The Bell company has also adopted rebranded its Bell ExpressVu, Sympatico and residential service in favour of Bell TV, Bell Internet and Bell Home Phone.”It’s all to convince to convey that Bell is and has gotten better,” Bell Mobility president Wade Oosterman said in an interview.But telecom analyst Carmi Levy of AR Communications said the changes will have little impact unless they are accompanied by a dramatic improvement to customer service.”You can change your logo and you can change the name of your offering until the cows come home but if you don’t change the fundamental way that you operate, then the rebranding effort will be for not,” the Toronto-based analyst said in an interview.He said Bell needs to be less adversarial and aggressive with customers and more responsive to their needs.“This needs to be just the first salvo in an ongoing effort to become a softer friendlier company to deal with.”New Bell chief executive George Cope has promised to improve customer service as it completely overhauls the vast business. The Montreal-based company recently announced plans to shed 15 per cent of management and sell non-core assets.
CRTC Internet Traffic Ruling Throttled ‘Til October
Complaints over the throttling of Internet traffic – in apparent violation of industry regulations if not ‘Net neutrality aspirations – are themselves being slowed.
The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission has delayed its ruling on a dispute involving Bell Canada and third party Internet Service Providers over Internet data rates and throughput.
The CRTC now says it will rule on the fight between Bell and the Canadian Association of Internet Providers (CAIP) by Oct. 31. ”
Clearly the CRTC is in someone’s back pocket for the CRTC is not speedily working on behalf of the many complaining Canadian citizens
Believe it or not, face it or not Bad and abusive Corporations, churches, pastors, cops, in fact all bad persons are often the number one concerns of many people, on the net too, many citizens, in every province, Canada wide too, and yet this is an area where the too often pretentious government, poor ministers, that have wrongfully also hired too often their pretentious friends into key and secondary jobs now too, are clearly wrongfully not doing enough now here too… but they still steal, take a big salary, with perks, expenses accounts wrongfully for it too.. https://thenonconformer.wordpress.com/2009/06/03/corupted/
A Canadian consumer cancelling their cell phone, or their Home Phone or their Internet service provider and any the supposedly applicable termination fees, related early cell phone termination fees supreme court ruling in the US FIRSTLY does not apply in Canada since the Telecommunication industry and the ISP, Internet service providers are all still unregulated by the governments, all of them, neither the customers or the corporations, providers they they generally are not subject to any possible COURT DISPUTES SETTLEMENTS, REGULATIONS, AND even if Rogers or Bell tries to tell you otherwise? and tries to enforce their cancellation fees? They Corporations they have to rely on the good will of their customers to pay these inapplicable contract, termination charges in Canada? True or false?
Some persons still do argue that when you agree to the contract with a carrier for that new phone even for free or at a discounted rate, or an ISP, Iphone services it was understood what you were doing entering into a legally bind contract so do explain to me what the point of a contract is… when you can just get out of it at any time with no deterrent? or Bell itself often as is it often the case now too does not keep their promised contractual commitments, and secondly their CONTRACT CLAUSES, agreements, clauses are so one sided, unfair the the COURTS TEND NOT SUPPORT THEM NOW AS WELL.
“A California Supreme Court judge has ruled that early-termination fees on cell phone contracts are illegal. This is HUGE. Contracts and early-termination fees basically define the cell phone industry in the United States. Could we be headed for a major change if this decision holds? By locking consumers into 1 to 2-year contracts with an early-termination fee tacked on, carriers are able to guarantee a certain amount of revenue from their subscribers. By doing this, they are able to offer subsidies on the actual hardware. This is why the iPhone 3G is only $199, but requires a 2-year contract. This is completely different from Europe and other markets where consumers pay full price for their hardware, but are not forced to sign any contracts. There will be appeals by the cell carriers, but if this holds, what could happen? Early termination fees put the power in the hands of the carrier. How many times have you heard a friend say they would love to get a new phone or switch carriers only to shoot down their idea because they are under contract for another year? In some cases, it could even be cheaper to pay for two contracts instead of paying the early termination fee on one. So, let’s assume this decision holds, and carriers aren’t legally allowed to charge these fees, we’ll probably either see the carriers attempt to work around the legal problems through a loophole or the abolition of cell phone contracts. Hooray! Except, cheap handsets are the first thing to follow contracts out the door. Most people don’t realize that cell phones are actually fairly expensive pieces of hardware after years and years of discounted, subsidized prices. In the end, it’s hard to say if the consumer will save money out of contract, but with a full-priced device. It’ll depend on the plans, which could increase in price in response. So if we might not actually save any money, what will be gained by this decision? Freedom. Some cell phone carriers are notorious for poor customer service because they probably don’t feel like going out of their way to help their customers when they have them locked into a contract. Without contracts, a greater responsibility to appease and provide for the customer falls on the carriers. Suddenly, threats to cancel service and move to a competitor could have meaning. Carriers would have to fight to keep you as a customer. Pair this up with the trend of moving toward open networks that must accept any device and you’ve got the making of a European style cell phone market. That is, of course, if the carriers don’t just find a loophole. You can be sure their best lawyers are on the case. On the hardware side, most phones would end up being sold unlocked. We wouldn’t be surprised if the retail market for devices moves online or into big box retailers, while the service is sold by carriers. Sure, they’d sell phones too, but suddenly a whole new market complete with competition could open for unlocked handsets. If you were suddenly able to break your contract without consequence, would you switch carriers? Are you patiently waiting for your contract to end so you can get a new phone or upgrade? http://www.g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/687741/No_Early_Termination_Fees_Will_The_Cell_Market_Completely_Change.html
do see the many Post about Bell here too..
https://thenonconformer.wordpress.com/2009/05/21/bell-throttles-internet-speeds/
