Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Canada Communications Government Television News

Canadian Telecoms Will Try to Justify Their 'Ripoff' TV Plans Today (vice.com) 141

Posted by msmash from the skinny-packages dept.
Starting today, Canada's top telecom companies will have to answer to the government for "skinny" TV packages -- more popularly known as "ripoff" by Canadians. Motherboard reports: In 2015, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) ruled that companies must offer a $25 "skinny" cable package, partly to benefit people earning a lower income. However, additional fees and installation charges added up so that the packages often cost a lot more than that -- in some cases, up to $100 per month. In response, Canadians called bullshit and complained to the CRTC en masse. Over two days of hearings beginning on Wednesday, Canada's top cable providers will have to prove that their skinny plans are in compliance with the CRTC's standards and that their packages meet the "spirit" of the skinny initiative. These hearings are part of the regulator's annual broadcasting license renewal process, meaning that if the companies aren't compliant, they could theoretically lose their license to operate in Canada.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Canadian Telecoms Will Try to Justify Their 'Ripoff' TV Plans Today More

Canadian Telecoms Will Try to Justify Their 'Ripoff' TV Plans Today

Comments Filter:
  • Well, if it wasn't so cold. :) But seriously, how do we get something like this down in the US? Can we also get this for the Internet providers too?

    • Re:This almost makes me want to move to Canada... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by ADRA ( 37398 ) on Wednesday September 07, 2016 @07:24PM (#52844177)

      Socialism! Or at least a stronger version of it than you're used to. The first question when I go to a doctor is 'How can I help you' not, 'Lemmie see your insurance card'.

      • Re: (Score:1, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward

        When I go, the doctor sheepishly tells me I can't be helped because my medical records were locked when my insurance claim was declined, and I can't continue talking to the doctor until I straighten out my past-due bill. American healthcare at its finest!

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by Anonymous Coward

          I call bullshit. Medical records don't get "locked" for non-payment, and any random doctor that you go see isn't going know if you've paid your bill in the past. Now if you're saying your current primary care physician won't see you again until you pay your bill, sure that seems reasonable, you have to keep the lights on, however just because you haven't paid a bill doesn't mean you can't go to another doctor, or the ER (not suggested). If you think that records are locked and patients can't see doctors

          • Re: (Score:1)

            by MercTech ( 46455 )

            Computerized medical records DO get locked out from access along with all other records in the system when flagged by accounting as past due. At least that is the default with two of the largest billing and records systems.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by srw ( 38421 )
        It's great when it works. When you have a surgery that is not successful, and you complain for five years, and the doc basically says "there's nothing we can do" and there's no way to get a second opinion...

        12 years later and my new doctor wants to get it dealt with... I'm back on a waiting list for the same doctor that brushed me off before.

        Some competition is not always a bad thing.
        • Sometimes, a referral back to the original doctor (AKA: There's something there, do your damn job) can help.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by srw ( 38421 )
            I'd like to be hopeful, but they categorized me as "non-urgent" and put me on the waiting list.

      • Whats going on with the cable companies isn't socialism... its customer protection... "basic" cable prices have sky rocketed and this is how the regulatory body is bringing them back in line...

        It would be nice to see one or two of them to lose their licence to operate over this so they will stop screwing customers over...

        25$ basic cable that has nearly 75$ in service charges? Come on now..

        • The best basic cable plan is a $10 cable to connect to a cheap antenna. Full HD with no recompression or down-resolution by the cable or satellite folks. No recurring fees. No "The cable/satellite is out."

          • Re: (Score:1)

            by Wulf2k ( 4703573 )
            You don't think OTA ever goes out or has reception issues?
            • It goes out if the station goes off the air or if I lose power. Otherwise, it's pretty robust. Fewer links in the chain that can break compared to streaming.

      • "Breaking Bad, Canada" would be a very short show.

        http://imgur.com/MKybStQ [imgur.com]

        • Same in most (all?) of Europe, mind you...

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Mashiki ( 184564 )

          Your meme is garbage. Let me tell you what would happen.

          You've got cancer, you have an appointment with a specialist in 5-7 weeks. Providing of course it's not stage 4 cancer, you're free to choose a variety of treatments at your specialists discretion. Now, if it *is* stage 4, you're easily looking at 5weeks to 15 weeks before seeing a specialist, then up wards of another 15 weeks before they start the targeted radiation therapy to reduce the cancer size so it's not so big and you can have a few months

          • Re: (Score:1)

            by Wulf2k ( 4703573 )
            My dad was receiving treatment in under 2 weeks from his first ER trip. He's fine now. I have no doubt that in the US my father would be dead and my mother struggling with a mountain of debt. So... YMMV?

      • The first question when I go to a doctor is 'How can I help you' not, 'Lemmie see your insurance card'.

        It's the secretary who asks you for the medicare card. And, believe me, you won't go past her if you don't have it...

      • Unfortunately, "how can I help you" is followed by, "come back in a week" so the doctor can bill a second visit to the province.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by dk20 ( 914954 )

          Unfortunately there is a lot of truth to this.

          Recently i tried to find a family Dr. After being "interviewed" for 10 mins, and flat out told that NO, i may not ask questions.. at the end i was told to book an appointment "next week" to ask the question i had originally went there for. i was also informed that i may ask only one question per appointment. This is a great use of my time.. waited for 25 mins, did a "meet and great" for 10 mins, and told to book two more appointments so i can wait another 25

          • Re: (Score:1)

            by Wulf2k ( 4703573 )
            Then that should have answered your questions, no? My doctor's great. Sure, he's always in a bit of a rush, but he'll answer as many questions as I have. Isn't the point of interviewing doctors to find one that will work for you?

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by dk20 ( 914954 )

              Considering my question was around why my shoulder was sore, no, it did not answer my question.

              • Re: (Score:1)

                by Wulf2k ( 4703573 )
                I was referring to the question of "Do I want this doctor", which should be the main thrust of an interview campaign.

              • I can tell you want the doctor will say:

                Don't do anything with that arm/shoulder for a week, come back and then we'll see how it is. Oh, you have to use both arms for your work. Can you take the week off?

          • Sounds pretty much exactly like the typical doctor's appointment in the US. I think that aspect of medical abuse has less to do with socialism or capitalism than with perverse incentives of the billing structure. If doctors (or hospitals) get paid by the visit, they're going to act to maximize visits, regardless of who is paying. Making patients pay out of pocket might mitigate things a bit, but only a bit, as they're already paying "out of pocket" in terms of copays and lost income/opportunities while si

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by dk20 ( 914954 )

              I found the US system to be more friendly to be honest. At least there i could see a "specialist" without having to go find a "family dr" and get them to refer me costing me time and several visits.

              Here (Ontario, Canada) it really does seem to be around maximizing the number of trips you make. That may be OK, but they waste a huge amount of your time as they book an appointment at 10:00 but wont see you until it is closer to 11:00. If you wanted to see me at 11:00, why not just book the appointment then?

              • It certainly does sound like there's some playing to perverse incentives that needs to be addressed, but still a huge step up from having a large portion of the population be denied medical care entirely because they can't afford it. The ACA(Obamacare) in the US helped dramatically, but there's still large gaps where people have too much income to qualify for government insurance or insurance assistance, but too little to be able to afford private insurance worth the name. I've heard the $15k-$25k income

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Mashiki ( 184564 )

        Socialism! Or at least a stronger version of it than you're used to. The first question when I go to a doctor is 'How can I help you' not, 'Lemmie see your insurance card'.

        Apparently you don't live in Canada. Let me show you want happens when you go to a doctor, you hand them your insurance card. It looks like this: If you're from Ontario. No you don't get free treatment if you don't show up without one. [blogspot.com] The first thing they ask you for is...did you guess "your insurance card?" No? You poor deluded soul. You're billed directly if you don't have one, if you've been to a healthcare provider in your area(doctor/hospital) in the last 30-45 days they'll waive billing for 90d

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by Wulf2k ( 4703573 )
          Do we live in the same Canada? I show up to my doctor's office. I say "I'm here to see Dr. xxx". I wait. I then go in to see my doctor. Yeah, you've gotta show your various cards any time you go to see somebody new, but I always assumed that was so that I wouldn't get breast implants when I just wanted them to check out my cough. I do get coverage for meds through my work though. That stuff's still crazy with no insurance.
      • Well, one of the first things the receptionist is supposed to ask is 'Health card, please.' What they generally actually ask, around here, at least, is 'any change from the card we have on file?'

      • Socialism! Or at least a stronger version of it than you're used to. The first question when I go to a doctor is 'How can I help you' not, 'Lemmie see your insurance card'.

        Not socialism when you have only 1 national provider and 10 large provincial providers. Your choice is only A or B

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by ark1 ( 873448 )
      Getting a hearing and pretending to do something about it is one thing. Siding with the people and actually drafting policies without loopholes which benefit the people is another. Remove protectionist barriers in Canada to allow for better competition could be a good start.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      You want to move to Canada because the CRTC legislated $25 skinny basic cable packages and the telcos responded nastily by bundling a handful of local channels with some streaming radio? In Toronto or Vancouver, you probably get better channel coverage using an HD antenna... for free.

    • Well the CRTC did open up the NOCs for the incumbents (Bell, Rogers, Telus, etc) so that the other ISPs use their wires for the last mile so we have a choice of ISP here. I haven't been with a telco or a cable company in over 15 years. I wouldn't say the prices are great compared to Europe but I'm paying less for my Internet access over cable than if I went directly to the cable company.

      I hope that the CRTC expands their ruling to fibre.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Mashiki ( 184564 )

        The only reason why that happened was because the government of the day(conservatives) threatened to rip the CRTC's mandate away on their ability to open up areas like that, and they were going to create a new parliamentary body to specifically deal with it. That was also at the same time that the CRTC was going humm-hawww-lllaaaaa... and listening to what Bell and Rogers were telling them, and were going to jack up the GAS and last mile rates so high that you'd have been paying twice the cost of what thos

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by dk20 ( 914954 )

      "Well, if it wasn't so cold. :) "

      Is your area under yet another "heat warning"?

      http://www.google.org/publical... [google.org]

      • "Well, if it wasn't so cold. :) "

        Is your area under yet another "heat warning"?

        It may be warm in Canada now, but it's all the frozen stuff in multiple months of winter that I don't like. Sure, it's in 90's (F) where I am now, but I can deal with that; I just don't like it to be below freezing.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

      Well, if it wasn't so cold. :) But seriously, how do we get something like this down in the US? Can we also get this for the Internet providers too?

      Forget it. The CRTC is late to the party.

      I mean, in Canada, you are forced to buy the cable boxes they sell - and while one Canadian provider supports say, TiVo, the other's don't, and no, you CANNOT activate a non-provider provided box - the providers don't allow it. Even though they're the same boxes you can buy in the US. So if you want TiVo, or Ceton, or HDH

  • There are low income Canadians? (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward

    But how? Canada is a socialist utopia?

    • Re:There are low income Canadians? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by PopeRatzo ( 965947 ) on Wednesday September 07, 2016 @08:10PM (#52844405) Journal

      But how? Canada is a socialist utopia?

      High and low are relative terms, knucklehead. "Low income" in Canada is about a 25% higher actual income than "low income" in the US.

      http://www.demos.org/blog/1/5/... [demos.org]

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Shados ( 741919 )

      its much harder to end up in the street with no way to bounce back, or be born completely fucked from the get go.

      But its possible to be at an income level low enough that a tiny home, food, and health care is all you have. Homeless people in Canada generally either really fucked up, or god REALLY unlucky, not just a little.

      Not like in the US where if you fuck up (not just heroin addict kind of fuck up), you have very little safety net (beyond a couple of super expensive social safety net placebos that only

  • I've got the best deal! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ADRA ( 37398 ) on Wednesday September 07, 2016 @07:21PM (#52844153)

    $0

    Cord cut years ago and it's so much better to live in a world where commercials are a novel occurrence (like watching TV in bars/family homes).
    I spend much of the difference on media (Bluray, yes I still buy dead-dinosaur-discs) and streaming services.

  • Theoretically (Score:5, Insightful)

    by knorthern knight ( 513660 ) on Wednesday September 07, 2016 @07:21PM (#52844157)

    > These hearings are part of the regulator's annual broadcasting license
    > renewal process, meaning that if the companies aren't compliant,
    > they could theoretically lose their license to operate in Canada.

    Just like Hillary Clinton could "theoretically" go to jail for running her own email server for government business. Don't worry about the fat cats. They just need to shoot a round of golf with the CRTC commissioners, and nothing will happen.

  • Well... (Score:3)

    by John Smith ( 4340437 ) on Wednesday September 07, 2016 @07:27PM (#52844199)
    At least ban ads for the poor sods with cable. You don't pay for something with ads in.

  • Canadian Government imposes a price ceiling on a market, then proceeds to run around like a chicken with its head cut off wondering why the markets managed to react the way they did.

    Price ceilings and price floors have predictable consequences, and for some reason we keep ignoring them.

    It's also a great way to reduce competition, a direct result of left-shifting the supply curve of the supply/demand plot.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Actually what happened is every vendor on the planet turned around and bared their collective asses at every BDU and tried to extort them, AMC is asking X dollars a subscriber (whether they subscribe to AMC or not) [I'm not gonna disclose the amount], but it's more than the price of the damn channel a'la carte and they are playing chicken like I imagine they did with Dish years back. And that is just one; imagine 100 hungry jackals who both want to be in the under 25 channel range and want to be paid for

    • Re: The tl;dr (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Bullshit, what you say would be true if they had only offered skinny packages containing shitty unwanted channels, but charged the correct price. Instead they tacked on a bunch of fees for the sole purpose of making free money. They already have an infrastructure built, they have minimal upkeep costs, and very little operating costs. There's no excuse for how they handled the situation. The correct response to the market pressures was to reduce or change the channels in the packages until it was cost ef

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      How about letting monopolies charge whatever they want. The market will sort it out, right? Has that ever worked? Ever?

      The monopoly telecoms in Canada were, and still are, given a great deal in concessions and also protection from foreign competition. The government (aka the people) has every right to impose rules and restrictions on their operations.

  • TV is a luxury and not a requirement. Plus there are ways to view some channels without cable or satellite.

  • All the poor American's who will rush to Canada after Trump wins will need to be able to afford TV to watch the Daily Show.
  • If the CRTC didn't see that their "flexible" rules weren't going to be abused to the limit they are either idiots or complicit. To show their metal they should now say the skinny package should provide good value and be no more than $20 per month everything included including local taxes. With a total charge not to exceed $240 in the first year. Plus no contractual lock in.

    Then when the telcos catch their breath the CRTC could then tell them that this will be reviewed every 6 months and if the general con

  • "But we reeeeeeeaaaaaaallllllly like money, and it's so much sweeter when we've hornswoggled it from people who can barely afford it."

  • The resume is totally inaccurate. As Canadians, we are incapable of calling "bullshit", that's way too impolite. What we said when we saw the packages was "Oh!" Yeah, I know, pretty strong word, eh. Shook the telecoms to their core.

Slashdot Top Deals

For God's sake, stop researching for a while and begin to think!

Close