Rogers says Canadian iPhone 3G plans to start at $60 for 150 mins

[AppleInsider]

Rogers Wireless, Canada's exclusive service provider for Apple's upcoming iPhone 3G handset, announced Friday that monthly service plans for the new touch-screen handset will start at $60 for 150 anytime minutes, 75 outgoing text messages, and 400 megabytes of internet data.

The wireless carrier said 400MB of data will provide subscribers with "up to 200,000 text emails or 3,100 web pages or 1,360 photo attachments." A $75 plan will include 300 anytime minutes, 100 outgoing text messages and 750MB of data -- good for "up to 380,000 text emails or 5,900 web pages or 2,560 photo attachments."

For $100 per month, Canadian iPhone users get 600 anytime minutes, 200 outgoing text messages and 1GB of data, which should be sufficient for "up to 524,000 text emails or 8,000 web pages or 3,500 photo attachments." Finally, a high-end plan priced at $115 per month offers 800 anytime minutes, 300 outgoing text messages and 2GB of data -- good for " up to 1,048,000 text emails or 16,000 web pages or 7,000 photo attachments."

All price plans require a three-year contract and include unlimited weekend and evening minutes, unlimited Visual Voicemail, and unlimited incoming text messages. Each plan also includes free Wi-Fi access at all Rogers and Fido hotspots.

Separately, Rogers will offer two voice value packs for popular wireless features: a $15 monthly value pack including Caller ID, Who Called, Caller Ring Trax, 2,500 Sent Text Messages and 2,500 Call Forwarding Minutes; and a $20 monthly value pack including Caller ID, Who Called, Caller Ring Trax, 10,000 Sent Text Messages and 6:00 p.m. Early Evening Calling and 2,500 Call Forwarding Minutes.

Rogers Wireless iPhone 3G Price Plans

Data Usage - What You Get

Fido, Canada's fourth largest wireless provider and Rogers partner also announced Friday that it will offer an identical set of iPhone 3G service plans.
[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ] (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=4265)

[cameronj]

Since when is caller ID given space on a feature sheet?

[solipsism]

That is actually good for Rogers.

Now why can't AT&T include SMS as part of the data. I have a feeling a class action is brewing with the US price gouging of text messages among its main carriers.

[webhead]

This doesn't seem too bad, but still too expensive for me. If the basic package was $40.00/month I would definitely get an iPhone next month, but I think I'll wait until the monthly rates come down. I really don't see why we have to pay a monthly fee for internet access on our home computers and on our wireless phones as well. I'm only paying for the internet once, paying twice for the same service is just nuts!

Is there a device out there that can broadcast your wi-fi connection from your home computer strong enough to cover your own home city, or is that just dreaming?

[dellarsoul]

Since when is "incoming SMS" given space on a feature sheet?

[Restalot]

Don't forget about the $8/month "system access fee" (= Ted Rogers 'bet I fooled you to think this was a gov't surcharge' Stupidity tax)

And the $0.50 911 access fee's...

So the basic plan with Caller ID (who doesn't want/deserve caller ID?!?) is:

$60 Base Fee
$15 Caller ID (and other less know/unused features)
$8 Ted Roger's Stupidity Tax
$0.50 911 Fee
======
$83.50 /mo
+ 5% GST
+ 7% PST (depends on province)
======
$93.52/mo
x 3years
======
$3,366.72

Old Teddy will be very happy.

[bsenka]

Wow. I knew Rogers was going to hose us, but even I didn't think it would be that bad.

[Virgil-TB2]

This doesn't seem too bad, but still too expensive for me. If the basic package was $40.00/month I would definitely get an iPhone next month, but I think I'll wait until the monthly rates come down. I really don't see why we have to pay a monthly fee for internet access on our home computers and on our wireless phones as well. I'm only paying for the internet once, paying twice for the same service is just nuts!

Is there a device out there that can broadcast your wi-fi connection from your home computer strong enough to cover your own home city, or is that just dreaming?Yeah, despite how "revolutionary" this pricing is for Rogers, it still pretty much sucks. This is what happens when you allow for monopolies in areas of the economy that should really be "given" services.

The base package is $60, but with system access fees and taxes you are still talking more like $75 bucks a month. If you have any overages or roaming fees, then more like $85 or even a hundred. And that's for the cheapest package, and for what? A phone.

I also still have to pay $40 a month to the monopolist land-line phone company for a line I don't even use. And I still have to pay $90 or so to the monopolist cable company just to watch TV.

There is no reason, given the actual costs of providing them, that these services could not be priced at about a quarter of what they are now and if there was some kind of competition in the market they would drop to that in a week. I'm not opposed to people making money but why as a society we allow monopolistic companies to prey on people in this way is beyond me.

[bigmc6000]

Looks like Rogers would cost me the same as AT&T except with AT&T I actually get a bit more.

450 mins + Unlimited Data + Unlimited Texts = $90

Rogers
300 mins + 700MB of Data + the $15 plan for 2,500 texts = $90

I think those 150 mins are huge tho. Looks like those in the US aren't the only ones getting the shaft on this deal.

As far as the incoming text message thing - I think that'd be great as it would cut my text message usage nearly in half... Then I might not need the unlimited package, just the 1500 package from AT&T (AT&T counts each text message, incoming or outgoing, against your allotment)

[wheatieheel]

That is actually good for Rogers.

Now why can't AT&T include SMS as part of the data. I have a feeling a class action is brewing with the US price gouging of text messages among its main carriers.

Did you see the prices Rogers is charging? They ARE charging extra for SMS. And there is no unlimited data plan with Rogers. Rogers is the definition of price gouging. All of the Canadian carriers are ridiculous. Look at the minute and data limitations for the above price points.

[mariofreak85]

And I thought AT&T was bending customers over....

[ajmas]

Is it possible to use the data mode only in Wi-Fi mode, without using the 3G data mode? If I could do that, then it would allow me to pay something more reasonable and then limit my data uses to where there are Wi-Fi hot spots.

[Booga]

And I thought AT&T was bending customers over....
Yeah, enough articles saying the US has it worse than other countries in the cellphone industry... we may not be as good as east Asia, but we're a far sight better than Canada!

[Toprock]

Not to mention it's only available on a 3 year contract. 2 would be fine with me, but as much as I want an Iphone there's no way I'd sign that.

[webhead]

Yeah, despite how "revolutionary" this pricing is for Rogers, it still pretty much sucks. This is what happens when you allow for monopolies in areas of the economy that should really be "given" services.

The base package is $60, but with system access fees and taxes you are still talking more like $75 bucks a month. If you have any overages or roaming fees, then more like $85 or even a hundred. And that's for the cheapest package, and for what? A phone.

I also still have to pay $40 a month to the monopolist land-line phone company for a line I don't even use. And I still have to pay $90 or so to the monopolist cable company just to watch TV.

There is no reason, given the actual costs of providing them, that these services could not be priced at about a quarter of what they are now and if there was some kind of competition in the market they would drop to that in a week. I'm not opposed to people making money but why as a society we allow monopolistic companies to prey on people in this way is beyond me.


Agreeded, would I pay a separate electric bill to charge my cell phone? No. So why do I have to pay for home inetrnet access and cell phone internet access??? Plus add to that cost the yearly cost of mobileme.com. I think I'll hope that free wi-fi access makes it to Edmonton soon, then I can use an iPod Touch for email and internet, because getting dinged twice for the same service is bogus!!!

[lfmorrison]

Since when is caller ID given space on a feature sheet?

Caller ID is a separately billed feature with every major Canadian wireless carrier, at least in Atlantic Canada. For their prepaid plans, last time I looked into it, most of the carriers generally threw in caller ID automatically, but for their contract plans they usually don't include it in the advertised plan price and charge extra to add it.

[Matthew Yohe]

Wow. A friend of mine said Rogers is a criminal... I didn't believe him until I saw these prices.

[solipsism]

Did you see the prices Rogers is charging? They ARE charging extra for SMS. And there is no unlimited data plan with Rogers. Rogers is the definition of price gouging. All of the Canadian carriers are ridiculous. Look at the minute and data limitations for the above price points.

It looked like SMS was counted as data.

[whuzza]

I'm a Rogers Wireless customer and I'm currently paying $65 CND/month for 1GB data access on EDGE on my iPhone. No, there is no cheaper plan, even though I only use 15-20 MB of data per month.

Without a plan, Rogers charges a ridiculous $30.72 per 1 MB.

Therefore, a $60 plan that includes 400 MB on 3G with 150 minutes, unlimited evening (9PM? Bah.) and weekends is a decent deal for the only GSM provider in Canada. It even includes voicemail, which used to be a $7 add-on.

Unfortunately, the new scheme forces people who want Caller ID to pay an additional $20/month. Rogers has never offered just Caller ID as a separate add-on.

it possible to use the data mode only in Wi-Fi mode, without using the 3G data mode? If I could do that, then it would allow me to pay something more reasonable and then limit my data uses to where there are Wi-Fi hot spots.

With the current iPhone, yes. The data access gateway for EDGE (APN) is "internet.com" for Rogers Wireless. (Settings -> General -> Network -> EDGE -> APN)

If you change this value, the iPhone will not be able to connect via EDGE. However, you can still connect to any Wi-Fi hotspot.

However, you will not be able to buy an Apple iPhone 3G without a phone plan. You're forced to sign on a minimum of $60/month 3-year plan to buy the iPhone at the $199/$299 price.

[webhead]

add in the cost of mobileme.com as well, because you'll want to sync all your stuff with your computer too.

[Tulkas]

Here is the actual press release for Fido:
http://prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/06-27-2008/0004840127&EDATE=

So, what does this mean for those of us on EPP plans or other nonstandard voice plans? Since it doesn't appear they will be offering data on top of existing voice plans, will we have to give up our current plans? That would be complete shit.

ihaterogersihaterogersihaterogersihaterogersihater ogersihaterogersihaterogersihaterogersihaterogersi haterogersihaterogersihaterogersihaterogersihatero gersihaterogersihaterogersihaterogersihaterogersih aterogersihaterogersihaterogersihaterogersihaterog ersihaterogersihaterogersihaterogersihaterogersiha terogersihaterogersihaterogersihaterogersihateroge rsihaterogers

And from Rogers site:
http://www.rogers.com/web/content/wireless-products/iphone_voice_data_packages

[iVlad]

OMG we're so spoiled in US. :err:

[rener]

Does Apple Inside own shares of Rogers?

Why not report on them accurately? Why not compare Rogers' rates with other iPhone carriers? Why not try to help out your Canadian readers?

Fido is not Rogers' partner. Rogers owns Fido, which is why they are a GSM monopoly in Canada, and engage in all sorts of anti-competitive practices, without any government oversight or consumer redress.

These plans are hideous.

[tuncer]

Wow, Rogers takes a dump on Canadian customers yet again. No wonder Rogers is nicknamed Robers...

Unfortunately I'm with Rogers...bring on T-Mobile Canada!

[whuzza]

add in the cost of mobileme.com as well, because you'll want to sync all your stuff with your computer too.

Not really. I'm using Google Mail and Google Calendar with my iPhone today. I don't really need MobileMe, especially if it costs $99/year.

My iPhone uses IMAP to access Google Mail. So e-mail is always accessible through the Web or my phone.

The calendar syncs with Google Calendar (through Spanning Sync) when I charge my iPhone every night. It's not as slick as MobileMe, but it's cheaper at $25/year.

[apprehensive]

I hate this company so much!

I thought Apple demanded unlimited data plans?!

What a downer.

[John_Drake]

OH. MY. GOD!!!

Rogers you incredible bastards!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm so f-ing happy I'm moving to the US in September. If I wasn't though I wouldn't even consider purchasing an iPhone with these plans.

Fellow Canadians lets make a stand here and now and not get locked into a horrible contract with Rogers.

This is absolutely, unequivocally unacceptable.

[rothmans]

First off, $60 for a complete plan is in the ballpark for Canada. I'm not happy about it but that is what friends who have owned treos have had to pay.

The real problem is coverage. Canada's old telephone companies are provincially and/or regionally based. 15 years ago they formed an loose partnership to better manage long distance and a new thing - the Internet. This alliance/partnership has long since faded.

Rogers is a relative upstart evolving out of the cable TV business. And while they have a presence in all provinces - making them the only real national company - there coverage outside larger cities is sad. Where I live it is considered a joke. That is not an exaggeration.

In addition to the old companies and Rogers there are a bunch of smaller companies. None of these smaller companies have there own network of cell towers. All carries are required by law to rent out usage of there cell networks to their competition. Fido, and most other non-traditional companies, use the Rogers network.

I have always felt that this situation has presented a dilemma for Apple. Do we go with Rogers and have one national carrier for the iPhone in Canada - or do we try to manage relationships with a bunch of regional (and far better established) companies? In the largest country on the planet with a population of 33 million (less than California) the answer was a no-brainer.

I have used Macs since 1985. As do all my kids. I have run three different Mac-based businesses. I am also am Apple stockholder.

I will not be buying an iPhone because if I go more than 30 miles from my home I will have no coverage. Fewer bars in fewer places.

[durangotang]

What a f*cking joke. I mean really. But at least you Canadians get healthcare ;-)

[solipsism]

Why not report on them accurately? Why not compare Rogers' rates with other iPhone carriers? Why not try to help out your Canadian readers?

The Rogers/Fido partnership was incorrect, but I see no reason why AI should compare and contrast the plans from Rogers in Canada to AT&T in the US to 02 in the UK, etc. I don't recall them doing that yet for any carrier, so why now? What would be the point of it? Different countries have different costs depending on terrestrial size, per capita coverage, per capita density, and government support. There is also things like free incoming calls in the EU that make it impossible to compare to countries that account for incoming minutes.

If you want to compare Rogers with other carriers in Canada, the US, or elsewhere feel free. I'm sure there are plenty here who would be interested (me included) in seeing how much Canadian cell service really sucks in comparison, but please try to cover all the bases and be objective in your assessment.

[solipsism]

Title: Unconcievable

This is absolutely, unequivocally unacceptable.

I am under the impression that 400MB for $60 is cheap for Rogers. Please correct me if wrong.

PS: While un- and in- mean the same thing they have different origins. the first is Germanic and the latter is Latin. 'Unconceivable' is an inconventional spelling for 'inconceivable'.

[krafix]

Don't forget: Evenings start at 9pm without extra

[rener]

AI has reported "incorrectly" on Rogers before:

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/08/02/05/rogers_unlimited_data_plan_an_inroad_for_iphone_in _canada.html

Every little piece of BS disinformation hurts the cause for reasonable data in Canada because it may make just one more person think it's no longer a problem, or Rogers isn't the GSM monopoly, or whatever.

And AI doesn't have to post anything, of course, but if posting something would be of great benefit to part of their readership, then why not? Heck, get Dilger to post it. He's on fire lately.

Forget Spain, Prince. Get into the Rogers BS.


The Rogers/Fido partnership was incorrect, but I see no reason why AI should compare and contrast the plans from Rogers in Canada to AT&T in the US to 02 in the UK, etc. I don't recall them doing that yet for any carrier, so why now? What would be the point of it? Different countries have different costs depending on terrestrial size, per capita coverage, per capita density, and government support. There is also things like free incoming calls in the EU that make it impossible to compare to countries that account for incoming minutes.

[ajmas]

Which countries are going to be selling the iPhone without a plan, unlocked? I am almost tempted to pay $700 for the iPhone and then use it as I wish, without EDGE or 3G data.

[Cam'ron]

I am under the impression that 400MB for $60 is cheap for Rogers. Please correct me if wrong.

PS: While un- and in- mean the same thing they have different origins. the first is Germanic and the latter is Latin. 'Unconceivable' is an inconventional spelling for 'inconceivable'.

Yeah, I have no problem with the data side of things. If the $60 offered 200 min and 200 txt (not 150 and 75) I would be very happy to take it. It looks like I might have to bend over for the $75 plan.

[munkynuts]

In the largest country on the planet with a population of 33 million (less than California) the answer was a no-brainer.

That would be Russia. 17,098,242 sq/km vs 9,984,670 sq/km

[Tulkas]

I am under the impression that 400MB for $60 is cheap for Rogers. Please correct me if wrong.

PS: While un- and in- mean the same thing they have different origins. the first is Germanic and the latter is Latin. 'Unconceivable' is an inconventional spelling for 'inconceivable'.
No, it isn't cheap. Rogers/Fido offer other 3G "unlimited" date/browsing packages for $7, $11, $15 and $20. For that, you keep your existing voice plans and add the 3G data package on top. The iPhone packages throw your existing voice plans out. Many people have grandfathered voice plans or EPP plans for negotiated retention plans. These people are SOL with the iPhone. They have to give up their existing voice plans and go with a canned voice+data plan that potentially gives them fewer minutes and certainly fewer voice side features (like call display).

Their other unlimited 3G data plans will not be offered on their iPhones.

[ronster]

Not surprised, as Rogers has a stranglehold on GSM in Canada. Come on emerging carriers, get your #$%@ together and build on the new spectrum you spent billions on.

I guess if I want an iPhone, it the v1 unlocked one for me.

[solipsism]

No, it isn't cheap. Rogers/Fido offer other 3G "unlimited" date/browsing packages for $7, $11, $15 and $20.

That makes no sense unless you quantify it. Id est, why would I choose the $20/month unlmited data plan if their an unlimited data plan for $7.

[rener]

That makes no sense unless you quantify it. Id est, why would I choose the $20/month unlmited data plan if their an unlimited data plan for $7.

Because its BS, and deliberately confusing BS.

The other "unlimited" plans are not unlimited, they only work under an incredibly complex series of conditions like: only on feature phones, not smartphones. Only on WAP browsers, not real browsers. Only on Rogers' branded browsers. Only on links from Rogers' page. Etc.

They've also experimented with an ever-increasingly confusing set of plans for Blackberry or Nokia unlimited email but not web, or vice versa.

EPIC FAIL.

[Cam'ron]

That makes no sense unless you quantify it. Id est, why would I choose the $20/month unlmited data plan if their an unlimited data plan for $7.

$7 is for unlimited WAP browsing, that's it. Not a very good feature, IMO. At least with the iPhone plan I know whatever I do on the device will be covers and I won't go over the allotted data provided.

[ronster]

$7 is for unlimited WAP browsing, that's it. Not a very good feature, IMO. At least with the iPhone plan I know whatever I do on the device will be covers and I won't go over the allotted data provided.


I don't think so. Knowing Rogers, as soon as you go over the allotted level, the $$$$ per MB kicks in.

I think Rogers is banking on people breaching the threshold and the dollars would be flowing in.

[rener]

For Canadians:

http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/epic/site/cb-bc.nsf/en/01260e.html

[bcode]

Doing a quick test using Facebook as the sample site... at 1.24MB, the 400MB data plan equals 333 webpages a month. NO WHERE NEAR 3000 sites... maybe if you were surfing text-based sites google.ca or the wiki homepage. But anything with an image on the page is going blow those estimates all to hell.

[John_Drake]

I am under the impression that 400MB for $60 is cheap for Rogers. Please correct me if wrong.

PS: While un- and in- mean the same thing they have different origins. the first is Germanic and the latter is Latin. 'Unconceivable' is an inconventional spelling for 'inconceivable'.
Well $65 gets you 1 Gb right now over Edge on Rogers. The point is though that one shouldn't have to justify it by saying "Oh well, it's pretty good... for Rogers". We should be getting a better deal! Plain and simple. Our dollar is on par with the US right now and has been for a while. Is $60 US a good deal for 400Mb of data? I think not. Why are we continually being denied a true unlimited data plan? It's issues like these coupled with incredibly poor customer service that cause Rogers to be hated, but ultimately a necessary evil as there's no GSM competition here.

PS. I probably put "UN" because I was thinking about the next word "unacceptable". Oh well, as you pointed out, it wasn't exactly wrong.

[polar315]

Was very excited about getting an iPhone, but did keep in mind that Rogers would do its best to kill you on the charges. Unless we get some real competition up here will not be getting an iphone. Happy with the BB for now and most likely the forseeable future.

I heard even Ted Rogers can't afford one:lol:

[ronster]

For Canadians:

http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/epic/site/cb-bc.nsf/en/01260e.html

It won't matter now that the wireless auctions are closing. The Bureau and CRTC would just point out there WILL be competition sometime soon.

Let's hope some of these emerging carriers move quickly.

[bigmc6000]

Is $60 US a good deal for 400Mb of data? I think not. Why are we continually being denied a true unlimited data plan?


Well - idk. Some folks may opt for saving the $10 a month (+tax) if they don't plan on using 400MB via the cell tower (a lot of people go Wi-Fi hopping these days).

However, the fact that there is no unlimited plan is just a complete crock and until there's some real competition it's going to stay that way. AT&T has a little competition but not much that's why all our friends over in the EU are getting better deals than here in North America - massive competition.

Also - the mins on those plans look pretty crappy. Only positive I found in all of that was free incoming texts...

[Tulkas]

That makes no sense unless you quantify it. Id est, why would I choose the $20/month unlmited data plan if their an unlimited data plan for $7.

You are right, they don't make sense. I believe that is intentional. There are some differentiating features. First, when they claim 'unlimited' you have to realize this only includes using Fido/Rogers sanctioned apps and does not include MMS messaging, or email. It is only browsing data. When I called them, they claim it is not limited to a few preprogrammed sites or WAP sites. So, the differet plans do differ based on email levels, MMS options, number of text messages.

The point was, that you could add the various data plans onto your existing voice package.

[Tulkas]

$7 is for unlimited WAP browsing, that's it. Not a very good feature, IMO. At least with the iPhone plan I know whatever I do on the device will be covers and I won't go over the allotted data provided.
The Fido reps I spoke to about this plan last week said it is absolutely not limited to WAP sites*. The $7 does only include web browsing though, so you are right, it is still very limited.

* I am fully open to the possibility that the were lying or were referring to the $15 or $20 plans.

[Cam'ron]

The Fido reps I spoke to about this plan last week said it is absolutely not limited to WAP sites*. The $7 does only include web browsing though, so you are right, it is still very limited.

* I am fully open to the possibility that the were lying or were referring to the $15 or $20 plans.

Well, the phones that plan works with all pretty much have crap browsers that don't do real html. I don't think it supports the N95, I could be wrong though. Either way, all you get is browsing. At least with my gouging iPhone plan I can go to YouTube, do GPS shite, browse, download music, etc. I'm not overly ecstatic about this pricing but they finally have data prices that aren't completely insane (related to past pricing of Rogers only of course).

[Tulkas]

Well, the phones that plan works with all pretty much have crap browsers that don't do real html. I don't think it supports the N95, I could be wrong though. Either way, all you get is browsing. At least with my gouging iPhone plan I can go to YouTube, do GPS shite, browse, download music, etc. I'm not overly ecstatic about this pricing but they finally have data prices that aren't completely insane (related to past pricing of Rogers only of course).

What I don't like about them is that I cannot add the iphone data portion to my existing voice plan. For me to get an iphone plan and not lose current features, I would need the $75 iphone plan + the $20 'Value' pack add-on. I currently get 300 daytime, unlimited nights/weekends starting at 7PM and call display, call forwarding, voice mail etc. The closest iPhone plan from Rogers/Fido is $75 (to get the 300 daytime minutes) and I would need the $20 to get my call display and 7PM evenings back. That is $95, which is over 3x the monthly rate I pay now. Essentially, I am paying $65 more per month for the data side. That I cannot just add on data to my existing plan for some reasonable rate is bullshit.

I was going to get one, but absolutely will not be upgrading in the near or medium term until the plans drop in price or Rogers/Fido announces how they will handle existing customers with existing plans. I should not have to give up features to get the iphone nor should I have to triple my monthly bill to get the iphone and keep my existing features. These are currently the options provided, so I am a no.

[Texadian]

Wow I am a Canadian and I would rather see Apple pull the iPhone 3G from the market than let this jack ass company take advantage of the people.

[jabohn]

At Canada.com, the end of the article states:

Rogers said data-less plans for the iPhone, with just voice and basic text, will start at $15 a month.

If this is true, it might be the only way I can afford an iPhone!
Of course, the $15 is probably minimal minutes and doesn't include the SAF etc.

[Tulkas]

At Canada.com, the end of the article states:

Rogers said data-less plans for the iPhone, with just voice and basic text, will start at $15 a month.

If this is true, it might be the only way I can afford an iPhone!
Of course, the $15 is probably minimal minutes and doesn't include the SAF etc.
Now, if they would go the other way too...have a data only portion that you could get to add-on to your existing voice plan.

Too bad. I would have liked an iPhone. Rogers could have played fair and would have attracted many more new users. As it is, here I am, an Apple user since 1982 and an existing Fido/Rogers customer (~8-9 years) who has been patiently waiting for the Canadian release for a year. I a SW developer in the tech industry and my office is surrounded by RIM staff and offices and I have never had an interesting in paying for a BB. I am a perfect, brand loyal, target customer and I will not be buying an iPhone from Rogers unless something changes. If they can't get me to buy (who should have been their easiest sale), then there are probably many, many others who feel the same and will also not buy. The have blown their opportunity by using the pent up demand for the iPhone for a little gouging. Perhaps, when Canadian numbers fall below expectations and certainly below other countries offering decent plans, Rogers will wake up and make some corrections.

[Peruchito]

For Canadians:

http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/epic/site/cb-bc.nsf/en/01260e.html

wicked. thanks man. i will post this on the other forums

[ecking]

Oh what the f*. I honestly thought apple had straightened out rogers similar to AT&T, but wow. I'm gonna try to ebay one or something.

[e90tt]

Wish AT&T would offer an unlimited plan such as Sprint's Simply Everything Unlimited plan for $99.99/month. I think that is a great plan but do not know how well the Sprint Network is. My plan just ended for Nextel, and am deciding about the Instinct from Sprint or wait for the New 3G iPhone. Total additional cost over contract for same option is extra $720. Big difference, but gotta see if it is worth it.

[rain]

What a joke. But not unexpected. Rogers is a horrible horrible company.
I was waiting to cancel my Razor with Rogers until the iPhone came out, I guess I can now go ahead and cancel it. You would have to be extremely wealthy, or a complete idiot to sign that contract. Mind you, the government imposed a law that only lets them sue you for a maximum of $250 for breaking a cell contract.
Looks like a lot of people are going to get bad credit and a $250 lawsuit.

Looks like iPod Touch for me.
I hope this spawns a more open access network, hotspots. I also hope a meteor falls on Rogers HQ and kills them all.

[Tulkas]

I hope this spawns a more open access network, hotspots. I also hope a meteor falls on Rogers HQ and kills them all.
I hope they include a barrel of lube with each contract. Otherwise there are going to be a lot of ripped off Canadians walking around sore.

[MacCheech]

What about a family plan?
I have a family plan with Bell and I was hoping getting one with Rogers.
I live in Montreal, work in another city (50km away) and my girl lives in another place (another 50km away). I was counting on voice plan that includes some long distance time (1000 min or illimited) to communicate with work or my girl (like I have with Bell) and then add a 30$ or so data plan.

If I quit Bell for Rogers, we'll be needing a cell phone for her (I was even considering getting her an iPhone) and an iPhone for me. But what will be the final costs? For what us frenchmen call "une bebelle" (a toy)...

Gee, I hope on july 11th Rogers will have somekind of flexibility... (I am dreaming).

I cant wait to see the coming of Videotron in this game. Only then us Canadian, will finally get fair service for our money.

[Tofino]

well - i can't say i'm surprised. just disappointed.

after ten years without a cell phone i was ready to consider getting tethered to the net full time again - i guess my boycott of canadian cellphone rates will continue... good thing the iPod Touch does most of what i want and open hot spots are plentyful even in the small village of Tofino at the end of the road...

there is NO WAY i would sign up for a plan that cost more than 100 loonies a month for THREE years. i've been burned before and i swore that would never happen again. i can't say i have much faith in the emerging competition either - and don't even get me started on the CRTC.

EPIC FAIL is right!

[Stormchild]

What a surprise, there's no unlimited data plan AT ALL, and it's a god damn rip off just to get basic voice service on this thing.

I'm not content to just blame Rogers any more. Every big asshole corporate will screw you if there are no laws and regulations stopping them. Canada is still living in the stone age of cell phone service, and our pathetic government doesn't do a damn thing about it.

F*ck this stupid country.

[anantksundaram]

While un- and in- mean the same thing they have different origins. the first is Germanic and the latter is Latin.

Wow. I learnt something today!:D

[anantksundaram]

Although I feel very badly for our Canadian brethren, I do have to say that you guys had me LMAO-ing most of the way through this thread! I am very impressed by your sense of humor and grace even whilst getting totally violated.

[Frank777]

The fault for this nonsense lies squarely with the CRTC (Canada's incompetent version of the FCC.)

By letting Rogers purchase Fido, they gave Canada a GSM monopoly and Apple had little leverage in negotiating carriage.

My Treo 650 will now take me into 2009. Hopefully things will get better when the new GSM provider gets up and running.

[ouragan]

Don't forget about the $8/month "system access fee" (= Ted Rogers 'bet I fooled you to think this was a gov't surcharge' Stupidity tax)

And the $0.50 911 access fee's...

So the basic plan with Caller ID (who doesn't want/deserve caller ID?!?) is:

$60 Base Fee
$15 Caller ID (and other less know/unused features)
$8 Ted Roger's Stupidity Tax
$0.50 911 Fee
======
$83.50 /mo
+ 5% GST
+ 7% PST (depends on province)
======
$93.52/mo
x 3years
======
$3,366.72

Old Teddy will be very happy.


Thanks for the calculation and the pun (Government Stupidity Tax). I didn't realize that the cost was going to be that bad.

In Quebec, Montreal based Fido is still big. I believe that it was bought first by ATT Canada, and then ATT Canada was bought by Rogers to launch its cellphone service. That's why Fido is a partner to Rogers and shares the same rates.

Thanks for the calculation.

:\:\:\

[parasubvert]

Doing a quick test using Facebook as the sample site... at 1.24MB, the 400MB data plan equals 333 webpages a month. NO WHERE NEAR 3000 sites... maybe if you were surfing text-based sites google.ca or the wiki homepage. But anything with an image on the page is going blow those estimates all to hell.

I've used an iPhone since last June on the 1 GB / $65 plan. I use my iPhone *a lot* but I frankly never cracked 180 MB in a month. That includes facebook, livejournal, blog browsing, news sites, youtube, etc.

This plan is way better than their prior pricing.

[parasubvert]

The fault for this nonsense lies squarely with the CRTC (Canada's incompetent version of the FCC.)

By letting Rogers purchase Fido, they gave Canada a GSM monopoly and Apple had little leverage in negotiating carriage.

My Treo 650 will now take me into 2009. Hopefully things will get better when the new GSM provider gets up and running.

This has nothing to do with the CRTC. Telus was going to buy Fido, and Rogers outbid them. That's basically it. They *became* competitive with Bell and Telus through that move -- Rogers wasn't close to its position back then.

The only hope you have for another GSM provider is if Telus decides to switch networks. That's a huge multi-billion dollar investment that may or may not happen. There was a rumour about it last year -- nothing since to my knowledge. Bell Mobility likely wouldn't make such a move due to the capital costs.

What Rogers is doing isn't anti-competitive, or price gouging. They've *dropped* their data rates to levels that would have been unfathomable in Canada only 2 years ago. They're charging what the market will bear -- and yes I agree they would be better off if they dropped the prices even further (3G has been in the Toronto area for 2+ years -- does anyone use it??) but I think they're taking a wait and see approach.

Let's not forget that $60 is the same cost as the basic iPhone U.S. plan and for most purposes is similar. Canadian plans are *always* more expensive minute-per-minute on any carrier. And you'd have to be on your iPhone a shit ton -- more than your home computer! -- to crack 400 MB. Not that some business people won't , especially those with large email attachments, but businesses pay for that. Does it suck it's more than the U.S.? Sure! The only way it will get better is if the carriers start a price war. You're not likely going to get the government to force them to triple your minutes ;-)

All Telcos suck in their own ways , do you honestly think this would be better with Bell or Telus? It's fun to bitch about it but what else can ya do....

[Tulkas]

The fault for this nonsense lies squarely with the CRTC (Canada's incompetent version of the FCC.)

By letting Rogers purchase Fido, they gave Canada a GSM monopoly and Apple had little leverage in negotiating carriage.

My Treo 650 will now take me into 2009. Hopefully things will get better when the new GSM provider gets up and running.
Dead on. Rogers almost never operates in a field where they are not a monopoly. The family just is not smart enough to compete with others.

While the have to compete with other cellular providers, the CRTC decision meant they by buying Fido, they did not have to compete within the GSM market. Now that 3G is really differentiating the GSM network from Bell and Telus, they are using the single most desired phone on the market to profiteer on their monopoly.

[Tulkas]

Thanks for the calculation and the pun (Government Stupidity Tax). I didn't realize that the cost was going to be that bad.

In Quebec, Montreal based Fido is still big. I believe that it was bought first by ATT Canada, and then ATT Canada was bought by Rogers to launch its cellphone service. That's why Fido is a partner to Rogers and shares the same rates.

Thanks for the calculation.

:\:\:\

No, Rogers bought ATT Canada and launch the Rogers network before buying Fido. Rogers couldn't get customers and Fido had a more advanced network, so buying Fido got them a million or so new customers and a better network...and a GSM monopoly.

[success]

You'd think they'd offer Rogers/Shaw cable subscribers discounts on iPhone plans.

They'd make even more $$ then with all the Telus/Bell switchers.

[Tulkas]

This has nothing to do with the CRTC. Telus was going to buy Fido, and Rogers outbid them. That's basically it. They *became* competitive with Bell and Telus through that move -- Rogers wasn't close to its position back then.



Rogers wasn't close because the were incompetent.

And it was the CRTC that allowed the purchse, which a)immediately reduced competition in the overall cell market (resulting in an immediate doubling of overage and LD charges for Fido customers) b) immediately created a GSM monopoly. For either and both of these reasons, the CRTC should have done their job and rejected the purchase. Imaging Rogers having to compete in a market. Their monopoly in cable gives them a huge warchest to move into new businesses, but unless the are a monopoly in that market, do they ever succeed?

[samab]

Just look at Italy's iphone prices --- 2 carriers selling iphones in Italy and the price is still high.

[Franco Borgo]

In the largest country on the planet with a population of 33 million (less than California) the answer was a no-brainer.


80% of the Canadian Land is human free :-) The area from Québec to Toronto has the same people density as most urban region in the US.

.

[Franco Borgo]

I do have some questions:
Does Rogers Plan include these like At&T does

1. Roll-over minutes ( I really want that)
2. Free long Distances call in the whole country
3. Free Roaming
and stuff like Call ID, Call forwarding etc. ?

Is it possible to ask Rogers to Cut my internet access once I have reach the 400MB Limit ?

I hope to built a chart to compare the iPhone plan in many country after July 11.

[Franco Borgo]

i can't say i have much faith in the emerging competition either - and don't even get me started on the CRTC.
EPIC FAIL is right!

I do not understand why the CRTC has allowed the Big Three to Bid on the soon to be release 700 MHz because the already have a network. The CRTC only kept 40% of the frequency to newcomers. They should have given all to new company.

I know the 700 MHZ has some advantage over higher frequency but I really doubt that Bell or Rogers are going to deploy all brand new equipment on the 700 MHz anytime soon.

I am missing something?

I really wish Google or AT&T would have bid in Canada. :-(

.

[icfireball]

I have a bandwidth limit on my home internet and let me tell you, it is a major bitch. I get 500 MB per 24 hour period and when I go over my limit, it get's deathly slow. And it's very easy to go over 500 MBs of bandwidth in one day. Even when I don't download anything, the average bandwidth per day is around 130 MB just for internet use. I know the bandwidth is a lot less on a phone, but it adds up quickly, especially if you download a song on the iTunes mobile store or something.

[icfireball]

U.S. is pretty bad for cell phone prices compared to Europe and Asia, but wow, I never knew until now how terribly bad Canadians have it with Rogers. I mean those prices are enough to make a grown man cry.

[icfireball]

And one more thing, a quick google search found this:

http://www.ihaterogers.ca/

[diazhill]

Ted Rogers trogers@rci.rogers.com

J Innes (VP) jinnes@rci.rogers.com

Jane Haitsma jhaitsma@rci.rogers.com

Please email them, politely, to express the disappointment you feel with the new iphone data plans

Also general contact form is here :

https://your.rogers.com/contact/contactus_main.asp

APPLE :

To email apple's media relations top guy

Simon Atkins ( Canada )
satkins@apple.com

and
The head corporate media guy in the USA

Steve Dowling
dowling@apple.com
(408) 974-1896

and the BIG honcho at Apple for communications is :

Katie Cotton
katiec@apple.com
Vice President of Worldwide Corporate Communications

[11thIndian]

The base package is $60, but with system access fees and taxes you are still talking more like $75 bucks a month. If you have any overages or roaming fees, then more like $85 or even a hundred. And that's for the cheapest package, and for what? A phone.

If all you want is a phone, I'm sure you can find something cheaper.

[diazhill]

www.fuckyourogers.com

[whuzza]

I do have some questions:
Does Rogers Plan include these like At&T does

1. Roll-over minutes ( I really want that)
2. Free long Distances call in the whole country
3. Free Roaming
and stuff like Call ID, Call forwarding etc. ?

Is it possible to ask Rogers to Cut my internet access once I have reach the 400MB Limit ?

I hope to built a chart to compare the iPhone plan in many country after July 11.

1. No rollover minutes.
2. Ha ha, no. Canada doesn't have a nationwide free LD like in the U.S.
3. No free roaming when using your phone outside your home calling region.

The only way to get caller ID is to purchase the $15 or $20 "value pack". Caller ID isn't available as a separate add-on to any plan. Same deal with call forwarding, it's only available as part of either "value pack".

Some employee pricing plans have caller ID bundled to the monthly rate, but no one knows whether there'll be any such plans for the iPhone 3G.

Like most carriers, Rogers does not inform you when you exceed your data limit. I found out the hard way from my next monthly bill. At least on the iPhone, it keeps track of incoming and outgoing data usage, so you can check whether you're close to your limit.

[Neil Anderson]

He meant the largest country on earth that is getting the iPhone on July 11. :D

[jabohn]

Mr. Rogers, it is not a good day in the neighborhood!

This is a portion of what I emailed to him:

As a current customer of Bell Mobility, you had a chance to switch me over to your company with the iPhone. Unfortunately, your pricing plans are simply too unreasonable and border on gouging. Because of this, my plans to switch have been put on hold until such a time as Rogers sees fit to be competitive and give the Canadian public good value and service.

I can only imagine how many other possible new customers you have denied yourself with these tactics.

[ronster]

No, Rogers bought ATT Canada and launch the Rogers network before buying Fido. Rogers couldn't get customers and Fido had a more advanced network, so buying Fido got them a million or so new customers and a better network...and a GSM monopoly.

I don't think so. Teddy started Rogers Cantel in the mid 80's with help from ATT (USA). He also created Rogers Network Services (using the CNCP / Unitel assets), which was sold to MetroNet for $1Billion, then merged with ATT Canada (for a lot more).

He later bought back the chunk ATT Wireless owned in Rogers Wireless, then bought Fido (Microcell Comm) right after.

[Hutcho]

I've been complaining about the plans here in Germany, but man, this plan is bad.. I feel for you guys in Canada.. the 3 year contract is really the straw that breaks the camels back.. I'd say it now takes the cake as the worst deal so far world wide..

[naftalim]

These "plans" are horrible and just more of the same from Rogers. I am a Rogers customer. I have an unlocked iPhone with no Data Plan. I will not be upgrading to the 3G with this crap

For the basic plan, who uses only 150 minutes a month? Evening starts at 9:00PM?
So, if you need any kind of decent voice and data that is actually usable, you have to move up to the $75 or $100 plan which is actually closer to $100-120 once you add Caller ID, evening at 6PM etc.

Rogers keeps using that outdated nonsenses stat about how many emails or web pages you can get with each plan. The iPhone is an always connected device and the usage is no longer just email or webpages, but various widgets, apps from the AppStore, MobileMe etc. There will be a lot of naive users who will buy the basic plan only to get an enormous bill at the end of the month for overages. There is no way for you to check where you are at during the month.

Worse though, is that approach of forcing you to see how little you can use the device instead of how much. Who wants to have such a device where you constantly have to worry about your limits?

I had a Treo with Rogers and a Data Plan, it was a horrible experience, cost overruns to the point where my monthly bills were over $350 and I was barely surfing the web, only email. In the end I cancelled the data plan. However, here I had this great Smartphone that the only features I could use was the phone and address book.

Trouble is, we Canadians are sheep and we just put up with it.

Rogers may be in for a surprise. The early adaptors have already purchased an iPhone, so now its about monthly costs, not the gadget.

[naftalim]

These are the people to contact

nadir.mohammed@rci.rogers.com (President Rogers Wireless)
john.boynton@rci.rogers.com VP Marketing
upinder.saini@rci.rogers.com
raj.doshi@rci.rogers.com



Ted Rogers trogers@rci.rogers.com

J Innes (VP) jinnes@rci.rogers.com

Jane Haitsma jhaitsma@rci.rogers.com

Please email them, politely, to express the disappointment you feel with the new iphone data plans

Also general contact form is here :

https://your.rogers.com/contact/contactus_main.asp

APPLE :

To email apple's media relations top guy

Simon Atkins ( Canada )
satkins@apple.com

and
The head corporate media guy in the USA

Steve Dowling
dowling@apple.com
(408) 974-1896

and the BIG honcho at Apple for communications is :

Katie Cotton
katiec@apple.com
Vice President of Worldwide Corporate Communications

[MacCheech]

This is a good place to sign in:
http://www.PetitionOnline.com/iPhone99/petition.html

[hypercommunist]

There's a slight difference between the Fido and Rogers plans: the 20$ "value pack" *cough* includes evenings starting at 5pm, rather than 6pm for Rogers.

The regular plans seem to be the same as the Robbers ones. They list "unlimited evenings and weekends" but don't specify when evenings are considered to start.

I hope that the regular Fido plans have evenings starting earlier than 9pm. This is the most egregious aspect of the pricey Rogers plans, IMHO.

[jwdav]

So, for 30% higher cost than AT&T, we receive 1/3 of the service.

450 anywhere in the USA minutes vs
150 local minutes

Mobile to Mobile Free vs
Charged

Incoming Calls Free vs
incoming Charged

Free Call Display/Evenings start at 7PM vs
$20 Call Display/Evenings start at 7PM

Unlimited Data vs
400MB Data

1/3 fewer text messages

per minute billing (Rogers) vs
per second billing (Go Fido ...)

2 Year Contract vs
3 Year Contract

I have phone calls that are longer than 150 minutes ... but, if you were to exceed your basic package, and use a similar amount of airtime offered in the entry level AT&T package:

Basic -$60.00
Call Display - $20.00
Fees: $6.95
911: $0.50
Additional 300 Talk minutes @.35 = $105.00
Additional 400MB Data = $40.20

$232.45 plus Long Distance @.25/min charges plus GST & PST

You'd have to be a moron to sign up for this package. On the bright side, there should be a flood of cheap v1 iPhones coming from Americans upgrading, and a City Fido plan, with a LD package and the new 300MB data plan comes in around $90

[Sadmir]

Open Letter to Steve Jobs about the situation.

http://www.fuckyourogers.com/dearsteve.php

also digg it here ; http://digg.com/apple/Open_Letter_to_Steve_Jobs_about_the_iPhone_in_Cana da

[Abster2core]

So, for 30% higher cost than AT&T, we receive 1/3 of the service.

450 anywhere in the USA minutes vs
150 local minutes

Mobile to Mobile Free vs
Charged

Incoming Calls Free vs
incoming Charged

Free Call Display/Evenings start at 7PM vs
$20 Call Display/Evenings start at 7PM

Unlimited Data vs
400MB Data

1/3 fewer text messages

per minute billing (Rogers) vs
per second billing (Go Fido ...)

2 Year Contract vs
3 Year Contract

I have phone calls that are longer than 150 minutes ... but, if you were to exceed your basic package, and use a similar amount of airtime offered in the entry level AT&T package:

Basic -$60.00
Call Display - $20.00
Fees: $6.95
911: $0.50
Additional 300 Talk minutes @.35 = $105.00
Additional 400MB Data = $40.20

$232.45 plus Long Distance @.25/min charges plus GST & PST

You'd have to be a moron to sign up for this package. On the bright side, there should be a flood of cheap v1 iPhones coming from Americans upgrading, and a City Fido plan, with a LD package and the new 300MB data plan comes in around $90

Apparently "AT&T says it rakes in an average of $95 a month from each iPhone customer.*" for 450 minutes and thus will now cost $105.

ATT Evenings start at 9PM, you can up to early nights, i.e., 7PM for an additional $8.99 a month

And there are terms for be aware of: http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en-us&q=average+phone+bill+of+an+iPhone+user+is+$95&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

Have to read the fine print.

*http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en-us&q=average+phone+bill+of+an+iPhone+user+is+$95&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

[solipsism]

Apparently "AT&T says it rakes in an average of $95 a month from each iPhone customer.*" for 450 minutes and thus will now cost $105.

ATT Evenings start at 9PM, you can up to early nights, i.e., 7PM for an additional $8.99 a month

And there are terms for be aware of: http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en-us&q=average+phone+bill+of+an+iPhone+user+is+$95&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

Have to read the fine print.

*http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en-us&q=average+phone+bill+of+an+iPhone+user+is+$95&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

He also lists incoming calls as free with AT&T. This isn't Europe. He also lists an additional 400MB even though it's hard to use that much with the current iPhone (new one will obviously be easier) and lists fees and 911 as if the US carriers are charged for that.

Plus, the whole idea of comparing different carriers in different countries makes little sense anyway. If Rogers plan is too much then he can wait until v2.0 is unlocked and buy a contract free iPhone which he can use with the Canadian GSM carrier of their choice.

PS: What is up with urls not auto-linking?

[sapporobaby]

I also hope a meteor falls on Rogers HQ and kills them all.

My goodness this quote is funny as hell. Rain, you are the (person). ROFLMAO !!!!!!!

[sapporobaby]

He also lists incoming calls as free with AT&T. This isn't Europe. He also lists an additional 400MB even though it's hard to use that much with the current iPhone (new one will obviously be easier) and lists fees and 911 as if the US carriers are charged for that.

Plus, the whole idea of comparing different carriers in different countries makes little sense anyway. If Rogers plan is too much then he can wait until v2.0 is unlocked and buy a contract free iPhone which he can use with the Canadian GSM carrier of their choice.

PS: What is up with urls not auto-linking?

Hey solipsism, a bit of what is going on over here in Europe (Finland)

Just had a visit with the local Sonera dealer here. Seems that they had a big hole in their iPhone plans. People that already have a Sonera card, can simply put this card in their iPhone and it will work. The fun part comes in, in a situation like mine. I have 500 mins, 500 SMS, REAL unlimited data (not capped), and wifi all for 45€ a month. If you go to: http://www.sonera.fi/Puhelin%20ja%20liittym%E4/Hinnat (sorry about the Finnish) you will see how they forgot about current Sonera card holders. So my current package is cheaper than their subsidized ones. I will simply buy the phone. After I pay for it, they will unlock it and I am free and clear with an unlocked iPhone on a cheaper tariff. The guy in the shop started laughing and saying that he will tell all his friends to just come in and get a new sim card, create their own service packages and then buy an iPhone outright when they are available.

[parasubvert]

No, Rogers bought ATT Canada and launch the Rogers network before buying Fido. Rogers couldn't get customers and Fido had a more advanced network, so buying Fido got them a million or so new customers and a better network...and a GSM monopoly.

That's not true. (Before you ask, yes, I'm an ex-Rogers employee).

AT&T Canada was a landline business and had nothing to do with wireless. Rogers owned it for a brief time (Unitel); it's now called AllStream.

Rogers did have a relationship with AT&T Wireless in branding and investment; that was shed back in 2004.

Rogers built their GSM network on their own dime (it was over $1B+!) back in 2001-2002. They have not yet recouped the cost as it was built way before people in Canada were ready for mobile data (that and Rogers didn't know how to price it for consumers). Fido largely mostly funded by T-Mobile. They were not more advanced in terms of network, though they did have GSM 850mhz. Though their billing system arguably was better, metering per-second, creating lots more compelling options. They expanded coverage and had better customer base in Western Canada (to compete with Telus). Rogers bought them in Autumn 2004.

Anyway, not until the iPhone did it really matter whether you were GSM or CDMA -- Treos and BlackBerry was available for either... so it's really hard to call Rogers a "monopoly" when they have so much competition from Telus and Bell. OTOH, Rogers Cable surely is a monopoly (though satellite has hurt them big time).

I guess the point is that sure vs. the U.S. these plans suck but welcome to the Canadian market -- the WHOLE REASON you have this is because the mobile companies have to be majority "Canadian" owned -- this means Vodaphone, T-Mobile etc. aren't really allowed to compete and charge lower prices.

Rogers sucks in their own way but honestly look at the competition:

Bell -- $30/month for 150 minutes, $6/month for Call Display, and $60/month for 30MB of data , $100/month for 1 GB of data! That's like $90 - $130/month. On the bright side you can get an HTC Touch for free if you sign up for 3 years.

Telus on the other hand has unlimited Email + Web Browsing for $30 if you buy a voice plan worth $30 or more. So they have the best data deal (and they're EVDO), though they're still only 150 minutes for the $30 voice plan!

[sapporobaby]

That's not true. (Before you ask, yes, I'm an ex-Rogers employee).

AT&T Canada was a landline business and had nothing to do with wireless. Rogers owned it for a brief time (Unitel); it's now called AllStream.

Rogers did have a relationship with AT&T Wireless in branding and investment; that was shed back in 2004.

Rogers built their GSM network on their own dime (it was over $1B+!) back in 2001-2002. They have not yet recouped the cost as it was built way before people in Canada were ready for mobile data (that and Rogers didn't know how to price it for consumers). Fido largely mostly funded by T-Mobile. They were not more advanced in terms of network, though they did have GSM 850mhz. Though their billing system arguably was better, metering per-second, creating lots more compelling options. They expanded coverage and had better customer base in Western Canada (to compete with Telus). Rogers bought them in Autumn 2004.

Anyway, not until the iPhone did it really matter whether you were GSM or CDMA -- Treos and BlackBerry was available for either... so it's really hard to call Rogers a "monopoly" when they have so much competition from Telus and Bell. OTOH, Rogers Cable surely is a monopoly (though satellite has hurt them big time).

I guess the point is that sure vs. the U.S. these plans suck but welcome to the Canadian market -- the WHOLE REASON you have this is because the mobile companies have to be majority "Canadian" owned -- this means Vodaphone, T-Mobile etc. aren't really allowed to compete and charge lower prices.

Rogers sucks in their own way but honestly look at the competition:

Bell -- $30/month for 150 minutes, $6/month for Call Display, and $60/month for 30MB of data , $100/month for 1 GB of data! That's like $90 - $130/month. On the bright side you can get an HTC Touch for free if you sign up for 3 years.

Telus on the other hand has unlimited Email + Web Browsing for $30 if you buy a voice plan worth $30 or more. So they have the best data deal (and they're EVDO), though they're still only 150 minutes for the $30 voice plan!

Thank you God, I don't live in Canada. Nothing against the country, but damn, those operators are murder.

[hypercommunist]

Pretty much everyone now knows how much it is going to cost to use
the iPhone on the Rogers and Fido networks. Some people, shocked by
the advertised plans, which can hardly be called generous, have
hastened to call Rogers to express their indignation. To their great
surprise, they have been told that the company might modify their
offer, to improve it in light of the feedback received leading up to
July 11th.

In order to get more information, we contacted Rogers and were told
that the posted plans were only temporary and that they might indeed
be modified if there was a great amount of feedback. Should we
conclude that the plans are just a trail balloon launched by the
Canadian operator in order to take the pulse of future subscribers?
If this is the case, it is surely worthwhile to give a phone call to
Rogers in order to make them understand that the fees demanded for
the use of the iPhone on the Rogers network are completely
unreasonable and could encourage us to turn our backs on July 11th.

Rogers customer service: 1-877-764-3772
(added - Fido customer service: 1 888 481-3436)

translated freely from http://www.macquebec.com/spip.php?article4752

[caribbean_mac]

Folks
i want an iPhone but not under rogers rules

Solution #1 Skype on the iPhone or some VOIP (APP/Service)
FREAKING PLEASE PLEASE

[solipsism]

The fun part comes in, in a situation like mine. I have 500 mins, 500 SMS, REAL unlimited data (not capped), and wifi all for 45€ a month.
Outside the US, that seems like a great idea with so many GSM carriers using the same 3G spectrum.


Rogers sucks in their own way but honestly look at the competition:

Bell -- $30/month for 150 minutes, $6/month for Call Display, and $60/month for 30MB of data , $100/month for 1 GB of data! That's like $90 - $130/month. On the bright side you can get an HTC Touch for free if you sign up for 3 years.

So why are we getting all these comparisons outside the US if the rest of Canada is just as bad?

[Tulkas]

That's not true. (Before you ask, yes, I'm an ex-Rogers employee).

AT&T Canada was a landline business and had nothing to do with wireless. Rogers owned it for a brief time (Unitel); it's now called AllStream.

Rogers did have a relationship with AT&T Wireless in branding and investment; that was shed back in 2004.

Rogers built their GSM network on their own dime (it was over $1B+!) back in 2001-2002. They have not yet recouped the cost as it was built way before people in Canada were ready for mobile data (that and Rogers didn't know how to price it for consumers). Fido largely mostly funded by T-Mobile. They were not more advanced in terms of network, though they did have GSM 850mhz. Though their billing system arguably was better, metering per-second, creating lots more compelling options. They expanded coverage and had better customer base in Western Canada (to compete with Telus). Rogers bought them in Autumn 2004.

Anyway, not until the iPhone did it really matter whether you were GSM or CDMA -- Treos and BlackBerry was available for either... so it's really hard to call Rogers a "monopoly" when they have so much competition from Telus and Bell. OTOH, Rogers Cable surely is a monopoly (though satellite has hurt them big time).

I guess the point is that sure vs. the U.S. these plans suck but welcome to the Canadian market -- the WHOLE REASON you have this is because the mobile companies have to be majority "Canadian" owned -- this means Vodaphone, T-Mobile etc. aren't really allowed to compete and charge lower prices.

Rogers sucks in their own way but honestly look at the competition:

Bell -- $30/month for 150 minutes, $6/month for Call Display, and $60/month for 30MB of data , $100/month for 1 GB of data! That's like $90 - $130/month. On the bright side you can get an HTC Touch for free if you sign up for 3 years.

Telus on the other hand has unlimited Email + Web Browsing for $30 if you buy a voice plan worth $30 or more. So they have the best data deal (and they're EVDO), though they're still only 150 minutes for the $30 voice plan!

Thanks for the clarification. I thought the timeline was slightly different and that Cantel was a joint venture between ATT and Rogers that Rogers subsequently acquired. In any case, Rogers buying Fido eliminated any GSM competition, even if mobile data was not a viable market at the time. In a few short years, it has not become a viable market and Rogers is the only player, thanks to the CRTC decision. The CRTC should have considered this, when they allowed the purchase.

[solipsism]

Folks
i want an iPhone but not under rogers rules

Solution #1 Skype on the iPhone or some VOIP (APP/Service)
FREAKING PLEASE PLEASE

1) Your point comes across well without the excessive font size.

2) Wouldn't the expensive data rates with Rogers be potentially more damning than their voice package?

3) Since the SDK rules specifically prevent VoIP apps from running while using the carrier's network, you'll have to be on a WiFi connection, trick OS X iPhone into thinking you are not on the carrier's network*, or have to get a cracked app that is installed with a jailbroken iPhone to run Skype.

* You can manually input your EDGE IP address into the iPhone thus allowing you to purcahse and DL music from the iTunes Store app.

[sapporobaby]

1) Your point comes across well without the excessive font size.

2) Wouldn't the expensive data rates with Rogers be potentially more damning than their voice package?

3) Since the SDK rules specifically prevent VoIP apps from running while using the carrier's network, you'll have to be on a WiFi connection, trick OS X iPhone into thinking you are not on the carrier's network*, or have to get a cracked app that is installed with a jailbroken iPhone to run Skype.

* You can current manually input your EDGE IP address to trick the iPhone into letting you purcahse and DL music from the iTunes Store app.

Dude, you are a plethora of info.

Are you saying the version of Skype I currently have on my iPhone will not work unless I have Sonera's card in? Even if the phone is unlocked?

Can you explain a bit more about using the EDGE IP to trick the phone into purchasing and DL'ng from the iTunes store.

[solipsism]

Dude, you are a plethora of info.

Are you saying the version of Skype I currently have on my iPhone will not work unless I have Sonera's card in? Even if the phone is unlocked?

Can you explain a bit more about using the EDGE IP to trick the phone into purchasing and DL'ng from the iTunes store.

I hope it still works after the v2.0 update. I hope the call quality is god over EDGE. Bandwidth its fine, but the carrier isn't offering any QoS.• http://www.iphoneblog.de/2008/05/25/video-iphone-speedtest-edge-vs-wifi/
• http://www.tuaw.com/2008/05/26/itunes-store-over-edge/

[OracleGuy]

One little bit of fine-print that hasn't been mentioned is that the overage charge for data is a punishing $.50 per megabyte, to a maximum of 60 megabytes per month (at which point the rate of $.03 per megabyte kicks in).

I'm pretty sure there are going to be a lot of people that sign up for the cheapest plan (perhaps based on Rogers' laughable estimates of how many web pages will fit in 400MB) and will be shocked at the extra $30+ /month showing up on their bill.

[samab]

Hey solipsism, a bit of what is going on over here in Europe (Finland)

Just had a visit with the local Sonera dealer here. Seems that they had a big hole in their iPhone plans. People that already have a Sonera card, can simply put this card in their iPhone and it will work. The fun part comes in, in a situation like mine. I have 500 mins, 500 SMS, REAL unlimited data (not capped), and wifi all for 45€ a month. If you go to: http://www.sonera.fi/Puhelin%20ja%20liittym%E4/Hinnat (sorry about the Finnish) you will see how they forgot about current Sonera card holders. So my current package is cheaper than their subsidized ones. I will simply buy the phone. After I pay for it, they will unlock it and I am free and clear with an unlocked iPhone on a cheaper tariff. The guy in the shop started laughing and saying that he will tell all his friends to just come in and get a new sim card, create their own service packages and then buy an iPhone outright when they are available.

Prices are always subject to fine print and are always allowed to be clarified.

The guy in the shop is going to start crying when the carrier starts to charge back on his commissions.

And of course, I don't want any shouting match with you. Babelfish doesn't do Finnish and we have statistics like 92% of Finnish mobile data coming from datacards and dongles --- on Nokia's backyard --- and only 4% coming from Symbian phones.

http://disruptivewireless.blogspot.com/2008/05/92-of-finnish-mobile-data-traffic.html
http://disruptivewireless.blogspot.com/2008/06/less-than-1-3g-traffic-from-smartphones.html

It makes me think that you got some kind of 3G dongle plan --- it's like mis-selling by the agents and the carriers have given up to try to police/fix the problem because nobody actually buys a Symbian phone in Nokia country to use it as a 3G device.

If you can get away with it --- that's great. It's like people who gets tethering with a $6 WAP plan from T-Mobile USA because they change a few proxy settings.

[Abster2core]

PS: What is up with urls not auto-linking?

No sure. However, I did send the wrong link to ATT Terms and Conditions page

http://www.wireless.att.com/cell-phone-service/legal/plan-terms.jsp#gsm

[Abster2core]

That's not true. (Before you ask, yes, I'm an ex-Rogers employee). Rogers built their GSM network on their own dime (it was over $1B+!) back in 2001-2002. They have not yet recouped the cost as it was built way before people in Canada were ready for mobile data (that and Rogers didn't know how to price it for consumers). Fido largely mostly funded by T-Mobile. They were not more advanced in terms of network, though they did have GSM 850mhz. Though their billing system arguably was better, metering per-second, creating lots more compelling options. They expanded coverage and had better customer base in Western Canada (to compete with Telus). Rogers bought them in Autumn 2004.

I guess the point is that sure vs. the U.S. these plans suck but welcome to the Canadian market -- the WHOLE REASON you have this is because the mobile companies have to be majority "Canadian" owned -- this means Vodaphone, T-Mobile etc. aren't really allowed to compete and charge lower prices.

Rogers sucks in their own way but honestly look at the competition:

Bell -- $30/month for 150 minutes, $6/month for Call Display, and $60/month for 30MB of data , $100/month for 1 GB of data! That's like $90 - $130/month. On the bright side you can get an HTC Touch for free if you sign up for 3 years.

Telus on the other hand has unlimited Email + Web Browsing for $30 if you buy a voice plan worth $30 or more. So they have the best data deal (and they're EVDO), though they're still only 150 minutes for the $30 voice plan!

Thanks for the background. But I am not sure that Roger's suck anymore than anybody else, either in Canada, the US or anywhere else.

As evidenced in these blogs, there is a significant misunderstanding of the terms and conditions that every carrier includes, price schemes are not truly comparable because the base units are not identical, and coverage is not uniform.

Canada, because it is geographically one of the largest countries in the world but with one of the smallest in population density*, i.e., ranking 230th out of 241 countries, is naturally burdened with a higher cost per person when it comes to building transportation and communication systems compared to most countries in the world.

Sitting beside the US which is ten times the population and if you omit Alaska, a population density about 15 times, Canada's cost for wireless services will always be significantly higher. As such, somebody has to pay for developing the infrastructure and obvious it is not the neighbors to the south or the tax payers, but the people that use the system.

It should also be kept in mind, that the majority of Canada's cellular construction was done when the dollar CDN was significantly below, i.e., 15 to 35%, the dollar US.

Even so, if one were able to accurately tabled the actual costs for wireless services for every country in the world, I would suggest that comparing the results would be quite surprising, and for Canadians, relatively speaking if not absolute, price for services are not as bad or variably different than is being portrayed.

As has been evidenced, ATT has been getting an average of $95 per iPhone customer for 450 minutes usage. True, the data plan charges are higher in Canada, but may not in effect end up costing the user more. It has been suggested that ATT's offering of an 'Unlimited Data plan' may in fact be 'over necessary' considering that the Roger's $60 plan will provide up to 200,000 text emails or 3100 web pages or 1360 photo attachments. I wonder how many users will have to upgrade to the next level? Better yet, what job would you have to have the time to do so?

In addition, let's not forget Wi-Fi. It's free and faster. And growing more every day. http://www.canadianhotspot.ca/

* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population_density

[Tulkas]

Thanks for the background. But I am not sure that Roger's suck anymore than anybody else, either in Canada, the US or anywhere else.

As evidenced in these blogs, there is a significant misunderstanding of the terms and conditions that every carrier includes, price schemes are not truly comparable because the base units are not identical, and coverage is not uniform.

Canada, because it is geographically one of the largest countries in the world but with one of the smallest in population density*, i.e., ranking 230th out of 241 countries, is naturally burdened with a higher cost per person when it comes to building transportation and communication systems compared to most countries in the world.

Sitting beside the US which is ten times the population and if you omit Alaska, a population density about 15 times, Canada's cost for wireless services will always be significantly higher. As such, somebody has to pay for developing the infrastructure and obvious it is not the neighbors to the south or the tax payers, but the people that use the system.

It should also be kept in mind, that the majority of Canada's cellular construction was done when the dollar CDN was significantly below, i.e., 15 to 35%, the dollar US.

Even so, if one were able to accurately tabled the actual costs for wireless services for every country in the world, I would suggest that comparing the results would be quite surprising, and for Canadians, relatively speaking if not absolute, price for services are not as bad or variably different than is being portrayed.

As has been evidenced, ATT has been getting an average of $95 per iPhone customer for 450 minutes usage. True, the data plan charges are higher in Canada, but may not in effect end up costing the user more. It has been suggested that ATT's offering of an 'Unlimited Data plan' may in fact be 'over necessary' considering that the Roger's $60 plan will provide up to 200,000 text emails or 3100 web pages or 1360 photo attachments. I wonder how many users will have to upgrade to the next level? Better yet, what job would you have to have the time to do so?

In addition, let's not forget Wi-Fi. It's free and faster. And growing more every day. http://www.canadianhotspot.ca/

* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population_density
While all of what you state here is technically correct, the numbers are coached to be a little mis-leading. Yes, obviously, Canadian population density is extremely low. But, since Rogers generally only provides network coverage in urban areas, the over-all population density of Canada is entirely irrelevant.

For the same reason you said to set aside Alaska for US pop density rates, if you set aside the vast majority of Canada's land mass and include only urban areas, Rogers cost per sq/km of actual coverage should not be far out of line with countries like the US.

[solipsism]

While all of what you state here is technically correct, the numbers are coached to be a little mis-leading. Yes, obviously, Canadian population density is extremely low. But, since Rogers generally only provides network coverage in urban areas, the over-all population density of Canada is entirely irrelevant.

For the same reason you said to set aside Alaska for US pop density rates, if you set aside the vast majority of Canada's land mass and include only urban areas, Rogers cost per sq/km of actual coverage should not be far out of line with countries like the US.

That is conjecture. While it would make sense that the Rogers would not support areas that have little to no population in the upper regions we need to see some stats about the userbase and the number of cell towers in use. From those two figures we can get a basic idea of how many users are per cell tower. But this is still not a complete picture but it's a better basis than what we have.

Alaska is the US' largest state, but it also represents a very small portion of the country's uninhabited and/or untenanted land. Where as Canada appears to have a much larger portion of similar terrain.

To further illustrate my point, if we use the CIA World Fact Book (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/xx.html)—a great way to spend a few minutes honing your geography skills—as a guide we can see that Canada is slightly larger than US but with almost a 10th of the population. Of course, the US has slightly more land than Canada.Canada
• Total Area: 9,984,670 sq km
• Total Land: 9,093,507 sq km

United States
• Total Area: 9,826,630 sq km
• Total Land: 9,161,923 sq km

Even if this was the first time we had ever heard of the two countries we can see that Canada is much harsher when we look at the finer details.Canada
• Arable land: 4.57%
• Irigated land: 7,850 sq km

United States
• Arable land: 18.01%
• Irrigated Land: 223,850 sq km

So Canada might be big but the US has more land that is inhabitable. But not 10x more to account for the dramatic population difference. I can't find info on Rogers but i can find info on the number of telephone users in Canada.Canada
• Population: 33,212,696
• Mobile telephone users: aboot 18,749,000 :)

United States
• Population: 303,824,646
• Mobile telephone users: about 233,000,000

This is not exact nor conclusive in any way but if we take the sq km of arable land and divide by the number of cellular users we see that the US has a far greater density than Canada. Again, this is not conclusive, but it's the only method I could conceive that would remove the unused land from Canada's northern territories. The more metrics we get the more we can refine the data, but looking at the raw numbers I don't see any way the numbers could ever be shifted to indicate that Rogers has less overhead per person than US carriers... unless they completely cut off service as soon as you leave a city.Canada
• 18,749,000 users ÷ (9,093,507 sq km x .0457 usable land) = 45 mobile users per sq km

United States
• 233,000,000 mobile users ÷ (9,161,923 sq km x .1801 usable land) = 141 mobile users per sq km

[icfireball]

solipsism:

Your estimates ignore the fact that Canada's cities are densely populated whereas there are tons of land in Canada that is uninhibited, similar to Alaska.

[solipsism]

solipsism:

Your estimates ignore the fact that Canada's cities are densely populated whereas there are tons of land in Canada that is uninhibited, similar to Alaska.

No, it doesn't. I thought I made that quite clear. if you look, I've only accounted for arable land. Id est, not the frozen tundra that dominates the North. Hence the much smaller percentage used to account for land mass of Canada as opposed to the US prior to my dividing by the number of cellular users.

As previously stated, if you can find more metrics that accurately removed the vast stretches of unused land from the equation go for it. But with less than a 10th or the cellular users of the US and a much lower percentage of the populace on mobiles the numbers are never going to work out in Canada's favour for this argument. It is still going to be considerably a much lower average of users per sq km.

[toxotes]

solipsism:

Your estimates ignore the fact that Canada's cities are densely populated whereas there are tons of land in Canada that is uninhibited, similar to Alaska.

Yes, including the entire area of the country is misleading because in fact most of the country probably has no cell phone coverage at all because it's barely populated, therefore no infrastructure cost to the provider in those areas--unlike the U.S., where a much greater percentage of the land area is populated and expected to have coverage. I think the person who suggested comparing cell phone towers to population served had a good method, but I still suspect Canada is gouged compared to other countries.

[Abster2core]

While all of what you state here is technically correct, the numbers are coached to be a little mis-leading. Yes, obviously, Canadian population density is extremely low. But, since Rogers generally only provides network coverage in urban areas, the over-all population density of Canada is entirely irrelevant.

For the same reason you said to set aside Alaska for US pop density rates, if you set aside the vast majority of Canada's land mass and include only urban areas, Rogers cost per sq/km of actual coverage should not be far out of line with countries like the US.

Let's be fair. The cost to build a tower is the same. Well not exactly. Most of Canada's towers would have cost from 15 to 35% more because of the exchange at the time.

The cost of materials are significantly less with larger orders. Usage per tower is the same, but only in equally declared populations. Management, maintenance and servicing is the same, however, it is spread over a significantly larger base.

In effect, it costs a lot more to have things done in Canada than in the US. Rogers cost per sq/km may not be far out of line with most countries. However, the fact that there is more users in the US to share all the costs, the cost to the Canadian user is still significantly higher.

One of the main issues that plagues Toronto, for example, is its public transportation costs. Canadian cities by at large are less densely populated and thus the cost per mile per person to service the main arteries are higher.

More important, considering that the entire population of Canada is less than the state of California. As such, to build, service and maintain a wireless operation in the relatively confined spaces of California would be less than in a country that is stretched over 5500 km.

Again, the total service/costs are that much different when you compare apples with apples and read the fine print

[anantksundaram]

.... Canada that is uninhibited......

Hmmmm....... I had always thought that the Canadians were a tad inhibited......;)

[Abster2core]

That is conjecture. While it would make sense that the Rogers would not support areas that have little to no population in the upper regions we need to see some stats about the userbase and the number of cell towers in use. From those two figures we can get a basic idea of how many users are per cell tower. But this is still not a complete picture but it's a better basis than what we have.

Alaska is the US' largest state, but it also represents a very small portion of the country's uninhabited and/or untenanted land. Where as Canada appears to have a much larger portion of similar terrain.

To further illustrate my point, if we use the CIA World Fact Book (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/xx.html)—a great way to spend a few minutes honing your geography skills—as a guide we can see that Canada is slightly larger than US but with almost a 10th of the population. Of course, the US has slightly more land than Canada.Canada
• Total Area: 9,984,670 sq km
• Total Land: 9,093,507 sq km

United States
• Total Area: 9,826,630 sq km
• Total Land: 9,161,923 sq km

Even if this was the first time we had ever heard of the two countries we can see that Canada is much harsher when we look at the finer details.Canada
• Arable land: 4.57%
• Irigated land: 7,850 sq km

United States
• Arable land: 18.01%
• Irrigated Land: 223,850 sq km

So Canada might be big but the US has more land that is inhabitable. But not 10x more to account for the dramatic population difference. I can't find info on Rogers but i can find info on the number of telephone users in Canada.Canada
• Population: 33,212,696
• Mobile telephone users: aboot 18,749,000 :)

United States
• Population: 303,824,646
• Mobile telephone users: about 233,000,000

This is not exact nor conclusive in any way but if we take the sq km of arable land and divide by the number of cellular users we see that the US has a far greater density than Canada. Again, this is not conclusive, but it's the only method I could conceive that would remove the unused land from Canada's northern territories. The more metrics we get the more we can refine the data, but looking at the raw numbers I don't see any way the numbers could ever be shifted to indicate that Rogers has less overhead per person than US carriers... unless they completely cut off service as soon as you leave a city.Canada
• 18,749,000 users ÷ (9,093,507 sq km x .0457 usable land) = 45 mobile users per sq km

United States
• 233,000,000 mobile users ÷ (9,161,923 sq km x .1801 usable land) = 141 mobile users per sq km

Are you sure we are not sharing the same office.

After reading the above, I was trying to remember where I had read this before. Sure enough, I found the following I wrote on a Stickie that I never got the chance to post. As you can see, this was to be a comment on one of your blogs and was in part a reference that Melgross was also took part of.

I tend to use the CIA World Factbook (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/) for that info. If I remember correctly, the US has a per capita of 30 per sq km, while Sweden has 300].

edit: Boy was I off. I may have been thinking of the Netherlands.

Sweden
Land Area: 410,934 sq km
Popualtion: 9,045,389 (July 2008 est.)
= 22


US and A
Land Area: 9,161,923 sq km
Population: 303,824,646 (July 2008 est.)
= 33

When we are calculating population densities, we find that the "arable" land areas are closer in regards to that area of the country that is being lived on, but be aware, not totally true.

For example, the percentage or "arable" land in the US is approximately 18% of the total land mass of 9.1 million sq km. However, this includes Alaska which represents about 1/5 of the total and has very little arable land.

As such, the US has about 7 million sq km in total land area, of which approximately 1.3 million sq km in arable, which equates to a per capita of 233 per sq km .

Sweden with 410,934 sq km in total land area, 5,93% arable for 24.3 thousand sq km, equal to a per capita of 372 per sq km.

Then in the US 70% or 200 million live in urbanized areas, vs Sweden with about 85%

Unfortunately, I never got around to finishing it and just let it go at the time.

[icfireball]

No, it doesn't. I thought I made that quite clear. if you look, I've only accounted for arable land. Id est, not the frozen tundra that dominates the North. Hence the much smaller percentage used to account for land mass of Canada as opposed to the US prior to my dividing by the number of cellular users.

As previously stated, if you can find more metrics that accurately removed the vast stretches of unused land from the equation go for it. But with less than a 10th or the cellular users of the US and a much lower percentage of the populace on mobiles the numbers are never going to work out in Canada's favour for this argument. It is still going to be considerably a much lower average of users per sq km.

Let's play the population density game!

US Cities:
New York – 27,147/sq mi
Los Angeles – 8,205/sq mi
Chicago – 12,470/sq mi
Houston – 3,701/sq mi
Phoenix - 2,937.8/sq mi
Philadelphia – 10,882.8/sq mi
Antonio – 2,808.5/sq mi
San Diego – 3,871.5/sq mi
Dallas – 3,605.08/sq mi

Canadian Cities:
Toronto – 10,287.4/sq mi
Montreal – 11,496/sq mi
Vancouver – 13,817.6/sq mi
Calgary – 3,522.9/sq mi
Edmonton – 2,764/sq mi
Quebec City – 2,800.3/sq mi
Winnipeg – 3,535.3/sq mi

http://media-2.web.britannica.com/eb-media/10/70010-004-BBFE93FB.gif

And a map that shows population density in the United States AND Canada:

http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/3151/picture2jp3.png

http://img296.imageshack.us/img296/6218/gameoverve2.png

[solipsism]

Let's play the population density game!

US Cities:
New York – 27,147/sq mi
Los Angeles – 8,205/sq mi
Chicago – 12,470/sq mi
Houston – 3,701/sq mi
Phoenix - 2,937.8/sq mi
Philadelphia – 10,882.8/sq mi
Antonio – 2,808.5/sq mi
San Diego – 3,871.5/sq mi
Dallas – 3,605.08/sq mi

Canadian Cities:
Toronto – 10,287.4/sq mi
Montreal – 11,496/sq mi
Vancouver – 13,817.6/sq mi
Calgary – 3,522.9/sq mi
Edmonton – 2,764/sq mi
Quebec City – 2,800.3/sq mi
Winnipeg – 3,535.3/sq mi

<image>

And a map that shows population density in the United States AND Canada:

<image>
<image>

What exactly is the point you are trying to make? You have stated the population densities of 7 Canadian cities and 9 US cities but have not quantified nor explained anything. I have no idea if you agree with my assessment that we need to look at colonised areas or not.

To further complicate things, you state in an earlier post, "[Solipsism,] your estimates ignore the fact that Canada's cities are densely populated", but then in a later post you post highly populated US cities. I fail to see any bearing the varying population densities have on the argument as it stands.

I'm also confused by your post as I clearly made my case stating that only 4% of the entire Canadian landmass was arable while stating that 18% of the US was arable, which greatly favoured Canada in my equation to determine a closer—yet not exact, as previously stated—estimate of liveable land area that people could reside comfortably, thereby being a potential customer base for the associated carriers.

Besides the point that the Britannica population density of Canadian map from 2002 makes no sense for your argument unless you are asserting that Canadian cities are more densely populated than US cities (which wouldn't make sense), the US map below is not not from Britannica and has red splotches that only vaguely match up with the Canadian map above.

On top of that, there is no legend or explanation of any kind by you to discern the meaning of the red splotches. For all we know they represent the the sales of the original Nintendo Game Boy in North America, which is the only reasonable explanation to its inclusion in your post.:D

[Tulkas]

What exactly is the point you are trying to make? You have stated the population densities of 7 Canadian cities and 9 US cities but have not quantified nor explained anything. I have no idea if you agree with my assessment that we need to look at colonised areas or not.

To further complicate things, you state in an earlier post, "[Solipsism,] your estimates ignore the fact that Canada's cities are densely populated", but then in a later post you post highly populated US cities. I fail to see any bearing the varying population densities have on the argument as it stands.

I'm also confused by your post as I clearly made my case stating that only 4% of the entire Canadian landmass was arable while stating that 18% of the US was arable, which greatly favoured Canada in my equation to determine a closer—yet not exact, as previously stated—estimate of liveable land area that people could reside comfortably, thereby being a potential customer base for the associated carriers.

Besides the point that the Britannica population density of Canadian map from 2002 makes no sense for your argument unless you are asserting that Canadian cities are more densely populated than US cities (which wouldn't make sense), the US map below is not not from Britannica and has red splotches that only vaguely match up with the Canadian map above.

On top of that, there is no legend or explanation of any kind by you to discern the meaning of the red splotches. For all we know they represent the the sales of the original Nintendo Game Boy in North America, which is the only reasonable explanation to its inclusion in your post.:D

You keep mentioning arable land, as if that was at all related to the question at hand, that is Rogers network substantially more expensive to build and maintain, specifically because of the geography of Canada vs the geography of the US. I don't know much about cell tower construction, but I don't think they grow out of the ground, so what does arable land mass matter? You can throw lots of number around, but if they are not relevant, they don't make sense.

Simply put: Rogers only services urban areas. That is, Rogers only provides any usable coverage in cities and metros. So, icfireball's stats of pop densities of a few cities is actually relevant. Canada only has a very small number of urban centres, where most of our population lives. In fact, the list from icfireball is most of them. There are a few smaller centres, but again, not many. Contrast that with the US, where there are many more than listed. Rogers only had to build enough towers to cover 10-15 centres. For that, they probably have access to 80-90 percent of the Canadian population. How many cities did ATT have to provie coverage to? Still think it was more expensive, per use, or per sq km or any other metric?

[icfireball]

What exactly is the point you are trying to make? You have stated the population densities of 7 Canadian cities and 9 US cities but have not quantified nor explained anything. I have no idea if you agree with my assessment that we need to look at colonised areas or not.

To further complicate things, you state in an earlier post, "[Solipsism,] your estimates ignore the fact that Canada's cities are densely populated", but then in a later post you post highly populated US cities. I fail to see any bearing the varying population densities have on the argument as it stands.

I'm also confused by your post as I clearly made my case stating that only 4% of the entire Canadian landmass was arable while stating that 18% of the US was arable, which greatly favoured Canada in my equation to determine a closer—yet not exact, as previously stated—estimate of liveable land area that people could reside comfortably, thereby being a potential customer base for the associated carriers.

Besides the point that the Britannica population density of Canadian map from 2002 makes no sense for your argument unless you are asserting that Canadian cities are more densely populated than US cities (which wouldn't make sense), the US map below is not not from Britannica and has red splotches that only vaguely match up with the Canadian map above.

On top of that, there is no legend or explanation of any kind by you to discern the meaning of the red splotches. For all we know they represent the the sales of the original Nintendo Game Boy in North America, which is the only reasonable explanation to its inclusion in your post.:D

You're numbers and estimations mean nothing when it comes to profitability.

The purpose of the first map was to demonstrate that within canada, most of the population is centered in a very small land mass and the rest of Canada, the majority of the land has an extremely low population density.

Now take a look at the second map (reproduced below). First, you'll note that this map is even more accurate than the first map because the densities are not boundaries. Next, you'll notice that the population of Canada is heavily centered in a very small area of land along the southern border of Canada. As your eyes wander south you should have noticed that the population centers in the US are more widely dispersed over a larger land mass than in Canada. What this means is that to maintain a reliable network in the U.S., since it's standard for operators to provide free roaming within the U.S., they most cover a greater area of land than in Canada. In Canada, the cell network can be heavily focused in regions of land. To clarify my point one last time, Rogers claims that "our network reaches 94% of the Canadian population." To reach 94% of the Canadian population requires a lot less cell network infrastructure than to reach 94% of the U.S. population.

http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/3151/picture2jp3.png

[solipsism]

...so what does arable land mass matter?
For some unknown reason people want to compare Canada to the US in terms of the cell carriers. Then they want to say that Canada has a lot of uninhabited land so I found a metric that would remove all the land that that would probably be uninhabitable. By taking the arable land, which is land that crops will grow, therefore land that people could possibly reside we get a measure that better suits the argument that Canada's population is in a smaller area and giving a metric that is much, much closer than the "I know it's cheaper for x over y because I said so" comments and the pointless roseate maps. I was hoping to stimulate some factual posting that actually led to someone finding a better metric instead of more un-objective conjecture. But that doesn't seem to be the case.


Simply put: Rogers only services urban areas.That is, Rogers only provides any usable coverage in cities and metros.
Are you saying that Rogers has no carriers in suburban areas or that Canada has no such sprawls?

So, icfireball's stats of pop densities of a few cities is actually relevant. Canada only has a very small number of urban centres, where most of our population lives. In fact, the list from icfireball is most of them.
And NYC has twice the density of the most dense Canadian city, as per icfireball's post, so how does his posting of some Canadian cities negate the density of US cities?

There are a few smaller centres, but again, not many. Contrast that with the US, where there are many more than listed.
Again, this metric is pointless as stated as the population of the US is 9x as large.

Rogers only had to build enough towers to cover 10-15 centres. For that, they probably have access to 80-90 percent of the Canadian population. How many cities did ATT have to provie coverage to? Still think it was more expensive, per use, or per sq km or any other metric?
Rogers having to put up less towers does not make them cheaper per capita based on that measure along. Here are some simple things that you are not considering:— The more towers bought the more likely the cost per tower lowers
— Which significantly more carriers in the US AT&T can rent out space, thus lowering the cost
— More competition in the US means lower prices as a general rule
— The US cell penetration rate is 84% compared to Canada's 58%
— AT&T has 10x the subscribers of Rogers
— The US has 13x the number of mobile customers than Canada

If you have viable facts to back up your claims that Canadian carrier costs are lower than the US then post it, but useless images of America with a rash isn't going to cut it. At least try to use a verifiable metric.

[solipsism]

You're numbers and estimations mean nothing when it comes to profitability.
I never said it did, I merely used a metric to remove all the unusual land from Canada to make the playing field more equal. If you have a metric that lowers the 4% figure even more then please post it.

To reach 94% of the Canadian population requires a lot less cell network infrastructure than to reach 94% of the U.S. population.[/B]
Less towers would only mean it's cheaper per capita if everything else is the same. But it's not. Not by a long shot, yet I haven't read where you are considering that in any form.

[NasserAE]

I really feel sorry for our friends in Canada. Maybe that's why Apple did not reach an agreement with Rogers when they used the revenue sharing business model. I don't think it is directly related to population density, I think it is plain greed and monopoly. They know that they are the only GSM carrier and people have no choice but to use their network. Once another GSM carrier comes into play, we will see a huge drop in prices and improvement in service. I have personally seen this happen in many countries (one carrier ripping-off consumers, once another carrier comes into play prices and services improve more than anyone thought).

[icfireball]

I never said it did, I merely used a metric to remove all the unusual land from Canada to make the playing field more equal. If you have a metric that lowers the 4% figure even more then please post it.

Less towers would only mean it's cheaper per capita if everything else is the same. But it's not. Not by a long shot, yet I haven't read where you are considering that in any form.

I wasn't arguing for the comprehensive profitability of wireless carriers in the U.S. versus Canada. I was, however, arguing against the assertion that Canada's geographic specifications made it less suited to wireless profitability, and I stand by that. In fact, I think Canada's geographical specifications make it better suited for wireless profitability when compared to that of the U.S.


Rogers having to put up less towers does not make them cheaper per capita based on that measure along. Here are some simple things that you are not considering:
— The more towers bought the more likely the cost per tower lowers
— Which significantly more carriers in the US AT&T can rent out space, thus lowering the cost
— More competition in the US means lower prices as a general rule
— The US cell penetration rate is 84% compared to Canada's 58%
— AT&T has 10x the subscribers of Rogers
— The US has 13x the number of mobile customers than Canada

If you have viable facts to back up your claims that Canadian carrier costs are lower than the US then