ULTIMATE UNLIMITED INTERNET? HOW ROGERS FOOLED US THREE TIMES

Yesterday, I heard that Rogers offers Internet plans with unlimited data. Could this be true? Here’s what Google shows.

The Content Disappeared

I clicked and found the page was empty. The link isn’t broken but the content is gone.

Google To The Rescue

Now I was curious. Luckily, Google saved a copy of the page eight days earlier. The unlimited option is “Now Available until June 30th”. Does this mean the bandwidth caps return on July 1st? Probably not. The offer probably means you must get the option before the deadline but can keep it “forever”.

The offer looks real and with no sneaky  fine print. The price isn’t too crazy either (an extra $30 per month). I thought there might be daily limits, restrictions during busy periods or bandwidth throttling. There’s no mention but maybe those things happen. Years ago, my Bell mobile plan had “unlimited” data [don’t ask the price] but I was told that meant 5 GB.

Your Call Is Important To Us

I phoned Rogers to get the unlimited data. Since my call is important to them, I got put on hold for minutes. Finally, I spoke to a rep. He confirmed the $30 offer was available and that unlimited meant unlimited. Why wasn’t I told about the option? He said the plan was unadvertised: you must phone in to ask. How is that fair?

The Shock

In passing, I asked for confirmation that we’re really on the 150 Mbps plan. He checked and said … no. We’re on a 75 Mbps plan. This came as a shock but explains things.

Some months ago, I asked about upgrading from 75 Mbps to 150 Mbps. I was told the new Ultimate plan cost $123 per month but we were grandfathered at our current rate of $103 per month. We just needed to upgrade our modem to get the higher speeds. This cost an extra $1 per month (an increase from $7 to $8). That seemed fair but why hadn’t Rogers told us proactively?

Less Than Expected

From our bill, we thought we had been upgraded because we were paying for the better modem. However, our Internet service deteriorated.

We weren’t getting double the old speed. Even worse, we had intermittent problems. We’d lose our Internet connection or get painfully slow speeds at times (even when using our our wireless router). I called for technical support several times. They couldn’t find a problem. I was never told that we weren’t getting 150 Mbps because we on the same 75 Mbps plan.

Facts

Thanks to SamKnows, we can now see our actual Internet speeds. We’re shown as being on the 75 Mbps plan but we’re getting a faster speed consistently (perhaps due to the modem or improved service from Rogers). That’s terrific … except we thought we were on the 150 Mbps plan.

How could we tell we were getting fooled?

The Misleading Account information

Our account was inaccessible after the switch to unlimited data. Perhaps that’s because the changes were being made. When I got through, I couldn’t find any indication that we were on an 75 Mbps plan.

How could you possibly tell that you’re on the less-than-Ultimate plan? The plan options do not show the 75 Mbps plan.
While we’re here, notice the jump in price from

• 45 Mbps (Extreme Plus): $75
• 150 Mbps (Ultimate): $123

There is definitely room for 75 Mbps plan and a 100 Mbps plan. Yet none are offered.

Suggestions

What are you really getting from your Internet provider? Don’t trust what you’re told verbally. Find out what speed your plan actually offers. Ask about an unlimited option since that’s very useful if you backup data online or watch Netflix in HD. You also get peace of mind.
We’ve been fooled by Rogers in at least three ways:

1. We thought we had been upgraded to a faster Internet plan.
2. We had performance problems for months after the “upgrade”.
3. We didn’t know we could get unlimited data.

We’ve been paying the full price that Rogers intended but didn’t get what (we thought) Rogers promised. Buyer beware … again.

Links

• A review of Rogers Unlimited Internet (new)
• The horror of Rogers ‘Ultimate’ Internet
• Great customer service from Rogers
• The right way to view Netflix in Canada
• Fight Back against corporate trickery with Ellen Roseman’s insider tips
• Buyer beware: the best way to measure intent
• Reasons to be cynical
• What’s your financial Plan B?
• The power of redundancy

Podcast 226

direct download | Internet Archive page | iTunes

PS Would you rather have faster Internet access or unlimited data?

CHOCOLATE, PRICE-FIXING AND SALMONELLA POISONING

I like chocolate.
I don't like price-fixing.
I hate salmonella poisoning.

The quest for money leads to bad behaviour.

After a five year investigation, three major chocolate makers got charged with price-fixing this month (Toronto Star, Jun 6, 2013):

• Hershey (Kisses, Oh Henry, Reese. Skor)
• Mars (Bounty, Mars, M&M, Snickers)
• Nestle (Aero, After Eight, Kit Kat, Smarties)

A national distributor, ITWAL is charged too.

What About Cadbury?

Cadbury (Caramilk, Crunchie, Dairy Milk, Wunderbar) is noticeably absent from the price-fixing charges. They got immunity by reporting the problem to Competition Bureau in 2007.

Confession

Yesterday, Hershey pleaded guilty and has been fined $4 million (CBC News, Toronto Star, Jun 21, 2013). This is lenient because Hershey informed the Competition Bureau in 2007, cooperated with the investigation, didn’t implement the price increases and fired the people involved.

Class Actions

The companies already paid $23.2 million to settle class action lawsuits:

• Cadbury: $5.7 million (seems odd since they weren’t charged with price-fixing)
• Hershey: $5.3 million
• Mars: $3.2 million
• Nestle: $9 million

They didn’t admit any wrongdoing, but since when do companies spend millions without a reason?

Making More Money

There are various ways to make more money such as increasing efficiency (e.g., Walmart), using cheaper ingredients and making more desirable products (e.g., Apple).

How do you charge higher-than-market prices when what you sell is much like a commodity? If you try, your competitors might grab market share and force you to drop your price unless buyers must have your brand. For many products, price affects demand. You may be willing to pay more for Coke than Pepsi. As the gap grows, you'll likely decide that Pepsi is a suitable substitute.

There are other games that companies can play. Different chocolate bars have different weight and ingredients. You can boost profits by using cheaper ingredients with names that people can't pronounce. You can reduce the package size. Rather, you can keep the package the same size but reduce the weight and volume of the contents. You'll likely be caught by a blogger somewhere but may not get enough publicity to affect sales.

Another way to boost profits is to get competitors to raise their prices too. If there's no cheaper option, buyers can't save by switching. This is price-fixing and illegal. There are numerous examples. Here is a small sampling from around the world:

• British Airways: $547 million fine for fuel surcharges (CNN, Aug 2007), cut in half last year (The Telegraph, Apr 2012)
• Cathay Pacific Airways: fined $1.5 million (The Standard, Jun 21, 2013)
• De Beers: $295 million (Star Tribune, May 2013)
• Electronics makers (LG, Panasonic, Phillips, Technicolor, Toshiba): fined $1.92 billion (New York Times, Dec 2012)
• LCD makers: fined $585 million (New York Times, Nov 2008)
• Mastercard and Visa: $7.25 billion for interchange fees (Bloomberg, May 25, 2013)
• North Face: $4.62 million (Korea Times, Apr 2012)
• Penguin: fined $75 million for ebooks (Apple Insider, May 2013)
• Samsung ($22.6M) and Hynix ($15.6M) for DRAM prices (newswire.ca, May 31, 2013)

Since competitors tend to match price points, it's difficult to tell whether collusion is taking place. Sometimes we find out thanks to insiders.

Tainted Chocolate

While price-fixing is bad enough, you wouldn't want to get salmonella poisoning too.

November 2006

Back in November 2006, Hershey recalled 25 products for possible contamination before anyone got sick (CBC News). The ingredient and cause were known but the public was never informed (Food Production Daily). At least the company acted appropriately. They now leave our story and the real culprits enter.

June 2007 (7 months later)

The recalled chocolate was to be destroyed but pallets were stolen from a recycling depot. The chocolate was sold in convenience stores in southern Ontario (CBC News).

Thieves are in the business of stealing but don’t vendors care about their customers? The stores probably bought the tainted chocolate at a discount and figured that no one would know since you can't tell by looking at the label or the chocolate. Why would you even check when you trust the store to sell fresh product? If you did get sick, how would you know the cause? You might even forget you bought the chocolate.

Oct 2008 (2 years later)

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency found that tainted chocolate was still on sale in Toronto two years later (CBC News). They found 640 bad chocolate bars in five stores. Who knows what they missed.

Chocolate doesn't stay fresh that long. Maybe the bars don't have Best Before dates. Imagine how much chocolate was stolen for some to remain available two years later.
Who’s on the side of your sweet tooth?

Links

• Chocolate price-fixing costs candy makers $23M (CBC News, Sep 17, 2013) (new)
• Price Fixing (Competition Bureau)
• Cadbury Adams told competition bureau about alleged chocolate price-fixing (Toronto Star, Jun 11, 2013)
• Nestle Canada, others charged with chocolate price-fixing (Toronto Star, Jun 6, 2013)
• Chocolate class actions (classaction.ca)
• Notice of settlement approval in the matter of chocolate products class action litigation (newswire.ca, Sep 2011)
• Why you can’t (and don’t) buy on price
• Noxious Chinese drywall and beyond
• Do advisors put their interests first?
• What’s worse than fine print?
• Check your pizza literacy
• image courtesy of Neal Fowler

Podcast 225

direct download | Internet Archive page | iTunes

PS Let's see what happens when Mars and Nestle go on trial in October