darcyh wrote:

On another note Rogers master card has increased the reward on the master card if you redeem your rewards toward paying for a Rogers product. It went from 3 to 4% but will more than offset by the 1.5% processing charge.

It’ll be interesting to see if they apply this fee to Rogers Mastercard holders.

bmaudioworks wrote:

I don't see any problem here, other than yet another anti-Rogers attack post. Don't like Rogers? Don't do business with them, and don't talk about them. Plain and simple. There are people and organizations that I don't like or agree with; I don't interact with them, and I don't discuss them at all.

While I fully appreciate the bulk of your point, especially concerning your business, I should note that there are many people who don't have any choice but to deal with Rogers.

Way too many apartment or condo buildings are exclusive to Rogers, so if they want cable or TV service, they can't go to Bell, Telus, TekSavvy or anyone else. 

This happened to my cousin in her Brampton condo and she was never happy about it. But who would pack up their lives and move just to escape Big Red's greedy clutches? (I might, but I'm admittedly an exception to the rule!) 

So saying just don't do business with them is often not an option. And it's almost impossible to equate a small David business with a giant Goliath. Rogers has continuously shown it will gouge its customers whenever possible. (Hello Leaf fans!) They are, in my opinion, an odious and bloated company that has been allowed to grow way too large. And while nothing I say here will affect that, that doesn't mean I can't express that viewpoint. 

You can, of course, choose not to read this thread if it really bothers you. But this is a board about opinions and when it comes to the Monster That Ted Built, that is mine.

Yes the Rogers Mastercard will be subject to the fee as well. I pay all my bills through online banking from the comfort of my Lazyboy recliner.

unclefester wrote:

bmaudioworks wrote:

I don't see any problem here, other than yet another anti-Rogers attack post. Don't like Rogers? Don't do business with them, and don't talk about them. Plain and simple. There are people and organizations that I don't like or agree with; I don't interact with them, and I don't discuss them at all.
 

Further, when I invest my money, time and/or energy in anything, especially in my business/professional life, I expect darn good returns on all of my investments, every time, without fail. No exceptions. That is a requirement. It is not optional, and it is non-negotiable.

Please do me a favour and post the full name and location of your business so that I and I suspect many others here don't ever have even the accidental option of having to deal with you Mr. Illinformed Small Business Man indeed.

Is your last name Rogers per chance?
 

I get your point, but he has the right to conduct business as he sees fit and you have the right not to give him yours. Seems like a fair exchange to me.

And by the way, I can understand a small business doing what he's doing. But with a Goliath like Rogers, it just seems like it's further gouging customers. They could easily swallow this, but hey, we can get another few bucks from the suckers, so we're going to do it. 

bmaudioworks wrote:

I don't see any problem here, other than yet another anti-Rogers attack post. Don't like Rogers? Don't do business with them, and don't talk about them. Plain and simple. There are people and organizations that I don't like or agree with; I don't interact with them, and I don't discuss them at all.

I am a small business owner, and I accept major credit cards at my office, as well as Interac debit and e-transfers. While e-transfers cost me nothing extra and debit payments cost me only a few cents each, I will likely soon be following Rogers' lead and charging extra (a higher percentage than Rogers) when customers pay by credit card, and if they don't like it, too bad. It's the cost of doing business. I am a for-profit business owner - I am in the business of making money and maximizing my profits. While accepting credit card payments is convenient for customers, it is not cheap for any merchant, whether as small as my "one-man show" or as massive as Rogers. The fees add up regardless, between Amex/MC/Visa, the payment processor (e.g. Elavon) and the merchant services provider.

Further, when I invest my money, time and/or energy in anything, especially in my business/professional life, I expect darn good returns on all of my investments, every time, without fail. No exceptions. That is a requirement. It is not optional, and it is non-negotiable.

 

  Obviously, you don't live in a condo which signed a bulk deal with Rogers, so we have no choice who we deal with.

RadioActive wrote:

dieter wrote:

bmaudioworks wrote:

I don't see any problem here, other than yet another anti-Rogers attack post. Don't like Rogers? Don't do business with them, and don't talk about them. Plain and simple. There are people and organizations that I don't like or agree with; I don't interact with them, and I don't discuss them at all.

I am a small business owner, and I accept major credit cards at my office, as well as Interac debit and e-transfers. While e-transfers cost me nothing extra and debit payments cost me only a few cents each, I will likely soon be following Rogers' lead and charging extra (a higher percentage than Rogers) when customers pay by credit card, and if they don't like it, too bad. It's the cost of doing business. I am a for-profit business owner - I am in the business of making money and maximizing my profits. While accepting credit card payments is convenient for customers, it is not cheap for any merchant, whether as small as my "one-man show" or as massive as Rogers. The fees add up regardless, between Amex/MC/Visa, the payment processor (e.g. Elavon) and the merchant services provider.

Further, when I invest my money, time and/or energy in anything, especially in my business/professional life, I expect darn good returns on all of my investments, every time, without fail. No exceptions. That is a requirement. It is not optional, and it is non-negotiable.

 

Obviously, you don't live in a condo which signed a bulk deal with Rogers, so we have no choice who we deal with.

I have never understood why this kind of thing is allowed. Is there any other business in this country that essentially forces the consumer to only buy their product? Imagine if they had a rule that you could only buy, say, a Volkswagen as your new car - no other choice! Or you could only shop at Metro, even if Loblaws had a store right across the street. 

I know the developers and the cable providers work these kinds of deals, but they should be illegal. 

 
Well put RA. I know three different people that are in this exact situation, I.e. forced to use Rogers in their condos. One of them has had issues with their cable and it took over six months, half a fricking year to resolve it, and the crappy part is that he was previously a longtime Bell subscriber and was very happy with them. He told me that on one of his calls to Rogers they told him to basically “suck it up as he was stuck with Rogers”, he was furious. Yes, this should be illegal and I sometimes wonder if there’s some payola involved.

Last edited by Shorty Wave (Today 6:21 am)

The Weed wrote:

My condo building has been Rogers since I got here 30 years ago and probably from the start. Never had much problem with customer service. 30 years back I had to use Bell as my ISP - dial up to begin with, later through a Bell modem, and never got near the speed I was paying for.

Fast forward to today, through Rogers' Multiple Dwelling Unit Division, and I have fibre to my unit - as do all the units in my building and complex (4 buildings over 1,000 units) - a Digital VIP Package for TV and 1.5 GB synchronous Internet including modem and 2 TV Entertainment boxes and remotes. Cost? $40 per month in my maintenance fees. Canadian and US Timeshifting Channels, $4 apiece plus tax and Rogers Homephone with unlimited callinig in Canada and the US for $21.75 plus tax. All a better deal than Rogers employees who get 50% off Rogers services and probaby minimum $250 a month for a retail customer.

I have a friend who lives in a rental apartment building with a choice between Bell and Rogers for Internet and TV and Homephone. She pays retail. Rogers isn't perfect by any means, but I have no complaints being "stuck" with Rogers. If I did, I'd be talking to my Condo Board about options. 

I'm really glad to hear it's working out for you. But I still think people should have the option to pick whoever they want, and not be forced to go with one provider.

Monopolies are never a good thing for the consumer in the end, and if Rogers ever does anything to piss you off, you're pretty much stuck with them. And as a previous poster noted in this thread, when they know you can't leave, they don't necessarily treat you all that well. Because they don't have to. 

paterson1 wrote:

I would think you would be aware that Rogers was the sole provider for cable when you took the apartment.  Most people would ask about that when looking at the place with the landlord, or they would tell you.  I know a few that have Rogers in their apartment or condo and like them fine.  

Telus is now in my part of town for TV, internet, phone etc.  They have a good offer that includes home security.  Debating whether to jump from Bell Fibe. I usually give the current provider a chance to sweeten my existing plan.  One friend had Virgin (Bell) for his phones and he moved to Telus with a home security plan.  So far so good. TV was not available in his part of Waterloo yet.

Does anyone have Telus for TV/internet/phone?  How do you like them?   

For home internet, Telus is a re-seller in Ontario, usually running on Bell's lines.