Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
General TopicsGSMBluetooth
Providers
AlltelATT WirelessCingularFidoNextelSprint PCST-MobileVerizon
Manufacturers
EricssonNokiaMotorola
Country Specific
Australian GroupUK Group
Related Topics
PocketPCPalmMore Topics ...

Cellular Phone Forum / Providers / Fido / January 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Rogers Wireless curbs Fido unit

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Norman - 27 Jan 2005 17:52 GMT
I'm surprised nobody's posted this yet.

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_T
ype1&c=Article&cid=1106779811499&call_pageid=970599119419


Jan. 27, 2005. 01:00 AM

Rogers Wireless curbs Fido unit
`Redesign' raises calling costs

Two new plans starting in March

TYLER HAMILTON
TECHNOLOGY REPORTER
Toronto Star

Rogers Wireless Inc. has put Fido on a shorter leash less than three months
after acquiring its master, Microcell Telecommunications Inc., by upping the
cost, capping the talk time and shrinking the coverage of its "unlimited"
CityFido plan.

Analysts said the changes, what Rogers is calling a "redesign," signal that
competition in Canada's wireless industry is beginning to cool off as the three
service providers left in the market put more emphasis on profits than
subscriber growth.

The situation stands in contrast with the U.S. market, where wireless plans
generally offer more value for less money.

"The bad thing about all of this is we're going to get back to where the
carriers are very conservative," said Mark Quigley, Canadian managing director
for the Yankee Group, a technology research firm.

"The Canadian carriers definitely have not been as aggressive on the price side
as they have been in the U.S. market. From a consumer's perspective it certainly
is a shot."

CityFido created a stir when it was first introduced because it offered
unlimited local calls for just $45, including the $6.95 monthly system access
fee its rivals routinely charge. Montreal-based Microcell promoted the
controversial plan as a replacement for traditional local-phone services
provided by Telus Corp. and Bell Canada.

When it was introduced in Vancouver in late 2003 and in Toronto last May, the
flat-rate plan sparked pricing battles in each market as Bell and Telus moved to
defend their respective turfs.

"What CityFido was trying to do was get rid of that local phone," said Brian
Sharwood, a telecom analyst with the Seaboard Group in Toronto. "It was saying
to people, `Why are you wasting that money on Bell?'"

After Rogers acquired Microcell last fall to become the country's largest
wireless provider, it surprised analysts by going ahead with the launch of
CityFido in Montreal. It did, however, slightly increase the monthly cost and
hinted that bigger changes were likely to come.

Beginning March 1, the redesigned CityFido will be sold as two plans, both
"smaller in size and more urban-focused," said Rogers.

The first offers 750 minutes for $45 a month; the second offers 1,500 minutes
for $65. Each plan's local coverage area has been greatly reduced, and calls
made outside the local zone will cost 50 cents a minute.

"It's pricey," said Sharwood, pointing out that the 50 cent a minute charge for
calls outside the local calling zone harkens back to cellular prices of the late
1980s and those large bricklike phones.

"And it's nice to know they understand urban lifestyle needs. Apparently those
needs were not met by an unlimited plan."

Rogers said the system access fee, local number portability, as well as call
waiting, call forwarding and conference call services will continue to be
included in both plans. Calls that exceed minute caps will cost an additional 30
cents a minute.

Existing CityFido customers will be protected from the changes for a year or
until the end of their service agreements, Rogers said.

Quigley said the decision, while it makes good business sense for Rogers and its
shareholders, is going to anger many CityFido subscribers who, after the effort
of liberating themselves from their local phone company, will face paying more
or going back to Bell.

Analysts also pointed out that the changes benefit Virgin Mobile Canada, which
is planning to launch mobile phone services any week now and is expected to
aggressively target disgruntled wireless users.

"This will fall into their hands," said Sharwood. "They'll be like, `You've been
lied to again, come to us.' "

- ---
Norman
Please reply via group. E-mail ID does not exist.
sbdot - 27 Jan 2005 19:38 GMT
Wow.  From 'unlimited' to 750mins, added monthly service fee, reduced
coverage, 50 cent/min roaming.  I guess the government really knew what
they were doing when they figured that competition wouldn't be affected
by this merger.  And they wonder why people are against bank mergers (I
canceled my Canada Trust account after the TD merger because my promised
'no fee changes' had my montly fees go from $3 to $11).  And don't get
us started on the raging success of merging Canada's only two major
airlines.

Back to the topic: The thing about Virgin Mobile is that, from what
little I've read, they won't be offereing GSM service, so it's really no
help to disgruntled Rogers/Fido customers.  I, as well as many others I
would suspect, liked having GSM service because I could use my triband
mobile when travelling.  A Virgin Mobile reselling Bell Mobility won't
help me.

> I'm surprised nobody's posted this yet.
>
[quoted text clipped - 88 lines]
> Norman
> Please reply via group. E-mail ID does not exist.
JF Mezei - 27 Jan 2005 20:53 GMT
> Back to the topic: The thing about Virgin Mobile is that, from what
> little I've read, they won't be offereing GSM service, so it's really no
> help to disgruntled Rogers/Fido customers.

Unfortunatly, the majority of customers don't know the difference
between CDMA and GSM. And they are used to the fact that changing
carriers requires changing handsets.

Come to think of it, Rogers's move to sabotage Fido at this point in
time may not be so stupid. If removing all the good packages from the
market now means that Virgin will be able to price their packages
higher, it is good for Rogers, Bell, Telus.

If Fido were allowed to retain their competitive pricing, it means that
Virgin would match them. And then, when Rogers would remove those
packages, Virgin would end up with a clear pricing advantage over all
the others.

So this is in fact reverse comnpetition where people raise their rates
so that the new entrant won't offer very low rates, and the legacy
carriers can then afford to lower their rates to appear to be competing
against the new entrant. (a bit like raising price of items and the next
day announcing a sale that brings the price back to what it use dto be).
sbdot - 27 Jan 2005 21:07 GMT
I will be calling to cancel my fido account at the end of this billing
cycle.  I have a pretty sweet deal, but the service is noticeably
deteriorating in my area and I suspect that my fees are going to
increase shortly.  The only question that I have is what if anything I
can do about keeping my number.  I haven't been keeping up, but what's
the deal with number portability as it stands now?  I could opt to
switch to prepaid until I manage to get in touch with everyone I would
want to communicate a new number to, but that would be giving Rogers
something every month.  I want them to get nary a nickel from me, seeing
as they don't deserve it.

>>Back to the topic: The thing about Virgin Mobile is that, from what
>>little I've read, they won't be offereing GSM service, so it's really no
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
> against the new entrant. (a bit like raising price of items and the next
> day announcing a sale that brings the price back to what it use dto be).
JF Mezei - 27 Jan 2005 21:58 GMT
> I will be calling to cancel my fido account at the end of this billing
> cycle.  I have a pretty sweet deal, but the service is noticeably
> deteriorating in my area and I suspect that my fees are going to
> increase shortly. ...  I want them to get nary a nickel from me, seeing
> as they don't deserve it.

While I also dislike Rogers, and deplore the disapearance of Fido, until
I find a better deal than what I currently have, I have to bite my
tongue and keep paying what is now rogers.

When Fido comes to me and tells me my deal is finished and I must eother
get a 2 year contract or see a hige price increase, then I will shop
around to see what is available. The day Fido introduced contracts, they
lost something which was very valuable: loyalty.

They used to have the lowest churn rate, until the period where they
started messing up SMS, web site, email etc. They went to one with the
highest churn rate.

Note: from what I have read, the GRPS offering on Ragers is 2 tiered.
There is a low end GPRS services that gives you just WAP and no IP
address visible to the internet, and the full services which gives you a
routable IP address  which you can use from laptop. i.e. the base one is
really just for WAP and possibly retrieve/send email from handset, the
second tier, much more expensive, is for what we get here on Fido: real
GPRS service.
JF Mezei - 27 Jan 2005 20:48 GMT
> CityFido created a stir when it was first introduced because it offered
> unlimited local calls for just $45, including the $6.95 monthly system access

Actually, it was $40 at first. Weeks later they upped it to $45 when the
realised how popular it was :-)

> The first offers 750 minutes for $45 a month; the second offers 1,500 minutes
> for $65. Each plan's local coverage area has been greatly reduced, and calls
> made outside the local zone will cost 50 cents a minute.

Ted Rogers's comments about Rogers being a premium brand, and Fido being
a low end brand seem to be key to understanding this. My guess is that
Rogers will or already has plans which are better then the 750 minutes
for $45, especially when you consider the exchorbitant $0.50 charges
when you cycle out of the downtown area.

Rogers is effectively killing CityFido. No surprise there. It isn't as
if they hadn't given out hints on this.

What puzzles me though is WHY they are doing this. I can understand
Rogers hating City Fido when it was a competitor since Fido was stealing
customers. But that very success should have been welcome now that
Rogers owns Fido.

Rogers has access to real data about CityFido usage, how many minutes on
average are being used and the actual profitability. Considering that
Microcell had just existed from bankrupcy when it introduced CityFido, I
can't believe that it would have been a money losing thing. Or was it
just a trick to raise ARPU (a metric very important to measure a
wireless network's performance) even if it lost loney ?

From a PR point of view, it is a total cataclismic mistake, especially
in Vancouver. Rogers had a foothold through Microcell in Vancouver,
competing against Telus and having a huge advantage over Telus. Now that
it is Telus vs Bell vs Rogers, such a competitive edge should have been
considered like gold instead of sh.t.

Rogers had made plenty of promises to maintain packages and maintain
Fido etc etc. While I knew that such promises would be broken because I
have observed many mergers in the past, this will really piss off MANY
customers who will no longer trust Rogers to take care of Fido.

But in the end, those customers will look around, find nothing that is
competitive, and reluctantly sign a 2 years contract, hoping that within
2 years, something will have happened to make mobile phones affordable
again in Canada.

Rogers seems to be very good have keeping disgruntled customers who hate
Rogers but who are forced to stay with Rogers.

And during the heydays of Fido (first 5 years before they ruined SMS and
their web site which signaled the start of downdard trend), Fido had 0
contracts and knew that they had to be very nice to customers and
couldn't afford to piss them off.

Rogers is very much a monopoly in tersm of mentality where it feels no
need to keep customer shpapy and knows exactly how mcuh it can screw
customers without customers leaving.

Bell is far mroe professional in that regards with much more subtle ways
of screwing customers at the same time as making cutsomers feel good
about it.

> Rogers said the system access fee, local number portability, as well as call
> waiting, call forwarding and conference call services will continue to be
> included in both plans. Calls that exceed minute caps will cost an additional 30
> cents a minute.

Well, there is a positive in all that... Since Rogers now added the
$6.95 extorsion fee, it seems that it will remove it when it introduces
the extorsion package where the extorsion fee is included :-) :-)

0.30 per minute for excess minutes is ridiculous.   But I bet that these
new packages will also include using Rogers's network.

> Existing CityFido customers will be protected from the changes for a year or
> until the end of their service agreements, Rogers said.

So, the big question now: if they introduce those extorsion packagees
June 1 2005, grand father non-contract CityFido customers for 1 year,
does this mean that a customers could remain no-contract for 11 months,
and in May 2006 call to get a 2 year contract at his existing rate (thus
keeping the real cityfido for 3 years). ???

> Analysts also pointed out that the changes benefit Virgin Mobile Canada,

Until they start to advertise packages, we have no idea what they plan
to do. And because they don't own the network, I somehow doubt that bell
will allow Virgin to provide a tru CityFido unlimited equivalent.

Remember that Rogers is now the only network that allows roaming outside
of north america. Virgin's wrong choice of technology will make it
useless and its own customers will continue to roam on Rogers when they
visit canada from abroad.
malingerer@gmail.com - 28 Jan 2005 00:31 GMT
Your whole post points to your lack of insight.

You mention Rogers coming out with a better plan at $45? Why would they?
They want to drive revenue higher than that and have customers pay more than
that ($45 is not high end). City Fido for Fido itself was a great product
and provided a great boost to their bottom line, but it must have been
degrading Rogers revenue (I can't imagine what it did to Telus and Bell).
With Fido now owned by Rogers they would need to manage their business with
respect to the whole company, not just Fido.

Fido is grandfathering ALL existing customers for at least the next year, if
they go on a contract they can keep the plan in perpetuity. I can't see why
customers would be made at that. I know I finally signed a contract when I
heard this was changing.

Virgin as a true threat? Funny, not from what I know.. Premium handset
prices because of the Virgin brand name, plus CDMA backbone, plus higher per
minute rates? You might be suprised to find out how competitors may strike
before Virgin launches.

Finally, you will notice not many people frequant this group anymore, only
you here most of the time, to bitch to yourself.

> > CityFido created a stir when it was first introduced because it offered
> > unlimited local calls for just $45, including the $6.95 monthly system access
[quoted text clipped - 90 lines]
> useless and its own customers will continue to roam on Rogers when they
> visit canada from abroad.
Amur_ - 28 Jan 2005 02:31 GMT
  A friend of mine is a CSR for Fido (he's the one who talked me into
joining Fido a year ago.)  I passed this news item along to him and his
comments were:

- Virgin will be offering a pay-as-you-go service.

- Rogers is trying to "annoy" Fido customers into leaving the CityFido
plans and switch to capped roaming plans.  Fido customers on unlimited
plans are now sharing their towers with Rogers customers, congesting
their network.  Conversly, Fido customers on capped plans are now
roaming on Rogers' towers, escaping that congestion.
  I can't verify any of this, btw.  :-)

- he mirrored JF's comments about Rogers eventually using Fido to
'counter-attack' Virgin

  I came to Fido to escape Rogers after two years of being treated like
an annoyance by their CSRs.  Now I'm back in bed with them.  At least
I'm not locked into a contract.  As soon as I see Rogers trying to hike
my bill, I'm done.  I think I'll drop using cell phones altogether until
 something more appealling (and not Rogers, Bell or Telus) comes along.
 I don't mean to sound like I'm pinning my hopes on Virgin, but hey - I
saw a little of Rebel Billionaire and Branson seems like a decent guy.  ;-)

ttyl,
Amur_
JF Mezei - 28 Jan 2005 09:15 GMT
> - Rogers is trying to "annoy" Fido customers into leaving the CityFido
> plans and switch to capped roaming plans.  Fido customers on unlimited
> plans are now sharing their towers with Rogers customers, congesting
> their network.

This would need more explanation. None of the unlimited currently sue
Rogers network. But Rogers customers can use Fido's network.

My guess is that Fido wants to transfer 1900 spectrum from Fido towers
to Rogers towers so that Rogers can grow. The spectrum was Fido's most
valuable asset. But Rogers can't really transfer that spectrum if it is
still being used.

I guess that the thinking is that if 2 cityfido customers take up as
much bandwidth as 3 Rogers customers, and total revenus from the 3
Rogers customers is higher, then it would pay to get rid of the CityFido
customers to free up the bandwdith, transfer it to Rogers and then grow Rogers.

>  Conversly, Fido customers on capped plans are now
> roaming on Rogers' towers, escaping that congestion.

Correct. But this will end at end of February, except for those paying
an extra $5.00 per month.

> - he mirrored JF's comments about Rogers eventually using Fido to
> 'counter-attack' Virgin

That would leave fido only for pre-paid stuff. Which was my prediction
from the start: the Fido name will become a product name for Roger's prepaid.

>    I came to Fido to escape Rogers after two years of being treated like
> an annoyance by their CSRs.

I came from Cantel because they were too expensive compared to Fido and
wanted 3 year contracts at $26 for 30 minutes (billed per minute) while
Fido wanted $20 for 100 minutes, billed by second, and Fido had GSM
whilst Rogers was still analogue. And  Cantel was renamed to AT&T, and
they wouldn't even give me a deal on a replacement battery for my Moto
handset which I had paid $1200 in the early 1990s.

Lots of the early Fido adopters have similar stories. But Fido now has a
large percentage of its cutsomer base who are first time mobile phone
users and don't really know much about Rogers.

> I'm not locked into a contract.  As soon as I see Rogers trying to hike
> my bill, I'm done.  I think I'll drop using cell phones altogether until
>   something more appealling

A lot of us would love to be able to do that. But in the end, Rogers
knows full well that as long as its package is $0.xx cheaper than Bell
or Telus, that it is still better to stick with Rogers.
(The $0.xx is the magic value which Rogers must very carefully evaluate
in order to make the price advbantage bigger than the psychocolocal need
to give Rogers a kick on the a.s for ruining Fido.
malingerer@gmail.com - 28 Jan 2005 15:06 GMT
>   I don't mean to sound like I'm pinning my hopes on Virgin, but hey - I
> saw a little of Rebel Billionaire and Branson seems like a decent guy.  ;-)

He is a Billionaire, he is out to make money by maximizing his brand in the
marketplace, thus building more wealth. The plan, as with any business in a
capitalist society, is to make money, he does a good job. As does Ted
Rogers.
Mason Storm - 28 Jan 2005 15:17 GMT
<malingerer@gmail.com> wrote in alt.cellular.fido:

> He is a Billionaire, he is out to make money by maximizing his brand
> in the marketplace, thus building more wealth. The plan, as with any
> business in a capitalist society, is to make money, he does a good
> job. As does Ted Rogers.

No matter what any of these people make. I am not addicted to my phone. I
have a pager that costs me $6.00 with voicemail. I am more than happy to
stick with that as there is always a phone around.

Signature

Mason Storm

-----------------------------
Remove "dogface" to reply privately in email.           
-----------------------------
http://ciudad.latinol.com//boinks/booters.html

JF Mezei - 28 Jan 2005 19:55 GMT
> He is a Billionaire, he is out to make money by maximizing his brand in the
> marketplace, thus building more wealth. The plan, as with any business in a
> capitalist society, is to make money, he does a good job. As does Ted
> Rogers.

There is a significant difference. Branson is also out to beat old style
stuffy establishment. He has attacked British Airways constantly since
he started Virgin Atlantic (airline).

The thing is that Branson's enteprises are designed to appear to be low
cost, but aren't in fact that low cost. But the marketing is excellent
and makes customers feel really good and happy to shop/use Virgin services.

Had the "Fido" brand not been so strong, Microcell would gave been a
perfect fit for Virgin Mobile. (forgetting foreign investment rules for
a minute).  In fact, Branson might have been able to return Microcell to
its pre 2000 mentality.

Ted Rogers is more like Conrad Black than Branson. He is out to build an
empire. He doesn't care about making customers like him, he knows that
he is despised and he doesn't mind. He views customers as a necessary
evil.

Remember that from a mobile point of view, Rogers has a very weak brand
because of the constant name changes over the years, combined with the
bad image Rogers has for its cable operations.

Virgin should have an easy time with its marketing gimmicks to steal
lots of customers. If I were Branson, I'd even consider using an airship
with a big Virgin logo on it and parade it over many cities. That would
really rub it in for Rogers.
malingerer@gmail.com - 29 Jan 2005 02:01 GMT
> Ted Rogers is more like Conrad Black than Branson. He is out to build an
> empire. He doesn't care about making customers like him, he knows that
> he is despised and he doesn't mind. He views customers as a necessary
> evil.

So.. Ted told you this? That he doesn't care? He has 19,000 employees
contributing to Canadian society..
Deep - 29 Jan 2005 04:44 GMT
I bet you if he could do it with 10, he would...

It's all about profit, not giving back...

Deep

> > Ted Rogers is more like Conrad Black than Branson. He is out to build an
> > empire. He doesn't care about making customers like him, he knows that
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> So.. Ted told you this? That he doesn't care? He has 19,000 employees
> contributing to Canadian society..
monkey cow moon - 28 Jan 2005 23:22 GMT
Anyone know how we can complain?  Who do we complain to?  the CRTC?  is
there a competition bureau or some sort of government agency that we can
complain to?

> I'm surprised nobody's posted this yet.
>
[quoted text clipped - 116 lines]
> Norman
> Please reply via group. E-mail ID does not exist.
JF Mezei - 29 Jan 2005 06:21 GMT
> Anyone know how we can complain?  Who do we complain to?  the CRTC?  is
> there a competition bureau or some sort of government agency that we can
> complain to?

Industry Canada is the body in charge of mobile phones. CRTC is useless
to begin with and thankfully they don't regulate mobile phones (except
for the number portability issue which is part of its jurisdiction over
legacy landline carriers).

From a political point of view, the Bloc and NDP are most likely to
provide some opposition. The Reform party probably likes the
disapearance of Microcell (Québec based) since it re-enforces their
western based Telus.
Pavel - 29 Jan 2005 22:14 GMT
The dog's been neutered and also being experimented on.  We all know
what happens to animals when they do this.   My guess is that City
Fido will be dead within a few years.  Here is some info on the latest
changes for those who use it in the Vancouver area:

"As of March 1, Surrey, Delta, Coquitlam, Port Coquitlam, Pitt
Meadows, Maple Ridge, Langley, Aldergrove, Mission, Abbotsford and
Chilliwack will no longer be served by City Fido."

http://www.canada.com/vancouver/vancouversun/news/business/story.html?id=f0d7d6a
6-0933-4bbe-b857-51dd4bdee7e7

JF Mezei - 30 Jan 2005 02:35 GMT
> http://www.canada.com/vancouver/vancouversun/news/business/story.html?id=f0d7d6a
6-0933-4bbe-b857-51dd4bdee7e7

What I find interesting is that despite this, they still insist City
Fido continues to exist.

As if anyone is going to find a 5000 minute @ $45 plan to be the same as
a 750 minute @ $45 plan.

It is a bit like Via Rail calling a train "The Canadian" when it doesn't
even use the same tracks or link the same cities as the real/original train.

Had a brief look at the rogers site. Boy, we had it good with Fido.

for 750 minutes, one has to pay $100 per month with Rogers. It si no
wonder Rogers want to get rid of Fido rates ASAP. Note that Rogers
charges between 0.20 and 0.25 cents per minute for minutes above on'e
plan. So the $0.50 is a true ripoff if they really intend to charge this
to Fido customers who choose "City Fido".

The next step I guess is to roll out Wi-Max, and provide mobile
IP-telephony and watch that Rogers monster crumble.
malingerer@gmail.com - 30 Jan 2005 08:04 GMT
> The next step I guess is to roll out Wi-Max, and provide mobile
> IP-telephony and watch that Rogers monster crumble.

Ummm.. Wi-Max in Canada has already been secured by Microcell/Inukshuk
(ifido trials earlier this year). License already provide to Microcell (now
Rogers owned) in 8 out of 10 provinces.
http://www.inukshuk.ca/anglais/offre.html is Wi-Max.
repatch - 30 Jan 2005 15:28 GMT
On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 08:04:27 +0000, malingerer wrote:

>> The next step I guess is to roll out Wi-Max, and provide mobile
>> IP-telephony and watch that Rogers monster crumble.
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> (now Rogers owned) in 8 out of 10 provinces.
> http://www.inukshuk.ca/anglais/offre.html is Wi-Max.

Ahh, you just ruined JF's dreams of some little company coming to his
rescue...

That said, WiMax is a protocol that can run on MANY different frequencies,
licensed or not. By the time it does come out developing a WiMax network
will be VERY cheap, so there will be alot of players.

Hopefully the Canadian government won't do what they do best: protect the
interests of the big companies without concern for how much we the
consumer are being screwed.
JF Mezei - 30 Jan 2005 20:52 GMT
> Ummm.. Wi-Max in Canada has already been secured by Microcell/Inukshuk
> (ifido trials earlier this year). License already provide to Microcell (now
> Rogers owned) in 8 out of 10 provinces.
> http://www.inukshuk.ca/anglais/offre.html is Wi-Max.

When did ifido change its infrastructure from the proprietary technology
to wimax ? At the time ifido was setup, Wi-Max didn't exist, I am not
even sure if the standard has been officially adopted yet.

And are you sure Inukshuk was actually purchased by Rogers ?
malingerer@gmail.com - 30 Jan 2005 20:54 GMT
> > Ummm.. Wi-Max in Canada has already been secured by Microcell/Inukshuk
> > (ifido trials earlier this year). License already provide to Microcell (now
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>
> And are you sure Inukshuk was actually purchased by Rogers ?

MCS was the technology now called Wi-Max. Inukshuk control is fully on the
Rogers side now. Not even within FIDO's house anymore.
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.