🚀 go-pugleaf

Calvin Ostrum wrote:

> I| Think of it as an all you can eat buffet.
>
> Restaurants do not generally offer all-you-can-eat
> buffets to people in perpetuity, regardless of what it
> might cost them.  If they start to offer such a thing
> ("all you can eat buffet, all day, every day") and find
> out that the higher price required to subsidize the
> heavy eaters drives away the light eaters, then they
> will retract the offer.  I don't see a lot of
> restaurants around making such an offer.

You are right in saying that a lot of restaurants do not do it. But some do, and
they stay in business for years, and they still offer the all you can eat buffet. It
is not all you can eat, but not more than three crab legs.


>  And those that do, I suspect, don't have such a varying rate
> of usage as do high-speed internet providers.  Finally,
> restaurants are not *required* to offer unlimited
> all-you-can-eat buffets.

Of course they are not required to offer all you can eat buffets. The point is that
if they do over all you can eat, that people expect  to get as much as they want.
They paid for it. They deserve it.  They paid the price which the operators figured
they could market the product. Customers are expected to pay the price and the
restaurant is expected to provide the food ... without restrictions.


> They can change their menus
> as they see fit.  You have been ranting for days about
> how Bell cannot do this because they agreed to
> offer you unlimited service, and now they are not
> allowed, ever, no matter what, it seems, to
> alter that offer.

I did not say unlimited service. They offered unlimited access. They charge a
monthly rate that is considerably higher than most monthly rates.  I also said that
the service agreement provides for changes in the price of the service, but that
"the service" is unlimited (hi speed) access to the Internet.


> In any case, why go on and on about unlimited access?  Bell is
> not required to provide unlimited access, are they?

As said  many times before, "the service" which they offer and for which they
charge, is "unlimited access to the Internet"

> Are they required to provide it forever because they offered
> you a service agreement at one time that has no explicit
> termination, yet reserved the right to change the
> agreement at any time?

They have not stopped selling "unlimited access to the Internet". They are still
advertising it as such.


>