Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
Businesses Canada Government Networking The Internet Your Rights Online

CTRC Orders Big ISPs To Provide Matching Speeds For Resellers 91

Meshach writes "In Canada there has been a regulatory decision rendered by the CRTC ordering ISPs to provide the same speed to resellers as they do for their own customers. 'Smaller internet providers such as Teksavvy and Execulink had argued that without requirements to offer matching speeds, the big companies would put them out of business. Bell and Telus are selling internet connections of up to 25 and 15 megabits per second respectively over newer fibre-based networks, but smaller providers can typically offer speeds of no more than five megabits per second over older copper-based infrastructure. After holding a public hearing earlier this year, the CRTC now says it will allow phone companies to charge smaller providers an extra 10-per-cent mark-up to use their newer infrastructure in order to recoup the costs of their investments. The regulator also said it would require cable companies to modify their existing internet access services to make it easier for smaller, "alternative" providers to connect to them.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

CTRC Orders Big ISPs To Provide Matching Speeds For Resellers

Comments Filter:
  • CRTTCSJER? (Score:3, Informative)

    by udowish ( 804631 ) on Monday August 30, 2010 @07:44PM (#33421438) Journal
    CTRC should read CRTC..messed up banner
  • USA (Score:3, Informative)

    by pleappleappleap ( 1182301 ) on Monday August 30, 2010 @07:51PM (#33421492) Homepage

    If only they would do that here. There's a local ISP here called Cloud 9 Internet which has EXCELLENT service. I'd much rather use them. However I'm forced to deal with Verizon (who don't even know how to route a CIDR block to me) to get my 35Mbps symmetric connection. It' infuriating.

  • Re:About Canada (Score:3, Informative)

    by mini me ( 132455 ) on Monday August 30, 2010 @09:30PM (#33422276)

    I would argue that competition is strong in this rural region of Ontario. We have a handful of independent telephone companies, a couple of cable companies, not to mention the big players all duking it out. Everyone has their own infrastructure so we do not have problems with the alternative ISPs having to use Bell's last mile, for example.

  • Re:Wow! (Score:3, Informative)

    by cgenman ( 325138 ) on Monday August 30, 2010 @09:39PM (#33422328) Homepage

    I remember back when DSL last-mile resellers would sell access per-user access to ISP's for $5 per month more than they were charging direct customers, for whom they also provided backbone access, service, and aquisition. It met the letter of the law for open networks, but it basically guaranteed that they wouldn't have to compete with small ISP's for service and access charges.

  • Re:About Canada (Score:3, Informative)

    by Moryath ( 553296 ) on Monday August 30, 2010 @10:33PM (#33422668)

    As opposed to the US, where the companies DO conspire, and when caught simply buy off the judge or buy off some legislators or "regulators" to claim that it's not "really" collusion, or else just buy up whole local areas for "exclusive" provisioning.

    I remember when Warner Cable ran Viacom Cable out of my hometown and got a monopoly in the county. Ads with a king declaring "I declare Warner Cable for my entire kingdom", and then hiking the rates by $40/month because what was someone going to do - go to a competitor? Switch back to over-the-air, where you could get maybe 3 stations and possibly the local barely-1000-watt PBS with a ton of snow in the picture on a REALLY clear day?

  • Just for comparison (Score:4, Informative)

    by ZDRuX ( 1010435 ) on Tuesday August 31, 2010 @05:11AM (#33424240)
    For comparison to those outside of Canada:

    My current ISP is Rogers Inc and I'm using their 15mbit/1mbit package which costs about $54 and comes with about 90GB cap (that's not a misprint).

    Since I'm a heavy user, I always end up using upwards of 300gb/month, which they charge extra for. My total monthly bill is always $102.

    Now, I can get the same speed service with NO bandwidth cap from "Montreal-DSL" for $54 flat. The two big ISP's Rogers and Bell will now be losing half of the money I was giving to them each month just for being total dicks, and I'm calling to start the switch over tomorrow morning.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 31, 2010 @08:19AM (#33425222)

    Teksavvy is getting access to Rogers cable internet now. Cheaper than Rogers, no caps. I think twice before jumping to dsl and look at staying with "Rogers" infrastructure but using the resellers option.

  • Re:About Canada (Score:3, Informative)

    by Guspaz ( 556486 ) on Tuesday August 31, 2010 @11:30AM (#33425784)

    the CLEC comes in there undercutting the ILEC and the ILEC is forced to let the CLEC use the equipment below cost.

    In Canada, the CLECs often undercut the ILEC (by running tighter ships and accepting slimmer margins), and the tariffs the ILEC charges the CLEC for use of equipment is far from below cost (indeed, for the new usage-based-billing aspect of the tariffs, it's most likely a markup of 5000-10000% of cost).

  • Re:About Canada (Score:3, Informative)

    by Guspaz ( 556486 ) on Tuesday August 31, 2010 @11:35AM (#33425842)

    Rogers/Fido doesn't offer TV or wired internet service in Quebec. Internet remains a duopoly between Bell and Videotron, TV has a third competitor (Star Choice/Shaw Direct), but it has a relatively small market share (less customers over the whole country than Videotron has in Quebec alone).

    Only the telephony market sees a fair amount of competition, with a variety of options (POTS/VoIP/cell) and providers (Bell, Videotron, Rogers, all the VoIP carriers, Public Mobile, etc).

    Internet access infrastructure largely remains a duopoly.

The IQ of the group is the lowest IQ of a member of the group divided by the number of people in the group.