CRTC approves new Internet BILLING PLANS

[Topaz]

So what does the dear Minister Moore say about this because the CRTC is under his mangement! http://www.mediacastermagazine.com/issues/story.aspx?aid=1000370429

[Smallc]

I personally think it's a good idea. The more you use, the more you pay. Internet isn't a necessity (especially usage over 60GB...that's a lot).

[Bonam]

Meh, stupid idea. The rest of the civilized world is getting faster and faster internet for cheaper and cheaper. In South Korea and Japan you can get limitless, gigabit, internet for way cheap. Meanwhile Canadian companies are trying to figure out a way to suck a few extra dollars from their customers for an inferior product.

Too much regulation, not enough competition, and this is what we get.

Anyway, I regularly use on the order of 1 TB of bandwidth monthly so any company/plan that charges per gigabyte is obviously out of the question.

Also, smallc's theory of the more you use the more you pay doesn't really apply to internet. The ISP's cost to provide internet to you is not based on how many gigabytes you use. Rather, their costs are associated with 1) infrastructure investment and 2) labour. These are exactly the same whether you use 1 gb per month or 1 tb per month, you're still gonna have the exact same cable line going to your building and the same employees handling installation, customer service, etc.

[Smallc]

Also, smallc's theory of the more you use the more you pay doesn't really apply to internet.

Ah libertarians. We should all use what we pay for....except for me. Networks aren't limitless in speed or availability. If you are using 1TB a month, you're eating much of what others could be using.

Also, we're getting faster and faster internet for cheaper and cheaper to. The problem here is that there is a great deal of ground to cover in comparison to Japan. We also have far fewer people.

[Bonam]

Ah libertarians. We should all use what we pay for....except for me. Networks aren't limitless in speed or availability.

First, I'm not a libertarian. Second, I do believe in paying for what we use (not necessarily using what we pay for, whether you use it or not after you pay for it is up to you). Third, most existing internet infrastructure in Canada can handle the traffic it gets just fine. Fourth, the majority of the cost associated with providing internet to a location is in simply placing a physical line to that location. The line can handle a certain amount of data, and most buildings use nowhere near the maximum amount of data that the lines connected to them can handle.

The point here is that the vast majority of the cost of providing someone with internet is entirely independent of how much internet they use. Either they have internet, which means someone invested in infrastructure to build internet to their location, or they don't have internet. Costs per bandwidth only make sense in locations where network capacities are being maxed out and the company needs to raise money to upgrade the infrastructure specifically to be able to service high bandwidth users, and that is only a few specific areas in Canada.

If you are using 1TB a month, you're eating much of what others could be using.

I think everyone in my area on my ISP is getting as much bandwidth as they want.

Also, we're getting faster and faster internet for cheaper and cheaper to.

We are slowly getting faster internet, very slowly. Take a look at Shaw for example, which provides cable internet in the Vancouver area. Their high speed extreme internet is 15 mbps, with a price of $55/month. Do you know what internet speed I had 8 years ago in Vancouver? 12 mbps, for $50/month. That is frankly a negligible change over that timeframe. Keep in mind, hard drives have increased in size more than 10 times, processing speeds have increased roughly 10 times, the sizes of files you may want to download have increased roughly 10 times in that time period. But internet speed has increased ~25%.

In other parts of the world it has increased from ~10 mbps to ~1000 mbps in the same time period, a 100 fold increase. Frankly, Canada is falling behind.

The problem here is that there is a great deal of ground to cover in comparison to Japan. We also have far fewer people.

Land size doesn't really matter for satellite communications, which are being used increasingly as part of the internet backbone. Remember, internet access from (almost) any country is worldwide. Providing fast internet in Japan means not just having good infrastructure in Japan, it means having a good connection to the US, to Europe, and to most other countries. Major cities in Canada all have the population density and wealth to warrant the same kind of high quality infrastructure as other major cities throughout the world, and from there the connections to other places around the world are handled through the same communication satellites. There is no reason that internet service in major Canadian cities should be slower and more expensive than it is in Korea or Japan, except that our market is simply not nearly as competitive.

I could understand rural and small town areas of Canada having poor internet service, but there is no reason that places like Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver should not have world class internet.

Edited May 7, 2010 by Bonam

[Smallc]

I hardly see how this ruling falls into your argument though. This is in fact less regulation, not more. All of the rest of your argument is somewhat valid, if a bit short and narrow sighted. It isn't as simple as you like to make out setting up infrastructure in a country so vast and sparsely populated. You can get super fast internet, but, you have to pay for it....unless you're proposing that we regulate how much companies can make.

[Bonam]

I hardly see how this ruling falls into your argument though. This is in fact less regulation, not more.

Agreed. Companies should be able to use this kind of pricing model if they wish. Like I said though in my first post, it's just a stupid idea. Cause all they are doing is pushing away customers who would actually pay for their premium services. People that don't use much bandwidth also will generally be paying for the cheaper internet plans and not getting many extras. It's the people who use a lot of bandwidth who might want other features (multiple IPs, static IPs, increased security, etc), which is where they can really make a profit because those services cost literally ZERO to provide while having a high value to the customer.

All of the rest of your argument is somewhat valid, if a bit short and narrow sighted. It isn't as simple as you like to make out setting up infrastructure in a country so vast and sparsely populated.

Again, I am not talking about internet access in sparsely populated areas, but in major cities. Having sparse internet coverage in Nunavut doesn't mean you can't provide world class internet in Toronto, for example.

You can get super fast internet, but, you have to pay for it....unless you're proposing that we regulate how much companies can make.

Indeed. And what I am saying is that Canadian companies are failing to provide fast internet for prices competitive with other areas of the world. They are behind not just a bit, but by about 100 times in terms of speed/price. And that is ultimately gonna have an impact on other parts of the Canadian economy. By the way the US has the exact same problem despite having ~10x the population density.

Edited May 7, 2010 by Bonam