I'm just pointing out my two cents worth here...and I'll address your concerns...funny, I have 4 TV's and a full family, and we have no problem with MTStv. Seems to me that MTS has more that a niche market. I can say exactly the same thing about Bell. It sucked for me, since I could only watch 2 shows at once unless I got anothe LNB, I had to buy a box for each tv, the quality sucked big time, the custoemr service sucked big time, no VoD sucked big time..... on and on, seems to me that Bell is a niche player and in my opinion you are correct Bell is not in the same league as MTS, since Bell sucks big time.
wow that was as productive a troll as your comments dm_4u.
Not exactly true. For each pair of streams, you need a receiver... and each LNB only officially supports 6 receivers. While it's more than MTS, it's also not unlimited.Bell is a far cheaper alternative as I have an infinite amount of HD streams.
Where did you see this deal? I got a letter yesterday with the same offer for $85/month and I don't think it said the first month was free. Can I just phone and mention the $72/month deal and get that instead?They are also offering , in addition to the two HD boxes & PVR functions for life, a $72/mth for the first 12 months deal. That is basic TV plus nine themes, HS Internet, and phone with the LD package included. First month free.
That works out to approximately $792 for the first year including the free month!
It is similar to those in the Bell-TV, Shaw Direct, Rogers, Shaw etc forums stating all the features and limitations of the various receivers that all the other providers offer...so that people will be able to make a more informed decision about what (if anything) they are going to purchase or rent.
Yeah - that comment seems objective to me.and with MTS being the only provider to actually limit each residence to 3 streams...(only 2 of which are in HD)... MTS is still not even close to being in the game!