This caught my eye. Not a great Rogers fan , use them put of necessity , mainly because they , Telus and Bell have such a monopoly there's little competition. Thus the high prices.
I think if people did exactly the opposite , and petitioned to EXCLUDE the Big Three form the bidding process , we'd see more reasonable pricing , better service from stiffer competition.
I saw that item on the CBC website as well. I could not help but relate it to the "Connected" Rogers Magazine I recently received, as a result of being a "Valued" Rogers customer.
This was the "LTE Special Edition". It welcomes us to "...life in the digital fast lane!"
This magazine is a very pretty, glossy production which trumpets the benefits of LTE, and is intended to tell us how much better life in Canada will be once Rogers deploys its LTE network. There is lots of interesting stuff in this very glossy magazine. I am told here that LTE stands for "Long Term Evolution". It will enable me to get download speeds to 75 Mbps, and it is now available in Ottawa and its rollout will continue to major Canadian cities.
A Dr. Ali Shah from Ericsson is quoted as saying things like:
"LTE's capability is flexible. It can operate on 5, 10, 15, and 20 MHz of spectrum. And then future versions, if you can add, say, four of those 20 MHz [bands], you can work on 80 MHz and go up to 1 GB per second..........that's why Rogers is making that investment now, starting to build that futuristic model."
My reaction as a current Rogers HSPA customer was probably predictable:
1. and exactly when is this LTE thing going to get to my neck of the Canadian woods?
2. and, given that my current under-performing cellular wireless connection is costing me an arm and a leg monthly right now, what exactly will this new high tech wonder cost me?
3. and, given that Rogers has met very few if any of its Internet marketing speed and throughput claims in recent memory, what guarantees are you, Rogers, offering that this time it will be any different?
I guess that we are facing a bit of a credibility gap here. Rogers, the CRTC, and Stephen Harper's free-market philosophies notwithstanding, we the Canadian consumers of Internet Service Provider offerings are continuously being s*c*r*e*w*e*d by our telecommunications oligopoly. Oh well, the more Rogers charges us, the more HST our governments get as well, so why do they care?
But what the hey. We as Canadians just need to buck up and grin and bear it, right?????? That's the Canadian way after all.
Competition is not something that we have ever shyed away from. I can tell you as a rogers employee that when it came to training we specifically were told that was company policy... because the thing is, the other people (besides telus, bell) are competitior, but competitors in quotes. In quotes because that's how the customer sees it, but why call them a competitor when their service is vastly different.
Companies like WIND, Public Mobile, etc. say they offer unlimited data, but with WIND for example once you hit 5gb you are cut down to 525kbps, unlike us. Wind and Public Mobile have very few stores making it hard to get the device you want (I had a customer call in that got our rocket stick because he couldnt' find wind's anywhere). Furthermore, their network and infrastructure is nowhere near the same. The reason why we are LTE (beyond 4G) is because we have the funds to do it. The reason why you get CANADIAN reps when you call in is because of the prices. Also, companies like WIND offer 75% less handsets than what Rogers does, and they focus so much on $ their network can't even support the IPHONE. Furthermore, their customer service hours aren't open as long as we are. We are moving forward, while they are not advancing... companies like WIND offer you "no contract" or so they say, but it is on a WindTab where they take 10% off your bill towards a tab... so on a blackberry, the actual full contract by the time you pay off the device is 9 years.
I am a Rogers employee, but my comments are my own and do not necessarily represent the views of Rogers or its affiliates. Je suis un(e) employé(e) de Rogers mais mes commentaires sont les miens et ne reflètent pas nécessairement le point de vue de Rogers ou d’une société de son groupe.
So if Rogers (and/or Telus and Bell ) are successful , how long before the LTE is available to RURAL customers where it's so desperately needed?
My only feasible internet options are WiFi if I put up a $4,000 tower , Xplorenet and Rogers HUB.
And apart form the WiFi , the monthly usage costs of the others border on extortion.
I was getting a crystal clear analog TV signal with just a small antenna.
So , instead of flooding an already saturated market in the large centres , I put it to you that Rogers , Bell etc. should concentrate on servicing the RURAL areas first offering pricing and services competitive with the large centres.
I appreciate you jumping to the defence of your employer, and pointing out that all the other telecom vendors and ISP's have their faults and issues too.
The problem I have with not only Rogers, but all the others as well is that they play fast and loose with the facts, they indulge in numerous examples of marketing BS, and generally try to oversell their offerings. Just because it is an accepted fact that all politicians lie, doesn't mean that the general public needs to tolerate. And just because all telecom vendors seem to practice the same advertising strategies of overstatement, obfuscation and subterfuge, doesn't mean that we, the Canadian consumer are not outraged by these practice
When I was in a technical support role in a computer sales and marketing environment, the general rule to be applied was:
"If you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, dazzle them with BS."
You make a number of valid points about Rogers' competition. But in my view, that does not excuse the behaviour of the whole industry. In my opinion, there is too much willingness to accept poor or non-performance. The consumer has contracted for a full service. But the consumer has little to no recourse if that full service is not delivered. To begin with because of the technically complex nature of the service it is a major exercise even to prove that there is a problem. And the onus seems always to be on the consumer to prove their case.
New! Introducing a new feature: groups. Read more.