Jump to content

      













Photo

Freedom Mobile in Victoria


  • Please log in to reply
168 replies to this topic

#41 MarkoJ

MarkoJ
  • Member
  • 4,641 posts
  • LocationVictoria

Posted 18 November 2012 - 03:08 PM

The big players are a rip-off in my opinion, it is what it is. It would be nice to see WIND in Victoria. At least my dividends from Roger's shares almost pay for my cell phone bills. If you can't beat them, join them.

Regarding Samsung, I have a Galaxy S3 and I don't think it is a better phone than the iPhone 5; however, it is perfect for those like me that have never owned Apple products nor wish to start. I still think the iPhone 5 is better overall from the reviews I've read and all the drop tests I've seen on youtube.

Marko Juras, REALTOR® & Associate Broker | Gold MLS® 2011-2018 | Fair Realty

www.MarkoJuras.com - MLS® from $899 and $1,000 cash back for buyers | www.834sales.com & www.promontoryforsale.com - Building(s) specialist 

Looking at Condo Pre-Sales in Victoria? Save Thousands!

 

 


#42 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 46,548 posts

Posted 18 November 2012 - 03:13 PM

Btw, Wind has launched a Facebook page called the Canadian Mobile Bill of Rights. Check it.

Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#43 bluefox

bluefox

    ex-Victorian

  • Member
  • 697 posts

Posted 18 November 2012 - 03:51 PM

The other, likely bigger challenge, is the game ROBELLUS plays with existing towers. They are supposed to make unused space on towers available to competitors per Industry Canada licensing requirements. The thing is, they have a loophole. They claim "future expansion" needs. Based on this they refuse space to Wind even when there is a ridiculous amount of space available on a tower.


No, that's actually incorrect. Prior to the introduction of LTE, Bell/Telus (HSPA) used different network technology than Rogers/Fido (GSM), who in turn use different network technology than Wind and Mobilicity (AWS). Once Wind and Mobilicity start supporting LTE technology, then you might have an argument.

It has nothing to do with the towers, which are not built to support multiple frequencies other than those the carrier itself is using. Those network technologies are the equivalent of an English guy trying to communicate with someone who only speaks French.

Same as someone getting upset when they find their "unlocked" phone from 1, 2, or 3 years ago still only works on one network. If everyone used the same network 2-3 years ago, then your device would indeed work everywhere. The reason it doesn't is the language the towers are speaking. As of 2012 the only phones that are reliably multiple-band are the iPhone, most BlackBerries and mid-to-high-end Android handsets.

In the end it has to do with what services the carrier wants to provide with each frequency on those towers, and not "oh, you have band x still available so you should give that to Wind". Cell towers don't work that way. It's not cost-effective to go out and build a tower that supports frequencies that the carrier doesn't even use. That CRTC/Industry Canada requirement, though real, is pretty much useless.
(Not the owner of, nor am I associated with, the Blue Fox Café, in any way.)

#44 Doggier

Doggier
  • Member
  • 46 posts

Posted 18 November 2012 - 06:13 PM

Blufox,
Thanks for the education. I understood that the towers themselves were merely structures to support antennae. I believed it was the antenna that dictated the frequency and that multiple antennae (of differing frequencies) could be mounted on a single tower. I'm no expert on the technology so I'd appreciate if you have a link or links on this topic that would help me to better understand how the towers and antennae interact.
I have been tracking links on Howard Forums that brought me to my erroneous understanding. Looks like more reading is in order.
Cheers

#45 http

http

    Data Sans Practicality

  • Member
  • 1,024 posts

Posted 19 November 2012 - 07:14 PM

The big players are a rip-off in my opinion, it is what it is. It would be nice to see WIND in Victoria. At least my dividends from Roger's shares almost pay for my cell phone bills. If you can't beat them, join them. [ snip ]

So you believe they rip off their customers, and you knowingly invest in them. That's... candid of you.
"Who are those slashdot people? They swept over like Mongol-Tartars." - F. E. Vladimirovna

#46 MarkoJ

MarkoJ
  • Member
  • 4,641 posts
  • LocationVictoria

Posted 19 November 2012 - 07:57 PM

So you believe they rip off their customers, and you knowingly invest in them. That's... candid of you.


When you invest you have to take out emotion out of the picture. It isn't like Rogers is taking food off the table for anyone. A smartphone with a data plan is a luxury not a necessity.

I am very pro WIND and competition but I also like solid dividend payouts.

Marko Juras, REALTOR® & Associate Broker | Gold MLS® 2011-2018 | Fair Realty

www.MarkoJuras.com - MLS® from $899 and $1,000 cash back for buyers | www.834sales.com & www.promontoryforsale.com - Building(s) specialist 

Looking at Condo Pre-Sales in Victoria? Save Thousands!

 

 


#47 bluefox

bluefox

    ex-Victorian

  • Member
  • 697 posts

Posted 19 November 2012 - 08:08 PM

Blufox,
Thanks for the education. I understood that the towers themselves were merely structures to support antennae. I believed it was the antenna that dictated the frequency and that multiple antennae (of differing frequencies) could be mounted on a single tower. I'm no expert on the technology so I'd appreciate if you have a link or links on this topic that would help me to better understand how the towers and antennae interact.
I have been tracking links on Howard Forums that brought me to my erroneous understanding. Looks like more reading is in order.
Cheers


Not sure I'd even be able to track down anything for you, this is just me talking from experience (as I've mentioned before in another thread, I work in telecoms).

The antennae themselves can support multiple frequencies; you're right. Most of the time carriers use similar transmission equipment. But the towers are never constructed to support more frequencies than the ones the carrier needs to provision certain services (voice, SMS/MMS, data, etc.). Economy of scale, and supply and demand, in a sense.

While there might be a thin band of opportunity to make marginal profit by leasing out bandwidth to so-called "mobile virtual network operators" who wish to do that rather than build their own infrastructure, the business case for it just isn't there, except on small scales or offering basic services — case in point, 7-Eleven's wireless product, which is literally voice & text only, and completely pay-as-you-go. Low overhead, revenue up front. It makes sense to enter that sort of partnership.

But we're talking about a new entrant that has national aspirations. Incumbent carriers have much more to gain financially (and, yes, strategically) by building only the infrastructure they need to provision the services their customers demand, even though, yes, considering the size of this country, and our population, that can seem quite the daunting task.

And that is exactly the approach Wind is taking, building its own network. Don't be under any impression they want to use anyone else's towers. They want to be completely self-sufficient, and have wanted that from day one. Swallowing short-term pain (the cost of building a mobile network from scratch) for long-term gain (ownership of its own infrastructure that it and it alone controls, just like the "big three") is a better business decision in the long run. It might be a different story if they didn't have backers with such deep pockets, but the only way to play the game and bat with the big boys in the Canadian industry is to do what Wind is doing. :)

EDIT: On a side note, don't believe everything you read on Howard Forums. It's usually just speculative drivel from bitter beans who think they know how the industry works or have unrealistic ideas on how it should work.
(Not the owner of, nor am I associated with, the Blue Fox Café, in any way.)

#48 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 19 November 2012 - 10:44 PM

But we're talking about a new entrant that has national aspirations. Incumbent carriers have much more to gain financially (and, yes, strategically) by building only the infrastructure they need to provision the services their customers demand, even though, yes, considering the size of this country, and our population, that can seem quite the daunting task.


Sometimes I wonder if the task is all that daunting in this country. I mean, how many cities do we have with over 250k people? I'm sure the US has more than 10 times as many, if you want to use that as some type of baseline of how hard it is to provide coverage in urban areas. ie. the US is 10 times our population size, but has more than 10 times the urban communities they need to be strong in. And look at the other challenges they have. Massive cities like NY, Detroit, Chicago and LA etc. Heck, on every Sunday from August to late December they have 14 places that have over 40,000 people in one place (an NFL stadium) and then a different set the next weekend.

How far can a cellphone hit a tower from, if it's just looking for the next one down the highway? 3 miles? 10? 30? I don't know.
<p><span style="font-size:12px;"><em><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">"I don’t need a middle person in my pizza slice transaction" <strong>- zoomer, April 17, 2018</strong></span></em></span>

#49 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 46,548 posts

Posted 20 November 2012 - 08:13 AM

It's been conceded in the past by whistleblowers from the big-three that the vastness of Canada excuse is just that, an excuse.

It's interesting that out of the cities Wind does serve, Montreal is yet to be added. Language issues, perhaps? I suppose if you stay out of Quebec you avoid having to brand your services in two languages?

Anyways, I ran a comparison yesterday of Fido's new unlimited plan and Wind's unlimited plan.

Check it:

Fido: $57/month (includes voicemail, caller ID and 2,500 call forwarding mins)
- Unlimited CAD long distance
- Global text
- 1GB data
- Unlimited picture messaging
- Evenings and weekends starting at 5PM - 7AM (why would you need that on an unlimited plan??)
- $35 activation fee unless you commit to 2 or 3 years

Wind: $40/month (includes voicemail, caller ID, unlimited call forwarding)
- Unlimited CAD + US long distance
- Global text
- Unlimited data
- Unlimited picture messaging
- No activation fee

You're saving $17 with Wind, you have no activation fee, no contract, no data restrictions within reason (despite Fido's assertion that 1GB = unlimited) and you're eligible for a "tab" whereby you pay off your phone over an extended period as you would with the other carriers. Over two years you'll have saved $19.04 x 24 = $457 (includes the tax difference).

If a small carrier like Wind can do this and still make money, what is stopping the big three from offering similar reasonably priced plans? In other words, what makes Fido's $57 quasi-unlimited plan worth $57 instead of $40?

Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#50 MarkoJ

MarkoJ
  • Member
  • 4,641 posts
  • LocationVictoria

Posted 20 November 2012 - 08:40 AM

It's been conceded in the past by whistleblowers from the big-three that the vastness of Canada excuse is just that, an excuse.

It's interesting that out of the cities Wind does serve, Montreal is yet to be added. Language issues, perhaps? I suppose if you stay out of Quebec you avoid having to brand your services in two languages?

Anyways, I ran a comparison yesterday of Fido's new unlimited plan and Wind's unlimited plan.

Check it:

Fido: $57/month (includes voicemail, caller ID and 2,500 call forwarding mins)
- Unlimited CAD long distance
- Global text
- 1GB data
- Unlimited picture messaging
- Evenings and weekends starting at 5PM - 7AM (why would you need that on an unlimited plan??)
- $35 activation fee unless you commit to 2 or 3 years

Wind: $40/month (includes voicemail, caller ID, unlimited call forwarding)
- Unlimited CAD + US long distance
- Global text
- Unlimited data
- Unlimited picture messaging
- No activation fee

You're saving $17 with Wind, you have no activation fee, no contract, no data restrictions within reason (despite Fido's assertion that 1GB = unlimited) and you're eligible for a "tab" whereby you pay off your phone over an extended period as you would with the other carriers. Over two years you'll have saved $19.04 x 24 = $457 (includes the tax difference).

If a small carrier like Wind can do this and still make money, what is stopping the big three from offering similar reasonably priced plans? In other words, what makes Fido's $57 quasi-unlimited plan worth $57 instead of $40?


This is the reason why I bought my Galaxy S3 straight up and refused to extend my Rogers contract which expires in 10 months. Patiently awaiting WIND's arrival in Victoria.

Marko Juras, REALTOR® & Associate Broker | Gold MLS® 2011-2018 | Fair Realty

www.MarkoJuras.com - MLS® from $899 and $1,000 cash back for buyers | www.834sales.com & www.promontoryforsale.com - Building(s) specialist 

Looking at Condo Pre-Sales in Victoria? Save Thousands!

 

 


#51 pherthyl

pherthyl
  • Member
  • 2,209 posts

Posted 20 November 2012 - 10:13 AM

This is the reason why I bought my Galaxy S3 straight up and refused to extend my Rogers contract which expires in 10 months. Patiently awaiting WIND's arrival in Victoria.


Did you get a discount for coming with a phone? High end phones are highly subsidized by carriers, but it still seems to be incredibly difficult to get any discount if you don't want their subsidy and arrive with your own phone.

#52 MarkoJ

MarkoJ
  • Member
  • 4,641 posts
  • LocationVictoria

Posted 20 November 2012 - 10:27 AM

Did you get a discount for coming with a phone? High end phones are highly subsidized by carriers, but it still seems to be incredibly difficult to get any discount if you don't want their subsidy and arrive with your own phone.


I was already 2 years into a Rogers’s contract with a Blackberry Bold. Instead of extending the contract and getting a discount on the Galaxy S3 I bought it straight up for $599 (business write off anyway). This way in 10 months I'll be free of contract and able to switch to WIND if they are here.

High-end phones are only highly subsidized by carriers if you sign a 3 year contract. A $149 Galaxy S3 on a three year contract isn't really $149....you pay for it via contract.

Marko Juras, REALTOR® & Associate Broker | Gold MLS® 2011-2018 | Fair Realty

www.MarkoJuras.com - MLS® from $899 and $1,000 cash back for buyers | www.834sales.com & www.promontoryforsale.com - Building(s) specialist 

Looking at Condo Pre-Sales in Victoria? Save Thousands!

 

 


#53 G-Man

G-Man

    Senior Case Officer

  • Moderator
  • 12,538 posts

Posted 20 November 2012 - 04:37 PM

^ The high end phones are only highly subsidized because carriers encourage the makers to allow obscene markups for devices.

The no-contract costs for phones are highway robbery if you compare them to any other electronic device. As I have said before it costs less to make an iPhone than an iPad but the iPad costs less to buy outright. This is because carriers want the device to cost a lot to scare people into 3 year contracts.

Visit my blog at: https://www.sidewalkingvictoria.com 

 

It has a whole new look!

 


#54 bluefox

bluefox

    ex-Victorian

  • Member
  • 697 posts

Posted 20 November 2012 - 06:53 PM

If a small carrier like Wind can do this and still make money, what is stopping the big three from offering similar reasonably priced plans?


Well, for one, attempting to gain market share vs defend it. And Wind is not making money right now, make no mistake. Like I said before, they're still well into the short-term pain stage of the first few years of existence. It's just creative accounting 101 that's making them look better off than they really are. Case in point: they promised shareholders in their business plan that they'd have 1.5 million subs by now; they still only have 510,000. Growing, but only enough to just barely offset the churn from the thousands of frustrated and severely underwhelmed people going back to incumbents. That's a BIG fail and it also explains why they're so painfully slow expanding into new markets.

It comes down to something called ARPU (average revenue per user). That's the pure revenue that the carrier gains from each active mobile phone line. Here's what the most recent ARPU figures from each carrier look like, or at least those that release these numbers:

  • Rogers, $61.92 per month
  • Telus, $61.42 per month
  • MTS Mobility, $60.58 per month
  • Bell, $57.30 per month
  • Wind, $29.30 per month (Q3 2012 just released)

A huge gap, one of almost double, between Wind (attacking market share) and the rest (defending market share). But to be honest, they're targeting totally different markets. People who want value-priced mobile service and don't care too much about having 1990s-era coverage and slow internet speeds will go to the new entrants; people who want reliability, blanket coverage and fast speeds understand that it costs money and they'll pay more for it, begrudgingly or not.

The "Big Three" do not view Wind as a direct competitor to their principal brands and probably never will (have to). They see it, and Mobilicity, Public Mobile, etc., as competitors of their fighter brands, like Fido, Virgin and Koodo.

Wind: $40/month
[ ... ]
- Unlimited data


Also, pet-peeve of mine about Wind and "unlimited data". It's not. Now I'm of the opinion that if you use more than 6GB a month on your phone, you deserve some sort of medal, but the honest truth is that with Wind, you get throttled HARD after 5GB (10GB if you pay an extra $10/month!) down to a 256kbps downlink speed. Hope you've read their "fair usage policy". That's not even 2G-equivalent speed... in fact, it's prehistoric. But, hey, you get what you pay for. :squint:

By the way, plenty of incumbent carriers have no-contract options now, and three of them are doing tab programs just like Wind. Some even give you a discount now on your monthly bill for bringing your own phone to their network.
(Not the owner of, nor am I associated with, the Blue Fox Café, in any way.)

#55 Doggier

Doggier
  • Member
  • 46 posts

Posted 24 November 2012 - 11:23 AM

This is the reason why I bought my Galaxy S3 straight up and refused to extend my Rogers contract which expires in 10 months. Patiently awaiting WIND's arrival in Victoria.


I'm with ya. Of course the key to this strategy is patience. Wind is already more that 2 years behind schedule. I'm guessing it'll be a least another year.

The strangest part of Wind's marking strategy is they don't tell anyone what their plan is. EG: when do you plan to come to Victoria? approx date... Seems to me that if people knew Wind was going live in say, September 2013, they would gain more customers who would be strategic about not renewing plans with ROBELLUS.

They refer to a coverage map that does not show any "in progress" growth. I feel this scares more potential customers away than it gains.

#56 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 46,548 posts

Posted 24 November 2012 - 04:34 PM

Also, pet-peeve of mine about Wind and "unlimited data". It's not. Now I'm of the opinion that if you use more than 6GB a month on your phone, you deserve some sort of medal, but the honest truth is that with Wind, you get throttled HARD after 5GB (10GB if you pay an extra $10/month!) down to a 256kbps downlink speed. Hope you've read their "fair usage policy". That's not even 2G-equivalent speed... in fact, it's prehistoric. But, hey, you get what you pay for.

By the way, plenty of incumbent carriers have no-contract options now, and three of them are doing tab programs just like Wind. Some even give you a discount now on your monthly bill for bringing your own phone to their network.


5GB + throttling after 5GB is still a heck of a lot better than anything Fido offers with it's "unlimited" plan that gives you 1GB of data and all other options being equal at $17 more per month than Wind. And without a contract that price could go up at any moment.

I truly believe that once Wind gets up and running at full tilt it will be far more lucrative to investors and potential customers than it is now but it will always struggle to attract clients that the big 3 can lure with combo deals (tv+Internet+cable+wireless, etc).

The big 3 are the big 3 largely because of protectionist regulations and it's no secret that Canadian telecoms are bloated behemoths that cannot compete with foreign carriers, otherwise you'd see Rogers encroaching on the European market and Telus setting up more than just call centres in the Philippines.

On the flip side Wind is a product of highly successful telecoms that found success amid a fierce global marketplace. With that in mind my money's on Wind, but that's not to say the company won't continue to struggle and under-perform for a few more years as it expands its network across the vastness of this country without the customers and established networks the big 3 benefited from during their years of wireless expansion.

Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#57 LJ

LJ
  • Member
  • 8,695 posts

Posted 26 November 2012 - 08:05 PM

Their very limited coverage areas would dissuade me from using Wind.
Life's a journey......so roll down the window and enjoy the breeze.

#58 Doggier

Doggier
  • Member
  • 46 posts

Posted 22 December 2012 - 11:01 AM

Their very limited coverage areas would dissuade me from using Wind.


Me too. I hope it gets better. At this point, KooDo plans are looking pretty good.

#59 bluefox

bluefox

    ex-Victorian

  • Member
  • 697 posts

Posted 22 December 2012 - 01:54 PM

Koodo, Virgin and Fido have essentially identical plans.

As for Wind, http://www.windmobilesucks.com - seems like they're just as bad as the "other guys" from what existing customers have to say.
(Not the owner of, nor am I associated with, the Blue Fox Café, in any way.)

#60 Doggier

Doggier
  • Member
  • 46 posts

Posted 23 December 2012 - 01:45 PM

Plan comparison

You're not quite at the end of this discussion topic!

Use the page links at the lower-left to go to the next page to read additional posts.
 



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users