Rogers increases data overage rate by $20 per gigabyte


  • Craig Cook


    • It’s Me

      This is in anticipation of CRTC enacting regs to force real MVNO access. So that when regulators use their rates to calculate wholesale rates they will use the newly inflated rates.

    • Humbre

      What makes you think that MVNOs will have a different access rate to facilities based player roaming??

    • It’s Me

      Mostly the chatter about needing regulation to stimulate MVNOs in Canada. If existing rates were sufficient then we’d not be having this conversation.

    • Humbre

      Maybe the existing roaming Tarifs (voice, sms, data) are sufficient, but MVNOs simply do not have access to this rate as they are not “facilities based players”. Just putting it out there…

    • It’s Me

      Could be. Unlikely. Real MVNOs and facilities based players are very different business models. No reason to expect regulators to be confused about that and assign identical rates. One would hope they know their jobs better than that.

    • John Lofwire

      He dream on but thats okay.

  • Alex

    i’m not even surprised by this any more.

    still angry though

  • frogstar42

    Interesting. Rogers texted me I was now over 100% of my data usage this month, and then when the invoice arrived, I was still 2GB under. Maybe they wanted me to run scared and pre-buy some data.

  • Gilbert Pierre

    Yikes… This is ridiculous

  • Aidolon

    Well that’s… extortionate. Are their data add-ons any cheaper than overage fees? (if such a program is offered by Rogers at all)

    Having trouble finding the information, but for comparison I believe Videotron’s overage charges are $0.05/MB, which works out to $50/GB… But if you know you’re going to go over, you can buy a block of 1GB of data in advance for much less – $7 on contract, $10 on BYOD.

    • Bob8889

      I just bought a data add on from Rogers yesterday and it was 15 for 1GB or $25 for 2GB. I’m on a 2 year contract family plan.

    • Rimtu Kahn

      This article is about data overage charges not data buckets you can pre-pay for. In your case if you paid $25 for 2 GB, and if you use 3 GB, you will be paying $25 / 2 GB + $70/1 GB = $95 for 3 GB

    • Brian

      I think his point was to demonstrate how much data actually costs versus how much these penalizing overage fees costs.

      There is no reason the data over your cap should cost any more than the data that you paid for within in your cap. It costs the same to deliver it.

    • SV650

      Or you pay $25 for 2GB + $15 for an additional 1GB for a total of $40 for 3GB. You don’t have to pay the overage rate, though it might make sense if you only need a couple of hundred MB to get you through the billing period.

  • Philosoraptor

    Not angry at all. I love seeing this. Speeds up the inevitable tighter regulations. It’s how we got home broadband resellers and it’s how we’ll get useful MVNOs.

    • It’s Me

      Yeah but they know new MVNO regs will be based on a percentage of their retail rates. So they are now preemptively inflating retail rates to game the regulators.

    • Brian

      No. That’s not how is done. The wholesale cost model is based on a tariff the CRTC sets based on how much they believe it cost to provide wholesale service.

    • It’s Me

      Really? You know that based on it not being in place at the moment for MVNOs?

      The original legislation on wholesale (and it was legislation and not regulation at the time) was a percentage calculation based on retail rates, i.e. a straight up percentage rate. And the same thing happened when that legislation passed. Wind and Mobi complained that the big 3 were violating the spirit and letter of the existing regulations that required fair and reasonable access rates. What the got from Rogers instead was $1000/GB. So the legislation was passed to make it a percentage of retail rates and the big 3 went through an exercise to the inflate their retail rates in response (though they couldn’t find a way to get back to $1000/GB)

      So yeah, that’s exactly how it’s been done.

    • Brian

      My feeling is that MVNOs will look more like wholesale broadband (DSL and Cable Internet) than any existing roaming requirements because MVNOs are more like Internet resellers than existing mobile providers that just need temporary coverage.

      Broadband wholesale is (AFAIU) priced based on the cost of providing it (where I would presume the costs are audited not just taken at the word of the provider) plus a markup, perhaps 10% if I recall correctly.

    • It’s Me

      You are probably right, it will end up using a similar model as ISPs. But the trick is determining the cost of providing the service. There is a chasm between lower and upper limits.

      Because of that, I fully expect “cost to deliver” will be calculated based on a percentage of retail rates.

    • Brian

      I don’t think it’s that tricky.

      The CRTC and the providers have already been around this block with broadband, so I think regardless of what service is being wholesaled, they already have a model for determining the cost and applying a markup.

      The providers absolutely know what their cost of delivery is. That’s a basic part of running a business.

    • John Lofwire

      So if the numbers they have is wrong they will rip off the carrier who built those network… thats quite communist way of doing thing.

    • Philosoraptor

      Yeah, and then there will be an another regulatory change. Whack-a-mole, as usual.

  • Ian

    Oh look, it’s Rogers squeezing out even more from people already spending a lot on mobile data.

  • Whome

    Really sad. So glad I switched to Videotron. I never come close to my cap and now I get an extra Gig to play with.

  • Shawn Kent

    70$ for 1 GB sounds legit

  • Syaz

    Well then. That’s expensive.

  • Dylan McGregor

    Rogers won’t let you top up data once you’ve gone over either

    • John Lofwire

      Thats very bad.. Telus and Bell allow you to top up at any time but data used in overuse before top up is charged at normal overuse rate.

  • St. Misery

    Did anyone think this kind of stuff wasn’t going to happen after the announcement of free unlocking?

    • It’s Me

      Did anyone think this kind of stuff wasn’t going to happen with or without the unlocking announcement? Must be new.

    • Can’t Fix Stupid

      It does justify a bonus price increase though. So here it is. Bonus. Thanks Rogers!

  • Hello Moto ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

    What are you talking about?! $70/GB is a great deal!

    Yours Truly,
    Ted Rogers

    • Rimtu Kahn

      RIP Ted Rogers

  • yuprules

    Welcome to Canada!

  • southerndinner

    From the same company who brought you the GRRF
    Another Rogers First™

  • MoYeung

    “The extra $2 equates to a 40 percent increase, or a $20 increase per gigabyte.”

    More reason to love Canada … in terms of rip-off pricing.

  • disqus_mOZ5V9TIW7

    Glad I am with Freedom everywhere I go it works fine, unlimited data and no roaming fees with LTE, glad I left Bell 2 years ago

    • hardy83

      Yeah. While their coverage will most likely always be an issue, the fact I don’t have to worry about overage charges of any kind is worth it without a question.

      Overage charges should just be flat out banned, with throttling being the go to practice if someone goes over their “softcap”.

    • Sledge

      Coverage should get better but Shaw is only investing the absolute minimum in customer service giving them worse service than the incumbents.

  • Scotiaman1

    Do not believe anything Rogers say. It cost them nothing to provide data as the towers are already up and other than an electric bill to run the tower this is just extortion that is criminal in nature

    • John Lofwire

      Have you ever ear about network congestion?
      Thats when too many ppl use too many bandwith at the same time making the whole thing much slower.

      To fight thats you need bigger optical transport line and bigger servers who need themselves more day to day checkup ect.

      Thats dont cost any money right?

    • Sledge

      A small portion of their annual budget goes to this. Small.

    • John Lofwire


      To build a optical fiber transport line cost an average of 26000$ per miles so lets say you need to build one between montreal and quebec city wich is around 300 km divide thats by 2.25 to get it in miles and you got about 180 miles. thats only for a basic one now lets say you need to put 10 of them to make sure you have enuf bandwith how much its cost?

      Sledge stop talking about stuff you know nothing about its really bad.

    • Sledge

      So you are telling me that this backbone service between two major centers costs under $5 million. Then you tell me they need ten of those really. Not sure I believe your numbers but sure. $50 million to set up a good backbone in Quebec. Revenues in Quebec are in the billions annually. The big three often lease this infrastructure from each other. By your numbers they could rebuild this annually at under 5% of revenue.

    • John Lofwire

      I am talking about 1 line between two city.
      There is MUCH more than two city in Quebec lol.

      its like take montreal by itself is about 50 km wide but its has over 4000 km of streets and road.

      Fiber optical transport network are like road you need them between each tower and often smaller one will link to bigger one going between cities so you easily have thousand if not ten of thousand km of transport line just in Quebec.

      Remake your calculation 😉

      Best optical transport line do 2.56 terabyte per second up and down ( about 2600 gb sec )

      Average LTE speed at Telus and Bell is 30 mb. ( so its can old up to 2 million user at the same time ) but i doubt they use those type of cable its probably much slower one ( those are the one used for under the sea internet transport between north america and europe )

      So having 10 normal fiber optical transport line at 100 gb sec each is more than probable.

      The worst we only talk about the cable themselves not the servers and everything else.

      Its no wonder new players dont want to build a network its would take them literaly years to even start making profit.
      Verizon estimated thats its would had taken them minimum 5 years to get back the investment just for the network and thats why they did not enter canadian market ( they also wanted to be able to get super low rate on current carrier network as wholesale deal )

    • Sledge

      LOL I was just using your numbers. These are regional backbones that also provide your landline internet etc. They are generally shared by everyone. By your claim then Freedom should be laughing as they already have all the Fibre in place. Fibre is expensive but the network is shared and already in place.

      Tell any business major that they can make back their initial investment in five years and they will jump for joy.

    • John Lofwire

      Bell/Telus mobile network use 100% dedicated transport line they do not share with internet and landline providers. ( maybe Rogers do? thats would explain why they get such bad internet speed outside of city )

      Fibre transport cable exist in many format from 1 gbps to 2.56 tbps.
      freedom dont own any fiber network so they probably use one thats already used for landline internet ect.

      thats would explain why Bell and Telus have an higher average internet speed on the mobile network compared to others carriers..

      Well apparently Verizon is not a major business because they refused to do it they where just looking for easy profit.

    • Sledge

      The Telus Backbone is actually a commercial enterprise. They actively share it out to make more profit off of it.

    • John Lofwire

      Nope they do not share the network used for mobile tower they do share the landline network they have for landline usage in west of Canada and part of eastern Quebec but the mobile network is 100% dedicated and non shared ( beside with Bell for wireless tower as all tower from bell and Telus are shared )

      Verizon wanted to make money right away ( because of those big purchases they made ) so they where not ready to wait years to see profit start to come in. ( wich is logical )

      but what happened if the governement would had put thats money and build the network and let them use it at very low wholesale cost? they would had destroyed the big 3 price and forced the price to go down big time.

    • Brian

      “day to day checkup”?

      What does that mean exactly? Does somebody run around checking if all of the equipment is working? To ask a silly question.

      All of that stuff is on proactive monitoring. Or at least it should be. If it’s not, shame on them.

      This all really just sounds like trying to make up excuses why we need to be gouged even more.

    • John Lofwire

      Every carrier have load of team working every day making checkup on equipements yes they need to inspect every tower 1 time a year minimum and there is a LOTS of them.

      Ofcourse its monitored from a central but its still need 1 checkup minimum a years if not more when there is episode of high wind or ice-rain.

    • John Lofwire

      Sorry Every Real carrier thats have a network to manage i am not talking about fake one piggyback on network of the others..

  • Rimtu Kahn

    Good for the sheep who stays and signs up with Rogers year after year and thinks they are doing Canada and other Canadians any favor by doing so. Rogers thrives on your stupidity.

  • Bob8889

    This is a major cash grab. I thought $50 per GB was way too high, now $70 this is nuts. It should be $10 per GB. I hope that the CRTC intervene and set a reasonable overage rate.

    • John Lofwire

      Yes lets hope CRTC turn Canada cellphone industry into Comunist one..

    • Brian

      Oh, because the price-colluding oligopoly that we have currently is working so well?

      You must work for a mobile service provider, and so probably get your service heavily discounted.

    • John Lofwire

      Got to love how some crybabies twist thing around.

      I disagree with CRTC setting prices but there is others solutions thats exist.

      like having governement build up a new coast to coast network its could then sell wholesale price to new players making them able to compete easier.
      network would pay itself over 5 years then generate more revenue for governement.

      Win win scenario.
      Not some communist crap like what Bob proposed.

  • Eluder

    Ridiculous, pricing in the US is constantly going down due to competition, while up here in Canada it keeps rising. Soon it’ll just be cheaper to get a US account and roam in Canada.

    • Rimtu Kahn

      It is already cheaper to do so. All top US carriers now offer Canadian and Mexican roaming and long distance (however with the limitation that in any 3 months period majority usage must be while in the US)

  • Burl House

    That’s the straw that broke my back, goodbye Rogers.

  • Andrew English

    This is hard to believe but I can see Robbers doing it. When there are 100 times more towers in China than there are spread out across Canada and yet the China cell phone service is 95% cheaper and faster than Robbers I am not that whatever reason Robbers says it really valid. Btw Beijing China as 2 million more people than all of Canada to put their size into better perspective. 🙂

    • John Lofwire

      china as 2 million more ppl than Canada really?

      We are 36.5 million ppl in Canada.
      China are 1.371 billion ppl as of 2015.

      Go check your numbers.

      You do know network cost are based on a ratio of population density ect?
      This mean China as so much population thats they can take 10 time less profit per person and still make much more profit than any north american carrier.

      But hey its okay to use bad number right?

    • cbstryker

      He said “Beijing China”. The city of Beijing has 2 million more people than all of Canada.

      The population density argument doesn’t fly. There are many countries with low population densities over vast areas that charge a fraction of what Canada does.

    • John Lofwire

      I did not see beijing thats my mistake sorry.

      As for population density argument my argument is very valid.

      What cost the most for the carrier is the transport optical cables. ( antenna and such is a joke when compared to thats )

      More distance equal to more cable length and more pricy requirements.
      beside Russia name a country thats has a larger distance from one side to another.. none exist.

      Still i agree we are been overpriced thats a fact but you cannot hope to get same pricing as country like china or Europe thats a fact as well.

      at least 20% less in Quebec and 40-50% in most other province is what we overpay.

    • cbstryker

      The argument isn’t about land size, but population density. The higher the density the less you need to shift the infrastructure costs to your clients.

      One major country that has an even lower density than Canada is Australia (at about 2.9 people per square kilometer, Canada is at 3.5), and Australia is huge. I just checked a major providers website, and you can get unlimited Nationwide calling and 10GB/mo for $52 CAD.

      To bring that point home. You cannot include the vastly empty Territories which make up almost half of Canada’s land mass with less than 0.4% of the total population.

      Let’s just take Ontario (which the northern part is sparsely populated). Ontario has a population density of over 14 people per square kilometer. Yet the average cell phone plan is over $70 with nearly nothing to show for it. People in the North West Territories would hardly expect to get LTE speeds of over 100Mbps. The country size argument does NOT stand.

    • John Lofwire

      Australia cellphone network cover less than 80% of the population.
      its cover 99.8% of canadian population ( bell and telus )

      Now take current canadian cost and remove the % i gave you.. what price you get? surprise! similar pricing more or less.

      My two simple point just proven how wrong you are.

      PS: australia using first generation LTE only with max 75 mb sec wich cost less to build than newer faster LTE.

    • cbstryker

      You’re math isn’t wrong, just your logic.

      Stop thinking about it in terms of “percent of population covered”. Imagine a country that is exactly 1 square kilometer and requires a single tower to service the entire population. Do you think people would be justified if they charged $500 a month for a basic cell service just because 100% of the population is covered? Perhaps, but the deciding factor would be how many people live within that 1sq/km. If it was only 5 people, then it might be justified. But if it was over 100 people, then it wouldn’t be.

      That’s why saying 98% of the population being covered doesn’t matter. No matter how you try to shape the data, Canadians pay more than anyone else in the entire world.

      What’s interesting is EVERY single Canadian agrees that cell costs are way too high. No cell phone paying Canadian would argue that the costs are legitimately justified. In fact, they are so ludicrously high that it’s now cheaper to get a US cell phone plan with an unlimited Canadian calling feature than it is to have a domestic plan. The ONLY people who argue this nonsense “CaNaDa Is JuSt ToO bIg!!” point are people who work for carriers or are paid to do so. Please stop being a spinster.

    • Victor Creed

      I’m assuming he works for one of the Big 3

    • John Lofwire

      the towers are not what cost the most.

      The transport network using optical fiber is what cost a lots more.

      Sorry but you are wrong on thats point.

      I agree we are easily overpriced between 20 a 50% compared to USA and thats bad because USA have similar needs for coverage ect.

      Did you read my previous comments?

      Yes i do work for a carrier this dont mean i cant see we are overpriced.
      But when an excuse make no sense i am happy to to adress it.

      When you dont know all the detail dont talk over your head.

    • Sledge

      Whose transport fiber is Telus or Rogers or Bell using?

    • John Lofwire

      I know Telus and Bell build the network together a dedicated one only for the mobile usage ( they do use the same transport path as Bell optical fiber for internet and tele but dont use the same cable and server )

      Rogers i think they have there own transport network its a bit more limited outside of city for speed compared to bell and telus and they do share it with many carrier around the country wich is why rogers usually suffer more of network congestion than the others 2..

    • SV650

      The Australian government continues to subsidize their cellular networks, to make costs more affordable, if I recall.

    • Sledge

      Low population density. Incredibly high urbanization.

    • Sledge

      Is this talking about rural areas? I have looked the data cables were usually smaller than the antennas if there is any population. That’s why you see small communities with internet but no cell towers. The opposite is true for rural areas. In Canada the big cables are already in place. The only cables needed are the smaller ones.

    • John Lofwire

      Carrier dont use same cables as internet one.

      they are 95% of the time underground as well. ( about 5% do use existing internet providers cable but only in very few place )

      And are now 100% optical fiber ( not like the copper cable still used by some internet providers for rural area )

      As i said in another reply the cost is very high around 25000$ per miles of cable thats a lots when you consider we have thousand of kilometer of cable.

      Bell and Telus just in montreal to update the network and add more transport cable to fight network congestion invested over 3 billion each thats just in montreal in past 4 years..

      Its still dont justify the price we pay just so we can agree on something but its still justify them not wanting to give it as freebies to new comer..

      Thats why the governement need to build a canada wide network thats the governement will loan at wholesale rate to new players thats network could pay for itself in 5 to 10 years max and then would generate revenue for the governement as well as help bring price down in the correct way. win win for all.

    • Brian

      But if the government invested that $3 billion (just in Montreal) they’d still recover it in 5 years, right?

    • John Lofwire

      If they build the main fiber optical transports lines ( not all the smaller one ) Yes.

      Its would also create lots of work to build the network and then support it repair it upgrade it ect.

      If they also build the towers and the smaller transport network between each towers its would be more like 10 to 15 years but on the long run would still worth it.

      They should do thats instead of investing in private company thats then abuse ( bombardier a good example they got 1 billion US from Quebec governement and obver 300 million US from Canada governement and they increased the salary of the 5 most high placed ppl by so much they are now making more cash than any others ppl at same rank at much bigger company like boeing ect )

      So instead of wasting Canadian tax payer money they should invest it in a place thats will help Canadian pay less for nothing.

  • rPacific

    This simply shouldn’t happen. You pay for an amount of data on your plan, if you want an overage safety net by all means request that and let the providers charge for that service, but this should not be done by default.

    • John Lofwire

      Go with koodo then.

      After you used 100% of your data your data is deactivated.

    • Sledge

      Or Freedom. Your data is just slower when you hit your cap.

    • John Lofwire

      Well freedom your data is just slower end of the story…

      the LTE network is super limited and AWS ( so very bad reception ) and when they roam on others network its on 3g speed only.

    • pjw

      False. Freedom subs have LTE roaming on both Rogers and Bell networks.

    • John Lofwire

      Freedom lte speed are what bell and telus have as show lol.

      Best speed on freedom was around 45 mb and thats in Toronto in rural area its a n

      Bell and telus did over 90 mb in same Toronto region.

      In Montreal I easily get over 150 mb down where I live.

      There is hspa speed lte and there is real LTE.

      Freedom mobile get what is left over and lte is NOT coast to coast for them where for bell and telus it is.

    • John Lofwire

      Hspa not show lol

    • rPacific

      I left Rogers long ago. Your comment enforces by point as it shows the ability for the other carriers to do the same thing. The idea of charging for overages should be something you opt into not something that is billed by default.

  • Bill___A

    It used to be $15 per gB for overages, then $50, now $70. My older plan is still at $15. These overage prices have gone up a lot more than 40%. They have also given me a free 3 gB per month for a year….mixed signals. Unconfirmed, but I was told by a CSR that if you buy the overage data in advance, it is still $15, so it isn’t optimal, but use their data monitoring tools and alerts.

  • AppleBerrySandwich

    Crazy – the other carriers are sure to follow!

  • fruvous

    Does this mean their data service will be less congested?

    • Sledge


  • pjw

    “Telus currently charge $5 per 100MB for the first 1GB a subscriber uses
    over their data cap and $0.10 per MB thereafter, while Bell charges
    $0.07 per 1MB.”

    The story should make it clear that Telus is charging $100/GB after the first GB.

    By cleverly changing the charge unit from $5/100MB to .10/MB, Telus obscures their $100/GB rate after the initial GB. At the $50 point you get the CRTC prescribed “continue using data?”, likely without realizing you are in fact agreeing to the higher rate of $100/GB.

    • SV650

      However, you can purchase bundles of data from Telus in advance of you reaching your limit for a much more reasonable price. The overage rates are an attempt to migrate people to planning their consumption, rather than simply running over constantly.

    • pjw

      So $100/GB is just Telus helping me plan.
      A higher monthly spend is the solution. Why couldn’t I see that?
      Thanks Telus! The 2×4 to the head was all I needed.

    • Sledge

      The Future is Friendly!

  • Victor Creed

    With prices as they are more and more people are getting the lower tier plans. This is move is just rogers forcing people onto higher tier plans. It’s extortion and the CRTC allows it, because well they’re scum too. Like most of our politicians.

    We’re Canadians so we’ll just shrug and accept it. Work done extra hours to pay the bills. No big deal right?

    • Brian

      @Victor_Creed:disqus You really ought to familiarise yourself with the CRTC’s track record over the last 5 years under Jean-Pierre Blais before throwing around denigrating terms like “scum”.

      Under Mr. Blais, the CRTC has brought in more most pro-consumer decisions than I would bet any recent Chair has.

      I fear it will be a long time before we see any such pro-consumer Chair. I hope as much as I can I am wrong, but I fear.

    • John Lofwire

      Victor you do know you have several notification before you get to 100% of your data right?
      This mean you can add more data ( top up ) for dirt cheap compared to overuse cost.

      So instead of complaining and saying crap just use the notification system.

    • Victor Creed

      And there it is. Canadian acceptance. Just shrug and accept it.

    • John Lofwire

      Dont mix thing up.

      I agree thats overall cost need to go down thats i am 100% with you.

      What i disagree is the way you complain about something you are already protected against ( you cant justify doing overuse with all those notifications system )

      As to give an explanation about data overuse cost i have a logical one for you.

      The included data you have they know as a fact so they put enuf bandwith for all the users based on the plans. When many user use more then its create what is called network congestion and the carrier need to increase bandwith and cost.

      So thats why they give you lower rate for data you take before the end of your allowance.

      Still i agree we need at least a 20% decrease in price ( in quebec ) and easily up to 50% decrease in price canada wide thats a fact thats we can easily all agree on.

    • Victor Creed


    • cheetose4

      If bandwidth allocation was the big three only concern and not how to squeeze more profit out of users they would first slow down your data after hitting a certain limit and then give you the option to purchase more high speed data at a hiked rate.

      But I agree though why can’t people set a hard limit on their phones? Paying overage fees after paying for a $70 plus dollar plain just seems like poor spending decisions.

      If the CRTC wasn’t being payed off by lobbyist they would only allow prepayed charging. If you want to use more data pull your credit card or debit card out and add more funds. How simple is that!

    • Zarly Doug Walker

      Even if we go with the warnings and top up before going over, were still being screwed because of the enormous price for data and they know that. Having such small data plans really are getting useless. We may as well just forget getting any data and get used to it. They’re milking their customers and they love it. Selfish fools.

    • John Lofwire

      The point of my comments was about using the notification to pay much less than the normal overuse cost..

      As i said at several points in my previous comments we are indeed overpriced..

    • Zarly Doug Walker

      Ok, I understand.

  • heynow00

    With all the data alerts/data manager stuff plus the ability to top up multiple times and get warned before you run out of each top up, how does anyone goes over these days anyway?

    It doesn’t explain why the rates for overage v.s. the rates for top up are so different but the article should mention that in comparison, a customer can add 6gb of data for the rest of the month for $75 if topping up before going over.

    • heynow00

      Looking at the website now, it looks like the 3gb and 7gb share everything plans are gone and replaced with 2gb and 6gb but there are also 20gb 40gb and 80g plans

    • heynow00

      Prices definitely have changed too

  • All this tech company does is to increase it’s prices nothing more.

    • john smith

      no innovation whatsoever. milking us dry.. no wearables, no esim, no number sync, no lte+

    • Luke Perry Glover

      The big 3 severely overcharge us yet are the top $ makers in the country. Compared to other countries we pay a lot more for less data, etc.

  • Aka, Crim stay with freedom.

  • Jamehz

    They’re simply looking for ways to recover their soon-to-be-lost unlocking fee revenue.. Nothing’s ever free..

    • Exactly what I was thinking. Did the CRTC really think the big 3 will part ways with $37million?

    • D’Arcy Mund

      You do realize when these changes come about from the CRTC, they’ve usually been working for months with reprisentatives from all Canadian Telecom and all the changes are usually implemented well before the deadline.

      Take the switch to phone subsidy VS length of term. That was changed at Rogers before it was even announced as a change by the CRTC, where do you think the CRTC got the idea for that.

  • TheTechSmith

    Kudos for posting this! This type of increase has been going on frequently, but nobody notices!
    My plan with Virgin a few years ago was $10 per GB over, my next plan with them was $5 per 250MB ($20/MB), and then an agent that didn’t know what they were doing changed my plan without my permission to one that was $5 per 100MB ($50/MB), and removed half my data at the same time for the same price! Last I saw it was it was $7/100MB (same as Rogers now), but they don’t even post it anymore. In fairness they tried to make it up to me with discounts, but the discounts only applied for two years so I left them when a better deal came out.

    • monkeymo

      Bell charges $10/2gb on most share accounts, because they only offer 6GB

    • Mike

      No they don’t? Maybe you have some special plan with special overage rates, but saying Bell usually charges $10/2GB on share plans is categorically false.

    • D’Arcy Mund

      Sounds like a small business flex rate plan

    • monkeymo


  • Dharmesh

    Misleading title imo, you took something of 2$ per 100mb into 20$ per gigabyte. Fine, the math works, but if I charge people 5$ per plate, then 2$ extra for topping, I don’t say I charge them 20$ extra for 10 toppings. Because that’s not how customers recieve the benefits, they receive them 100mb at a time, or.. a topping at a time

    • Russel C

      That comparison doesn’t make a lot of sense. We usually refer to data usage by gigabyte, saying 2.5GB instead of 2500MB. By stating the change of $20 more per GB, people are able to quantify it easier since 100MB is rather insignificant. It’s easier to understand true costs as we move up in size, that’s why you didn’t refer to it as $0.07/MB from $0.05/MB. The change is $0.02. When we go to a bigger number more people are comfortable with, the costs make more sense.

      I’m on a 6GB plan and I NEVER think in increments smaller than 500MB. I’d burn through 100MB in a heartbeat, which makes the $2 more figure make little sense to me.

  • WiseOldMan

    In case no one has noticed, Bell has already raised their standard overage charge to
    $0.07/Mb ($70/Gb). The intent of all the carriers is to corral us into higher ARPU plans. But forcing us to commit to monthly buckets, charging us for unused data, and punishing us if we exceed these artificial caps is grossly unfair on all fronts.

    Data plans should either be unlimited, or usage based at a reasonable price per Gb.
    Currently, there is absolutely no reason to charge us more than $2 to $3 per Gb.
    Both Rogers and Bell offer business share plans with data add-ons of $10/4Gb.

    • Victor Creed

      Consumers finance the cheap corporate plans. Sad reality

  • incredulous

    F U Rogers

  • thedingo8

    Rogers the empire built by systemic overbilling

  • Joël van Daalen

    And then you’ve got the Netherlands where you have unlimited 4G for €25 per month ????

  • D’Arcy Mund

    This is definitely an opinion piece. I’ll be the first to admit, I’m biased, I work for Rogers and the Canadian Telecom market makes sense to me. Its not ideal but I can see both sides of the argument.

    What this article didn’t mention is that the released plans with larger data buckets at cheaper rates and reduced the cost for additional lines also. There is no reason why someone should incur overage with the free data manager and the affordable larger data buckets.

    I changed my plan over yesterday because I’m now getting 20gb for less then I was paying for 12.

    • Brian

      Indeed, you are biased.

      To people who are not biased, the Canadian Telecom market does not make any sense. That’s completely obvious when all of the “big 3” (national) providers have exactly the same plans at exactly the same prices and all move in lock-step.

      It becomes particularly obvious when one looks at the two outlier provinces where there is a 4th (viable) option that is not playing the game with the “big 3” and the “big 3″‘s prices are so much better in order to be competitive with that 4th player.

      That 4th player is also useful to demonstrate how low prices can really be and still be profitable — demonstrating how much profit the “big 3” are skimming.

      Everyone can see and understand what is going on, yet the competition bureau “can find no evidence of collusion”.

    • D’Arcy Mund

      Which fourth viable option are you talking about? If we’re talking freedom, they were given the majority of their infrastructure and sold bandwidth at a fraction of its value (which actually took money out of the government’s pockets)

      It simply comes down to number of subscribers VS service area and money spent on infrastructure to keep our service current.

      Those other providers haven’t spent the money so they can afford to offer a cheaper service and as a consumer I applauded you for making those educated choices for yourself.

    • D’Arcy Mund

      Also if we’re talking about the provincial suppliers like Sasktel and Videotron. There is a reason you don’t see then in other provinces. They know how expensive it is to expand infrastructure.

    • Sledge

      Yeah because to expand they have to fight the incumbents which in many cases have been subsidized in their original infrastructure.

    • D’Arcy Mund

      They would be subsidized too. Any new entrant into the market is offered prime bandwidth at a cheaper rate then what the big three would pay (at the expense of the tax payer) and they existing providers have to share their towers. Even with all that it’s still too expensive to expand out of province.

      If you really want to get pissed about unfair costs take a look at the oil companies.

    • Sledge

      “prime bandwidth” as was offered to Wind when they started? IE bandwidth that doesn’t work indoors generally?
      Only now is Shaw actually getting some of that “prime bandwidth”.

    • naviz


      Looking back, Rogers got swaths of good spectrum for free from the government in the 90s. WIND had to buy millions of dollars for a tiny sliver back in the late 2000s. Then Rogers charged exorbitant roaming fees just to try to kill them off and launched fighter brands like Chatr as well. Instead of trying to make a better network, they were more concerned about killing off the competition.

      Looking back even further, Fido was a successful provider with the best plans (even compared to now arguably) and were profitable. The second Rogers bought them out, they removed the unlimited CityFido plans.

      Rogers is also lagging far behind the Bellus network (which also colludes with them, but at least their network is much better), so I don’t think for a second the money is going into the network. Local towers here are mostly just 3 bands (4,7,12) and most towers can barely do 2CA, let alone 3CA vs. Bellus with 8 (2,4,5,7×2,13,17,29,30) and ability to do 4CA for most towers, and at the very least 3.

      Rogers is simply a dinosaur trying to stay alive, no innovation or investment into their networks at all.

    • specialk2000

      Yup and they had to pay a lot for it.

    • FprimaG

      I work in telecom on the installation and service side as a contractor. The tower sharing is bs. I’ve been to hundreds of cell towers across the country and not one of the “big 3” owned sites has any freedom presence. All the big 3 have to do is present a business case that the tower cannot accommodate more equipment or that they have future plans for it and boom, freedom has to build their own. Which they do and that is why they’re network isn’t expending geographically very quickly.

      I won’t go into the other shady and unethical business practices I see from big red on a regular basis. I will say that they will never get a penny from me as a consumer, even if I end up paying more for a service.

    • Brian

      The 4th viable option used to be MTS in Manitoba before the government so shortsightedly let Bell buy them, but in Saskatchewan there is SaskTel and in Quebec there is Videotron.

      If you want to see how much better the pricing is in those provinces, as an example, go to Koodo’s website and go to the plan list with your province set to Ontario. Take a snapshot of the price list. Now change your province to Saskatchewan and observe the price list. Look at the difference.

      In Saskatchewan you can get 5GB of data for $48. In Ontario you have to pay $60 to get just 1GB of data. If you want that same 5GB you have to pay $85 and even that that’s only a 3GB plan that they are adding 2GB for a limited time. So when that offer is over, it will still be $85 (almost twice the Saskatchewan 5GB plan) for only 3GB.

      Why are prices so good in Saskatchewan? Because they have that 4th player, Sasktel, offering those kinds of prices so the “big 3” have to compete.

    • D’Arcy Mund

      So the two that I pointed out as well as the reason why they’ve not expanded out of province.

      Videotron has tried to expand into Ontario in the past and its too expensive.

      If Canadian telecom is Nickle and dimming like you say, show me a list of the most profitable companies and Canada that has a telecom near the top of the list. Huge amounts of revenue are turned around and put back into the company to provide more and upgraded services

    • Sledge

      You mean like Rogers attributing its increase in profits to its wireless division? They had a huge quarter in spite of problems with their cable business.
      From their website:
      Total revenue for 3 months = 3,338 million
      Adjusted operating profit for 3 months = 1,166 million
      In other words this poor suffering business is only making a billion dollars per quarter because of the wireless division. Poor them.

    • D’Arcy Mund

      There isn’t a single telecom on the list of top 15 most profitable Canadian companies. If you don’t think a company should make a profit for providing a service then I don’t know what world you live in.

      By your own reference two thirds of revenue are eaten up by operating costs. That doesn’t sound like anyone whose trying to rob or take advantage.

      The average cellphone plan hasn’t changed much in cost in the last 10 years. $80 nine years ago got you a bucket of local minutes, evenings and weekends, a bucket of text messages, and about 16mb of data. Customers get considerably more for their money now and they do have the option of going with some. Allergy providers with a smaller coverage area to get an even cheaper rate.

      Take a look at the banks, insurance, and oil companies if you want to get angry about record profits and gouging.

      Banks make billions in profit off of charging customers service fees and nsf fees every year. They are charging you for the ability to use your money to invest and make profits for themselves, where’s your outrage at their profitability.

    • Sledge

      Any company that maintains an overall profit of half their operating costs is not in a competitive situation. This is in spite of their other divisions not doing well. Don’t pretend that this is reasonable.
      Saying that another company also makes a lot of profit does not change this situation. However just to humor you historically Rogers (who we are talking about) is in the top twenty. Additionally this year they are on track to move up significantly. Compare them to Royal Bank who you speak of gouging. They made around 7 billion in profits with revenues of around 35 billion. So for Royal Bank they kept one dollar out of every five. For Rogers its is one out of every three. Who is gouging?

    • specialk2000

      Nobody gave Freedom their infrastructure, they built it themselves, in fact, the Big 3 were suppose to allow tower sharing and refused to let companies like Freedom put their equipment on their towers when it came down to it. Do you have any idea how much spectrum the Big 3 got for cheap price even free over the years?!

  • jay

    Bell , Telus in 3.2.1

  • David Harley2

    Foreign competitors aren’t interested in Canada for mobile data service, the infrastructure costs compared to the market population isn’t worth it. Canada’s population is still smaller than that of the state of California, so to build a network nationwide from scratch and then try to market it to a population less than that of California, then you have 3 major competitors who have long standing infrastructure, just not going to happen. And that’s not even factoring in the CTRC regulations.

    • Brian

      And that is being made even worse in Canada by having 3 big competitors all spending to build network in many overlapping areas.

      Imagine if there were just one network that had the investment of the 3 overlapping networks. How good would that one network be?

      Then competitors can compete on services instead of “who’s network is better this week?”. They would all have the same amazing network and could use services and pricing to compete.

      Every provider would be an MVNO.

      Too radical, I know.

  • Sledge

    “We are always looking to deliver great value for money and service to our wireless customers”
    Yeah that’s a joke right?
    Seriously as D’Arcy points out this is a deliberate tactic to scare people onto the new bigger plans. With the $50 overage cap people will hit that limit before they even get to a single gigabyte. Then they get scared and move to a new higher ARPU plan.

    • Allyouranusarebelongtous

      i’ve recently experienced this. it’s unreal. As I track all data, I know I’m no where near my plans max flexiness…when I get cut off of data half way…clearly something is up.

  • Sledge

    Not just government granted monopolies. Many of them were literally government owned. AGT in Alberta was basically given away to Telus based on the promise that privatizing it would lower prices. Yep. That worked well.

  • leviel

    I’m with Videotron. I can add a 1Gb data block for 10$ and it goes for the month.

    70$ for 1Gb is INSANE. Especially when VTR are using Roger’s network when “roaming”.

    • Nathan

      Here in Tanzania, I pay about 75 cents (Canadian) per gigabyte on a package I buy every 7 days. No, this is not a typo.

  • Kusanagi

    Welcome to the Canadian way of doing business in the Wireless industry.
    More money for the shareolders, taken from our pockets.

  • JD Watkins

    I am one of the guys that killed ALL MOBILE DATA. I live in a city where public WIFI is plentiful. I no longer travel out of town. So, the WIFI works perfect for me. For messahing.. I ise BBM and Hangouts. Both work flawleas on WIFI.

    • Victor Creed

      Good for you. Removing yourself from a service is not a solution though. Will you also cancel your power when the costs are too high?

  • Allyouranusarebelongtous

    I burn through 6bg like it’s nothing…how are we still here.

  • Josh L

    I don’t mean to rub it in, but since I moved to France last year, I get access to 20 euros/month plans that include 25 GB and that’s contract-free (in fact, there was even a promotion running that gave you 25 GB/month for 2 euros/month for the first year, with a contract tho).

    They really need to do something about the cost of data plans in Canada, these prices are nothing short of obscene.

  • silverfox007

    How many of you complaining use iPhone/android without data limit setup.

    • Brian


      You could not possibly have missed the point any more than you have.

      The entire point of the article is the gouging cost increase. Not that people are going over their limits.

  • Bardya Sarkhosh

    Why would you subscribe to any other provider when you get the best deal on the best network + shock free data with koodo. Also, Koodo doesn’t charge for nationwide plans. Stop complaining & get busy.

    • MassDeduction

      You can get the same network and potentially even better deals than Koodo with Public Mobile, and prepaid data is arguably even better than “shock free” data. So, in answer to your question, that’s one reason.

    • DJRiful

      I would like to see if anyone can beat mine Koodo plan $46, Canada Wide, Txt/Pic unlimited with 5GB data + shock free.

    • MassDeduction

      I prefer the equivalent of $38.55 I pay Public Mobile each month for province-wide phoning, global text, and 12Gb of data every 90 days (12GB for 90 days is potentially more useful than 5GB a month, because it’s like 4GB a month with a 3 month rollover period). If you don’t need the Canada-wide phoning, Public Mobile’s offer may be better for you. And last I checked it was possible to get that deal if you were porting in from Freedom Mobile (and anyone could sign up for Freedom and then immediately port in). That Koodo plan also isn’t available to me in BC, and I’m personally not interested in gaming the system to get out-of-province plans.

  • Jazzy

    Haha ….great value right!