Another example
I'm reading more articles about this, and a lot of analogies about water pipes is coming up. The argument goes that if more people move in, the water company is going to need to increase the size of the pipe to handle the increased use. Makes sense then why they would be interested in charging per liter (to pick a volume we're using for this analogy)
The analogy is very broken.
If Bell were a water company, Bell would have its water tower, big fat pipes running from that to your street, a smaller pipe run down your street to your house, and then smaller pipes inside your house: all those pipes are owned by Bell, and Bell charges you for your water use.
Techsavvy comes along and says they can provide water in some superior way to Bell: maybe it's clearer, maybe higher pressure, maybe lower cost, whatever; they have a gimmick and a market they can fill. They put up their own water tower, run their own fat pipes to your street, but the cost of running the smaller pipes and indeed replacing all the pipes in your house is ridiculously expensive, so instead they use the existing ones that Bell has already installed.
So to start off with, if I am with Bell and my neighbour is with Techsavvy, it doesn't matter how much water he uses: his water comes from the Techsavvy tower over the Techsavvy pipe and if he drains that sucker dry I will still have my water from Bell. The only thing he, as a Techsavvy customer, is using is that last 50 feet between the junction point where the water comes in and his house. Bell's argument that these independent ISPs are leeches that will cause Bell customers problems is FUD plain and simple. There are other ISPs that are renting Bells lines start to finish, getting wholesale prices, which they then resell to other people or businesses, but these companies are (usually, I don't think Bell does unlimited even for wholesalers anymore) already paying by the GB end to end.
Second, for using those pipes that run through your house, Bell wants 100% of what it charges it's wholesalers from these independents. It's only getting 85%, which the CRTC has decided is a bargain.
Not 85% of what it costs, 85% of what Bell charges wholesale. For the entire thing, front to back.
Finally, Techsavvy says it costs them between 1 and 3 cents per GB to get the "water" from their "tower" to your street. At $1 per GB, either that last 50 feet to your house is really, REALLY expensive, or Bell is taking some major profit.
I am not opposed to Bell getting money for the usage of their lines, but let's have some perspective here. 3 cents to 85 cents seems a little ridiculous, don't you think?
Heck, here's a solution: make it a $5 flat fee per customer. It's not a prohibitive amount, with the average person using less than 60GB Bell is automatically making a profit of at least $3.20 per third party customer for doing nothing more than what they were already doing.
The analogy is very broken.
If Bell were a water company, Bell would have its water tower, big fat pipes running from that to your street, a smaller pipe run down your street to your house, and then smaller pipes inside your house: all those pipes are owned by Bell, and Bell charges you for your water use.
Techsavvy comes along and says they can provide water in some superior way to Bell: maybe it's clearer, maybe higher pressure, maybe lower cost, whatever; they have a gimmick and a market they can fill. They put up their own water tower, run their own fat pipes to your street, but the cost of running the smaller pipes and indeed replacing all the pipes in your house is ridiculously expensive, so instead they use the existing ones that Bell has already installed.
So to start off with, if I am with Bell and my neighbour is with Techsavvy, it doesn't matter how much water he uses: his water comes from the Techsavvy tower over the Techsavvy pipe and if he drains that sucker dry I will still have my water from Bell. The only thing he, as a Techsavvy customer, is using is that last 50 feet between the junction point where the water comes in and his house. Bell's argument that these independent ISPs are leeches that will cause Bell customers problems is FUD plain and simple. There are other ISPs that are renting Bells lines start to finish, getting wholesale prices, which they then resell to other people or businesses, but these companies are (usually, I don't think Bell does unlimited even for wholesalers anymore) already paying by the GB end to end.
Second, for using those pipes that run through your house, Bell wants 100% of what it charges it's wholesalers from these independents. It's only getting 85%, which the CRTC has decided is a bargain.
Not 85% of what it costs, 85% of what Bell charges wholesale. For the entire thing, front to back.
Finally, Techsavvy says it costs them between 1 and 3 cents per GB to get the "water" from their "tower" to your street. At $1 per GB, either that last 50 feet to your house is really, REALLY expensive, or Bell is taking some major profit.
I am not opposed to Bell getting money for the usage of their lines, but let's have some perspective here. 3 cents to 85 cents seems a little ridiculous, don't you think?
Heck, here's a solution: make it a $5 flat fee per customer. It's not a prohibitive amount, with the average person using less than 60GB Bell is automatically making a profit of at least $3.20 per third party customer for doing nothing more than what they were already doing.