Ongoing Deal Discussion

[Bell] 50% Off Bell internet for the next 12months, no contract

Deal Addict
Apr 27, 2005
1840 posts
893 upvotes
Montreal
What are the recent deals that people are getting in Quebec for Fibe 7/1 and Fibe 10/1 as a standalone service?

I'm paying $38+tx and it's increasing to $41+tx in Feb. So basically- the price is $52.95, with a $10 discount and $2 electronic statement credit. I have 60gb bandwidth- which is fine. I just want a cheaper price.

I'm wondering if I can get a better deal....?
Best Deals: Star Alliance Silver without even flying= FREE
Fido CAN/USA Unlimited, CID/VM/SMS 2gb $33/month
3 Logitech X-230 Speakers (150% PM at Staples) = $13 each (I bought 3!)[/B]
Deal Addict
User avatar
Aug 17, 2005
1403 posts
97 upvotes
alanbrenton wrote:
Jan 23rd, 2013 1:03 pm
Sounds akin to sending a chat transcript to my email after the session is over. But it's a good idea to ask for those details (I didn't I can ask for those as some chat agents only give a confirmation number). I'll be sure to ask for them in the future though what exactly is the difference between reference and confirmation? Is reference the subject matter while confirmation is what Bell's response is to our request (discounts, credits)?

I subscribe to some Bell services so these tips will come in handy.


A reference number is a number that tells you where you can obtain the information you want.



Confirmation, it would be merely an act of repeating a statement by the same person (the one who issued it)
Penalty Box
User avatar
Apr 21, 2004
49220 posts
14553 upvotes
May wrote:
Jan 23rd, 2013 1:27 pm
A reference number is a number that tells you where you can obtain the information you want.



Confirmation, it would be merely an act of repeating a statement by the same person (the one who issued it)
Thanks for clarifying. To play safe I'll ask for all three pieces of information. Just surprised why they would need two numbers when everything is logged in the same note.
Deal Expert
Jan 7, 2002
15665 posts
7946 upvotes
Waterloo, ON
deal_king wrote:
Jan 23rd, 2013 1:00 pm
+1 Anyone who doesn't do this will be screwed royally.
Often Bhell will refuse to honour a deal or commitment because they don't have any record of it. If you have a record of who you talked with, what you agreed to and when you did this, then you've disarmed them. Sometimes you have to escalate to the VP's office. But at that point they know that if it ever went to court, say small claims court, a judge is generally going to take the side of the party with the records over the party who arrives naked.
veni, vidi, Visa
Deal Addict
Aug 12, 2003
1558 posts
72 upvotes
alanbrenton wrote:
Jan 23rd, 2013 12:40 pm
After Suju reminding of Electronic Box, I'm going to ask about availability in my area. It seems the best compromise with the 25/10 since the dry loop fee is waived and I didn't know about the free download period though with DMCA takedowns, I'm finding myself downloading less material off the web.
Lol this is something I should probably have asked before I paid for my installation and first month (they are coming next week), but the 25/10 from Electronic Box should be just as fast as Bell's correct? And would it be faster and more stable than Start's Advanced cable? I know technically it isn't as Start's is 30 down, but I'm talking real life usage. For example for torrenting I only get a max of 3.7 with Start.
Penalty Box
User avatar
Apr 21, 2004
49220 posts
14553 upvotes
SuJu wrote:
Jan 23rd, 2013 3:31 pm
Lol this is something I should probably have asked before I paid for my installation and first month (they are coming next week), but the 25/10 from Electronic Box should be just as fast as Bell's correct? And would it be faster and more stable than Start's Advanced cable? I know technically it isn't as Start's is 30 down, but I'm talking real life usage. For example for torrenting I only get a max of 3.7 with Start.
It should be as fast but I was very disappointed with Teksavvy (was on 16/1). They managed to blame Bell or me for all slow downs, never admitting that it could be their commercial routers or switches. After I switched to Bell, I rarely get slower than 25 Mbps when testing on speed test. If I do experience slow downs, an access point (router as an AP) reboot fixes it, which means it's my equipment's fault.

With Bell, they are responsible for everything until the cell pipe modem, including the demarcation point. For 3rd parties, they can always say the slow down is due to congestion/issues at the demarcation point (blame Bell).

EB sounds like a good choice too if they will not blame you or Bell for all slowdowns. Just remember the business model, Bell has technicians roving the entire country whereas with EB and Teksavvy, they only have a few and will troubleshoot from the comforts of their offices. Bell's thousands of technicians are a fixed cost so it doesn't cost Bell a lot more to deploy them for troubleshooting and margins are higher as they "own" the network and the feds funded part of the infrastructure. Bell will not charge for technician visits if speed is slow at the cell pipe modem level (they own it and everything beyond it [inside looking out] -- the cable that connects the dsl jack to the demarcation point, the demarcation point, the fiber to the node and the CO) but for TSI or EB, they may just as well blame Bell. I was even told that TSI couldn't guarantee that I don't have to pay the $90 Bell technician fee even if I can prove that the slowdown is not of my doing. What a lot of crap!

Simple experiment I thought of when the concept of line stats was introduced to me by a TSI representative -- asked them for line stats without letting them know what kind of speeds I was getting on speed test. Guess what? Whether I was getting good internet speed (16 Mbps) or not (5-6 or even slower Mbps), they told me the line stats they were reading off my dsl modem were bad (lots of noise). So from that simple experiment, I knew the line stat was a crappy indicator and shouldn't even be used for troubleshooting since it's always noisy whether I was getting good internet speed or not. After I realized TSI's blame game, I decided I was switching over to Start Cable (forgot EB existed) but then the Bell student deal came about.

My set up is simple, all my devices including that access point is hooked to a gigabit switch. So the only time I am at fault for slow internet connectivity is if my router or access point fails or need rebooting. With Bell, I can always run diagnosis at the cellpipe modem level, and if tests show speed is rather slow at that level, Bell will send a technician to troubleshoot. With a third party, they could blame the demarcation point, owned by Bell and I will be helpless as I can't make the complaint to Bell myself.

Just a food for thought for those who think third party ISP's are always the best. With 3rd party, they can blame demarcation point or Bell, and charge you the Bell technician visit $90 a pop. With Bell, it's easy to ascertain that the problem resides with Bell if at the cell pipe modem, speed isn't looking rosy. A technician will be dispatched at no charge.

I was with Teksavvy for over a year and believe me, I'd rather be with Bell, as troubleshooting is more straightforward and there is only me or Bell to be blamed.
Deal Addict
Aug 12, 2003
1558 posts
72 upvotes
alanbrenton wrote:
Jan 23rd, 2013 5:15 pm
It should be as fast but I was very disappointed with Teksavvy (was on 16/1). They managed to blame Bell or me for all slow downs, never admitting that it could be their commercial routers or switches. After I switched to Bell, I rarely get slower than 25 Mbps when testing on speed test. If I do experience slow downs, an access point (router as an AP) reboot fixes it, which means it's my equipment's fault.

With Bell, they are responsible for everything until the cell pipe modem, including the demarcation point. For 3rd parties, they can always say the slow down is due to congestion/issues at the demarcation point (blame Bell).

EB sounds like a good choice too if they will not blame you or Bell for all slowdowns. Just remember the business model, Bell has technicians roving the entire country whereas with EB and Teksavvy, they only have a few and will troubleshoot from the comforts of their offices. Bell's thousands of technicians are a fixed cost so it doesn't cost Bell a lot more to deploy them for troubleshooting and margins are higher as they "own" the network and the feds funded part of the infrastructure. Bell will not charge for technician visits if speed is slow at the cell pipe modem level (they own it and everything beyond it [inside looking out] -- the cable that connects the dsl jack to the demarcation point, the demarcation point, the fiber to the node and the CO) but for TSI or EB, they may just as well blame Bell. I was even told that TSI couldn't guarantee that I don't have to pay the $90 Bell technician fee even if I can prove that the slowdown is not of my doing. What a lot of crap!

Simple experiment I thought of when the concept of line stats was introduced to me by a TSI representative -- asked them for line stats without letting them know what kind of speeds I was getting on speed test. Guess what? Whether I was getting good internet speed (16 Mbps) or not (5-6 or even slower Mbps), they told me the line stats they were reading off my dsl modem were bad (lots of noise). So from that simple experiment, I knew the line stat was a crappy indicator and shouldn't even be used for troubleshooting since it's always noisy whether I was getting good internet speed or not. After I realized TSI's blame game, I decided I was switching over to Start Cable (forgot EB existed) but then the Bell student deal came about.

My set up is simple, all my devices including that access point is hooked to a gigabit switch. So the only time I am at fault for slow internet connectivity is if my router or access point fails or need rebooting. With Bell, I can always run diagnosis at the cellpipe modem level, and if tests show speed is rather slow at that level, Bell will send a technician to troubleshoot. With a third party, they could blame the demarcation point, owned by Bell and I will be helpless as I can't make the complaint to Bell myself.

Just a food for thought for those who think third party ISP's are always the best. With 3rd party, they can blame demarcation point or Bell, and charge you the Bell technician visit $90 a pop. With Bell, it's easy to ascertain that the problem resides with Bell if at the cell pipe modem, speed isn't looking rosy. A technician will be dispatched at no charge.

I was with Teksavvy for over a year and believe me, I'd rather be with Bell, as troubleshooting is more straightforward and there is only me or Bell to be blamed.
Thanks for the input. So am I to expect frequent slowdowns with DSL fiber connections? Seems like a common and frequent problem from your take on it.
Penalty Box
User avatar
Apr 21, 2004
49220 posts
14553 upvotes
SuJu wrote:
Jan 23rd, 2013 6:51 pm
Thanks for the input. So am I to expect frequent slowdowns with DSL fiber connections? Seems like a common and frequent problem from your take on it.
No, I have not experienced any slowdowns with Bell for the past month and a half since I signed up for Fibe 25/10 (but upload speed I was told was really just 7 Mbps -- 70% of the advertised speed). Hoping EB has good infrastructure in place so they don't stoop as low as Teksavvy blaming you or Bell all the time for the slowdowns.

Issue arises from 3rd party IPS's likely taking on too many customers their infra cannot handle. If Bell intentionally sabotages and slows 3rd party ISP users down, can't the users join in the lawsuit against Bell throttling, the news article of which I just saw in the papers two weeks ago? 3rd party ISP's can also monitor Bell's throttling can't they not? Why should they not police this so-called Bell throttling if it happens at all and take the matter up with the CRTC? It could be that these 3rd party ISP's just making up stories to put the blame on the Bell/Telus/Rogers/Cogeco/etc.

I understand Bell throttling when there was unlimited internet everywhere. Right now, Bell stands to reap more profits if it opens the spigots and let 3rd party ISP users download/upload all they want as they successfully got approval for Usaged Based Billing (UBB) in 2011 I believe. Throttling by 3rd party ISP's make more sense as they are paying the network owner more money when customer data usages increase. :)
Newbie
Nov 25, 2012
75 posts
5 upvotes
NORTH YORK
alanbrenton wrote:
Jan 23rd, 2013 5:15 pm
It should be as fast but I was very disappointed with Teksavvy (was on 16/1). They managed to blame Bell or me for all slow downs, never admitting that it could be their commercial routers or switches. After I switched to Bell, I rarely get slower than 25 Mbps when testing on speed test. If I do experience slow downs, an access point (router as an AP) reboot fixes it, which means it's my equipment's fault.
I second that thought. I had a similar experience with Acanac. Switched to Bell and never noticed any down time. Usually, it's my router's fault.

Recently had my service upgrade to Fibe 15/10. Had a problem with modem disconnecting. A technican came to the house recitifed the problem in 2 days instead of weeks which would have been the case with Acanac.
Deal Addict
Dec 9, 2006
1263 posts
87 upvotes
alanbrenton wrote:
Jan 23rd, 2013 5:15 pm
It should be as fast but I was very disappointed with Teksavvy (was on 16/1). They managed to blame Bell or me for all slow downs, never admitting that it could be their commercial routers or switches. After I switched to Bell, I rarely get slower than 25 Mbps when testing on speed test. If I do experience slow downs, an access point (router as an AP) reboot fixes it, which means it's my equipment's fault.

With Bell, they are responsible for everything until the cell pipe modem, including the demarcation point. For 3rd parties, they can always say the slow down is due to congestion/issues at the demarcation point (blame Bell).

EB sounds like a good choice too if they will not blame you or Bell for all slowdowns. Just remember the business model, Bell has technicians roving the entire country whereas with EB and Teksavvy, they only have a few and will troubleshoot from the comforts of their offices. Bell's thousands of technicians are a fixed cost so it doesn't cost Bell a lot more to deploy them for troubleshooting and margins are higher as they "own" the network and the feds funded part of the infrastructure. Bell will not charge for technician visits if speed is slow at the cell pipe modem level (they own it and everything beyond it [inside looking out] -- the cable that connects the dsl jack to the demarcation point, the demarcation point, the fiber to the node and the CO) but for TSI or EB, they may just as well blame Bell. I was even told that TSI couldn't guarantee that I don't have to pay the $90 Bell technician fee even if I can prove that the slowdown is not of my doing. What a lot of crap!

Simple experiment I thought of when the concept of line stats was introduced to me by a TSI representative -- asked them for line stats without letting them know what kind of speeds I was getting on speed test. Guess what? Whether I was getting good internet speed (16 Mbps) or not (5-6 or even slower Mbps), they told me the line stats they were reading off my dsl modem were bad (lots of noise). So from that simple experiment, I knew the line stat was a crappy indicator and shouldn't even be used for troubleshooting since it's always noisy whether I was getting good internet speed or not. After I realized TSI's blame game, I decided I was switching over to Start Cable (forgot EB existed) but then the Bell student deal came about.

My set up is simple, all my devices including that access point is hooked to a gigabit switch. So the only time I am at fault for slow internet connectivity is if my router or access point fails or need rebooting. With Bell, I can always run diagnosis at the cellpipe modem level, and if tests show speed is rather slow at that level, Bell will send a technician to troubleshoot. With a third party, they could blame the demarcation point, owned by Bell and I will be helpless as I can't make the complaint to Bell myself.

Just a food for thought for those who think third party ISP's are always the best. With 3rd party, they can blame demarcation point or Bell, and charge you the Bell technician visit $90 a pop. With Bell, it's easy to ascertain that the problem resides with Bell if at the cell pipe modem, speed isn't looking rosy. A technician will be dispatched at no charge.

I was with Teksavvy for over a year and believe me, I'd rather be with Bell, as troubleshooting is more straightforward and there is only me or Bell to be blamed.
Had very similar issues with Primus and then everything was great when I was with Bell. I've moved to eBox now and am very happy and get the same speeds as I did with Bell. It seems most of the 3rd party issues right now are peak time congestion with TekSavvy and Primus. The CEO of TekSavvy has a post on DSL reports regarding this. Bell wouldn't run into this issue and it seems that currently, ebox doesn't either. The usage cap during peak time/unlimited off peak is their model and it seems to work to even out the network load as big downloads are moved to off-peak times. But the infrastructure rates charged to these companies is ridiculous which is why these 3rd parties can't upgrade to avoid congestion.

Bell charges 3rd parties approximately $2200 a month for a 100 Mbps connection. It is speculated that allowing for a healthy profit, the cost should be in the $50 range. Other large ISP's charge 3rd parties between $700 and $2400. At this price, a single customer utilizing their 25 mbps connection during peak time daily, would cost any 3rd party $550 a month in bandwidth costs plus the fixed $25 or so bell charges for the connection. Sorry for going off topic but its important to be fair to the limitations imposed on 3rd party ISPs.
Penalty Box
User avatar
Apr 21, 2004
49220 posts
14553 upvotes
sunnyd71 wrote:
Jan 24th, 2013 9:13 am
Had very similar issues with Primus and then everything was great when I was with Bell. I've moved to eBox now and am very happy and get the same speeds as I did with Bell. It seems most of the 3rd party issues right now are peak time congestion with TekSavvy and Primus. The CEO of TekSavvy has a post on DSL reports regarding this. Bell wouldn't run into this issue and it seems that currently, ebox doesn't either. The usage cap during peak time/unlimited off peak is their model and it seems to work to even out the network load as big downloads are moved to off-peak times. But the infrastructure rates charged to these companies is ridiculous which is why these 3rd parties can't upgrade to avoid congestion.

Bell charges 3rd parties approximately $2200 a month for a 100 Mbps connection. It is speculated that allowing for a healthy profit, the cost should be in the $50 range. Other large ISP's charge 3rd parties between $700 and $2400. At this price, a single customer utilizing their 25 mbps connection during peak time daily, would cost any 3rd party $550 a month in bandwidth costs plus the fixed $25 or so bell charges for the connection. Sorry for going off topic but its important to be fair to the limitations imposed on 3rd party ISPs.
Thanks. Why do 3rd party ISP's offer unlimited off peak hours access then if they pay a high fixed cost to Bell? It doesn't make sense to be in business if a single customer paying $100/month at most can cost the ISP $550/month. And believe me, a lot of people on RFD have their torrents/newsgroup clients running 24/7. I'm sure the CRTC factors what Bell charges to its retail customers. Better close us shop if your cost estimates are spot on since it doesn't make sense and the CRTC will not allow that to happen. It's just a wild guess, but I'm pretty sure the cost to the 3rd party ISP's are variable based on data usage and from there, they play around with their offerings.

For Bell, it is usage based billing (UBB) for 3rd party ISP's (not sure what the arrangement is with Rogers/Cogeco/Telus/etc.) and from that I interpret it to be per /KB/MB/GB is charged to the ISP with off peak hour usage being much cheaper than peak hour usage. That is why some ISP's offer unlimited off peak usage.

According to the Bell technician who installed my service, this is the reason why Bell had to remove unlimited internet-- so that it can present to CRTC or governing body a case that it is too costly to provide unlimited internet to its own retail/business customers alone, so what more its 3rd party ISP's customers. His statement actually made a lot of sense. How can CRTC allow Bell to charge 3rd party ISP's UBB when it is giving its own customers unlimited internet? It's contradictory, to say the least. Only be removing unlimited internet can Bell present its argument that it cannot provide inexpensive fixed cost leases to 3rd party ISP's and must go UBB, which is to me a more fair arrangement (variable instead of fixed).
Penalty Box
User avatar
Apr 21, 2004
49220 posts
14553 upvotes
^ According to Rocca of Start Communications (he posted a response on the Start thread), one of the two (either aggregate or non-aggregate POI's or something like that) which Distributel is on does have a fixed cost arrangement with Rogers. That is why Distributel can provide unlimited internet to its customers. But he said that arrangement will be gone soon.
Deal Addict
Dec 9, 2006
1263 posts
87 upvotes
alanbrenton wrote:
Jan 24th, 2013 9:21 am
Thanks. Why do 3rd party ISP's offer unlimited off peak hours access then if they pay a high fixed cost to Bell? It doesn't make sense to be in business if a single customer paying $100/month at most can cost the ISP $550/month. And believe me, a lot of people on RFD have their torrents/newsgroup clients running 24/7. I'm sure the CRTC factors what Bell charges to its retail customers. Better close us shop if your cost estimates are spot on since it doesn't make sense and the CRTC will not allow that to happen. It's just a wild guess, but I'm pretty sure the cost to the 3rd party ISP's are variable based on data usage and from there, they play around with their offerings.

For Bell, it is usage based billing (UBB) for 3rd party ISP's (not sure what the arrangement is with Rogers/Cogeco/Telus/etc.) and from that I interpret it to be per /KB/MB/GB is charged to the ISP with off peak hour usage being much cheaper than peak hour usage. That is why some ISP's offer unlimited off peak usage.

According to the Bell technician who installed my service, this is the reason why Bell had to remove unlimited internet-- so that it can present to CRTC or governing body that it is too costly to provide unlimited internet to its customers (retail and 3rd party ISP's). His statement actually made a lot of sense. How can CRTC allow Bell to charge UBB when it is giving its own customers unlimited internet? It's contradictory, to say the least. Only be removing unlimited internet can Bell present its argument that it cannot provide inexpensive fixed cost leases to 3rd party ISP's.
I'd agree with you partially. Bell definitely couldn't offer unlimited themselves and then use UBB for the 3rd party customers. The CRTC's UBB decision tried to rectify the issue by finding a middle ground. The cost structure was previously a fixed cost of approx $19 per customer at the 5Mbps speed and no limits to usage. Bell said this is unfair as those customers may use a lot of bandwidth, that they say is scarce. To rectify this, the CRTC imposed a new cost structure which charges a lower fixed cost (I don't have the numbers in front of me but can look them up if you can't find them) of about $12 or so and then per 100 Mbps connection between Bell and the 3rd party they get another fixed cost of $2200. So this way, if users are using a lot of bandwidth, the 3rd party must buy additional 100Mbps 'pipes' to keep up with demand.

The usage of internet is unlimited during non-peak times because the 3rd party must have available enough 100 Mbps 'pipes' to serve their customers during peak time. If that's say 5 Gbps, and non-peak usage is 2 Gbps, then during non-peak hours, they are paying for but not using 3 Gbps. This means that they are wasting resources. By putting unlimited off-peak hours, they encourage customers to move their big downloads to the off peak times meaning they might need 4Gbps during peak and use 3 Gbps off-peak which will lower their costs significantly. The graph below shows the traffic of ebox throughout the day on a 500 Mbps connection with Bell.

[IMG]http://www.electronicbox.net/blog/wp-co ... _image.jpg[/IMG]

You can see that peak hours, there is much more utilization of the connection than off-peak. Evening this out allows them to lower fixed costs since bandwidth is essentially 'free' but they must have a connection to support it. This is a very fair model adopted by the CRTC but they are currently reviewing the rates charged by Bell and other big ISP's to see why Bell charges $2200 where another such as Rogers may only charge $1200 for the same 100 Mbps interconnection. (Rogers is used as an example, I don't recall which ISP actually charges $1200 off hand. I believe it was them or another large cable provider. Telus also charges a relatively low amount) These amounts and the usage model are explained in the CRTC decision and long posts by each of the 3rd party ISPs.
Deal Addict
Dec 9, 2006
1263 posts
87 upvotes
alanbrenton wrote:
Jan 24th, 2013 9:31 am
^ According to Rocca of Start Communications (he posted a response on the Start thread), one of the two (either aggregate or non-aggregate POI's or something like that) which Distributel is on does have a fixed cost arrangement with Rogers. That is why Distributel can provide unlimited internet to its customers. But he said that arrangement will be gone soon.
This is also true. Many ISPs have tried to retain the old model where they pay the fixed cost per customer and no additional bandwidth costs. So at the 5Mbps DSL speed this was $19 per month per customer. This is instead of paying approx $12 per customer + pay per 100Mbps interconnect. I don't recall all the numbers for the higher speeds and the cable rates off hand.

I believe most or all 3rd parties are switching to the new cost structure at some point so unlimited is costly to support. The unlimited off-peak usage is not available on any cable providers whether incumbent or 3rd party as far as I know. This is because they report the usage to the 3rd party ISP by day rather than by hour so it is difficult to determine if you are using it on peak or off-peak right now. I believe this is being changed soon.
Penalty Box
User avatar
Apr 21, 2004
49220 posts
14553 upvotes
^ Sounds good Sunny. Thanks for taking some more time to explain to us all. What made me respond to your earlier post was the possibility of a heavy 25 Mbps DSL downloader costing an ISP $500/month. What I forgot was that most ISP's charge for data overage so your example did not mention that the downloader would have paid thousands in overage. :)

Are you saying that during off peak, ISP's pay very little to Bell for data consumption? That seems to be the only plausible explanation as to how ISP's are able to offer unlimited off peak downloads. Even with the 100 Mbps pipe fixed cost rentals, it doesn't make sense to offer something just because it is less utilized unless data usage costs much less during these off peak periods.

Top