Editor’s note: This is part 1 of a three part series about Shaw’s new bandwidth caps. For part 2 click here, for part 3 click here
As of January 1, 2011, Shaw is implementing a pretty significant change into how it charges for internet service. The company is going to begin enforcing bandwidth caps on all of it’s customers. What does this mean? Your account has a limit on how much data you can use per billing cycle. If you go over that limit, they will charge you for every gigabyte you go over the limit. For the two Shaw plans that would be most common, High Speed, and High Speed Extreme, these limits are 60GB and 100GB respectively. On the High Speed plan, the overage cost is $2/GB, and on the High Speed Extreme plan, the overage costs are $1/GB
So What’s The Big Deal?
Several things, actually, so bear with me. Shaw has actually had caps on their plans for a long time, they have just never actively enforced them. They have been used in the past only to act against the users who abuse the network the absolute most; users that go over the cap by several hundred gigabytes. Until now they have never charged anyone any kind of overage fees on their accounts. Why now? Shaw is reading the tea leaves, and it doesn’t like what it sees. Did you know that as of 1 month ago, Shaw’s caps were actually 75GB and 125GB? The caps were actually raised to that level several months ago, and Shaw was very proud of it. Near the end of December, the caps were lowered back to their current levels. People have asked Shaw about why that happened, and they say that the limits were raised as part of a pilot project, and that they showed that only 2% of their customers went over that limit. The limit was dropped back to current levels, where about 10% go over the limit.
Speaking of trials: if you live in Edmonton, did you know that you were lucky enough to be part of the trial program for this new system, running from October through December? Neither did I, until near the end of December. Edmonton was chosen as the test ground for it. Thankfully we are not being charged right away, and are being reset back to the first notification level so no one in Edmonton will be charged in January.
Who Cares if Only 10% Go Over The Cap? They Should be Charged then.
Those are *current* usage levels. With the current path that media and entertainment is going, that level is going to go up, and go up fast in the very near future. A few months ago, Netflix launched in Canada. For those who do not know, Netflix is a streaming video service available that allows you to stream movies and TV shows to your TV, or other device. This service is $8/month for all you can eat video, meaning you can watch as much Netflix video you want for $8/month. Admittedly, the selection in Canada right now is not fantastic, but new content is being added literally every day, and much of it is in HD. You can watch Netflix right now on your PC, iPhone, iPod, iPad, Apple TV, Playstation 3, Xbox 360, and Nintendo Wii. More devices will be added in Canada in 2011, including blu-ray players, TV’s, and many other internet enabled set top boxes. This means that this functionality will simply come built in to at least one new device that people buy within the next year or two. That type of market penetration means that Netflix will see increased use simply because almost everyone has access to it. I have measured how much data Netflix uses, and 1 hour of Netflix streaming in HD via my Playstation 3 came in to be about 2GB. With the average movie being 2 hours long, that is 4GB per movie. Two movies a week over the course of a billing cycle will work out to 8 movies x 4GB/movie. That is 32GB, or just over half of your monthly bandwidth cap alone. If you are already over your cap, it will cost $8 to watch a single move on Netflix, beyond the $8/month you pay to use the service.
Netflix is not the only service that will be affected. Cineplex Odeon just announced a program to allow people to purchase movies online. Apple has had this service for years with it’s iTunes store, where the average HD movie is close to 2GB.
Each TV network in Canada (Global TV, CityTV, CTV, and CBC) offer free streaming of their TV shows online, which is very helpful if you miss an episode of your favorite TV shows, or want to watch a part of the news again. At least two of the networks, Global TV and CityTV, offer apps for the iPad specifically designed for this. While not as high quality as Netflix, watching a TV episode on those websites will be a few hundred megabytes each that counts against your cap.
The other big entertainment venue that will be affected by this is gaming. There are many services that allow games to be purchased and downloaded online. The more popular ones include Steam and Direct2Drive, along with the Xbox Live store and Playstation Network Store. Many new games run in the 10-15GB range, each. World of Warcraft, for example, is currently 19.9GB. That is 1/3 of my cap to buy and download a single game, or almost $40 if I am already over that limit.
The last service I will mention is online backup services. I personally use Carbonite for online backups primarily for off site backup of my pictures. It is not a huge deal right now, since I don’t add much to my Carbonite backup, but first time users who might have 10GB of pictures to upload to back up, that counts against your cap that month. If you go on a holiday and take 4GB of pictures that you want backed up with those services, that counts against your cap.
These services are only going to become more popular, not less as time goes on. And these new caps put in place by Shaw are going to severely limit what people can do with this content.
Will This Affect Most People Today?
In a word, probably not. Okay, that was two words. The average family of 4 will probably have issues, but one average person, especially on 100GB, might not have any issues with this at all, today. But within a year, maybe two, this will become a significant issue for many more people. This issue, while still affecting people today, will only become bigger over time, and will catch people unaware 6 months, 9 months, or 12 months from now, as their usage naturally increases over time as the internet gets used for more and more services.
What Does Shaw Say?
Sadly, not a lot. They do offer several ways to lessen the blow of this. First off, let me emphasize: SHAW WILL NOT BE CHARGING YOU THE FIRST TIME YOU GO OVER YOUR LIMIT. You will receive two notices on page two of your bill the first two times you go over the limit on your plan. Shaw *will* begin charging the 3rd time you go over your limit. Shaw’s High Speed Extreme package is probably their best bang for the buck deal right now. For only $10/month more than High Speed, you do get 40GB more data and the overage costs drop in half. They also offer “data packs” which allow you to add bandwidth to your account for a reduced rate. Those packs are $5 for 10GB extra, $20 for 60GB extra, or $50 for 250GB extra. Those can be added to your account at any point up to 3 days before the end of your billing cycle to reduce the overage costs, but will remain on your account unless you remove them manually. Shaw will also provide you with a tool to monitor your bandwidth on your account page at secure.shaw.ca. However, Shaw will not turn this tool on until after you have already exceeded your bandwidth once. So the average user will use up one of their two strikes without even realizing it.
So Why is Shaw Doing This, Exactly?
Shaw’s statement says that they are doing this to ensure better management of their network, and to ensure that all users have equal access on their network. They say that the minority of the users use the majority of the bandwidth on the network, and they have the right to manage that. Now, I will fully admit that that is true. The minority of users right now do use the majority of the bandwidth on their network. One Shaw rep has said that 9% of users use 50%. Is that a problem? In many ways, yes. However, I personally believe that will even out over time as more users discover things like Netflix, or other similar streaming services.
However, this has been the case for years, and it’s only now that they have chosen to start enforcing their limits. There are several possible reasons for this. Now, these are mostly my personal opinions. I have no proof of this, but this is what I think makes sense.
Shaw sees the coming threat of those online services to it’s cable TV service. Shaw Video on Demand movies are in the $5/each range, where Netflix is $8/month for unlimited video. Why would people want to pay/rent a Shaw DVR when you can watch TV shows that are missed online legally for free with ads, or pay $2 to watch them on iTunes. Of course Shaw would rather you pay to use their service than pay someone else to get that same content. The goal here seems to be making all of the other services so expensive to use that the majority of people will have no choice but to use the Shaw services. That seems the most likely explanation.
Another possibility, one which I have no real proof at all, is that Shaw is in the middle of two very expensive endeavours. They just purchased the Global TV network for $2 Billion. Shaw is also building out a wireless network, and will be launching a Cell Phone service in Western Canada in 2011. These are very expensive programs, and Shaw probably needs ways to recoup that cost.
You Sound Like You’re Totally Against Capped Internet.
As much as I’ve hated on Shaw so far here, I’m actually not. My problems lay mainly with a couple things. First off, Shaw’s limits are very low. As stated above as usage naturally increases, users will have a very difficult time staying under the 60GB cap on the High Speed plan. Think of the average family of four, all of whom use computers and the internet. Restricting each user to 15GB/month, or even 25GB a month when a single Netflix movie is 4GB, and a single game might be 15GB, is practically impossible. The internet with Shaw may become like cell phone plans, where a teenager who downloads a large amount of content without knowing that there are limits, or a household just having an above average month, can have a Shaw bill significantly larger than normal, placing a burden on that family. Buying 3 large games and watching 4-5 movies over the limit would take a $37 bill on 60GB up to $137. And those months can easily happen. Someone could get sick and just want to watch movies on Netflix for two straight days (as recently happened to me, actually), someone could buy 3x20GB games in a month. That can easily happen in real life.
However, I do believe that the true abusers of the system should be penalized. If your use is 10x the average, I do believe that they should have to pay overage charges. But the average person who just has a month where they watch 5 more movies than normal should not be penalized. In 2008, Comcast, an internet service provider in the United States, became among the first large ISP’s to place a cap on their internet bandwidth in that country. Their limit on all of their plans is 250GB, slightly over three times more than Shaw’s limit on High Speed. That limit, in my opinion is more than fair, and only punishes those who truly use significantly more than the average. Some people with disagree with me on this, that the internet should be truly unlimited forever, but the internet is becoming like a utility, and no utility is an “all you can eat” plan. I completely disagree with Shaw, but I’m also fair.
The second thing that really frustrates me and upsets me as a Shaw user is the complete secrecy in which Shaw has started this program. The pilot project in Edmonton started without anyone’s knowledge. The only indication that this was happening was for people who went over their limits for the billing cycle who received a two line notice on page two of their Shaw bill. Shaw also has not notified the entire customer base of these limits, choosing only to send letters to users who have gone over the limit at some point in the past. I am not sure how far back they are going to notify people. I know for a fact that I was over my 60GB limit in either August or September, and I did not receive any notification. Shaw should at the very least be notifying, in plain text, it’s entire customer base that this new program is going into place. The number of people that this could affect is staggering. Shaw has about 1.5 Million customers. If 10% of their customers go over, that is 125,000 customers that will be affected by this system, and that number will only go up in time as more users discover more internet services. The fact that Shaw has kept the vast majority of it’s users completely in the dark about so many of it’s services is a very bad thing, and something that I as a consumer do not appreciate. My absolute favorite thing to say about this is something that I sadly have no physical proof of, yet I have seen with my own eyes. Shaw’s Terms of use page currently lists a last modified date of May 13, 2010. I know for a fact that in mid December that Terms of use had the higher 75GB and 125GB limits in the document. By the end of December, the Terms of use now reference the 60GB and 100GB limits., while still stating a modified date of May 13, 2010, while they clearly have been modified since then. I do not have a screenshot from before this, so I sadly cannot prove this to be true, but I looked, and I know what I saw. That kind of practice does not leave me with a good feeling about Shaw.
EDIT: Note that as of January 13th, the Shaw Terms of Service have been updated to reflect a modified date of December 15, 2010, and that is no longer reads at July 20th.
So What Are The Options?
There aren’t very many good ones, honestly. If Telus has the Optik TV service in your area, switching to Telus is something that is a possibility. Telus’ Optik TV and internet packages actually provide better service and value for a very comparable price to Shaw’s offerings, and a Telus representative has stated on camera that they will not be capping and charging for overages on their network.
The only other real option is to call Shaw and voice your displeasure and concerns. Talk to managers, not the front line staff. Talk to the highest person you can get a hold of. The best option is to get Shaw to either dramatically increase the limits to reasonable levels, or to remove them altogether. If there is enough of a customer backlash, anything is possible.
Are you done now?
Almost. I just want to say a few quick things to close. First off, much of the information I have put into this post comes from a series of forum posts. So while I cannot confirm their accuracy 100%, many things that they have said have matched the few mainstream media reports, and the few official things that Shaw has published. Other information I gathered from Wikipedia, Global TV, CTV, CityTV, the CBC and the Globe and Mail.
I asked that you call Shaw and provide your feedback against this new system, and the way it was implemented. One thing that I do ask is for anyone calling to remember that the first person you talk to is likely a front line staff member who has absolutely nothing to do with the decisions that were made. These are staff who do their best and take a lot of angry calls every day. Please be kind to those people, your problem is not with them, it is with the decision makers. If you do not have a positive experience with the front line staff you speak with, ask to talk to their manager, and keep going up the chain until you get someone who is reasonable.
One thing that I ask of you, the person reading this, is to spread the word. As I have stated, very few people have been notified of this, and fewer really know all of the issues with this change to Shaw’s services. This is an issue that deserves more attention, and the more people that know about it, and ask questions, the better.
And lastly, You may have noticed that I have kept discussions on this article to services that are legal. I know that there are perfectly legitimate uses for services like Bittorrent, but I also know what most people use it for the majority of the time. I welcome discussion in comments, but please note that all comments are moderated before going up, and that any posts talking about illegal services and uses of internet service will not be approved. Please keep all discussions civil.
Richard
January 7, 2011
Calling up Shaw right now to express my viewpoint about these changes.
Well written post too.
Heath
January 7, 2011
This line: ” Telus representative has stated on camera that they will not be capping and charging for overages on their network.” is very interesting as on Telus’ “products” page they “say” they will charge you when you go over the limits. I break my 75GB limit every month, and they have yet to charge me, but seeing Shaw do this makes me think Telus will follow soon.
Rafal
January 7, 2011
Honestly, I believe that the reason they are raising their prices, or “implementing caps” without “raising prices”, is because people will be dropping full cable service etc because of services such as netflix, the apple tv, etc.
I myself have basic cable, and extreme internet with shaw. I pretty much watch maybe two channels, and I had the full blown cable experience. This model just doesn’t work for me. I don’t want to be dependent on a service dictating when I can watch a show or movie. I want to have this media available when I am available to watch it. The new services popping up provide just that. Also, I would like to watch certain shows that aren’t available with Shaw, or Canada for that matter. So, I can’t even add a plan of any sort to be able to view that content. Internet is the only resource providing such content.
Even with the extreme plan, I go over the limit. Not only because of watching shows or movies, but also due to backups etc. My wife is a photographer, and to backup the large files on the web these days, it would be really hard to stay within their ridiculous limits.
They simply see this as a business opportunity and will take full advantage of it. And they can, because there really isn’t much competition, just like with cell phone options.
We can all hope that other internet providers will start popping up and offering services.
It’s just sad, as I’ve been a customer since it was Shaw @Home. I think this dates back to 1996…
So Shaw, BIG F U and I will be looking for other providers. Because you want to make an extra $20/month, you will lose a client that is paying $120/month.
Ben Babcock
January 7, 2011
My reservations about these moves by Shaw and comparable moves by other ISPs is that it is going to further put Canada behind the rest of the world when it comes to broadband penetration and usage.
I am usually the last person to insist the market is going to solve the problem, but I really think we need to open up to foreign competition. These companies can get away with tactics like this because consumers really don’t have much of a choice when it comes to “voting with their money.” What are we going to do, not have Internet?
I recognize that the demands placed upon our network by bandwidth-hungry users are real and that ISPs must take steps to ensure the network can handle those demands. In theory, there are situations where usage caps make sense. However, I do not think Shaw and other ISPs are employing such caps in good faith. There comes a point where the demand on a network means you need to build a better network rather than try to limit the amount of traffic on the network. But instead of investing in innovation and improving their infrastructure, Shaw has chosen to spend its capital buying defunct media enterprises. And then they raise prices. Because what are going to do, not have Internet?
Well we’ll probably still have Internet. But because our ISPs are more interested in making money than providing a service, that Internet will be worse than what is available in other developed countries. If we are not careful, Canada could fall even further behind other countries. Finland is promising a legal right to 100 Mbps service by 2015. Where is Canada going? Nowhere fast.
wunderbar
January 7, 2011
Telus does have that limit on paper, but if they are willing to say they are not going to start enforcing it I am willing to believe them, for the time being at least. Shaw has had their limits posted for years as well, but have never started to enforce them until now.
If you want to see the Telus rep say it, here is the CTV news article that started this all, for the mainstream at least. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m1ItlDwebRc&feature=player_embedded
RyanBerry
January 7, 2011
Excellent post! Very good summary.
Shaw is both our ISP, and our TV Network. Therefore, If Shaw TV is having trouble competing with Netflix, Shaw Internet just quietly lowers our bandwidth caps, starts charging exhorbitant overage fees, and makes it cost prohibitive to use their competitors.
Shaw should not be our only way to access their competitors! Its like Ford being able to charge a levy on any Toyotas purchased, thereby making it too expensive to buy a Toyota! Or your ISP blocking Skype so you are forced to purchase their phone service. It just makes no sense.
Here is the reason why There is a conflict of interest when Shaw is both a TV provider, AND an ISP… http://www.thestar.com/news/sciencetech/technology/lawbytes/article/913640–geist-shaw-sings-new-tune-on-net-regulation
The CRTC are naive to have allowed the ISPs to do this, and the Conservative party are the WORST party when it comes to net neutrality.
Fact is, in Japan, they have internet speeds 10x as fast as Shaw, and for one quarter the price, with unlimited bandwidth. Canada has internet access that is slower, and more expensive than nearly any other country in the world.
Everytime this story is in the media, all they talk about is how consumers are mad about a cost increase. It’s so much more than that. Its about ISPs that have control over access to their competitors, and now that we use the net for phone, work, entertainment, movies, music, school, etc… they have us right where they want us. The CRTC was supposed to protect Canadians… yet they are a bunch of retired phone company execs! Whose side are they really going to be on?
Anyways, great article… good to see Shaw is having problems keeping this quiet. I think its despicable that they arent telling people that their caps were reduced by 25%… and when asked about it, they lie and state that it was only a part of a pilot program.
Lots of angry Shaw customers are congregating here…
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r24949041-Shaw-charging-for-extra-bandwidth.~start=940
Princesstefer
January 7, 2011
I’ve got a partial screen shot on December 23rd of the google cache version of what their the $37 pkg used to advertise on the web. I can pass that along to you, though since it’s just and image (and can therefor be altered, I don’t think it stands as concrete evidence, but definitely is a graphic representation of what the package was prior to the change. Let me know if you’d like to have it.
GordLacey
January 8, 2011
You said “I know for a fact that in mid December that Terms of use had the higher 75GB and 125GB limits in the document. By the end of December, the Terms of use now reference the 60GB and 100GB limits., while still stating a modified date of May 13, 2010, while they clearly have been modified since then. I do not have a screenshot from before this, so I sadly cannot prove this to be true, but I looked, and I know what I saw.”
Enter The Google Cache:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://www.shaw.ca/en-ca/AboutShaw/TermsofUse/AcceptableUsePolicyInternet.htm#q8
There you go, it clearly shows the previous levels, with a modification date in July (which is what it still says right now).
I was P*SSED at this. Yes, I go over my levels, and yes, I understand why Shaw has implemented these caps. When I heard this was coming I upgraded to the Warp speed because I knew I would be covered by the 250 gig download limit (for $97). Two days after signing up for this plan, it was dropped to 175 gigs. That’s a 30% reduction in bandwidth! I wrote a polite email to Shaw explaining to them that I was happy to move to their higher plan, even though it was doubling the cost of my Internet (my Shaw bill with Internet, Cable, and Phone is now roughly $260/month), but they turned me from a happy customer to a pissed off one when they dropped the bandwidth to 175 gigs. I received a form letter in response. Grrr!
SomeGuy
January 8, 2011
Shaw internet services suck anyways. Who gives a damn? If you ever worked as a field tech or linesman for Shaw, you know what I am talkin’ ’bout Willis.
Juanita Perrier
January 8, 2011
Can’t crafty hackers get into your computer and steal your allotted monthly usage?
Shaw_Alex
January 8, 2011
Hey great write up, and I appreciate the level of detail and attention you put into this.
We do have an official Facebook and Twitter account that are watched closely by upper management. Posting well written and constructive comments in these mediums will gather more attention that speaking to a front line representative.
As an official representative; I will be forwarding this blog directly onto my superiors as a great example of how our customers are reacting to this change.
Regarding current bandwidth caps, we will be watching future usage trends to ensure we make our packages and network matches. The internet is evolving, and our products and services will be evolving with it.
Cheers
-@Shaw_Alex
RyanBerry
January 8, 2011
Shaw Alex;
We have all seen EXACTLY what Shaw does when they see internet usage trending upward. They LOWER our caps by 33%, and begin charging massive overage fees… and then make the ridiculous claim that the old caps were only part of a pilot. We arent that naive. Even one of your own reps stated clearly that reps were asked to lie regarding the cap change being a part of the pilot.
Shaw is a shady company. They quietly reduce caps, and charge $2 per GB for overages when it costs .04c per GB to provide that same GB to an end user.
Cant compete with Netflix? Make it cost prohibitive to use, so you can continue ripping customers off with $6 Shaw VOD movies.
Netflix… FINALLY a legal alternative to torrenting! Now, Shaw has made Netflix too expensive to use. When Shaw was only an ISP, they called Netflix “an innovator”. but as soon as Shaw became a TV broadcast provider, Shaw’s stance changed.
http://www.thestar.com/news/sciencetech/technology/lawbytes/article/913640–geist-shaw-sings-new-tune-on-net-regulation
High Speed “Extreme” – Now with a new, lowered cap of 100GB! How “EXTREME” is that?!
Want more info? Here is a thread with nearly 100,000 unique visitors, and 60 pages of angry customers.
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r24949041-Shaw-charging-for-extra-bandwidth.~start=940
I truly am disgusted with Shaws business practices, and seriously, with all the endless Shaw TV commercials now, about how “together is amazing” it makes me feel sick to my stomach. Our family has been loyal to Shaw for 10 years, at $225 per month. We are now switching providers, and will never come back.
http://openmedia.ca/meter
Greg
January 8, 2011
Lots of utilities are “all you can eat”: Home phone. Water. Medical services. Car insurance. Garbage collection. If there’s no vilification of people who throw out more garbage than others, which is actually bad for the environment and hurts us all, why is there such animosity toward users who use a lot of Internet?
It is always the case — always! — that among a population of users, 50% of the use will be by a much smaller percentage of the users. That’s a power law, and it’s repeated over and over, everywhere. So it is not correct to label the top bunch of users “hogs” or “abusers”. How about “power users” and “ahead of the curve”?
Right now, Shaw seems to do just fine supplying me Internet at full speed, all the time, with no (enforced) caps. So there is absolutely no justification for “managing” their network with caps (at least, not in my area). Given that the marginal cost to Shaw of supplying nearly any additional number of gigabytes is practically nil, $50 for 250 GB is absolutely extorionate.
Shaw’s move to caps is a protectionist, anti-competitive cash grab, pure and simple.
T
January 8, 2011
We called in to Shaw to complain and were given this contact information to mail a letter in….
Doug McWilliams
Regional Systems Manager
Shaw Communications Inc.
2400 32 Avenue NE
Calgary AB T2E 9A7
It is beyond ridiculous what they are doing…
john
January 8, 2011
This is sad that a Shaw is making it more expensive for the average internet user to upload HD 1080P video to YouTube, and view HD content.
Lars
January 9, 2011
As mentioned by Ryan Berry above.. indeed – I’m in Japan – my Fiber to Home package running here hass 100Mb connect speed for about $30 per month, $40 if you want a dedicated IP# (which I have to run a pizza box server). There is no-cap on data xfer, real or imagined.
As for the apparent situation w/Shaw there now.. For Shame! It seems very much like tossing the baby with the bath water. If they have a small minority of clients who move xTB’s of data per month.. punish them. Shaping bandwidth (ie, choking their connect speeds down to dial-up rate for rest of that billing cycle) would be one easy, natural and effective option.
However, the vast majority of valued clients, who may (or may not) go over some arbitrary – and widely unknown – limit, should not be held wholly accountable for the actions of a few abusive users. That is really a weak (read: Stupid) business strategy.. just saying. It’s both short-sighted and un-sustainable.
However, if there actually is an anti-competitive tactic in play related to their other business units, this ‘should’ be rather difficult for the company to argue effectively to the regulators. Communications are a public utility and Shaw is bound by license to provide such services, at a reasonable profit. Surely acceptable industry cost / benefit standards should apply to govern all parties with vested interest?
Shaw_Alex made a reasonable point, the web is evolving and so they must too. That being said, there is an industry term called ‘churn’ which basically calculates to the cost of customer acquisition vs. retention – yes, it’s all about money. Simply put, in a healthy competitive market, the cost to gain new customers is generally much higher than keeping the existing base happily paying.
Therein is the catch, is the local market healthy? If not.. Why, and more importantly – what is being done to resolve these issues going forward? Perhaps a good look at current offerings in other comparable markets to benchmark the value proposition would be in order.
Good luck with that.. +_+
Greg
January 9, 2011
I can’t believe I overlooked what is clearly the most obvious and ironic “all you can eat” service: digital cable TV!
Shaw does not care if you watch TV all day, every day; or leave it on while you’re out of the house; or even fall asleep with it still blaring away — that’s all one price, regardless of use. No calling for “signal hogs” to “pay their way,” and no artificial “viewing caps” to hold couch potatoes to just a few minutes of TV a day.
Yet the infrastructure is *exactly the same* as that for Internet service. This is made even clearer with Telus’ Optik TV, where Internet and TV are plugged into the *same box*, and share bandwidth!
How come it’s just assumed that for a flat rate you can watch TV 24/7/365, with no harm to “the network” without caps of any kind, but when those same bits are used for Internet, now all of a sudden they’re precious commodities that have to be rationed tightly, or else the poor, delicate network will bog down and break??
[Just ran some numbers: leaving your TV/PVR on all month would use about (15 Mb/sec / 8 Mb/MB * 60 sec/min * 60 min/hr * 24 hr/day * 30 day/month = 4860000 MB, or about 4750 gigabytes per month -- for which Shaw charges a flat rate. If that were Internet service, Shaw wants you to believe it's reasonable that they charge you for the last 4650 GB at a rate that would add surcharges of about 4650 GB * $50/250GB = $900 per month!]
tester
January 9, 2011
It is not a coincidence that Netflix comes to Canada and then Shaw starts charging for “extra” bandwidth. If everyone switches to Netflix, who would buy cable?
Just like how many VOIP providers are completely useless on Shaw internet, this is bad for consumers and bad for the marketplace of digital innovation. Can you imagine if these policies were in place before youtube and other streaming video was in place, do you think youtube would have blossomed into what it is today with bandwidth caps?
Pam
January 9, 2011
I give broadcast television 5 years before it is done. The trend over the last several years has been that users want their content when they want it, not on someone else’s schedule. This got started with services like video on demand, then later time-shift services so we could watch our shows on Eastern channels at earlier times and now we have services like Apple TV and Netflix. This is only going to grow as more folks realize the benefits and jump in and more services are offered.
The media landscape is shifting and shifting more quickly every day. If Shaw wants to cling to broadcast television as it is in its death rattle, so be it. Some innovative upstart will come along and I’ll be right there with them riding the wave to the future!
Phasorburn
January 9, 2011
Minor nitpicking, Greg. Digital tv signals remain within Shaw’s network and probably use multicast. Internet mostly is between you and something outside of Shaw, for which they have to pay for peering agreements, bandwidth capacity build out, etc, with external entities. It does indeed cost them more.
Now, how much more we can’t exactly know without being able to see their entire operating and capital expenditures details.
RyanBerry
January 9, 2011
http://openmedia.ca/meter
The petition is growing by 1000 signatures per day now. The appeal process for UBB is over, on January 26. Please send the petition link to all of your friends, family, and co-workers as soon as possible – along with a link to this article so they fully understand the situation!
I cant believe that the CRTC hasnt yet noticed that Shaw being both an ISP and a TV broadcaster is giving them the ability to limit access to their own TV competitors! (web based video, such as hulu and netflix). This should never be permitted.
Shaw’s anti-competitive behavior cannot go unnoticed. Shaw is trying very hard to keep it quiet… lets not give them their wish.
RyanBerry
January 9, 2011
A user on the DSL reports website made an excellent point regarding folding@home.
A lot of canadians donate their spare CPU time to folding, which helps for all sorts of important scientific studies to battle diseases, etc.
http://folding.stanford.edu/
If this requires 20gb per month, why would anyone help with this project. At $2 per GB, it becomes cost prohibitive… but this is very important! I wonder how many people will no longer assist with this research anymore.
Oh well, with Shaw, nothing but revenue matters… as their new slogan says… “Together is amazing”. (together = shaw + your cash = amazing)
Greg
January 9, 2011
@Phasorburn: One thing Shaw *doesn’t* have to pay for is content. They successfully argued that they shouldn’t have to pay carriage fees to the content producers. I think they framed that argument in terms of “benefit to the consumer.” (Wow, those people at Shaw sure are looking out for us!)
In other words, Shaw is insisting that not only should they pay one “all you can eat” price for the content they retransmit, but that that price should be… free!
Melanie A
January 9, 2011
I live in Montreal, and I’m with Videotron, and our high speed internet upload/download is 40 gigabytes at the ridiculous price of $52.95 BEFORE taxes, and close to $60 AFTER taxes! Our capped overage costs us $8 per gigabyte. NOTHING compared to what Shaw offers…. and they barely even charge their clients if they go over!!!
I use Netflix (not regularly), but I watch a few movies a week, and as long as you don’t stream HD, you shouldn’t download more than 1 GB per movie.
I can recommend you keep track with your internet company and see how much you use, and then you can see what’s hogging the most!!!! BE smart, not stupid and download every thing you see.
ANGRY AT SHAW
January 9, 2011
Shaw is literally grabbing its clients by the balls here. Same priced service for 2010 with higher caps than the same price for 2011 but with the 25-30% lowered bandwidth? OK are we all brain dead here to stand for this crap. Also, they leave out the little portion to INFORM its customers about this really makes me mad. This is just a cash grab and honestly i am disgusted with shaw. What’s next? An enforced curfew on internet usage’s?
If Shaw had any brains, they should have increased the bandwidth, say by 5-10%, keeping the same fee and adding the cap fee charges; would not be so devastating.
I don’t care if you are a high user or not, the bottom line is 60-100 gb a month is small due to all the media intensive sites, games and movie oriented entertainment. This is set up to bite us in the ass. Blockbuster is pulling out and soon rogers will be too. Where will we get movies? Netflix or buy the damn DVD/bluray and the difference in prices is a no brainer.Netflix for the win. So if we choose Netflix this means bandwidth… with more bandwidth means higher $$$$. *Crunch*
Bryan
January 9, 2011
How exactly is Shaw going to win if Telus is offering me 25/mnth for the same service as Shaw’s Extream package, and no inforced cap? I have Shaw down to 29.95 /month for Extream for the next 6 months thanks to Telus’ counter offer, and am running them both simultaneously as I trial run Telus after being with shaw for 10+ years!
So far, the first two months of Telus service has been great!
So after my two overage warnings are up, I’ll probably cancel and go with Telus.
Data storage prices have collapsed exponentially over that last 10 years, yet Shaw has just lowered their cap to that of 10 years ago!
In Japan you can get fiber with unlimited data for 30 a month at 100mb/sec!
Shaw is afraid of netflix, hulu etc from competing with their cable TV offering.
Stephanie
January 9, 2011
Thank you for the valuable information. I will be calling shaw, becuase I’m sure that I would fall into that 10%.
Shaw is not being very forthcoming with their customers. Page 2 of your statement, who reads those. They should be emailing or sending a specific notification about this.
Omega
January 9, 2011
I have written a generic letter about this for people who wish to voice concern to their representatives.
Http://tinyurl.com/WakeUpCanada
You should check it out to understand how usage based billing is totally unacceptable.
RyanBerry
January 10, 2011
Excellent article, Omega… but perhaps you might want to consider shortening it a little bit? I honestly think its too long, and most of the people who receive it will only make it through the first paragraph.
Your points should be hard hitting, impactful, and designed to elicit a strong response from the reader.
Many people are upset over UBB, but it’s folks such as yourself, and Wunderbar who truly make the difference by putting in the effort to get the word out. I truly appreciate it, as should all Canadians who use the internet. Thank you.
Omega
January 10, 2011
RyanBerry, I definitely agree. I think in this case however, brevity is part of what’s gotten us into the mess.
Consider how poorly this technical situation has been served by trying to shrink the concept. It is in fact exactly what telecommunications providers in Canada have been doing.
Of course, this is a letter for MPs, MLAs, councillors and mayors to read. Give them the details! In other places, telling someone “Do you like netflix and youtube? Do you $40 extra dollars a month like it?” is enough to get a reaction.
All that said, this letter is free and open for anyone to use and improve. If there is a specific change or iteration you would like me to make on it for you, get in touch with me or your local geek!
RyanBerry
January 10, 2011
Good points, Omega. It doesn’t hurt to have a more detailed explanation. You did a good job writing it, and I’m glad to have one more eloquent person writing articles that people can use as required.
I found another article that might be of interest to readers of this blog:
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/study-canadian-internet-users-pay-69858#comments
We only have until January 26th to get the CRTC to reverse their decision on usage based billing. What Shaw is doing is anti-competitive, and the primary reason that a TV Broadcaster should not also be an ISP – It’s a conflict of interest, and Shaw is therefore able to effectively “Tax” their competition at a tremendously high-rate.
If consumers knew that they are going to be billed by the byte from now on, and how that would actually affect them in the future, there would be hundreds of thousands of angry Canadians. Unfortunately, by the time people find out, it will be far too late to do anything about it. Exactly what Shaw is hoping – I assume this is why they haven’t announced that they REDUCED OUR CAPS BY 33% EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2011!! That would be a “call to arms” that Shaw is hopeful to avoid.
velabronx
January 10, 2011
While I found this post to be mildly informative, all I really got out of it and the comments was a bunch of people who bog down the network with streaming and don’t want to pay for it. I pay out the ass to Shaw every month for my bundle which includes the highest level of Internet. With working from home and being huge online gamers (PC/PS3) it ensures I have the best service possible. I am not too cheap to pay to garuntee good speeds and bandwidth. It annoys me when Shaw’s service sucks because it’s run down by people cleaning out the “all you can eat buffet” but didn’t buy it.
Another thing I will say is regarding Netflix and streaming. 1. Though convenient to watch shows on your computer it’s also annoying. Most people own PVR’s and are smart enough to record shows they watch on a regular basis. 2. Shaw’s on demand service DOES provide free tv episode viewing. While the selection is limited and only contains the latest few episodes it’s a good service. If your program is in a prime-time spot on a major network it’s probably there. 3. Shaw’s movie system will always beat Netflix. Why? Netflix will never fork out the mega money required to license new releases into Canada. Though Netflix runs some alright documentaries, there’s nothing I can’t find on my Shaw programming. I like my new releases and Shaw gives that.
I really don’t understand why people complain constantly about the communication giants. Bell, Telus, Rogers and Shaw all have you up their asshole. It’s nothing new.
Ryan
January 11, 2011
velabronx,
What gives you the right to tell everyone how they should be using the internet they paid for? The Caps are too low to be justified.
If you don’t understand you should probably re-read the article.
Editor’s note: comment edited to remove profanity
Adam Snider
January 11, 2011
This is exactly how I feel.
I can’t track down hard numbers on PVD/DVR penetration in Canada, but it appears to be significantly less than 50% (most likely between 15-20%), so it certainly is not true that “most people own PVRs…”
Jon
January 11, 2011
Just because I make my living using the internet doesn’t mean I should be ‘punished’ as one person commented from Japan.
Shaw is crippling all sorts of innovation and job professions by doing this.
Most people don’t see the broader picture and it’s pretty sad. Gaming & Netflix users aren’t the only ones affected.
What about photographers that upload all of their content to show their clients?
What about videographers who do the same?
What about developers or IT professionals who have to upload their work to websites on a constant basis?
What about familiers larger than four who have kids that constantly use the internet?
What about folding@home users that want to help out science?
There is probably a bigger list than that. And don’t you dare say “Get a business internet plan then” because those have caps as well.
Vote with your wallet. Sign the petition at openmedia.ca.
Don’t let corporations limit the future potential just because they have competition now.
Leigh Makarewicz
January 11, 2011
Thank you for breaking this down in an understandable way. When you are just a computer user and not a techie these sorts of articles really help.
Omega
January 11, 2011
velabronx, as a PC/PS3 gamer, you are officially a “heavy” user according to Shaw. Those games you download from PSN, or the data transmitted while playing your games amounts to several gigabytes worth of data moved per month.
Don’t use righteousness to understand this situation. There is no such a thing as a “heavy” user when talking about data moved over a period of time. Shaw has mislead you by misusing terminology.
A “heavy” user can’t tax Shaw any more than what they paid for because they can only get the bandwidth their subscription package affords them.
But this is all beside the point. The fact of the matter is that Shaw is trying to scare you with big numbers. They are banking on the fact that you will take their lies at face value.
Nobody is a heavy user in Canada to be perfectly honest with you. Largely because they can’t be. There’s no possible way with how slow our connections are. And the amount of data transmitted in a billing cycle just doesn’t ultimately mean anything.
Want an example? Let’s pretend you have 10GB of download per 30 days. In the first day, you use up all 10 of your gigabytes. How much are you straining the network the other 29 days?
How much did you strain the network on the first day?
The fact is, with current internet connections, the speed you did that 10GB likely would have taken you most of the day anyway. To shaw, that’s barely even a blip on their radar.
So think about what you’re saying and who you are blaming. You are playing right into their misdirection, and it’s costing us all dearly.
wunderbar
January 12, 2011
Another note regarding bandwidth, and something I didn’t put into the article itself because I can’t actually confirm it to be 100% accurate, is that everything I have read says that it costs Shaw, and any large ISP between 2 and 4 CENTS per gigabyte of bandwidth. Yet the standard overage fees are $2 or $1 depending on your plan. That’s quite the markup. Bandwidth is not free, I’ll never claim it is, but at the levels that many ISP’s have, it’s very cheap, and they are charging huge fees for it. That’s why shaw can sell the “pack” of 250GB for $50, which works out to 20 cents/gigabyte, and still make money on it. Especially since when you buy one of those packs you’re not likely to use all of the data you get in it.
Kenjuta
January 12, 2011
velabronx, when you said highest level of internet i highly doubt you’re paying $150 a month for the nitro package.
1. most ppl don’t have pvr
most of the ppl i know don’t even have a set top box
2. shaw on demand only has some eps of some shows and i won’t call them latest as well. they’re quite behind
i don’t really know about shaw’s movie system so i can’t really comment on that
last month has been an odd month for me and i used over 200GB of bandwidth
start playing WoW agian so that’s a 20GB download
Steam started to have a bunch of sales on games which also increased my download quite a bit
hell L4D2 and TF2 have updates very often and they’re not small
got a new computer so it has to do a bunch of windows update and driver updates
my brother is in university and they were on their winter break so he started watching netflix like mad
stream a bunch of GSL starcraft 2 tournament videos in HD (you can only watch these online as well) and my brother did the same so that’s like 2x the bandwidth
250GB for $50 is still overpriced
extreme cost $47 a month and you have 100GB a month
so that’s 350GB a month for $97
at that point i rather just upgrade to shaw nitro for $150 a month
you get the same 350GB bandwidth but you now have 100Mbps download and 5Mbps upload
though paying $150 a month is a bit unreasonable for me so i’ll most likely switch back to telus which i hate because they started blocking inbound port 80, 21, 25, 443, 993 for me
NoName
January 12, 2011
@velabronx:
Judging from what you’ve written, it’s clear that you are nowhere near informed enough to contribute to this. Go do a little reading, and then come back and share the opposing viewpoint with some credible information (i.e. not corporate propaganda).
Omega
January 13, 2011
How can you measure that per gigabyte? You’re missing the factor of time in that analysis. Who told you this?
You don’t measure network usage in total data transmitted. Shaw has to tell you how much a transmission at a specific rate of flow (kbps) cost them. Not how much a certain amount of data cost them.
1GB over 3 days costs them next to nothing.
1GB over 10 seconds may mean a little more work. But don’t be deceived, even that amount of effort is negligible.
I really wish people would start using a proper technical understanding for this situation. Shaw and others have been getting away with marketing guilt for far too long.
Brian
January 14, 2011
a. Shaw has a network of older then the hills cables in the field. They sell services on these cables that cannot ever meet current standards. Ever see your TV picture breakup? That is Shaw selling you service on a line that is over capacity. I am talking about the last mile CATV Cables and the lame fiber (single pair) back to the headend system.
b. Shaw should NEVER be allowed to own radio, TV, Cable, phone and Internet as well as programming companies. Cross ownership of the media in this manner very bad for the consumer.
c. Shaw is going to need cash to replace the older equipment and where will it come from? Oh, the same CRTC that keeps allowing this stuff will just let American companies buy in when the time is right. Bell & Telus are working to wards that end game anyway so get ready.
d. Quality programmes. How many times does Shaw repeat the same content in a 12 month time frame? Lots. Shaw controls everything from the ads to the – Lack of Local weather Radar – Why? Why not.
e. Shaw “Peers” at a fewInternet points in N. America. Shaw is NOT a Tier One ISP, far from it. Shaw has a big Pipe that sucks data in one direction for the most part. Shaw does not OWN the NETWORK as they claim. Shaw leases fiber in the USA and Canada. Yes they own fiber and the amount vs; the amount they lease is a joke.
f. All Canadian carriers are getting rich off bandwidth fees. A direct connection at 100 Megs in the U.S.A. with no caps is $100 a month. That is all.
g. The CRTC is made up of Telco, Cable and all the other scum that never do a real days work.
Last” leave the Internet alone. Stop bitching your customers out for using the damn service you have pushed them into for years. Upgrade your crap systems – They belong to you the providers, not us. As for all the new equipment starting to flow in the marketplace… do not blame us for buying items all of you the providers sell, and try to support. If you want me to pay for your systems then expect me to have a say in how you run your company. If not fine, then I will just vote with my wallet.
Brian
January 14, 2011
BTW: If you ever want a real explaination of how these networks are built, why they are so poor and how to save money just ask. Rogers and Shaw are among the worst in the world.
Roofer
January 14, 2011
Shaw is the only Western Canadian ISP to impose charges for exceeding your quota. I would strongly encourage everyone to cancel all their Shaw services, and encourage your friends, family and co-workers to do likewise.
The facts are in black-and-white for everyone to see:
- Shaw reduced the quota for their customers. Telus did not.
- Shaw charges for exceeding your quota. Telus does not.
- Shaw throttles torrents. Telus does not.
- In my opinion, this makes Shaw an internet-hostile company, and Telus an internet-friendly company.
- While Shaw charges for exceeding the quota, they do not provide a refund for those who use less than the quota. As with so many things with Shaw, it is a one way street.
- Shaw by default does not provide access to an accurate usage meter to all their customers.
- Shaw does not provide an alerting system so their customers know the quota has been exceeded.
- Shaw does not provide an option of slowing down your internet connection when you have exceeded your quota. The only option you have is to pay.
- All customers have not been informed that their quotas have been reduced. All customers have not been informed of the costs for exceeding the quota. They are finding out about these expensive changes in the news media. In my opinion, this is under-handed.
- Shaw changed the Terms of Usage Agreement without changing the date, thus effectively hiding these costly changes from their customers. In my opinion, this is not something that a trustworthy company would do.
All of the above steps are there in order to make it easy for Shaw to take more money from you, and more difficult for you to avoid givng more money to Shaw.
The question you have to ask yourself is, do you want to do business with an internet-hostile company? A company that takes something away, then charges you to get back to where you were? And then hides that information from you? Do you have better things to do with your life than always being worried about where the next big negative surprise is going to come from?
I suggest cancelling all of your Shaw services, and move to Telus, MTS or SaskTel. ANYONE BUT SHAW. And convince your family, friends and co-workers to do likewise.
Glenn
January 15, 2011
I have been a Shaw customer for over 10 years and I have now canceled. I will be going with Telus.
The point most people miss is that this is not a electric bill or a gas bill. There is no limit that Shaw has and when it’s used up it has to be paid for. Will people see a refund if they use less than their limit? No they will not.
Shaw doesn’t have any financial burden when it comes to bandwidth. The real story here is that they are a spoiled child running scared of Netflix because in Canada you don’t behave like a proper business instead you run to the CRTC and use your anti-competitive practices to destroy any chance of competition.
What’s more sad is that under the guise of patriotism these companies along with the CRTC cry that Canada will be destroyed by foreign business competition. It’s nonsensical to think it will somehow cease to be an independent country if a little telecommunications competition is allowed.
[WORDPRESS HASHCASH] The poster sent us ’0 which is not a hashcash value.
Xenon
January 15, 2011
If Shaw is going to charge for overages, they need to provide us with a way to check our usage.
Jonathan
January 15, 2011
I am in Vancouver and I have Novus (fiber to home) – they just INCREASED our allotment to 125G per month – used to be 110 at no extra price. Overages are 50c/Gb. Not sure if they enforce that or not – never been close to it.
If you live in Vancouver downtown, you can see if Novus is in your area.
Really glad I am not with Shaw!
Samantha
January 15, 2011
The online services should be paying Shaw for providing the infrastructure to deliver their services. Why should Shaw pay to deliver movies for Netflix?
HeavyLight
January 15, 2011
Thanks for the great post, and to commenters for the engaging discussion.
I have been a Shaw customer for 17 years, and a loyal one all of that time. I also worked for Shaw for 4 years, which had little impact on my loyalty. As with a good portion of the customer base, my satisfaction comes not only from the quality of the product, but the quality of the customer service, something that’s very important when it comes to something as intangible as Internet or TV.
In the last year or so, my personal experience is that not only has the product gotten worse, but the customer experience has degraded to the point that I am now seriously considering moving to Telus – and I despise Telus (primarily for their atrocious customer service). Sadly, they have a $15/mo deal on right now (I was told it’s on until Feb
for Shaw customers that’s too good to pass up. I’m paying $105/mo with Shaw for non-HD and High Speed, and I can get Telus’ Essentials TV and 15 MB/s Internet (more on par with Shaw Extreme) for $30/mo for a year. Supposedly with no cap.
As previous commenters have mentioned, this whole overage model has been implemented in a very underhanded way, and if it wasn’t for coverage in the media, most of Shaw’s customers wouldn’t realize it’s even happening. Admittedly, a lot of those customers don’t care because they’re unaffected, but the typical Internet user these days – who is likely a High Speed package customer – can easily, as this post points out, go over their totally unrealistic (and recently lowered) cap.
I was recently telling my aunt about all of the Rogers and Blockbuster stores that are closing outside of her part of town (she was only aware of the one near her). She still wants to rent (physical media) movies, but when I pointed out to her that it soon won’t be possible to take her grandchildren to a rental store to pick out a couple movies for their sleepover, she asked how she would even get content. I said she’d likely have to get a media player (Apple TV or similar), but she only has Shaw’s Lite service. That means a hardware purchase of some kind – even if she stays loyal to the Shaw empire and gets their box for VOD – and an increase in monthly charges for the bandwidth and speed.
To compare Japan’s access to ours is unrealistic. Their population density is exponentially above ours (over 15 million people in Tokyo during the workday), so of course a more inexpensive service can be provided. Even comparing Canada to the US is troublesome when you consider that Calgary has a very similar geographical area to New York City, but with 15% of the population. It costs big dollars to implement cable networks, and when they’re spread as thin as a lot of western Canadian markets, it takes a long time to recoup that cost.
Annoyingly, Shaw is attempting to pay for their expansion on the back of users that have now become dependent on the Internet for many things, and that expansion will not serve to improve the customer experience. They must have been rubbing their hands together like Mr. Burns when Netflix announced they were coming to Canada. “Exxxxxcellent, Smithers, now we can fund our wireless startup.”
Darren
January 15, 2011
What i can never figure out is if you go over the limit why does your plan not just auto adjust to the higher level. US companies offer this service. Its like your cell phone bill as well. Its a scam where they over charge you per gig because you are over your package. I was often over my limits in 2001 -2002 ish and they made me bump my package but havent bothered me since then. Too bad they will be starting again. It id strange to that it seems recently the data through put has increased to 1.5 mb per second and while enjoying these speed not we will be capped. Bigger pipe smaller sink. As many posters have stated the true problem is lack of competition.