babble: Bell Canada dings customers with 136% jump in

FAQ | Forum Home

»	babble » walking the talk » labour and consumption » Bell Canada dings customers with 136% jump in

Email this thread to someone!

Author

Topic: Bell Canada dings customers with 136% jump in

prince
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1341

posted 06 December 2002 11:23 AM

The Canadian Press

Since 2001, Bell as added network fees and program fees to their long distance programs. You are now paying an extra $94.80 plus tax per year for choosing Bell long distance.

Thank You for choosing Bell.

From: Ontario | Registered: Sep 2001 | IP: Logged

WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 06 December 2002 11:32 AM

Why would you have a problem with this, prince? I would assume you supported deregulation and competition in long distance, didn't you? So now that you have what you want you are unhappy? Unless my assumptions are all wrong and you supported a Bell monopoly?

From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001 | IP: Logged

prince
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1341

posted 06 December 2002 11:38 AM

In addition the CRTC has ruled against Bell for unfair practises regarding winbacks. The following is a brief description of the ruling. The term ILEC refers to primarily to Bell.

In light of the above, the Commission orders that the local winback guidelines be amended to read as follows:
... an ILEC is not to attempt to win back a Business customer with respect to primary exchange service, and in the case of a residential customer, with respect to primary
exchange or any other service, for a period of three months after that customer's primary local exchange service has been completely transferred to another local service provider, with one exception: ILECs should be allowed to win back customers who call to advise them that they intend to change local service provider. (Amendments in bold.)

From: Ontario | Registered: Sep 2001 | IP: Logged

Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 06 December 2002 11:38 AM

Natural monopolies like land-based phone systems should be crown corporations. Why is it so difficult for people on the right to understand that when natural monopolies go private, the price rises because the barriers to entry into the market are too frigging high for competition?

It makes me nuts, it really does.

From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001 | IP: Logged

prince
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1341

posted 06 December 2002 11:55 AM

I have my consumer advocate hat on for this post.

Deregulation of long distance has in fact lowered the cost dramatically.

The point here is that we now have choices. We are no longer at the mercy of the monopoly and by exercising are right to free choice we do not need to pay Bell's new fees. All other long distance providers have better long distance rates than Bell. Many have no fees for their better rates.

My suggestion is to look at your long distance bill, analyse your calling pattern and find another long distance provider.

As an example if you use the $20.00 maximum evening and weekend program. Find another identical program with no fees and save the equivalent of 5 months long distance compared to Bell.

From: Ontario | Registered: Sep 2001 | IP: Logged

Debra
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 117

posted 06 December 2002 12:00 PM

Oh bullshit it lowered costs.

It used to be all your wiring was done, new jacks, replacement phones, information, etc was just all part and parcel of the service now these are all things that incur extra cost.

I can wire in a jack and look up a number but what about a senior on a fixed income, who has to hire someone ot come in or pay the 75 cents for a number because the font is so goddamn small in the phonebook?

From: The only difference between graffiti & philosophy is the word fuck... | Registered: Apr 2001 | IP: Logged

prince
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1341

posted 06 December 2002 12:06 PM

EarthMother

You concerns absolutely right on.

I was only talking about long distance charges being dramatically reduced. The monoply Bell has not improved customer service in any other area of the business. I too have arms too short to read the damn phone book. That is why I go on line to look up phone numbers.

From: Ontario | Registered: Sep 2001 | IP: Logged

Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 06 December 2002 12:26 PM

You're right about long distance - but that's because it's not a natural monopoly. Whereas the basic service IS, and that part of Bell has also been privatized as well. If they had split Bell into a local service company that stays crown, and the long distance end deregulated and privatized, there might not have been as much of a problem.

From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001 | IP: Logged

paxamillion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2836

posted 06 December 2002 12:36 PM

Is it a natural monopoly or a legistlated one? Aren't Rogers and others prepared to offer either wireline or wireless local loop upon clearing regulartory approval? Of course, this who telephony competition thing really reminds me of the robber barons of the train industry.

From: the process of recovery | Registered: Jul 2002 | IP: Logged

prince
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1341

posted 06 December 2002 12:45 PM

Michelle

Companies like Sprint (Call-Net) are slowly entering the local service and they do have very competitive pricing. The problem is Bell turns around and as winback promotion undercuts Sprint and Bell's own regular rate. The CRTC hearings are filled with reports and decions on this topic. Bell has manged to maintain its stranglehold on this service.

Bell wants to force Sprint or other companies to install new expensive hardware. Sprint wants to use the existing Bell Hardware and pay a price based upon the current (depreciated) value of the used equipment.

Its a hell of a battle. And believe it or not it is costing you and I money.

From: Ontario | Registered: Sep 2001 | IP: Logged

DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 06 December 2002 01:06 PM

Not all long distance rates came down because of deregulation. They used to come down because the CRTC would make the telcos lower them.

From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001 | IP: Logged

prince
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1341

posted 06 December 2002 01:24 PM

Dr Conway
Since long distance was deregulated in Canada in 1992 (I believe) the CRTC has not mandated a price change. In fact because of deregulation we as consumers cannot go to the CRTC and get them to stop Bell's new fees. The industry is deregulated.
The only rulings the CRTC has dealt with are those regarding the rules of competition.

If you have other facts I would be keenly interested in reviewing the information.

From: Ontario | Registered: Sep 2001 | IP: Logged

DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 06 December 2002 01:34 PM

I'm talking about before 1992.

From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001 | IP: Logged

prince
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1341

posted 06 December 2002 02:01 PM

Bell's web site still shows the pre-deregualtion rates under the heading "Basic long distance rates"

A few examples:
Calls in Ontario and Quebec 43 cents per minute.
Discount 60% for evenings, weekends and holidays =
17.2 cents per minute

Calls across Canada 53 cents per minute.
Discount 60% = 21.2 cents

With deregulation you can call anywhere in Canada anytime day or night for a maximum 10 cents per minute. And many companies have rates as low as 5 cents per minute.

From: Ontario | Registered: Sep 2001 | IP: Logged

TommyPaineatWork
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2956

posted 10 December 2002 01:50 AM

I just signed with a new long distance company.

Bell has been calling me every couple days since. I'm too busy.

Now I know the "winback" thing is illegal, I will be bringing this to their attention next time they bother me.

From: London | Registered: Aug 2002 | IP: Logged

prince
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1341

posted 10 December 2002 03:39 PM

I just received a call from Bell to win me back. I haven't used Bell long distance since 1997. So I can't get at them for the CRTC ruling.

This is what they offerred me.

7 cents per minute 24/7 anywhere in Canada or US.
No $4.95 program fee for one year.
I asked about the network charge but they said they couldn't do anything about the charge. They also told me about the increase in network charges on December 14th.
I still refused to switch back, so they offerred me a $100.00 credit to my account.

My question was why do you offer me so much to switch back to Bell. When your loyal customers pay the highest rates in Canada.

His response was, loyal customers will always be with Bell regardless of cost. Our focus to bring back as many others as possible.

From: Ontario | Registered: Sep 2001 | IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time

Hop To: