Bell is pulling out all the stops trying to defend its justification for Internet Overcharging through so-called usage-based billing.  In a published debate between the telecom giant and TekSavvy — a small independent ISP trying to preserve flat rate broadband service in Canada, Bell claims Canadian broadband is the third best in the world, ahead of the United States, all of Europe, and just barely trailing Japan and Korea:

At the same time, Canada has increasingly become a world leader when it comes to broadband. When it comes to actual download speeds, Canada ranks third in the G20, behind only densely populated Korea and Japan. And prices are low — in fact, for higher-speed services, lower than in both the U.S. and Japan.

Michael Geist, a popular columnist fighting against Canadian Internet Overcharging, scoffs at the notion:

I’m not sure where these claims come from – Canada does not appear in the top 10 on Akamai’s latest State of the Internet report for Internet speed and no Canadian city makes Akamai’s top 100 for peak speed. The OECD report ranks Canada well back in terms of speed and price as does the Berkman report.  The NetIndex report ranks Canada 36th in the world for residential speed. Moreover, the shift away from the OECD to the G20 has the effect of excluding many developed countries with faster and cheaper broadband than Canada (while bringing in large, developing world economies that unsurprisingly rank below Canada on these issues). While there is probably a report somewhere that validates the claim, the consensus is that Canada is not a leader.

Bell’s Magic Pony-stories are at best exaggerated and at worst, phoney-baloney from the telco’s government relations department.

Stop the Cap! compared prices across several providers and found no value for money in broadband plans from all of the country’s major phone and cable companies.  Without fail, all were heavily usage limited, most throttled broadband speeds for peer-to-peer applications, engaged in overlimit fees the credit card industry would be proud to charge, and simply were almost always behind their counterparts to the south — in the United States.  In fact, some consumers are importing their broadband from the USA when they can manage it.

“Bell can’t win the argument on the merits, so it is making things up,” writes London, Ontario resident Hugh MacDonald.  “I have had Bell DSL for years now, and there isn’t anything fast or cheap about it.”

MacDonald’s broadband service from Bell tops out at around 4Mbps.

Mirko Bibic, senior vice-president for regulatory and government affairs at Bell claims consumers have to pay more to fund infrastructure expansion, and even challenges our long-standing assertion that telephone network comparisons don’t apply:

Bell provides all our customers with the best possible Internet experience available — the result of heavy and ongoing investment to expand our network capacity both to meet fast-growing demand and to manage the congestion that threatens everyone’s Internet experience.

Internet congestion is a fact and it cannot be wished away. Network providers like Bell must, like hydro utilities, build our networks to handle the heaviest usage times, not just an average of usage over time. At 8:30 in the evening, demand is at its absolute peak. And we have to deliver based on the volume at that time.

Keeping up with growing volume obviously means these network investments are not one-time costs. Between 2006 and 2009, Internet usage more than doubled, and Bell has invested more than $8-billion in the last five years in network growth and enhancement to keep pace. Yet at the same time, the CRTC has found that the average price per gigabyte downloaded has actually declined by 20%.

That’s why the long distance analogy, so often used by those with an interest in confusing the issue, is fundamentally misleading. In the case of long distance, it’s the simple transmission of voice over long-established legacy networks.

But Bibic ignores several important facts and doesn’t disclose others:

What broadband network does not have to make regular investments to expand to meet demand?  Cable and telephone company DSL business models, in place for at least a decade, priced network expansion, infrastructure return on investment, and data transmission into pricing formulas.  While data demands are increasing, the costs to meet those demands are, as Bell openly admits, declining.

What amount of revenue and profit has been earned from selling broadband service to Canadian consumers and the wholesale market and how does that compare to the dollar amount invested?  Bell Canada’s financial report for the third quarter of 2010 shows the company will earn an estimated $3.5 billion in revenue from its broadband Internet division alone.  Bell’s capital spending numbers also include network investments for its fiber to the neighborhood service, Fibe.  Bell’s revenue from selling the video side of that service were on track to deliver an additional $1.5 billion in revenue in 2010.  Not including the enormous wholesale broadband market, Bell will earn at least $5 billion a year from its broadband division.

In fact, Bell’s financial report also openly admits much of its capital spending increases have been spent on deploying its IPTV network Fibe in Ontario and Quebec, not on Internet backbone traffic management.

What are some of Bell’s biggest risks to a happy-clappy shareholder report for investors next quarter?  To quote:

• “Our ability to implement our strategies and plans in order to produce the expected benefits;
• Our ability to continue to implement our cost reduction initiatives and contain capital intensity;
• The potential adverse effects on our Internet and wireless businesses of the significant increase in broadband demand;
• Our ability to discontinue certain traditional services as necessary to improve capital and operating efficiencies;
• Regulatory initiatives or proceedings, litigation and changes in laws or regulations.”

Bibic

As for Bell’s claims about the “long distance analogy,” it’s only slightly ironic that a telecommunications company considers today’s voice networks radically different from data networks.  Analog transmission of voice calls went the way of the telegraph around a decade ago, with the last analog, step-by-step telephone switch in North America in Nantes, Quebec switched off in late 2001.  Today, telephone traffic is digital data, no different than any other kind of data transported across the country.

Bell cannot afford to have comparisons made between the telephone company’s move towards flat rate billing for phone calls and their broadband service moving away from it, because it torpedoes their entire argument.

Bibic then argues UBB is the right way to go because… major providers already charge it:

UBB has been the established framework for Internet services in Canada for years. Bell, for example, offers standard Internet service packages ranging from 25 gigabytes up to 75 gigabytes per month. As well, customers can sign up for 40 GB more for $5 per month, 80 GB for $10 or a whopping 120 GB more for $15. Keep in mind that 120 GB will get you 600 hours of standard definition video streaming or 100 hours of HD video streaming.

Not a bad deal when you consider average usage on our network is 16 GB per month and half of our customer base uses just five GB a month.

Most Canadians don’t see the “good deal” Bell says they will get from dramatically increased broadband prices. In fact, polls reveal the only groups in Canada that support such pricing are Big Telecom executives and the CRTC.

A new Angus Reid/Toronto Star poll illustrates what we’ve found to be true wherever ripoff “usage-based” pricing appears: people despise it, no matter how much Internet they use:

In the online survey of a representative national sample of 1,024 Canadian adults, three-in-four respondents (76%) disagree with the recent decision from the Canada Radio-television Telecommunications Commission (CRTC), which set the stage to eliminate unlimited use plans.

Bibic can relax as long as the current panel of commissioners at the CRTC, largely drawn from telecommunications companies, remain in place.  They continue to agree with Bell’s point of view and ignore the citizens they are supposed to represent.

Prime Minister Harper's government is facing an open revolt by Canadian consumers over Internet Overcharging.

A full-scale revolt among consumers across Canada has brought the issue of Internet Overcharging to the highest levels of government.

A spokesman for Prime Minister Stephen Harper said the government is very concerned about a decision from the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission that has effectively forced the end of unlimited use broadband plans across the country.

Both the Liberal and NDP parties have made a point of protesting the CRTC decision, which happened under the Conservative Party’s watch.  Harper’s Industry Minister Tony Clement stepped up his remarks this morning which hint the government is prepared to quash last week’s decision by the CRTC, which has already forced price increases for broadband service across the country.

“The decision on its face has some pretty severe impacts,” Clement told reporters in Ottawa after NDP and Liberal critics in the House of Commons repeatedly pounded the government on the issue of so-called “usage-based billing.”

“I indicated the impacts on consumers, on small business operators, on creators, on innovators. So that’s why I have to work through a process, cross my T’s, doc my I’s. When you’re dealing with a legal process, that’s what you have to do. But I will be doing that very, very quickly, and getting back to the prime minister and my colleagues very, very quickly,” said Clement.

As of this morning, more than 286,000 Canadians have signed a petition protesting the Internet Overcharging schemes.

The protest movement has now been joined by small and medium-sized business groups who fear the impact new Internet pricing will have on their businesses.

Richard Truscott, with the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, normally a group that prefers less government action, said his members are demanding a stop to the pricing schemes before they get started.

“The vast majority of small businesses rely on reasonably-priced Internet service to conduct their operations,” he said. “Generally this is the sort of thing that hits the most innovative sector with higher costs.”

Most cable and phone companies are lobbying Ottawa politicians to keep the new usage-based billing schemes, and several are pretending the protest movement doesn’t exist.

AgenceQMI, a cable-company owned wire service, is also coming under fire for misrepresenting Clement’s positions on the pricing schemes in a news report issued yesterday.  The wire service claimed Clement supported the CRTC’s position, something Clement adamantly denied this morning.

The National Post, a self-described conservative newspaper, this morning published an editorial supporting usage-based pricing, claiming a handful of users were creating a problem that light users should not pay to solve.  But many readers leaving comments on the article strongly disagreed, claiming the newspaper is out of touch.

Although the regime of usage caps, speed throttles, and overlimit fees have been in place with most major providers for at least two years, the culmination of several events in the last six months have brought the issue to the boiling point:

1. The arrival of Netflix video streaming, which provides unlimited access for a flat monthly fee;
2. The ongoing limbo dance among several providers who are reducing usage allowances when competitive threats arrive;
3. The increase in providers now enforcing usage limits by billing consumers overlimit fees that spike broadband bills;
4. Recent examples of bill shock, which have left some consumers with thousands of dollars in Internet charges.

Bill Shock

Kevin Brennan, a graphic designer who works from home and downloads large files from clients, was first hit with extra charges in November, which cost him $34 above his usual Shaw bill.

“I’d never been contacted about going over before,” he told the Calgary Herald, adding he was also over in December. “Thirty-four dollars doesn’t seem like much, but over the course of a year it adds up.

“What concerns me, outside my own business, is the lack of innovation people will be able to do. And it makes Shaw a monopoly. . . . if you watch TV or the Internet, you pay more to them.”

Shaw reduced its usage allowance for customers like Brennan late last year from 75 to 60GB on its most popular broadband plan.  It also now enforces a $2/GB overlimit fee.

John Lawford, counsel for the Public Interest Advocacy Centre, told the Herald the concern isn’t just that smaller companies can no longer offer unlimited plans, which reduces competition.

“The phone and Internet and cable companies of the world are playing it both ways. They’re saying, ‘Well, there’s these big data hogs that are using too much, we’ve got to punish them to keep the price down.’ On the other hand they’re buying media companies so they have stuff to shove down the wires, which doesn’t count toward your cap,” Lawford said. “That’s anti-competitive.”

Most Canadian media companies are now tightly integrated with large telecommunications companies.  CTV, Canada’s largest commercial network, is now owned by Bell, the country’s biggest phone company.  Rogers, Shaw, and Videotron — the largest cable companies in Canada own cable and broadcast stations, newspapers, and magazines.  They also control cellphone companies, Wi-Fi networks, and have interests in satellite providers as well.

When a competitor like Netflix arrives to challenge the companies’ pay television interests, turning down consumers’ broadband usage allowances discourages cord-cutting.

The CRTC’s decision to allow Bell to charge usage-based pricing for wholesale accounts was the final death blow to unlimited Internet according to several independent service providers, because virtually all of them rely on Bell — a company that received taxpayer subsidies to build its broadband network — for access to the Internet.

Canadian Parliament

TekSavvy, a company that used to offer unlimited use plans, can do so no more.  In a statement to customers, TekSavvy laid blame on regulators for being forced to increase prices.

“From March 1 on, users of the up to 5Mbps packages in Ontario can expect a usage cap of 25Gb (60Gb in Quebec), substantially down from the 200Gb or unlimited deals TekSavvy was able to offer before the CRTC’s decision to impose usage based billing,” read a statement sent to customers.

TekSavvy spokeswoman Katie do Forno said the CRTC decision is a disaster for Canadian broadband in the new digital economy.

“This will result in unjustifiably high prices and a reduction in innovation,” said do Forno. “I think it’s going to change behavior about how people use the Internet.”

The company underlines the point by including “before and after” pricing schedules on its website, an unprecedented move.  Shaw, western Canada’s largest cable company, was heavily criticized for trying to hide their reduction in usage allowances.

Ottawa residents are planning direct action to protest the decision this Saturday.  Shawn Pepin is organizing the protest rally.

“What they’re doing right now looks like a cash-grab scheme, and people aren’t going to take it,” he said.

[flv width=”640″ height=”388″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/CBC News Pay As You Go Tony Clement 2-1-11.flv[/flv]

Minister of Industry Tony Clement was pressed by CBC Television about the Harper Government’s stand on Internet Overcharging.  The CBC asks why Canadians are paying some of the world’s highest prices for broadband and why Clement is finally getting involved.  Watch as he mysteriously avoids stating the obvious: Canadians are in open revolt and politicians from competing parties are taking their side.  (9 minutes)

The Associated Press reports, and Stop the Cap! can confirm AT&T is allowing some of their long-standing customers to switch back to unlimited data plans, even if they gave them up after the company introduced cheaper, limited data plan options.

After our regular reader “PreventCAPS” sent word AT&T was relenting on some requests for unlimited data plans, we spent some time late this afternoon with Jim Scott, an AT&T customer from New Rochelle, N.Y. as he navigated his way through AT&T customer service trying to get back to an unlimited data plan.

“When AT&T offered customers new, cheaper data plans, I never knew those replaced the unlimited option and I thought I could save some money downgrading to a cheaper data option,” Scott told us.

But Scott discovered the plan allowances he got didn’t save him money at all, because he exceeded them.

“I am a contractor and I spend all day on my phone moving large image files and even video of work being done on the properties I manage,” Scott says.  “Two gigabytes didn’t cut it.”

Scott tried to switch back to his unlimited plan this summer, but was told he could not, as it was no longer offered.

Enter Verizon Wireless, which is keeping its unlimited service plan at least temporarily as it introduces the Verizon iPhone.  Verizon’s imminent iPhone has become leverage for customers who want to turn the tables on AT&T.

“Thanks to AT&T’s greed, I had already made the decision to dump them for Verizon when my contract ends in February,” Scott says. “AT&T works fine in this part of New York, and the only reason I am leaving is because they don’t have a wireless data plan that met my needs.”

We worked with Scott and suggested he threaten to cancel his AT&T service and walk his future business to Verizon Wireless.  We asked him to make sure to tell AT&T the reason he was planning to cancel his service was because of the end of unlimited data option.

On a three-way call with AT&T customer service, AT&T promptly offered to restore Scott’s access to its discontinued unlimited data plan.

“All I had to say was ‘Verizon’ and ‘iPhone’ and the customer service representative immediately starting clacking away on her keyboard, and I had my unlimited data plan restored in less than five minutes,” Scott said.

The AP reports the key to success is having been a previous subscriber to AT&T’s unlimited data option.  New customers who signed up after June 2010 never had that option, and AT&T has refused to offer unlimited data to these customers.

Because newer customers are under relatively new contracts, actually following through on a threat to drop AT&T is an expensive proposition with early termination fees still well into the hundreds of dollars.  For those closer to a penalty-free exit, AT&T recognizes many of these customers already have one foot out the door.

Jose Argumedo, of Brentwood, N.Y., told the AP he and a friend were switched to an unlimited plan recently after they called AT&T’s customer service. Both have iPhone 4s, and previously had earlier iPhone models.

AT&T spokesman Mark Siegel wouldn’t confirm the option to return to an unlimited plan.

“We handle customers and their situations individually, and we’re not going to discuss specifics,” he said.

Scott says he is comfortable with his iPhone, but getting back an unlimited data plan was more important than the handset.

“If I can use the iPhone as leverage against these guys, why not?” Scott says.  “They’ve had me under their thumb for more than six months now with overlimit fees — now the table is turned.”

Stop the Cap! advises customers who want to follow in Scott’s footsteps get organized before calling:

1. Be sure to note the number of years you have been an AT&T customer;
2. Explain you used to have unlimited data and now want that plan back;
3. Tell them you are prepared to drop AT&T, even at the risk of a cancellation fee, if they don’t restore your access to the unlimited data plan.

If a representative is unable to make the switch, or doesn’t have information about how to switch you back, ask for a supervisor or hang up and call back.

Gary McCallum, a Shaw customer in Edmonton, Alberta, has received word his broadband service is about to get more expensive — a lot more expensive.

“Holy crap, it’s like text messaging [bill shock] all over again when your broadband bill arrives and you are now looking at hundreds of dollars instead of the $40 or $50 you used to pay,” McCallum told CTV News.

McCallum, and other designated “heavy users,” are receiving letters in the mail from Shaw notifying them they have been exceeding the company’s declining usage limits imposed on its broadband service.  If they exceed the limits again, they may be subject to penalty fees of as much as $2 per gigabyte.

“I’m upset about the backdoor tactics,” McCallum complains.  “They keep it secret and then lambaste you later.”

Most Shaw customers will be forced to confine their usage to 60GB per month, the limit on the company’s most popular broadband plan.  If they don’t, after some warning, they’ll pay a stiff fine.  Just 20GB of overlimit usage will more than double the average customer’s broadband bill, currently around $37 a month.

A house full of teenagers watching Netflix or downloading files could cost far more than that.

Company officials deny the potential revenue bonanza is unjustified.

Customers who use more will pay more, admits Terry Medd, vice-president of operations for Shaw Communications in Calgary.

“It’s video over the Internet that’s driving a lot of this cost,” he said. However, most Shaw Internet customers won’t hit their caps, Medd claims, suggesting it should affect fewer than 10 per cent of customers.

“The average user consumed about one-third of what the cap is. In other words, we’ve set the caps at three times the average usage. For the average user, there’s no concern here,” Medd said.

However, Shaw recently reduced their usage caps on virtually all of their Internet plans, making it more likely customers will be snagged by overlimit fees.

Some customers want to know what they will get if they use far less than their plan allowance.

Don McGregor believes Shaw’s plan to charge Internet users for the data they use is fair and equitable, so long as those who use less than the allowance get a break on their bills.

“Shaw should plan on refunding fees for any use of data below the contracted amount,” the Edmonton resident wrote in a letter to the editor published in the Edmonton Journal.  “Since 90 per cent of Shaw’s subscribers use less than the full GB capacity they pay for, I am sure these subscribers’ refund cheques are in the mail.”

Don, like other Canadians, is about to learn Internet Overcharging is never about fairness or saving customers money.  It’s about charging customers more for the same service they used to receive for less, without any improvements.  ISPs will not provide true “usage pricing” for consumers because it would slash revenue from their broadband service.

But western Canadians need not be victims of Shaw’s overcharging.  Telus, which sells landline-based DSL service in British Columbia and Alberta says it has upgraded its facilities to accommodate usage demands and won’t expose customers to overlimit fee bill shock.

Telus offers a way out of Shaw's Money Party hangover

Although Telus’ website does show usage limits, company officials claim they are rarely enforced, and not at the subscriber’s expense.

Telus could make a significant dent in Shaw’s customer base by dropping them altogether, which will save the phone company from these kinds of  silly legal gymnastics in their FAQ:

Why do you call your service unlimited, when my monthly usage is limited?
We refer to TELUS High Speed as being unlimited because you get unlimited hours of monthly access.

If you do not want to play Shaw’s Internet Overcharging game, perhaps spending time with a new Xbox 360 would be better?  Telus is giving them away to qualified new customers signing up for service.

[flv width=”480″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/CTV Edmonton Shaw Internet Overcharging 1-7-11.flv[/flv]

CTV News in Edmonton informs Alberta’s Shaw customers their broadband service could get a lot more expensive.  (2 minutes)

Knology's Shakedown in Lawrence

Pesky facts have a way of getting in the middle of silly marketing campaigns.  Knology of Kansas (actually Georgia) has run into this problem in a big way with its glitzy, carefully-crafted welcome website KnologyKnows.

Some of the company’s facts are uncoordinated.

Lawrence blogger Joe Davis sure noticed:

Knology put up a new website to help build their brand in Lawrence, Kansas. In big capital letters, they write:

Allow us to introduce ourselves. We’re Knology, the new (115-year-old) kid on the block.

Sounds eerily familiar to the beginning of “Sympathy for the Devil” by the Rolling Stones.  Trust me… I have no sympathy for the Devil (in this case, a non-local company), also known as Knology. Their website is called KnologyKnows.com. But considering how many “facts” they’ve put out this past week that have been wrong, they really don’t know.

[flv width=”640″ height=”253″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Sunflower Broadband is Now Knology.flv[/flv]

Knology’s opening welcome video to residents of Lawrence, Kansas has some fact-checking problems. (1 minute)

Davis caught a fact-checking lapse in the company’s introductory video, which claims the world record for handshakes was 13,372.  Oops.  In 2002, while campaigning for office, soon-to-be Gov. Bill Richardson set a world record for the most number of handshakes in an eight-hour period: 13,392.

The only thing Knology has been good at so far in Lawrence is shaking down their customers with Internet Overcharging schemes.  The company has plenty of money to invest in promoting itself, but has so far retained Sunflower Broadband’s costly usage limits and overlimit fees.

Knology hasn’t been around for 115 years either — a company it bought out was.  The Interstate and Valley Telephone Company was one of many independent phone companies created to serve areas AT&T dismissed as rural backwaters not worthy of their service.  Knology itself has only been around since 1994, owned by ITC Holding Company — the people who also brought you Mindspring, a defunct Internet Service Provider sold to Earthlink one month before the dot.com crash.

Did you know Lawrence omits several states?

Davis is also unimpressed with the company’s sell-out of its customer support staff, many of whom will lose their jobs as part of the company’s “rightsizing” initiative.

For Davis, first impressions mean a lot, and Knology is doing themselves no favors.  Some of their other trivia isn’t always accurate, either:

This “fact” is told to anyone who first comes to Lawrence. However, it is wrong. Truth is, 14 states are missing from the Lawrence street grid. The first thing I did when I was told this in 2006 was to find where Connecticut street was located. The funny thing is… Of the 36 state streets in Lawrence, Georgia is not included. Knology is based out of Georgia. Whoops.

Davis says Knology has turned Sunflower’s well-regarded Twitter customer support account into an automated marketing spambot, spewing out continuous tweets telling customers to enter its giveaway and visit its newly branded website.

Stop the Cap! reader Brian, also from Lawrence, agrees with Davis.

“Knology has no concept of the truth in their marketing campaign. This is a scary test of things to come. Fortunately, we just switched to AT&T’s U-verse.”

Perhaps Knology should learn from the ghost of Mindspring, which used to have legendary customer service and a list of:

By filling out Knology's survey, you can give the company a piece of your mind over its Internet Overcharging schemes and possibly win this 32" Samsung flat panel TV.

The 14 Deadly Sins of Mindspring (a/k/a “the ways that we can be just like everybody else”)

1. Give lousy service- busy signals, disconnects, downtime, and ring no answers.
2. Rely on outside vendors who let us down.
3. Make internal procedures easy on us, even if it means negatively affecting or inconveniencing the customer.
4. Joke about how dumb the customers are.
5. Finger point at how other departments are not doing their job.
6. Customers can’t get immediate “live” help from sales or support.
7. Poor coordination across departments.
8. Show up at a demo, sales call, trade show, or meeting unprepared.
9. Ignore the competition, they are far inferior to us.
10. Miss deadlines that we commit to internally and externally.
11. Make recruiting, hiring, and training a lower priority because we are too busy doing other tasks.
12. Look for the next job assignment, instead of focusing on the current one.
13. Office gossip, rumors, and politics.
14. Rely on dissatisfied customers to be your service monitors.

Readers can share their views about Knology’s unjustified Internet Overcharging schemes and enter to win a 32″ Samsung flat panel TV in the process.  You need not be a customer to participate.  Just complete their survey, and be sure to let them know in the box labeled “other” that you will never do business with an Internet provider that doesn’t provide truly unlimited, full speed, flat rate broadband service.