O Canada! > Canadian > Canadian Broadband > Wind Mobile wants CRTC hearing over Telus ownership

Wind Mobile wants CRTC hearing over Telus ownership

reply to elwoodblues
Payback may be a bitch for Telus... too bad they have money and power and will get off with nothing more than a hand slap likely.

reply to elwoodblues
It's an interesting take, but I'm confused about how a company is supposed to stop their shares being bought by foreign investors. There's a difference between shares being owned by people/investment companies outside Canada and the company being almost entirely foreign financed and controlled. If people outside of Canada want to buy shares in Bell/Telus/Rogers/Videotron, energy companies, whatever.....how are these companies supposed to stop that from happening?

From what I can remember, BCE sold 5% of Bell Canada (wireline telephone and Internet only) to Ameritech (one of the RBOCs created by the breakup of AT&T) in the 90s. Ameritech was then bought by SBC, which then bought Southern Bell and AT&T (by then, only an LD and data provider) and rebranded back to AT&T. Bell bought it back from them in the early 2000s I think, at quite a profit to the US company. I'm not sure if there are any other parts of the BCE empire that have a portion of foreign ownership still in play, other than TSN in the CTV family, which I think is partly owned by ESPN (that's the reason the graphics are all similar). Anyone? Anyone?
--
All of us get lost in the darkness, dreamers learn to steer by the stars
All of us do time in the gutter, dreamers turn to look at the cars
- Peart / Lifeson / Lee
Join Team Helix

reply to elwoodblues
Does anyone really give a flying crap who owns what? Better choice and cheaper prices for consumers should be #1. The bulk of their employees are in foreign call centers anyways...

reply to Kardinal

reply to El Quintron

This might be interesting. Edgar is nicely searchable.

»www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/···ndex.htm

A cursory glance seems to indicate a chunk of their debt is US rather than Egyptian.

Somebody with greater search-fu may find a few gems.

reply to Gone

reply to Phorkster

I have to wonder the merit of this whole situation, though. If the investment is held the same way as it was for Globalive, the courts ruled it was perfectly legal, which means that Telus and Bell would have just as much right to operate under this kind of ownership model as Globalive does.

If you think about it, Globalive may have done Telus and Bell a favour.

reply to Kardinal
SBC IS Southern Bell. They changed their name to SBC prior to Ameritech/SNET/PacBell merger/buyout. SBC stands for Southern Bell Communications.

reply to Gone

It'll be interesting to see how the recent ownership rules come into play, because as I understand it Globalive could have significant foreign ownership up to and including 100% as they are a new entrant, but Telus and Bell are still limited to the old rules.

But you're right, if Telus was found to be in the exact same position as Globalive was when they launched an objection it will be a lawyer feeding frenzy.

I'm sorry, I know I'm going to get trashed, but I'd love to see the rule completely jettisoned. I'd love to see US Carriers be able to put up towers in Canada and start offering cross-border plans with no surcharge as a hook to get business.

Unlike TV and Magazines, I don't buy the culture arguments as applied to mobile phones. Most people get their information from the web and apps, not a cellular company's web portal. Moreover, a foreign carrier operating on Canadian soil will offer such content. As a Detroiter, I can tell you that Canadians are not the only ones who like Hockey. H---, we even have an active curling club on our side of the border.

I love Canada, but you make me think I have a cellular bargain down here (at least until I visit my bros. in the UK).

reply to stufried

A number of public utilities are foreign owned in a number of countries. Why pre-tell are cellular companies different. If our countries ever have a breakdown you can nationalize the company. Germany lost a lot of property holdings in North America because of World War I. Moreover, there isn't one company delivering power in the community, there are four or five. The interest seems less compelling.

You guys are paying some of the highest rates I know. Our rates aren't low and you make ATT look like a bargain basement. "MetroPCS Canada" would shake up your industry (until you realized the gaps in their coverage).

NAFTA was an agreement between our nations that committed to the principle of mutual trust of the other. Perhaps a bigger testament to it is the thousands of miles of unfortified border. While 9/11 fubbed it up somewhat, consider:

»www.canadiangeographic.ca/magazi···town.asp

Look at your deal with your telco. Most Canadians I know pay roaming when they are 70kms from their house. You pay three year contracts for your phones and get really hammered when you cross the border.

The Canadian culture exception has been used as a non-tariff barrier. There is a limit on US television on your network to protect Canadian culture, but consider some of these Canadian produced programs that don't quality:

*House (supposedly set in New Jersey);
*Andromeda;
*Battlestar Galactica;
*Highlander;
*MacGyver (later episodes);
*Police Academy - The Series (supposedly set in California);
*Stargate SG1, Universe, and Atlantis;
*21 Jump Street;
*The Commish (filed in supposedly set in New Jersey);
*NYPD Blue (supposedly set in NYC);
*Silk Stockings (supposedly set in Palm Beach);
*Eureka;
*Human Target;
*Smallville (supposedly set in Kansas);
*F/X

My point is not that there is no such thing as true Canadian culture -- there is. My point is that the justification is often a pretextual and used to protect incumbent interests at the expense of the consumer.