UBB 2.0

Bell was never going to just quietly give up on forcing usage based billing onto the wholesale ISPs. Their mistake was trying to impose the Bell retail UBB onto the wholesale ISPs, which created a public outcry and turned UBB into a political hot potato. They have learned from that mistake and have made a new proposal which moves the UBB from the wholesaler ISP's retail customers to the ISP itself. The ISP would buy blocks of usage at $200/TB/month and pay overage fees of $0.30/GB/month. Bell calls the new proposal "aggregated volume pricing" (AVP) but it is really UBB 2.0.

On the face of it, AVP looks better as the ISP can be more creative in how it passes the cost on to its customers. However, the pricing is way out of line with how much it actually costs to deliver a TeraByte per month at the wholesale level. Besides, the ISPs already pay Bell to have their data transit GAS and AHSSPI so the new proposal is still double billing for the same service. AVP is still nothing more than a cash grab by Bell.

This proposal is unlikely to get 500,000 people to sign a petition and cause another media stir, as the direct impact on the individual customer is much less obvious. The proposal ensures that the fight is now between Bell and the wholesale ISPs, who unfortunately do not have any influence at the CRTC. I expect the CRTC to rubber stamp UBB 2.0, perhaps with few token concessions to make it look like they were impartial. Bell wins again.

UBB In The Spotlight

Usage based billing is still in the spotlight which indicates it is not going to be easy for the CRTC to dodge the issue, or for the government ignore the problem later. Sadly, it is very clear the CRTC just doesn't get it.

This article debunks the myths that UBB supporters typically use in their arguments. Even the comments are good... well most of them anyway.

These folks raised enough money from donations take out print media adverts and are hoping to repeat the exercise with another round of donations. Are they using old fashioned methods to make a point about a modern problem? Well, price gouging really isn't a modern problem, is it?

Apparently, about 1% of the Canadian population signed the openmedia.ca (above) petition. That's definitely not a small sample, statistically speaking.

UBB Cancelled

The folks at TekSavvy celebrated that the 1 March implementation of UBB is cancelled, by raising the monthly caps from 200GB to 300GB. They credit the increase to the cost savings they obtained from their non-Bell providers. I found this distinction mildly humourous. The larger cap is bound to attract subscribers away from Bell even if the speeds that TekSavvy can offer are likely to be much lower, at least for now.

Whether UBB is completely dead, remains to be seen. The Industry Minister has promised to overturn anything that resembles UBB after the CRTC completes its 60 day review. When politicians make promises, I only believe them when they actually follow through, and not a moment before. So yes, I'm skeptical.

Tracking Usage

Oh, this is rich. Right in the midst of the wholesale UBB debacle, Bell admits that it found errors tracking the usage of its retail customers. Talk about adding fuel to fire. Of course, they insist that it has only happened to a small number of their customers. I believe them. Many wouldn't. :-]

Yeah, right. More likely, these are just the people who were paying attention to their bills.

Pointless Fights

It seems that I'm not the only one who feels the CRTC's 60 day moratorium on UBB, is not going to accomplish much. Micheal Geist explains clearly why he believes this isn't going work. (The post also has an excellent rebuttal of the idea that bandwidth should billed like water and gas, and is worth reading just for that.) If Geist is correct, the CRTC will reach the same conclusion because it will start with the same faulty premise that the bandwidth hogs are a problem that must be controlled.

Fine, if that happens the Industry Minister will just overturn the decision, so it doesn't matter, right? Unfortunately, it's not that simple. Remember the Globalive business back in 2009? The CRTC ruled that Globalive did not meet the foreign ownership rules, which was legally correct, and the the Minister overruled that decision because increasing competition was more important. Well, the courts overruled the Minister today, almost two years after Globalive's Wind Mobile started operations in Canada.

As long as the CRTC simply stays within the boundaries of the current Telecommunications Act, the courts will always support their decisions, and this is no different with the UBB decision. It may be wrong but it's legal. The obvious solution is to change the law so that it aligns with the goals of Industry Canada. So why hasn't the government done that yet? Instead we get these pointless fights between the the goverment and one of its own agencies.

Welcome to Canada. Water flows uphill here you know...

CRTC Back Peddles But...

The CRTC has back paddled on the UBB decision... by merely delaying the implementation for 60 days so they can study it further. For goodness sake, they've been studying it since the autumn of 2009. If they don't understand the consequences of UBB by now what difference is another 60 days going to make? I smell a rat. My bet is, they (and Bell, who is pushing UBB) are hoping that the attention will die down in 60 days, then it will be back to business as usual.

The CRTC chairman dissembled extensively before his political masters today. For example, when asked why Bell's IPTV is exempt from their retail UBB, he replied that IPTV is not an Internet service. However, this is Bell's definition of IPTV. I'm sure Netflix would disagree. Another example, the chairman indicated that UBB is a common pricing structure. That might be true for retail customers but it definitely not the norm for wholesale customers. Do you see why I don't trust the CRTC?

On the positive side, the Industry Minister has stated that, if the CRTC comes back with the same decision in 60 days, the government will definitely over turn it. OK, but how much does the decision have to change? If the 15% discount on the 40GB usage blocks is increased, would that change be considered acceptable? It should not be, because it still treats the wholesale ISPs as if they just reselling Bell's services.

UBB Reaches The Top

Micheal Geist has written an analysis of UBB which covers the entire situation rather well. UBB is caused by the same disease which infects the entire Canadian telecommunications industry: lack of competition. There are only for major ISPs in Canada, although only one operates nationwide, and in most areas they are lucky if they get two choices. Between those four, they control 96% of the ISP market and all of the last mile infrastructure. Unless that domination of the market is properly managed, the tiny 4% of the remaining ISPs cannot exist.

That message appears to have reached the top with the Prime Minister getting involved and promising an immediate review of the CRTC decision. Given Harper's top down style of running the government, if he is getting involved, it means that some action will definitely be taken. But they make the right choice? We wait with bated breath. The future of competitive Internet access in Canada hangs in the balance.

UBB Metering

One of the scariest parts of UBB is that know one knows exactly how Bell intends to meter the traffic. Are they going to measure PPP or ATM packets? The overhead of the latter would inflate the numbers significantly. When asked about this, their response has effectively been, "Trust us." Sorry but that's just not good enough. So far attempts to get Measurement Canada involved have not been successful, but I don't see how they can avoid it once complaints start to roll in. And there will be disputes, of that I am absolutely certain.

UBB Can Only Get Worse

Mamdatory usage based billing (UBB) starts on 1 March and it is even worse than what was originally proposed over a year ago. The usage cap dropped from 60GB to 25GB. The overage fees went up from $1.12/GB to $1.90/GB. Despite the best efforts of everyone to fight this, the CRTC basically ignored them all, and only listened to Bell's input.

The only concession was that the overage allowances that Bell offers its retail customers had to be made available to the wholesale ISP's customers as well. Of course, greedy Bell wanted this to cost the same as retail but the CRTC decided a 15% discount was enough. It's not. 15% percent gives the wholesale ISPs no wiggle room to be creative in their pricing. Which is probably the point.

These allowances are sold in 40GB blocks for $4.75. You can have a maximum of three blocks. If you need more than 145GB you can get a 275GB block for $55 which covers you to 300GB, the maximum allowance you can buy. After that you have to pay $1.90/GB which is a ridiculous amount for a retail level usage charge. How can retail cost more than wholesale usage fees?

It's all very complicated and completely inflexible. You can't just add and remove a block when ever you need since it's all tied to Bell's metering and billing cycle which is a calender month. Basically, every customer has to decide a month in advance what their usage is going be, which is totally impractical. On top of that, the wholesale ISP is liable for their customer's usage, so they will need to ensure that everything is covered when a user is getting close to their limit. Some ISPs could throttle or even cut people off.

In my case, my monthly usage is low now (~60GB) but once F1 and WRC season starts, it will climb well past 90GB, which is too close for the two block allowance (105GB) for my liking. I opted for the three block allowance for piece of mind. Effectively, I'm paying $46 for a paltry 2.5Mb/s connection. Basically giving Bell money for nothing. I've eliminated the services on my Bell land line to compensate, and I'm looking for ways to cut it even further. Unfortunately, DSL requires a land line so I can't ditch it completely.

I can guarantee that there will be disputes between Bell and the wholesale ISPs over differences in the overage amounts. Those fights will be ugly. UBB can only get worse before its get better. The reason it will eventually get better is because the CRTC introduced UBB in a way that effectively reduces competition, which completely goes against their mandate. The fight goes on.

Bell Says Jump, CRTC Jumps

The CRTC is such an obedient little corporate lap dog. When Bell says jump, the CRTC jumps. Usage based billing was a approved several months ago but the CRTC stipulated that UBB could only begin once Bell had eliminated all its unlimited accounts. Bell asked the CRTC to reconsider this requirement. The CRTC jumped.

Now, accounts created before 1 January, 2007, will be grandfathered. On Bell's retail side this means they won't have to eliminate many unlimited accounts since they stopped offering that option in 2007. On the wholesale ISP side, accounts created before 2007 will not be subject to UBB. Unfortunately, I signed up with TekSavvy in October 2007, so I'm going to be UBBed, starting in 90 days.

Considering I use about 60 to 100GB per month and the UBB cap is only 60GB, my paltry 3 Mb/s Internet access is about to become very, very expensive. To cover the cost, I'm going to cancel all the features on my land line and reduce it to the basic phone service, which is needed for the DSL. Effectively, Bell is not making any more money from me than it did before UBB. I'll be sure to tell the Bell CSR exactly why I'm cancelling the services.

Nobody at Bell will care why I'm reducing my services. Bell's goal is to eradicate the wholesale ISP competition and UBB is a big step towards that result. One of the mandates of the CRTC is that it must foster competition in the telecom market, which is directly at odds with Bell's goal. Sooner or later, the CRTC is going to have to answer for being Bell's obedient corporate lap dog.

Sore Winner

The only thing worse than a sore loser, is a sore winner. Bell got everything it wanted in usage based billing. The only requirement was that they had to downgrade their grandfathered unlimited subscribers to UBB before it would take effect on the wholesale ISPs. Instead of getting on with satisfying the requirement, Bell complains about it to the CRTC. Considering how long it takes for the CRTC to decide anything, Bell's complaint only serves to delay UBB even further. How dumb is that?

Bell's submission is about more than UBB, though. The wholesale ISPs finally have access to the cable companies networks. The wholesalers have found a loophole that allow them to offer unlimited accounts over cable. Er, wait, unlimited is back again? Since Bell wants to eliminate unlimited accounts from its competitors, this latest development must have caused some serious cursing over at Bell. Even worse, some wholesale ISPs are offering 10Mb/s unlimited accounts on the cable networks, at least double the speed they can offer with DSL.

Oh, I'm going to enjoy watching Bell squirm for a while. ^_^

Argh! UBB Approved!

This is turning into a really depressing week. Yesterday, it was the Canadian DMCA bill. Today, the CRTC approved usage based billing (UBB). Bell shoots and scores again!

UBB won't kick in immediately. It becomes active 60 days after Bell informs the CRTC in writing that it has eliminated all its customers on grandfathered unlimited accounts. But that won't be very difficult. Bell can just switch people without so much as a by-your-leave.

Once UBB takes effect, there is a cap of 60GB per month. The overage fee is wopping $1.75 per Gigabyte, up to maximum $22.50. There's a secondary cap of 300GB with a fee of $0.75 per Gigabyte. I used 95GB in April so my Internet bill would have been around $56 plus taxes. April was unusual though. March was 66GB which is around $44. Wow, that's suddenly one very expensive 3Mb/s DSL connection!

The throttle is supposed to go away once the UBB comes into effect, since the UBB is supposed to curtail the dastardly bandwidth hogs. I fully expect Bell to find some reason to keep the throttle in place, probably using the unchanged usage as an excuse. With the CRTC in their back pocket, they know they can get away with anything. This is turning into a very depressing week.

Interview With CRTC Chairman

After listening to the Search Engine interview with CRTC Chairman Konrad von Finckenstein, it is clear why the CRTC needs to be dissolved. If the Chairman is so completely out of touch with reality, the Commission in its current form will never be able to serve the interests of the Canadian public. If you are Canadian please take a minute to sign the petition at disolvethecrtc.ca.

And you can count me as one of Finckenstein's "Internet Hogs." I use my 3Mb/s to its maximum potential!

Living With UBB

Now Usage Based Billing (UBB) of wholesale ISPs is a reality, how would this affect me? TekSavvy's usage report stop working in June (hope they fix that soon), but in March, April, and May I used about 66GB, 65GB and 59GB respectively. That would have resulted in a extra charge of $6.75 and $5.63 in March and April on top of my normal bill of $34.95 ($29.95 + $4 for static IP). This just shows that 60GB isn't that much once you start using the Internet as a TV source. A lot of people are going to be surprised by these extra charges because they stream video without really understanding how much data they transferring.

Now that the CRTC has rubber stamped UBB it is here to stay, and will probably get worse as Bell becomes emboldened by getting everything it wants. And there is little we can do about it as the CRTC seems to blithely ignore all protests. It rankles that Canada went from a world leader in broadband to worse than some Third Countries in the space of a decade. Back then the CRTC had much better foresight.

CRTC Must Die

Would somebody please kill off the waste of tax dollars known as the CRTC, and get us out of this misery? In its most outrageous decision yet the CRTC has approved Bell's application for Usage Based Billing of the customers of the independent ISPs.

This forces all ISPs to have a 60GB cap with a $1/GB overage charge. My TekSavvy account has a 200GB cap and charges $0.25/G above that. So the CRTC has allowed Bell to dictate business decisions to an independent ISP like TekSavvy. Remember that those ISPs already pay Bell to carry their customers data, so Bell is double dipping. The UBB comes into effect in three months time.

The only good news is that the CRTC did not ban MLPPP as Bell requested in its application. This means that it is still possible to bypass throttling for now, but how long before Bell makes another application to correct this oversight?

The CRTC has completely screwed up once again. I can only wonder how much worse it can get. The only recourse now is the government or the courts.

Usage Based Billing

Bell wants to start billing the independent ISPs for the bandwidth that their customers use when their data passes over Bell's network. Huh? I thought the independents already pay Bell for that bandwidth. If those fees are not enough, why not just request a change to the existing tariff?

The independent ISP are a thorny problem for Bell because they are real competition. Even though they depend on Bell of that last mile, they differentiate themselves quite well with better customer service, higher caps, and even unlimited accounts. Bell have been bleeding customers to the independents ever since Bell eliminated its unlimited service. When Bell started throttling their own users, the bleeding became a gaping chest wound. Bell decided to throttle the independent ISPs as well but that didn't help, since some companies offered ways to by pass the throttling. UBB would most definitely hurt the independent ISPs since Bell would be imposing caps on all of them. Unlimited accounts would be history everywhere in Bell territory. Even Teksavvy's 200GB account would be gone or become very expensive. The offerings of the independents would eventually look the same as Bell's, which is the goal, I think.

ISPs that have their own DSLAMs in the Central Offices will be unaffected, since their data would not pass over Bell's network. Unfortunately, very few of the independents have the wherewithal needed to make those kinds of infrastructure investments. Bell hasn't exactly made it easy either and have actively resisted allowing other companies into the COs. Only some of the other large telcos like Telus have managed to do it, but even they are not in every CO.

I would be surprised if the CRTC does not approve UBB, after a show of public consultation of course. Yes, I've become quite cynical of the CRTC, which I believe has forgotten that its true purpose is to serve the public interest, not the large corporation's. Bell's application hasn't appeared on the CRTC site yet, but this is the notice that Bell sent to the independent ISPs to inform them of the pending application.