Telus bails on unlimited internet, bandwidth plays on for a price

just another example of follow the leader. Shaw does it, so we are now too....NO real choice in this country.

Makes sense to me that the more you use of something, the more you pay. For high users, maybe offer an unlimited plan, same as with phones. But there's been lots of talk about the internet becoming overused, congested. This seems inevitable to me as the net gets used more and more instead of cable tv, landlines, etc etc. Oh, look, I can turn on my toaster from half a world away. All that stuff takes bandwith.

SaskTel is still unlimited, but with the speeds we get, no great benefit here.

When the cost is fixed, once the equipment is in place - how does that make sense? Electricity or water or gas do not suddenly become more expensive because the user goes over an arbitrary limit.

Normally, high users of utilities pay less if they use more because they get the discount of volume.

Don't know about alberta, but in BC if you use more electricity your rate goes up - to encourage conservation. My understanding is that the net it becoming overused and may run out of bandwidth at some point, so it would make sense to conserve what we've got.

But to take your case for electricity - a higher user doesn't pay less than a lower user, they may just pay less per volume. In absolute terms they still pay more. What people are demanding from ISPs is that once they are hooked up, they could use unlimited amounts of electricity, to use the analogy. So, using your argument, telus would charge x for y amount of data, then 1.75x for 2y, etc etc. You would still by paying more for more usage, just that the cost per data unit would go down.

You are incorrect. There is no limit to internet bandwidth, because more can always be added. Costs are fixed once that addition occurs.



No, my argument is that Internet service was offered as a flat rate and that rate didn't change because the cost of the service didn't vary based on usage. Suddenly, this changed because they saw the ability to charge more for arbitrary limits.

Our policy of limited monopolies means that we have no ability to change providers offering different service or rates because a lack of competition.

tell me why I read stories then about a problem with the internet and overusage? Maybe it was the servers hosting it, but there was some problem looming and nobody seemed to know how to fix it.

In the land of competition:

C
- See more at: http://www.dailytech.com/Comcast+to+Use ... ugkgJ.dpuf

Because they have been spun that way. I'll bet if you were to do a little research, the story was in media owned by the same corporation that owns an internet provider.

Usually, Netflix data is the highest usage data for prime time, and the ISPs are also the main competitor of Netflix because they also sell TV and Cable access. TV viewership is falling, and they still want their cut of entertainment revenue.



Again, spin. Google offers fiber to the home, flat rate pricing and speeds that make the competitions' head spin.



https://fiber.google.com/cities/kansascity/plans/

It's a plan to save their declining TV systems by what's essentially double-billing. Telus/Bell/Shaw/Rogers customer cuts their TV bundles by more than half because he's watching what he wants when he wants on Netflix/Amazon/torrenting for a much lower price or for free. Providers end up losing big money as a result. Therefore they bring in this fixed bandwidth plan which will mean they get to charge Netfilxers/torrenters more because the massive size of their video files mean they will exceed their bandwidth allotment sooner in the billing month than later, and it allows them to bill more which recovers some of the money they're losing on lost TV sales. It also forces those Netflixing and torrenting to add things like CraveTV to their package so they can watch things at a much lower price than exceeding their bandwith allotment will cost them.

It's BS but considering that the providers, with the existential collusionary monopoly they're running, have the ear of the government on this issue they're covering their turf. Liberal-Tory, same old story, because apparently this is another issue where the Conservatives really don't believe in any of that free market/more consumer choice nonsense they blather on about and are quite willing to play the This Island Canada game as much as the Liberals or Dippers are.

What's amusing..in a way.. is that TV providers are now compressing programs so they can fit more commercials into the time slots. On CBC they had a fellow talking about this and they did comparisons on shows. They used a Seinfeld episode from 2003 and 2013. The 2013 was two minutes shorter. Part of the reason people are deserting the regular providers and going to netflix and torrents, is to get away from the annoying commercials. By adding more commercials to make up for customer loss, they are just going to piss off more people and exacerbate the problem they are now facing. I guess this is a case of penny wise, pound foolish.

The problem is that their collusion and their influence over the government means that they can build the wall around their buggy-whip factory business model as high as they want and sustain it long after it should have passed away naturally. Look how quickly they managed to bury Verizon entering into Canada, with the Liberals and Dippers coming in on the industry's side thanks to all that cheap 'save Canadian jobs' crap they pulled. Which in itself is as funny as fuck coming from assholes like Bell who have their call centre in Morocco and Telus who set up shop in India or Sri Lanka. The Tories caved in as fast as they could because there was no upside in them pissing off their regular campaign contributors who threatened to go all-Liberal if Verizon was let in.

Globalization only means something when money flows into the pockets of industry leaders and their pet politicians. It means absolutely nothing, and gets gutted as quickly as possible, when the potential of offering real choice or saving to the customer might actually occur.

The True North Strong and Free*

*Up to 75 GB/month. Additional data for a fee.

The problem isn't paying more for more bandwidth it's the price they want for it.

Their bandwidth costs them about 1-5 cents a GB. I'd be willing to pay 10 cents per GB of data, not $1-5 per GB.

If the ISP want to claim it's about fairness of billing and having most of the user subsidize a minority then we can start to talk about their right of way access and things like property taxes and just who is subsidizing who.