Rogers bought us

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
T

Tony

Distinguished
Aug 5, 2001
1,944
0
19,780
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.fido (More info?)

In case you haven't heard, looks like Fido is agreeing to it:

<http://www.cbc.ca/story/business/national/2004/09/20/rogers_040920.html>

I certainly hope City|Fido stays in tact, as does Fido's current voice
mail with instant reply. I have Roger's vm system. I'm guessing if
this gets finalized this year, not a lot will change in the first half
of 2005, but then, who knows? 🙁

Maybe Rogers will change over some of their system's to Fido's plans
and vm, which would be good for us and them.

..:. tony
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.fido (More info?)

It's about time. Finally Fido users will get decent coverage.

On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 06:34:31 -0700, tony wrote:

> In case you haven't heard, looks like Fido is agreeing to it:
>
> <http://www.cbc.ca/story/business/national/2004/09/20/rogers_040920.html>
>
> I certainly hope City|Fido stays in tact, as does Fido's current voice
> mail with instant reply. I have Roger's vm system. I'm guessing if this
> gets finalized this year, not a lot will change in the first half of 2005,
> but then, who knows? 🙁
>
> Maybe Rogers will change over some of their system's to Fido's plans and
> vm, which would be good for us and them.
>
> .:. tony
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.fido (More info?)

repatch <repatch42@yahoo.com> wrote in
news😛an.2004.09.20.15.19.35.800449@yahoo.com:

> It's about time. Finally Fido users will get decent coverage.

and new minimum service contracts to sign, terrible customer support, and
higher monthly prices!
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.fido (More info?)

Go Go Gadget tony <tfortony@yahoo.com>:
> In case you haven't heard, looks like Fido is agreeing to it:

> <http://www.cbc.ca/story/business/national/2004/09/20/rogers_040920.html>

Argh. And I just bought a new phone! (Unlocked Nokia 5140, very nice)

I'd stick with a Telus-owned Fido, but probably jump ship because of
Rogers. Too bad, too -- Telus would have brought fresh capital to the
GSM market in Canada, and all Rogers is going to do is milk Fido's base
and brand.

--
Rob.Russell@Canada.Com, Unicorn of Usenet & Bastard of Bandwidth
"If my son wants to be a pimp when he grows up, that's fine with me. I
hope he's a good one and enjoys it and doesn't get caught. I'll support
him in this. But if he wants to be a network administrator, he's out of
the house and not part of my family." Steve Wozniak, http://www.woz.org
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.fido (More info?)

On 20 Sep 2004 13:54:08 GMT, Rob Russell <colonel@engsoc.org> wrote:

>Telus would have brought fresh capital to the
>GSM market in Canada, and all Rogers is going to do is milk Fido's base
>and brand.

And what makes you think that Telus would not disassemble Fido's GSM
network and put all Fido's customers on their CDMA network? It's not
as if that's never happened before.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.fido (More info?)

On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 11:33:29 -0500, Good Man wrote:

> repatch <repatch42@yahoo.com> wrote in
> news😛an.2004.09.20.15.19.35.800449@yahoo.com:
>
>> It's about time. Finally Fido users will get decent coverage.
>
> and new minimum service contracts to sign, terrible customer support, and
> higher monthly prices!

Odd, considering my move to Rogers actually resulted in my spending LESS
per month then I did with Fido, fancy that...
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.fido (More info?)

Rob Russell <colonel@engsoc.org> wrote in alt.cellular.fido:

> I'd stick with a Telus-owned Fido, but probably jump ship because of
> Rogers. Too bad, too -- Telus would have brought fresh capital to the
> GSM market in Canada, and all Rogers is going to do is milk Fido's
> base and brand.

I'm considering going back to alphanumeric pager and payphone again.
Cheaper. Guess we'll see what the outcome of the offer is.

--
Mason Storm

---------------
Remove "dogface" to reply in email.
---------------
Think your pop-up blocker works?? Try this:
http://ciudad.latinol.com//boinks/booters.html
---------------
Unlimited local calling anywhere in Canada $70/month.
http://www.fido.ca/portal/en/packages/monthly.shtml#unlimitedcanada
---------------
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.fido (More info?)

"Mason Storm" <mydogfacenippy@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:Xns956A5A6111CA3mysnippynippyshawca@24.71.223.159...
> Rob Russell <colonel@engsoc.org> wrote in alt.cellular.fido:
>
> > I'd stick with a Telus-owned Fido, but probably jump ship because of
> > Rogers. Too bad, too -- Telus would have brought fresh capital to the
> > GSM market in Canada, and all Rogers is going to do is milk Fido's
> > base and brand.
>
> I'm considering going back to alphanumeric pager and payphone again.
> Cheaper. Guess we'll see what the outcome of the offer is.

Find a way to get a Rogers corporate plan. Rogers is about to have urban
coverage as good as Fido's (and theoretically better because it can overlay
Fido's towers with GSM 850), rural coverage that blows Fido away, and if you
can get a corporate plan you can get rates that are similar to or better
than a lot of Fido's plans.

I'm hoping Rogers decides to keep Fido's low long distance rate and billing
by the second - it could do some serious damage to Telus, Bell, Aliant,
SaskTel, MTS, etc. if it did.

Jim
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.fido (More info?)

Joseph <JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com> wrote in alt.cellular.fido:

> And what makes you think that Telus would not disassemble Fido's GSM
> network and put all Fido's customers on their CDMA network? It's not
> as if that's never happened before.

Any of the current cellular operators would eventually kill Fido if they
aquired it. They only want to gain control of it because right now Fido
is killing the market for these other loosers with their great rate
plans. Look what happened to Clearnet when Smelus bought it! Wish we had
competition like in the USA. They have great plans too.

--
Mason Storm

---------------
Remove "dogface" to reply in email.
---------------
Think your pop-up blocker works?? Try this:
http://ciudad.latinol.com//boinks/booters.html
---------------
Unlimited local calling anywhere in Canada $70/month.
http://www.fido.ca/portal/en/packages/monthly.shtml#unlimitedcanada
---------------
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.fido (More info?)

> > I have no Fido signal issues. When I swap my friend's Rogers sim-card
> > into my unlocked phone, I giggle at the ridiculous quality and drop
> > offs.

The poster probably has a 1900 MHz phone. Rogers isn't that great on a
1900-only phone, but it's extremely good on an 850/1900 phone. Since Fido
has no spectrum at 850, it *has* to be good at 1900 only.

Jim
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.fido (More info?)

"repatch" <repatch42@yahoo.com> a écrit dans le message de
news😛an.2004.09.20.15.19.35.800449@yahoo.com...
> It's about time. Finally Fido users will get decent coverage.
>

The coverage of fido is enough for my need. If I want better coverage (and
higher prices) I wold go with Bell/telus. They go where rogers didn't like
up from Rimouski, quebec. I don't see any advantage for Rogers. The
custumer service is awful with syntetic voice and acadians CSR impossible to
understand. The network acts bizarre with calls that not go though (I have
a Rogers SIM and tried it with a lot of phones and 850/1900 too and I prefer
Fido). But at least, if Fido is to be bought it's better to be Rogers than
Telus (with their CDMA-robotic-voice-american-only-go-direct-voicemail
system!)
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.fido (More info?)

On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 18:43:10 +0000, Blandine wrote:

>
> "repatch" <repatch42@yahoo.com> a écrit dans le message de
> news😛an.2004.09.20.15.19.35.800449@yahoo.com...
>> It's about time. Finally Fido users will get decent coverage.
>>
>>
> The coverage of fido is enough for my need.

I thought the same, until I moved into a building in the GTA with ZERO
Fido coverage, yet Rogers coverage. For me that was the final straw.

> If I want better coverage
> (and higher prices) I wold go with Bell/telus.

I don't know. My parents have a Bell phone and while they do have signal
in most places I do, it's FAR harder for them to get a call through. That
and it's analog in many places with Bell, with Rogers their GSM850
coverage is as good as their analog in almost every place I've tried, and
I'd much prefer GSM over AMPs no matter where I am.

> They go where rogers
> didn't like up from Rimouski, quebec.

Yes, that is one area I lost coverage, along with New Richmond and
Gaspesie area, but hey, when you're in such beautiful scenery you don't
really need a cell phone!

> I don't see any advantage for
> Rogers.

For me the number one advatange is GSM. I HATE the codecs Bell and Telus
use. They sound so horrible to my ears I actually pray for a Bell or
Telus phone to switch to analog. I just can't stand it. That and the SIM
card, an amazing feature. Just the thought of having to get permission
from my cell provider to change phones is laughable in my mind.

> The custumer service is awful with syntetic voice and acadians
> CSR impossible to understand.

In my experience no worse then Fido. I know that isn't much of an excuse,
but hey there it is.

> The network acts bizarre with calls that
> not go though (I have a Rogers SIM and tried it with a lot of phones and
> 850/1900 too and I prefer Fido).

What do you mean by "strange"? I've actually encountered less problems
with calls going through then I ever did with Fido.

> But at least, if Fido is to be bought
> it's better to be Rogers than Telus (with their
> CDMA-robotic-voice-american-only-go-direct-voicemail system!)

Agreed. TTYL
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.fido (More info?)

Jim MacKenzie wrote:
> I'm hoping Rogers decides to keep Fido's low long distance rate and billing
> by the second - it could do some serious damage to Telus, Bell, Aliant,
> SaskTel, MTS, etc. if it did.

If Rogers chose not to have per-second billing, it is because it felt it had
no competitive need to do so, and buying Fido will even further reduce this
small need.


Roger's purchase of Fido will end up the same as Telus' purchase of Clearnet,
if it is allowed to go though: Fido's brand will disapear, Rogers may
integrate some of the former marketing )for instance the dog theme) into its
own ads, but Fido rates will no longter be offered to new customers and little
by little, Rogers will stop grandfathering existing ex-Fido customers' rates.

If this is allowed to go through, within 1.5 years, expect to start getting
nice letters giving you some sweet deal to move to a Rogers plan with the
first couple months at reduced reate, and following months at the good old
expensive Rogers prices.
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.fido (More info?)

On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 16:44:40 -0600, Jim MacKenzie wrote:

>
>> > I have no Fido signal issues. When I swap my friend's Rogers sim-card
>> > into my unlocked phone, I giggle at the ridiculous quality and drop
>> > offs.
>
> The poster probably has a 1900 MHz phone. Rogers isn't that great on a
> 1900-only phone, but it's extremely good on an 850/1900 phone. Since Fido
> has no spectrum at 850, it *has* to be good at 1900 only.

Hmm, never thought of that, you're of course absolutely correct, without
850 coverage Rogers network doesn't look to great outside of major urban
centers. TTYL
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.fido (More info?)

On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 11:19:37 -0400, repatch <repatch42@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>It's about time. Finally Fido users will get decent coverage.

And dropped calls, and higher prices, and by the way repatch
your just a dick and a troll.



>
>On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 06:34:31 -0700, tony wrote:
>
>> In case you haven't heard, looks like Fido is agreeing to it:
>>
>> <http://www.cbc.ca/story/business/national/2004/09/20/rogers_040920.html>
>>
>> I certainly hope City|Fido stays in tact, as does Fido's current voice
>> mail with instant reply. I have Roger's vm system. I'm guessing if this
>> gets finalized this year, not a lot will change in the first half of 2005,
>> but then, who knows? 🙁
>>
>> Maybe Rogers will change over some of their system's to Fido's plans and
>> vm, which would be good for us and them.
>>
>> .:. tony
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.fido (More info?)

On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 23:50:36 +0000, yoyo wrote:

> On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 11:19:37 -0400, repatch <repatch42@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>It's about time. Finally Fido users will get decent coverage.
>
> And dropped calls,

Haven't had any more dropped calls with Rogers then I did with Fido,
except of course during the big blackout last year (when I had Fido), but
I don't count that...

I did have one night where I kept getting crossed lines on Rogers, very
weird, every call I tried to make ended up being connected to another call
in progress, very weird. The effect disappeared after I switched towers.

> and higher prices,

That depends on your usage and features you want. For me Rogers actually
turned out to be cheaper by a very small amount.

> and by the way repatch your just a
> dick and a troll.

Oh, that hurt, I think I'm going to go cry now...

Listen, if you're not
capable of having a debate like an adult then maybe you should hang out
with people your own mental age. Elementary school "name calling" is
laughable during elementary, imagine what it is in your later years...
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.fido (More info?)

repatch wrote:
> Hmm, never thought of that, you're of course absolutely correct, without
> 850 coverage Rogers network doesn't look to great outside of major urban
> centers. TTYL

Nobody has a decent 1900 network outside urban areas. 1900 happened well after
Cantel and Mobility had built up their 850 analogue networks. They weren't
going to expand 1900 to all of their existing 850 covered areas since they
chose their phones to be dual frequency so there was no gain to put additional
capacity in rural areas. And they started with beeper networks in the 1980s
and analogue phones in early 1990s so had plenty of time to roll out coverage.

Fido and Clearnet started from scratch with only 1900 in the late 1990s, and
had a mandate from government to cover X% of population, so their priority was
to roll out cities due to that government requirement.
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.fido (More info?)

It will be to Rogers's advantage to keep the CityFido product (with perhaps
just rebranding).

Think about it:

Rogers has no landline telephony. So by keeping CityFido, it can hurth both
Bell and Telus without hurting its other businesses.

And consider that with a recent decision by the government to lift certain
bandwidth restrictions imposed on the legacy carriers (Bell/Telus/Rogers), if
Rogers is able to use all of the bandwidth from Fido, it may be able to do
interesting things.

If Roger's standards are lower, it will also be able to fit more customers
than Fido would have in the same bandwidth.
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.fido (More info?)

JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote in alt.cellular.fido:

> If Rogers chose not to have per-second billing, it is because it felt
> it had no competitive need to do so, and buying Fido will even further
> reduce this small need.
>
> Roger's purchase of Fido will end up the same as Telus' purchase of
> Clearnet, if it is allowed to go though: Fido's brand will disapear,
> Rogers may integrate some of the former marketing )for instance the
> dog theme) into its own ads, but Fido rates will no longter be offered
> to new customers and little by little, Rogers will stop grandfathering
> existing ex-Fido customers' rates.
>
> If this is allowed to go through, within 1.5 years, expect to start
> getting nice letters giving you some sweet deal to move to a Rogers
> plan with the first couple months at reduced reate, and following
> months at the good old expensive Rogers prices.

I think this is very well put. I totally agree with you.

--
Mason Storm

-----------------------------
Remove "dogface" to reply privately in email.
-----------------------------
http://ciudad.latinol.com//boinks/booters.html
-----------------------------
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.fido (More info?)

I find it interesting that the media seem to believe Roger's claims that it
will keep the Fido brand. How naive can they be ???????

Considering Fido still have a fair percentage of its customers without
contracts, loyalty will become totally 0 the minute Rogers buys Microcell.

Will be interesting to see how Rogers handles the issue of locked FIDO phones.
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.fido (More info?)

I don't expect to see an increase in front end prices, but I do expect
to see an end to a gradual drop in prices.

We used to see Fido pushing prices steadily down, so that it was
reasonable to expect for the average consumer (No, not each consumer, so
maybe not you) to see a drop.

I think the current price plans will stay, but there will not be new
lower prices.

I also expect to see that backend prices going up, like international
roaming, international long distance, so they nickle and dime you.

Cheers all
Andrew

JF Mezei wrote:
> Jim MacKenzie wrote:
>
>>I'm hoping Rogers decides to keep Fido's low long distance rate and billing
>>by the second - it could do some serious damage to Telus, Bell, Aliant,
>>SaskTel, MTS, etc. if it did.
>
>
> If Rogers chose not to have per-second billing, it is because it felt it had
> no competitive need to do so, and buying Fido will even further reduce this
> small need.
>
>
> Roger's purchase of Fido will end up the same as Telus' purchase of Clearnet,
> if it is allowed to go though: Fido's brand will disapear, Rogers may
> integrate some of the former marketing )for instance the dog theme) into its
> own ads, but Fido rates will no longter be offered to new customers and little
> by little, Rogers will stop grandfathering existing ex-Fido customers' rates.
>
> If this is allowed to go through, within 1.5 years, expect to start getting
> nice letters giving you some sweet deal to move to a Rogers plan with the
> first couple months at reduced reate, and following months at the good old
> expensive Rogers prices.
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.fido (More info?)

AndrewH wrote:
>
> I don't expect to see an increase in front end prices, but I do expect
> to see an end to a gradual drop in prices.

Which is interesting since the media seem to believe that by buying Fido,
Rogers will be able to continue to push price down adn be good for customers.
Again, the media are so naive.

From an accounting point of view, It could be a good deal for Rogers since it
will acquire bandwidth, infrastructure as well as a lot of customers.

Big question is how much rationlisation can be made in terms of towers.

I am very disapointed that the Microcell board has already recommended
acceptance. It is a very sad day.

With Fido about to disapear, I will request that they give me unloack codes
for ALL my phones, including my old 2190 in case I ever need those again years
from now when we'll have Rogers SIMs and Fido will be long gone.
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.fido (More info?)

"JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote in message
news:414FAE88.3442A7F6@teksavvy.com...
> Nobody has a decent 1900 network outside urban areas.

Telus does in Alberta. A friend has an old Clearnet analog/1900 CDMA phone
(I told him to upgrade :) ). He gets analog only in Saskatchewan (as one
would expect) except in Regina and Saskatoon, but gets full digital
everywhere in Alberta. Telus must have CDMA 1900 implemented province-wide.

Jim
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.fido (More info?)

<yoyo@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:l4ruk0l6sqdkur55u7fmbu167efjo44kcg@4ax.com...
> And dropped calls, and higher prices...

Since Rogers will own the Fido towers, and can take advantage of them,
Rogers' new amalgamated network should be at least as good as the better of
Fido and Rogers at the moment. I see this merger as win-win as long as some
of the plan advantages that Fido has get retained post-merger (low-cost long
distance, etc.).

Rogers could remove some of Microcell's towers and redeploy them (in certain
places, that might make sense - Rogers probably doesn't need two GSM towers
at Davidson, Saskatchewan, for example) but I would think most if not all of
the urban towers will stay right where they are.

Jim
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom