Bell, Canada’s largest telecommunications company, quietly increased the interest rate for late payments to a whopping 42.58 per annum, sparking complaints from company critics that accuse Bell of racing towards the nation’s 60 percent usury limit.

Michael Girard, writing for lapresseaffaires.cyberpresse.ca, says the company is way out of line demanding interest 42 times higher than the interest rate charged to the Bank of Canada on past due balances .

To “appreciate” Bell’s 42.58% rate, let’s compare it with other rates charged by lenders in Canada:

• It’s 42 times the Bank of Canada rate;
• 14 times the 3% prime rate charged to banks;
• Eight times the mortgage rate for five years (5.0%);
• More than twice the interest (19%) charged by credit card issuers;
• Approaching double the interest rate charged by the worst department store credit cards (28%)

The increase in interest charges took effect this past June.

Why has Bell increased its late fee interest rate into the stratosphere?  Because it can.  In July 2009 the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC), the agency that oversees the country’s telecommunications industry, deregulated late fees.  This policy change lets providers charge whatever they want for late payments, so long as they don’t exceed Canada’s 60 percent legal limit for interest charges.

Girard says the outrageous fees bludgeon customers who are least equipped to afford them.  He also suggests they are completely out of whack with what other telecommunications companies across Canada charge.

Girard

“Previously, Bell late fees amounted to 26.82%, the same rate as that charged by Rogers and Telus,” Girard writes. “Why did Bell require a rate so high? Bell Canada’s response: ‘The increase in the [interest] rate reflects our increased collection costs, which are now covered.'”

Somehow, Bell’s competitors eke out a barren, profit-scarce existence charging far less:

• Videotron appears the least greedy with annual interest of 19.56% (1.5% annualized per month) on outstanding balances;
• Cogeco ranks second by charging 24% (2.0% per month) on unpaid balances;
• Not far behind, we find Rogers and Telus, with their late payment fees of 26.82% (2.0% annualized per month).

A handful of large sized Internet Service Providers threaten to strangle Canada’s transition to a digital-ready economy.

The Globe & Mail, Canada’s largest national newspaper, this week called out the country’s broadband conditions.  The country is falling behind, says the editorial, and without fast action to change things, “the innovations that could employ our future work force could well pass us by.”

One passage should puncture Canada’s complacency: “Canada … is often thought of as a very high performer, based on the most commonly used benchmark of penetration per 100 inhabitants. Because our analysis includes important measures on which Canada has had weaker outcomes – prices, speeds and 3G mobile broadband penetration … it shows up as quite a weak performer, overall.”

The newspaper was particularly critical of current providers, and the regulatory body that oversees them — the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC).  Recent CRTC policies and rulings have allowed a handful of providers to place a strangehold on the Canadian broadband marketplace, reducing competition and controlling wholesale pricing and access policies.  Bell, Canada’s largest telecommunication company, was awarded approval of a policy to implement usage-based billing on the company’s wholesale accounts.  Many independent service providers obtain broadband access from wholesale accounts with Bell.  When they themselves face usage-billing, so shall customers, who now have fewer reasons to choose an alternative provider in the first place.

There is no magic recipe, but some prescriptions are worth heeding as Canada develops its Internet strategy. The report recommends open access policies, in which companies that build infrastructure for mobile and fixed broadband access are encouraged or required to lease that infrastructure to the competition.

But in Canada, limits on foreign ownership and inconsistent CRTC decisions have lowered the amount of competition needed to spur new and better offerings. There was less stimulus spending on projects to support more widespread Internet access in Canada than there was elsewhere. Decisions on related policy issues, such as copyright reform, have been delayed. A national conference on the digital economy generated buzz – ministers Tony Clement and James Moore are reputed to “get it” – but yielded few results. Our best hope to lead on Internet innovation, the Long-Term Evolution platform being developed by Nortel as a successor to 3G, is now largely in foreign hands.

The editorial provoked a response from Jay Innes, vice-president-public affairs, at Rogers Communications, one of Canada’s largest cable and wireless operators.  He sought to change the subject:

For Canada to win in a global digital economy, our country needs to establish a national vision that looks beyond the often-flawed statistical rankings of broadband infrastructure. What we need to understand is why so many Canadian households still don’t have computers, why Canada is lagging in scientific research, and how we should best promote the development of Canadian content and applications.

Internet providers called out for offering slow service at high prices routinely attack surveys that measure broadband speed as beside the point, and then just as quickly blame something else for their problems.

Innes fails to recognize that Canadian broadband service, speed, and access policies are directly on point when answering his question about the dearth of Canadian content and applications.  The fact is, with near-universal Internet Overcharging schemes like usage caps and usage-based billing, no innovative high bandwidth developer is going to plunge headfirst into the Canadian market.  When that developer realizes Canadian ISPs also have the right to artificially impede their content using “network management” speed-throttling techniques, they won’t even dip a toe in the water.

Canadian media websites, for example, contain dramatically less multimedia content for visitors to explore than their American counterparts.  Multimedia eats into your monthly usage allowance, so Canadians think twice before watching.  Hulu and other online video enterprises don’t bother to license content for Canada because usage limits and overlimit amounts discourage viewing.  Canadians who don’t want even higher telecommunications bills may simply decide the Internet is not for them, and they can get by without a computer.

If Innes wants to get in touch with his fellow Canadians, who are already well aware of his industry’s pricing and usage schemes, he can read Canadian bloggers like Éric St-Jean, who calls out Vidéotron and Bell:

It’s funny how we hear about Vidéotron‘s Ultimate Speed 50 Mbps access, and now Bell‘s Fibe 25 Mbps access and we’re told how great they are. They’re actually both humongous ripoffs, if you have even basic math skills and five minutes ahead of you. Why? They both advertise great speeds, but hidden behind those figures, in very small print, behind two or three clicks from the product pages, you’ll find abysmal monthly transfer caps. This means that, yes you have a very fast connection. But if you were to use it fully, you’d very quickly fall into a lot of debt.

Vidéotron’s transfer cap for their 50 Mbps service is at 100GB/month combined up/down – this means you will bust your cap within 5 *hours* if you were to fill your pipe. In turn, this means that you simply CANNOT reasonably use this service.  If you were to use your service fully – at 50Mbps – for the whole month, you would get a bill for $24,132.50. Granted, that’s a lot of data. But I just want to point out how ridiculous the terms of that offer are – it should not be legal.

Bell’s 25Mbps service has – get this – a 20GB transfer cap on it. They offer an extra 40GB for 5$/month. The base rate is $64.95/month (after 12 months).  The overage is charged at the whopping rate of $2.50/GB. So, if we take the base service + the extra 40GB, we’ll get to that limit within about 5.3 hours.

All I have is a 5Mbps (DSL) connection from Teksavvy. But for $43.95 I have no transfer cap at all, a fixed IP, and immediate access to support techs who’ll know what I’m talking about.  But they can’t offer more than 5Mbps.

I honestly don’t understand how the media isn’t picking up on Bell and Vidéotron’s tactics, and how this can be legal. To me it’s completely false advertising: they advertise great speeds (barely on par with the international market, though), which you can’t reasonably use. All this needs is a lawsuit.

When will we get decent Internet access in Canada?

That’s a question Innes is not prepared to answer because, for him and his provider friends, “decent” access is already here.

Innovation requires freedom to innovate.  Rationed broadband service guarantees “stick to the basics” thinking.  But as long as providers can live comfortably off the proceeds, why should they change the winning formula that provides them with financial success?

from Digg

Bell has announced it will boost broadband speeds for selected residents of Ontario and Quebec as high as 100/20Mbps service through a fiber service upgrade it will begin this year.

While Canada’s largest phone company is providing a “fiber to the neighborhood” service that still relies in part on traditional copper phone wiring in other parts of Ontario, Bell promises to install true fiber to the home connections starting in Quebec City, and in new housing developments elsewhere in both provinces.

Quebec City was chosen because most of the city’s telecommunications wiring is installed above ground on traditional telephone poles.  Upgrading above-ground service costs considerably less than coping with buried cables.  It will take the company three years to complete the upgrade.

Bell claims the upgrades are part of a natural evolution of telecommunications service in Canada.

“Investment in broadband networks and services is a core strategic imperative at Bell,” said chief executive George Cope in a statement. “We’re actively building the communications platforms that support the growth of competitive new internet, video and other digital services now and into the future.”

Competition may be the key factor in Bell’s decision to upgrade service, particularly in Quebec.  Incumbent cable provider Videotron has effectively called out Bell for its slower broadband DSL service, which offers “up to” 7Mbps DSL service.  Videotron already provides speed tiers up to 50Mbps for just under $80 a month, and is capable of expanding service to 100Mbps in the future.

In Ontario, Bell faces competition from Rogers Cable, which itself has boosted speeds after a DOCSIS 3 upgrade.  The cable operator offers residents in the Greater Toronto Area 50Mbps for $100 per month.

But two things that will come along for the ride are Bell’s notoriously low usage allowances and throttled speeds when using bandwidth-intensive applications like file swapping software.

The company did not release what usage limits are anticipated for their fiber optic offerings, but consumers acquainted with Bell service are skeptical the upgrade will be worth the price.

“Who cares what Bell’s speeds are when you cannot use the service at promised speeds,” writes Stop the Cap! reader Noelle.  “Besides, if Bell’s usual stingy limits remain in place, if you did maximize your connection, you could blow through their usage limit in an hour or so.  As usual, we get to pay for what most others get for free as part of their subscription price.”

Some other online reactions:

“Sure we’ll all have faster speeds, but Bell will make us pay through our teeth for it. Faster speeds mean less time to reach the bit-cap limit = more profit for Bell. Also everyone with an independent ISP will continue to use whatever crumbs of service Bell wishes to dole out as part of it’s non-monopoly obligations. Having a hyper-fast internet with Bell is like having a Ferrari and having to drive the speed limit everywhere. I know it can do 200mph, but Ma Bell limits me to 50. Its like throwing your money away.”

“Bell’s theoretical DSL download speed of 7Mbps is a joke.  Most people barely break 1Mbps, and after they’re done throttling you to death, you’d beg for that speed if you could get it.  I dumped the Bell nightmare years ago.”

“I can’t wait to find out what my bill will be after they charge me another arm and a leg to pay for all these upgrades.  Who cares about speed upgrades when their usage-based limits mean you cannot use them.  Instead of upgrading speed, how about upgrading your network capacity and do away with the usage limits and throttled broadband speeds?”

Providers have a love-hate relationship with fiber optics.  When confronted with a competitor rebuilding their network to provide fiber to customer homes, many providers lampoon and mock fiber’s capabilities, claiming it’s more light than substance.  But when a provider itself wants to do fiber on the cheap, which means not actually providing true fiber-to-the-home service, they’ll bandy about marketing slogans like “100% fiber optic network” or “advanced fiber network.” Fiber is better, and those who have it want to promote it.  Those that don’t want to pretend they do.

Bell has decided it can deliver truthiness in fiber optic broadband by simply chopping a letter off the end of the word ‘fiber.’

Fibe is a close cousin of AT&T’s U-verse system.  It uses fiber optics part of the way, but relies on the same old copper phone wire that’s hanging on those phone poles in your front or back yard.  Because of the shorter distance of copper involved, Bell can use more advanced VDSL2 technology for a faster connection.

That’s certainly an improvement over Bell’s anemic DSL service, difficult to provide to many Canadians spread across the countryside.  But don’t mistake it for Verizon FiOS, or any other true fiber to the home service.  After learning the details, you won’t mistake it for a great consumer value either.

Fibe offers some urban and suburban Canadians new choices in broadband speed: 6/1Mbps, 12/1Mbps, 18/1Mbps and 25/7Mbps at prices ranging from $31.95-52.95 per month ($5 higher for standalone broadband service).  Prices may be slightly lower in some areas depending on what’s on offer from competitors.

But Bell also brings an uninvited guest to the party: Internet Overcharging usage limits.  They also reserve the right to throttle your speeds lower when using high traffic applications.

Check out the company’s marketing rhetoric next to the limitations:

• “Fibe 6 will light up your online life.” The bulb burns out after 25GB of consumption, and your online life is in the dark until the next billing cycle begins.
• With Fibe 12, “You’re totally cool and connected online.” Unfortunately, after 50GB of usage, -you- are left out in the cold.
• “Digital defines who you are. At any given time, you are networked and on your game.” With Fibe 16, the game is over after using 75GB.  Then you can redefine yourself with a good book for the rest of the month.
• “You’re a master of the digital universe. A power++ online user who blazes through bytes and is always looking for more upload speeds. Nothing less than the awesome power of Fibe 25 will do.” Fibe 25, like Fibe 12, sputters out after 75GB of usage.  Then Bell is the master… of your wallet.  There’s nothing like blazing fast speed that gets a bucket of cold water thrown on it with a usage limit and overlimit penalty.  Nothing else will do… for Bell.

Bell is among the more nervy providers out there.  After creating Internet Overcharging schemes that force customers into low usage allowance plans, the company offers to sell you “usage insurance” to protect you from their own paltry limits!  For an additional $5 per month up front, you get protection from their overlimit penalties for up to 40 additional gigabytes of usage.  Of course, you pay the fee whether exceeding the limit or not.  If you don’t have Overcharging Insurance, look out.  Overlimit penalties start at $1/GB and run to $2 and beyond for some smaller allowance plans.  For now, Bell limits the maximum overlimit penalty to $30 per month, but that can change at any time, as Rogers customers have found out.

Fibe appears to be primarily available in parts of Toronto and the GTA.  Selected customers may also receive a letter offering 50 percent off their IPTV video package for one year.  Expect the service to primarily launch in larger cities.  Living in a rural community in a province like Alberta, Saskatchewan or Manitoba?  Don’t hold your breath waiting for these kinds of services to arrive anytime soon.

[flv width=”640″ height=”405″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Bell Entertainment Overview.flv[/flv]

A Bell-produced overview of their new Fibe IPTV service.  (6 minutes)

Telus' goats jump for joy as the company wins a favorable ruling in the B.C. courts over Rogers' "misleading" claims about network reliability

Ad wars over wireless data don’t just happen in the States.  Canadian providers have also been at each other over ad claims that just don’t tell consumers the whole story.  That’s the conclusion of a judge in British Columbia, who ruled that Rogers Communications’ wireless ads touting the provider as Canada’s “most reliable” are misleading.

In a court ruling Tuesday, the judge ruled in favor of a complaint lodged by Telus Communications that argued their wireless network was just as good as what Rogers had to offer.

[flv]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Rogers Stick Internet Fastest Network Ad.flv[/flv]

Rogers “Prove It – Foot Print” Ad touts “Canada’s fastest mobile network.” (30 seconds)

What is really at issue, once again, is the differences between two different wireless network standards.  Rogers beat Telus and Bell in upgrading its network to “High Speed Packet Access” technology, which has been marketed with more familiarity to consumers as “3G.”  Once Rogers launched the service, up went advertising promoting Rogers as the “fastest” and “most reliable” Canadian mobile provider.  Last month, Rogers was forced to drop the “fastest” claim, but has maintained it runs the most “reliable” network in the country.

Now that Telus upgraded their network, they wanted to know what justification Rogers had to claim that.  Telus eventually sued.

Justice Christopher Grauer found Telus had cause.

“The only basis Rogers ever had for making that representation was the comparison between its HSPA network and its competitors’ first-generation EVDO networks,” Grauer wrote in his decision. “Rogers’ representation nevertheless continues to be made. In these circumstances, I conclude that is misleading.”

“What is clear from the evidence before me is that the present network technology is at least equivalent between Rogers and Telus,” the judge wrote.

“The technological advantage that allowed Rogers to represent that it has Canada’s most reliable network has disappeared.”

“I conclude … that the balance of convenience favors the granting of an order restraining Rogers from continuing to represent, without appropriate qualification, that it provides ‘Canada’s most reliable network’.”

The case has some slight similarities to the Verizon-AT&T spat, if you took AT&T’s position in the case.  Rogers, in this case, promoted its 3G network before the others had networks of their own, and used language that suggested that 3G access provided enhanced reliability.  Once the competition also upgraded, Rogers simply added new fine print in their advertising touting that 3G was better than the older network standards their competitors had relied on up until earlier this month.

Rogers claims they are “perplexed” by the decision because they still believe they have the most reliable network.

[flv]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Rogers Most Reliable Dropped Call Ad.flv[/flv]

Rogers, “Canada’s most reliable network” doesn’t drop calls in elevators, according to this ad. (30 seconds)

There is no “good guy” in this story, however.  Once Bell upgraded their network on November 4th, they promptly began running commercials claiming they have Canada’s best network themselves.

Telus has the cutest… ads that is.  Nobody does cute quite like Telus.  Since 2001, the company has relied mostly on critters to sell their goods.  Among them: pot-bellied pigs, bunnies, tree frogs, monkeys, lizards, ducks, fish, hedgehogs, parrots, meerkats, and perhaps to celebrate their western Canadian roots, lots and lots of goats.

Watch the petting zoo, and some other Canadian wireless ads below:

… Continue Reading