies including Rogers Communications will be able to keep their wholesale internet rates as they are while the federal telecommunications regulator reviews its decision to cut them.

The companies have been battling the 2019 CRTC decision to slash what network operators can charge independent internet service providers (ISPs).

The federal cabinet and Federal Court of Appeal have both refused to overrule the CRTC's decision, but noted the federal regulator is doing its own review of the decision.

Canada's largest independent internet company, TekSavvy, and its industry association have argued the new, reduced rates should be implemented.

The independent ISPs argue the wholesale prices have been set too high since 2016 and prevent them from lowering retail rates for their customers.

However, the telecommunications regulator said Monday that Bell and the cable carriers met the requirements to obtain a stay of the August 2019 order.

www.ctvnews.ca

CRTC to keep wholesale internet rates steady while reviewing decision to slash prices

Bell Canada and several cable companies including Rogers Communications will be able to keep their wholesale internet rates as they are while the federal telecommunications regulator reviews its decision to cut them.
www.ctvnews.ca
 
I've heard people toss around the idea of letting the large American providers enter the Canadian market to increase competition and presumably lower prices - is this at all viable/realistic?
 
Undead said:
I've heard people toss around the idea of letting the large American providers enter the Canadian market to increase competition and presumably lower prices - is this at all viable/realistic?
Click to expand...
Don't forget that the United States itself is having fewer major telecoms than before with the merger of Sprint and T-Mobile.

The United States has three major cellular phone service providers: AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile (which owns Sprint).
 
Most countries allow foreign mobile telecom carriers into their country. The problem now is that the distinction between those creating "content" and those "carrying" it is very murky and will be ever-more so. There may be some good reasons to keep it a Canadian field. Unfortunately, the entrance of Wind (now Freedom) and whatever that other one was, didn't really change much of anything.
 
I think the oligopoly model in the isp industry is getting worse now, bigger telecoms are constantly increasing fees while it's harder and harder for smaller ones to survive
 
It can't be cheap--at least not in the near future. Starlink has to manage capacity in each geographical cell they serve. That means pricing above the terrestrial options available in the market so only those without such access would opt for the service. Either that or a lottery to allow people to subscribe. Really, Starlink is a boone for people in rural areas that are stuck with line of sight microwave or cellular data service that are expensive and unreliable. One thing I was worried about was whether heavy clouds would disrupt the signal (as it sometimes does for satellite TV). TV satellites are much further away in GEO, and initial feedback I am seeing is that even heavy snowfall/clouds does not completely disrupt service, though it does seem to cause a slight decrease in bandwidth.

At any rate, as more satellites are added, the cell sizes will shrink and more customers can subscribe. But cities will never be a compelling market for this type of service.
 
We have sat TV and the only weather disruption is very dense rain clouds - generally the core of a cumulonimbus '(thunderhead') and is usually relatively short-lived (that and heavy wet snow on the dish). How that relates to low earth orbit satellites I have no idea. Although I acknowledge the concerns of both professional and amateur astronomers, it will definitely be a boon to many rural residents (Bell seems to care less and less about their DSL service and it has inherent limitations) and certainly for remote communities.

 
SunriseChampion said:
We can't afford decent, proper transit but we have money to build duplicate infrastructure?

Ok.....:rolleyes:

Comrade Perks, is that you?
Click to expand...

Here's the thing, I agree duplicate infra is wasteful; as it is now, when Telus, Bell and Rogers all build duplicate Fibre in the corridor.

But as said Oligopoly mooches their consumers mercilessly.............

I must wonder what options should be considered.

Perhaps expropriation of all of their fibre would be a better alternative.........????
 
Northern Light said:
Perhaps expropriation of all of their fibre would be a better alternative.........????
Click to expand...
Maybe, maybe not. I don't see why it should be owned by the city or why that would even be desirable.
Are the city going to run it at a loss?

They'd have to pay the telecoms for it if expropriating it anyway.

As I said, we don't have proper transit up in this piece and we're worried about high internet speeds which are absolute NOT necessary to a fulfilling and functional life?

Ok......I'm pretty dumb but......
 
SunriseChampion said:
Maybe, maybe not. I don't see why it should be owned by the city or why that would even be desirable.
Are the city going to run it at a loss?

They'd have to pay the telecoms for it if expropriating it anyway.

As I said, we don't have proper transit up in this piece and we're worried about high internet speeds which are absolute NOT necessary to a fulfilling and functional life?

Ok......I'm pretty dumb but......
Click to expand...

I'm not overly concerned w/speed.

I am concerned w/being over-priced. (relative to other similar jurisdictions).

That said, I'm not particularly in favour of a City-owned network............I'm just open to bullying the telcos into being less greedy.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top