CRTC Decision on UBB?

[leungly]

http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2011/2011-44.htm

The decision/ruling is being discussed shortly I think. Not sure what it really means yet, I think Teksavvy and others will have a better idea of what it exactly entails in the next day or two or more.

[leungly]

Commission’s analysis and determinations

9. The Commission notes that carriers’ retail UBB rates are market-based and are not subject to prior Commission approval – that is, they are forborne from regulation. The Commission also notes that the flat-rate component of the carriers’ retail Internet service rates recovers most, if not all, of the associated retail UBB costs. In the Commission’s view, this situation provides carriers with the flexibility to adjust or waive retail UBB rates on a promotional basis.

10. However, the Commission considers that, for competitors, carriers’ wholesale UBB rates are an additional, direct, and unavoidable cost that competitors will need to recover from rates paid by their retail customers. The Commission also considers that wholesale UBB charges will result in additional customer care costs for competitors, including a review of the relevant carrier’s wholesale usage records and associated UBB charges.

11. Further, the Commission notes its view in Telecom Regulatory Policy 2010-632 that services provided by smaller competitors bring pricing discipline, innovation, and consumer choice to the retail Internet service market. The Commission considers that, in the absence of a discount on carriers’ wholesale UBB rates relative to their comparable retail UBB rates, smaller competitors’ ability to continue to differentiate their retail Internet services would be unduly impaired.

12. In light of the above, the Commission concludes that wholesale UBB rates should be established at a discount relative to carriers’ comparable retail UBB rates and that, in the absence of such a discount, the wholesale UBB rates would not be just and reasonable, contrary to subsection 27(1) of the Telecommunications Act (the Act).

13. Regarding the amount of the wholesale UBB discount, the Commission considers that if it is too large, the effectiveness of UBB as an economic ITMP will be reduced, while if it is too small, competitors’ capacity to recover costs will be undermined.

14. The Commission concludes that a discount of 15 percent for carriers’ wholesale UBB rates relative to their retail UBB rates recognizes these considerations appropriately.

[Starkicker]

So does it mean UBB is going ahead or is it still a work in process?

[Aske001]

??!

You mean to say that the CRTC took all of the public input, deliberated deeply, and came up with the recommendation that 3rd parties like TekSavvy should be offered a 15% wholesale discount off the $2/Gbyte UBB charge over Bell's 25 Gbyte cap??

[ipxxx]

f.

[Aznsilvrboy]

I think this means the the big telco's should offer the likes of Teksavvy a discounted UBB rate (15% off?), but that's still UBB...damn it!!!

[ipxxx]

I think this means the the big telco's should offer the likes of Teksavvy a discounted UBB rate (15% off?), but that's still UBB...damn it!!!

someone on DSLR said this and I'm quoting because I completely agree...:

It still means that Bell can WAIVE the UBB charge in whole or in part for its own retail customers on a 'promotional basis'.

Bell's promotional waiving of the UBB for its own customers will likely be 100% until the day the last indie goes broke.

this decision is stupid...

[DaMooli]

Is this story picking up steam in the national media? If it isn't .. we're screwed.

[Tijuana]

This seems so sketchy and illegal. Bell lobbies for imposing caps because they are losing money, and now they can waive them if they want to... Crooks, never using Bell, ever.

[apn64]

Is this story picking up steam in the national media? If it isn't .. we're screwed.

Globe & Mail running it: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle1882339/

[Ironsmack]

One thing that pisses me off about this, is Bell got help from the govt to expand/upgrade its line using the public tax money.

And yet, theyre allowed to go ahead with this!

Not sure if having the gov't own the lines (much like your 400 series highway) are much better.

[leungly]

Well Hopefully this will get turned over similarly like the Wind Mobile fiasco.

Members of Parliament and the Minister in Charge of this Portfolio should be held accountable.

[hyperion]

I feel ashamed to call myself a Canadian today. What a slap in the face this ruling is. The beginning of the end of internet in this country.
You can run to cable (Rogers resellers) for a few months, but their own UBB-like plan has already been announced and will come in June I believe.

[Evil Baby]

It is beyond me how we allow telcos to own television stations(or rights to) and Internet at the same time. How are we possibly supposed to create competition?

It's also very annoying to me that we protect companies like Rogers and Bell by stopping foreign companies from entering Canada. The laxed teh rules a little by allowing Wind but Rogers and Bell are still protected. IMO it's not worth protecting Canadian companies(and jobs I assume) while allowing them to rip of Canadians and stifle other potential Canadian competition.

I really do wish the Government owned the lines that supply the internet and then just leased them out to companies willing run services. Canada is already far enough behind in speed(even in our large cities) now we have these pathetically small caps.

Blarg!

[loybond]

Apparently, new infrastructure can be set up, and then they can have unlimited... but will anyone be doing this? This makes me so angry.

This will really hurt digital entrepreneurship...