Gone Premium Member join:2011-01-24 Fort Erie, ON |
to El Quintron
Re: Wind Mobile wants CRTC hearing over Telus ownershipIt'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. |
|
|
stufried
Premium Member
2012-Aug-3 12:24 pm
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). |
|
El QuintronCancel Culture Ambassador Premium Member join:2008-04-28 Tronna |
said by stufried: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. I'm afraid they'd swallow up our monopolies and continue offering service at monopoly rates! (or worse) I'm not trashing you, but competition is something that needs to be orchestrated somewhat... if not what motivation is there to be competitve? |
|
|
Teddy Boomk kudos Received Premium Member join:2007-01-29 Toronto, ON |
to stufried
said by stufried:I'd love to see the rule completely jettisoned. ... As a Detroiter, Manifest Destiny? Ideally telecommunications should be delivered on a public utility model, and no public utilities should ever be foreign owned. Doesn't matter much who owns the companies that do the branding & marketing and customer service & billing, but the critical infrastructure must be nationally owned if not nationalized. |
|
|
|
stufried
Premium Member
2012-Aug-3 2:53 pm
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.c ··· town.aspLook 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. |
|
stufried |
to El Quintron
If Verizon & ATT were permitted to buy Rogers and Bell, I'd agree with you. If they were allowed to come in, string their own towers, and compete with them, that is entirely different. You guys are probably not going to love to go with the US carrier and they won't be your default choice. If they can sweeten the pot enough, your wallet will rule. |
|
|
bt
Member
2012-Aug-3 3:01 pm
said by stufried:If Verizon & ATT were permitted to buy Rogers and Bell, I'd agree with you. Which is an option that would be viable if the rules were just tossed completely. Easier to buy in than to build up. |
|
El QuintronCancel Culture Ambassador Premium Member join:2008-04-28 Tronna |
to stufried
said by stufried: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. The unfortunate phenomenon you're referring to is regulatory capture, I'd have no problem with US players settng up shop here, as long as their Canadian operations are not subject to the Patriot Act and such. |
|
|
stufried
Premium Member
2012-Aug-3 3:34 pm
If I thought I could get German style privacy protection, I'd switch to TMobile in a New York minute. I absolutely presumed that the US players had to play by Canadian rules. |
|
El QuintronCancel Culture Ambassador Premium Member join:2008-04-28 Tronna |
said by stufried:If I thought I could get German style privacy protection, I'd switch to TMobile in a New York minute. I absolutely presumed that the US players had to play by Canadian rules. Assuming they set up a Canadian operation, I'd assume they would, but I don't know how that would interact with their own obligations to the Patriot Act and with our cross border cooperation arrangements. I'd want to investigate that's for sure. |
|
|
easy peasey
Anon
2012-Aug-3 4:09 pm
said by El Quintron:Assuming they set up a Canadian operation, I'd assume they would, but I don't know how that would interact with their own obligations to the Patriot Act and with our cross border cooperation arrangements.
I'd want to investigate that's for sure. There would be nothing to investigate. US law applies to us companies, *even* if they are only partially owned by Americans. Patriot Act applies, regardless of anything else. You can check priv coms site for this and more info. |
|
El QuintronCancel Culture Ambassador Premium Member join:2008-04-28 Tronna |
said by easy peasey :There would be nothing to investigate. US law applies to us companies, *even* if they are only partially owned by Americans. Patriot Act applies, regardless of anything else.
You can check priv coms site for this and more info. I'm not disputing your point, in fact what you just said there is what concerns me about, say, subbing to Verizon, or T. Mobile. Where it may get hairy for these companies, is if all the gear is located in Canada, then which law takes precedence. Obviously we're talking theoreticals here. |
|
|
easy peasey
Anon
2012-Aug-3 4:48 pm
said by El Quintron:said by easy peasey :There would be nothing to investigate. US law applies to us companies, *even* if they are only partially owned by Americans. Patriot Act applies, regardless of anything else.
You can check priv coms site for this and more info. I'm not disputing your point, in fact what you just said there is what concerns me about, say, subbing to Verizon, or T. Mobile. Where it may get hairy for these companies, is if all the gear is located in Canada, then which law takes precedence. Obviously we're talking theoreticals here. Answer: Patriot Act. This and more can be found on Priv Com. You know... there is a reason why BC, PEI and some other prov's ended contracts with partially owned, or fully owned, american data houses with server farms in Canada. |
|
MaynardKrebsWe did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee. Premium Member join:2009-06-17 |
to Gone
said by 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.
Wind may use the result of this to exact damages from Telus in a civil suit, for delaying the startup of Wind. |
|
MaynardKrebs 1 edit |
to stufried
said by stufried:.... but consider some of these Canadian produced programs that don't quality:
*House (supposedly set in New Jersey);
The predominant thing about House is that the creator/executive producer, David Shore, is Canadian. Prior to becoming a writer, Shore was a partner in a law firm in London, Ontario, where he practiced corporate and municipal law. 'House' was not filmed in Canada. |
|
El QuintronCancel Culture Ambassador Premium Member join:2008-04-28 Tronna |
to easy peasey
said by easy peasey :Answer: Patriot Act. Didn't I say that upthread? |
|
|
easy peasey
Anon
2012-Aug-3 8:28 pm
said by El Quintron:said by easy peasey :Answer: Patriot Act. Didn't I say that upthread? Nope. You posed a question, as shown here: said by El Quintron:Where it may get hairy for these companies, is if all the gear is located in Canada, then which law takes precedence. Obviously we're talking theoreticals here. Nothing "theoretical", and nothing "hairy", nothing "hypothetical". Patriot Act take precedence. |
|
statestress magnet Mod join:2002-02-08 Purgatory |
to El Quintron
(topic move) Wind Mobile wants CRTC hearing over Telus ownershipModerator ActionThe post that was here (and all 12 followups to it), has been moved to a new topic .. » Wind Mobile wants CRTC hearing over Telus ownership |
actions · 2012-Aug-4 9:24 am · (locked) |
El QuintronCancel Culture Ambassador Premium Member join:2008-04-28 Tronna |
to MaynardKrebs
Re: Wind Mobile wants CRTC hearing over Telus ownershipsaid by MaynardKrebs:said by 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.
Wind may use the result of this to exact damages from Telus in a civil suit, for delaying the startup of Wind. They would have a pretty good case for doing so, Like I said upthread if I were WIND I'd certainly be pursuing this angle. |
|
|
Ott_Cable
Anon
2012-Aug-4 12:13 pm
Civil suits cost money and they are up with the heavy team from Telus with the "Loser pays" system here.
Let the government agencies doing the dirty work for them and after Telus had been declared guilty, then come in for the damage in civil court. Telus would still drag it out for a few long years. |
|
El QuintronCancel Culture Ambassador Premium Member join:2008-04-28 Tronna |
said by Ott_Cable :Civil suits cost money and they are up with the heavy team from Telus with the "Loser pays" system here.
Let the government agencies doing the dirty work for them and after Telus had been declared guilty, then come in for the damage in civil court. Telus would still drag it out for a few long years. WIND's pockets are pretty deep, I would assume that's why they brought this up in the first place. |
|
|
Ott_Cable
Anon
2012-Aug-4 4:10 pm
With 700MHz bids coming in next year (and the less useful 2500 MHz auction to be held in 2014), should WIND actually spend that money on a court battle that can drag on for a few years with no guaranteed positive outcome or use it wisely to have a large coverage? |
|
|
to El Quintron
said by El Quintron:WIND's pockets are pretty deep, I would assume that's why they brought this up in the first place. Not really. The Egyptian multi-billionaire owner of Wind has deep pockets. Not wind. Also the Egyptian owner was having fits at Telus' allegations over in Egypt saying he was going to pull out then made a press release saying people shouldn't invest in Canada. It hit the fan. This came at a time when the Mexican mutli-billionaire was looking at Canada. I see this more as a single Egyptian man (and his legal team), mad as hell, and now looking for some payback to toss back at Telus. And yeah, he should give them grief and force it all public. Payback is a bitch. |
|
El QuintronCancel Culture Ambassador Premium Member join:2008-04-28 Tronna |
to Ott_Cable
said by Ott_Cable :With 700MHz bids coming in next year (and the less useful 2500 MHz auction to be held in 2014), should WIND actually spend that money on a court battle that can drag on for a few years with no guaranteed positive outcome or use it wisely to have a large coverage? Arguably since the rules have been changed, WIND could do both. |
|
|
to stufried
said by stufried:*House (supposedly set in New Jersey);
From Wikipedia: » en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ho ··· _series)The pilot episode was filmed in Canada; primary photography for all subsequent episodes has been shot on the Fox lot in Century City.[35] Bryan Singer chose the hospital near his hometown, West Windsor, New Jersey, as the show's fictional setting.[12] Princeton University's Frist Campus Center[a] is the source of the aerial views of PrincetonPlainsboro Teaching Hospital seen in the series.[67] Some filming took place at the University of Southern California for the season three episode "Half-Wit", which guest-starred Dave Matthews and Kurtwood Smith.[68] Part of House's sixth season was filmed at the abandoned Greystone Park Psychiatric Hospital, in Parsippany-Troy Hills, New Jersey, as the fictional Mayfield Psychiatric Hospital.[69] |
|
|
to El Quintron
By casting doubt on the "Canadianess" on Telus would basically limit Telus to only use "Canadian" sourced funding for their bids at least until the hearing (if there is one) is settled. On the other hand, WIND is no longer limited to where they raise their money. That's what I think WIND is up to instead of a revenge. Winning a bid have much more long term effects on capturing the mobile market than a one time suing for damages.
These bids are only part of the what needed to increase coverage. There are a lot of money needed for investments that are need to get the infrastructures etc built/deployed. |
|
MaynardKrebsWe did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee. Premium Member join:2009-06-17 |
to El Quintron
said by El Quintron:WIND's pockets are pretty deep, I would assume that's why they brought this up in the first place.
Wind's pockets are only as deep as Vimpelcom is willing to fund. |
|
El QuintronCancel Culture Ambassador Premium Member join:2008-04-28 Tronna |
said by MaynardKrebs:said by El Quintron:WIND's pockets are pretty deep, I would assume that's why they brought this up in the first place.
Wind's pockets are only as deep as Vimpelcom is willing to fund. Vipelcom is halfway into the market as we speak, and the Canadian market is fairly lucrative for an established player, assuming I were Vipelcom, I'd be digging in my heels right about now. |
|
MaynardKrebsWe did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee. Premium Member join:2009-06-17 |
to Ott_Cable
Telus wouldn't have any problem floating a bond issue (or preferred shares) in Canada. |
|
El QuintronCancel Culture Ambassador Premium Member join:2008-04-28 Tronna |
to Ott_Cable
said by Ott_Cable :By casting doubt on the "Canadianess" on Telus would basically limit Telus to only use "Canadian" sourced funding for their bids at least until the hearing (if there is one) is settled. We can only speculate at this point, but that's a pretty good guess too. |
|