dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
2975
share rss forum feed


Ahh droool

@videotron.ca

And now a message from our dark overlords

New Corporate Canadian website!

»www.SayNoToBell.ca

Brought to you by:

Louis Audet
President and CEO
Cogeco Cable Inc.

Lee Bragg
CEO
Eastlink

Pierre Karl Péladeau
President and CEO
Quebecor Inc.

I find it funny that Pierre Karl Péladeau is giving me this warning as I pay more than anyone else in Canada for shitty cable service:
WARNING: Letting one company control so much TV programming in Canada could be dangerous to your wallet. Click here to find out how.

Pierre! Think you can lower my bill by 30$? oh.. oh yeah, I forgot. You are the only cable provider and have a monopoly control in Quebec. Silly me...

Are these people really ones to talk?



Ott_Cable

@teksavvy.com

So this is a CableCo "Spy vs Spy" website... Rogers is not on the list.

Not sure who the actual good guy(s) are as they are all corporations that milk Canadians.


HeadSpinning
MNSi Internet

join:2005-05-29
Windsor, ON
kudos:5
reply to Ahh droool

said by Ahh droool :

Pierre! Think you can lower my bill by 30$? oh.. oh yeah, I forgot. You are the only cable provider and have a monopoly control in Quebec. Silly me...

Are these people really ones to talk?

They're not exactly shining examples of competitive forces at work, but the message still has merit.
--
MNSi Internet - »www.mnsi.net


The Doctor

join:2011-11-25
Montreal,Qc
Reviews:
·ELECTRONICBOX

2 edits

The message as merit but they are not doing it to protect us.
If its allowed it will cause all these cableCo's to actually try to compete and they fear that like the plague.

Bell should not be given this much power over content but that ship as sailed long ago.


plebel
Premium
join:2011-01-27
Ottawa, ON

1 recommendation

reply to Ahh droool

They're definitely out to protect their own interests rather than those of the consumer. Nevertheless, they're correct about the extent of media concentration in this country. One thing that would go a long way to resolving this problem is the separation of delivery and content providers. Structural separation has been discussed many times on these forums. Unfortunately the government and the CRTC don't seem to see any problem with the way things are going. I was going to suggest this in the SayNoToBell online petition, however it won't allow any editing of the message. That's sneaky. I suppose they want to control the message to better suit their purposes. I'll write my own message, thank you very much.



Read it

@videotron.ca

Their purpose, if you read it, is not the Canadian public like the websites pretends to be about. It's about their million dollar shareholders.


HeadSpinning
MNSi Internet

join:2005-05-29
Windsor, ON
kudos:5
reply to Ahh droool

Oh, I agree that their motivations are NOT what they say, and they're against consolidation simply because they're not the ones doing it.

Not withstanding that, Bell will be in a position to drive up per end subscriber charges for ALL players, the difference being is that THEY get to keep the money when a subscriber is on Bell OR Cogeco OR Eastlink OR XYZ independent cableco.

Basically, it will become less important to Bell who you buy your TV from - they profit regardless.
--
MNSi Internet - »www.mnsi.net



Nicely said

@videotron.ca

said by HeadSpinning:

Bell will be in a position to drive up per end subscriber charges for ALL players, the difference being is that THEY get to keep the money when a subscriber is on Bell OR Cogeco OR Eastlink OR XYZ independent cableco.

Basically, it will become less important to Bell who you buy your TV from - they profit regardless.

You explained it well.

IamGimli

join:2004-02-28
Canada
kudos:1
reply to HeadSpinning

said by HeadSpinning:

Oh, I agree that their motivations are NOT what they say, and they're against consolidation simply because they're not the ones doing it.

Actually, PK Peladeau is one of the ones doing it. He's just not as successful at it as Bell.

His Quebecor Inc. company owns Videotron (internet service, cable TV distribution, wireless phone, movie rental/distribution), Sun Media, Sun News, QMI Media, TVA (one of the two main private TV networks in Quebec), TVA Publications (70 magazines), Musicor (record production company), Distribution Select (record distribution company), Archambault (record retail and web store), 16 book editing and distribution companies, CEC, the largest editor of school books in Quebec.

Plus they have plans to buy an NHL team and establish their own, new, sports TV channel.

BTW none of this, except the French newspaper/magazine business, was actually built by Quebecor. PKP has just preyed on successful Quebec companies, brought them to their knees by organizing deliberate attacks against them, only to buy them off at their lowest and gutting them of what made them successful to begin with only to keep their well-respected name.

In other words, he's trying to be Bell. Except Bell is better at it than he is.


El Quintron
Resident Mouth Breather
Premium
join:2008-04-28
Etobicoke, ON
kudos:4
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·TekSavvy DSL
·WIND Mobile
reply to HeadSpinning

said by HeadSpinning:

Oh, I agree that their motivations are NOT what they say, and they're against consolidation simply because they're not the ones doing it.

Not withstanding that, Bell will be in a position to drive up per end subscriber charges for ALL players, the difference being is that THEY get to keep the money when a subscriber is on Bell OR Cogeco OR Eastlink OR XYZ independent cableco.

Basically, it will become less important to Bell who you buy your TV from - they profit regardless.

Very well said,

I'd also argue it's much better that they're at their own throats rather than mine for a change.
--
Support Bacteria -- It's the Only Culture Some People Have


el whato

@videotron.ca

El Quintron, We're next :/



Davesnothere
No-BHELL-ity DOES have its Advantages
Premium
join:2009-06-15
START Today!
kudos:7
reply to El Quintron

said by El Quintron:

said by HeadSpinning:

Oh, I agree that their motivations are NOT what they say, and they're against consolidation simply because they're not the ones doing it.

Not withstanding that, Bell will be in a position to drive up per end subscriber charges for ALL players, the difference being is that THEY get to keep the money when a subscriber is on Bell OR Cogeco OR Eastlink OR XYZ independent cableco.

Basically, it will become less important to Bell who you buy your TV from - they profit regardless.

Very well said,

I'd also argue it's much better that they're at their own each other's throats rather than mine for a change.

 
I agree with both of you.

The only trouble is that they are fighting over the dagger which will eventually spill OUR financial blood and spell OUR demise !

--

We have only 2 things about which to worry :
(1) That things may never get back to normal
(2) That they already HAVE !


El Quintron
Resident Mouth Breather
Premium
join:2008-04-28
Etobicoke, ON
kudos:4
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·TekSavvy DSL
·WIND Mobile

said by Davesnothere:

The only trouble is that they are fighting over the dagger which will eventually spill OUR financial blood and spell OUR demise !

True dat! The point was simply that while they're busy screwing each other they're not screwing us. I was implying that they're always screwing us anyways....


--
Support Bacteria -- It's the Only Culture Some People Have


Davesnothere
No-BHELL-ity DOES have its Advantages
Premium
join:2009-06-15
START Today!
kudos:7

said by El Quintron:

....I was implying that they're always screwing us anyways....


 
Yes, absolutely.

Though since my switching to START cable, Cogeco only has the head in.

But my Ferengi senses were tingling at the opportunity to use the 'dagger' line, and I simply couldn't resist.

Sometimes, I think up stuff ahead, and wait for the moment of optimum impact.

But that one just popped into one of my cortexes, and begged me to say it !


El Quintron
Resident Mouth Breather
Premium
join:2008-04-28
Etobicoke, ON
kudos:4
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·TekSavvy DSL
·WIND Mobile

said by Davesnothere:

But my Ferengi senses were tingling at the opportunity to use the 'dagger' line, and I simply couldn't resist.

I know what you're saying... I figured out a clever comparison yesterday and I've been dying to use it.
--
Support Bacteria -- It's the Only Culture Some People Have


milnoc

join:2001-03-05
H3B
kudos:2
reply to Ahh droool

They hypocrisy behind all of this is simply hilarious!



Davesnothere
No-BHELL-ity DOES have its Advantages
Premium
join:2009-06-15
START Today!
kudos:7

said by milnoc:

They hypocrisy behind all of this is simply hilarious!

 
It could completely change the meaning of that old soul song 'What is Hyp' [What is Hip - Tower of Power - 1970's]


CanadianRip

join:2009-07-15
Oakville, ON

1 recommendation

reply to Ahh droool

The first mistake was to let Bell own ANY channels. They're making this mistake across the border by letting ComCast own Content as well.

How the CRTC allowed the CTV acquisition in the first place, without seeing the glaring conflicts of interest just demonstrates what a lack of foresight they have.

Don't hold your breath if you're waiting for them to admit to the massive blunder.


anakin5

join:2012-06-04
Montreal, QC

1 recommendation

said by CanadianRip:

How the CRTC allowed the CTV acquisition in the first place, without seeing the glaring conflicts of interest just demonstrates what a lack of foresight they have.

You're assuming they (the CRTC) lacked foresight. My guess is they knew *exactly* what they were doing. Corruption is everywhere in this country.


Davesnothere
No-BHELL-ity DOES have its Advantages
Premium
join:2009-06-15
START Today!
kudos:7

1 recommendation

said by anakin5:

You're assuming they (the CRTC) lacked foresight. My guess is they knew *exactly* what they were doing. Corruption is everywhere in this country.

 
+1


dillyhammer
START me up
Premium,MVM
join:2010-01-09
Scarborough, ON
kudos:10
Reviews:
·Start Communicat..
reply to anakin5

said by anakin5 See Profile
You're assuming they (the CRTC) lacked foresight. My guess is they knew *exactly* what they were doing. Corruption is everywhere in this country.
[/BQUOTE :

+1

Mike
--
Cogeco - The New UBB Devil -»[Burloak] Usage Based Billing Nightmare
Make The Switch - »openmedia.ca/switch



travisc

join:2001-11-09
Uxbridge, ON
reply to Ahh droool

This is all sour grapes, because the complainers don't have enough content to be part of the "I screw you, you screw me, we all screw the customer" game played by Bell, Rogers and Shaw.

It's important to note that Rogers and Shaw aren't complaining about the Astral purchase, because they are very much part of this game. The game involves these three major players agreeing to significant wholesale rate increases for the channels each of them own, knowing that it all falls out in the wash for their bottom line. Rogers will pay more for TMN, but will charge Bell more for Sportsnet and their other content. Shaw will do the same. Each side happily signs the contracts. This leads to companies like Telus, Cogeco and independent cable companies being faced with large increases and being told that the increases are market rate, because (choose two) Bell, Rogers and Shaw signed on. Not having enough valuable content of their own, the smaller companies are forced to sign on with no help from the CRTC and the customer takes it in the ass. This just happened with the binding arbitration between Bell and whatever the group of smaller providers called themselves.

We all lose in the end. Cogeco, Videotron and the rest of them surely don't have pure motivations, but at least the result of what they're trying protects us in some small way.



elwoodblues
Elwood Blues
Premium
join:2006-08-30
Somewhere in
kudos:2

TVA, owned by QMI, does quite well on its own in Quebec, they're threatened by a larger bell, so yeah its self preservation, the rest, sour grapes for not locking up content in the first place.



Ott_Cable

@teksavvy.com
reply to anakin5

Yeah. The CRTC always have the mind set that "Bigger is Better" and only the 'Big Guys" would invest. The smaller players are only there as an illusion that they are "doing their jobs" and there are "Competitions" in the "Free market".



CanadianRip

join:2009-07-15
Oakville, ON
reply to anakin5

said by anakin5:

You're assuming they (the CRTC) lacked foresight. My guess is they knew *exactly* what they were doing. Corruption is everywhere in this country.

True but if you push with that kind of statement you will quickly be ignored and marginalized. If you come at it from the perspective of giving them the benefit of the doubt. You now force to rationalize their position, rather than simply dancing around your baseless conjecture.

The DSLR community would be far better served by avoid the issue operating and thinking that the CRTC is working in the public interest and policy direction. It's only when you force yourself to think in that manner that you can anticipate their potential responses (excuses) for fucking it up so bad.

Once you know how they will likely respond you can have follow-up questions ready to demonstrate how inept they are.

For example, my history is foggy on this is spotty but I believe at one point one of the major telegraph operator owned a newspaper and the telegraphs necessary to transmit storey's from news bureaus. It was soon discovered that allowing them to own both content and distribution was a dangerous monopoly that had criminal elements to it. All the way to fixing elections.

Now one could pose the question, that of course the CRTC having done its due diligence had already reviewed this historic AntiTrust case since it was so relevant, and is avoiding the same fate by using "X" preventative measures.

The more likely response is, "what are you talking about, we're not familiar with this". In which case you get to educate them on one of Histories most relevant monopolies and the damage it did to society. Repeating itself almost exactly 100 years later.


Although I responded directly to a person, this is a common sentiment and the response is more of a general one to anyone writing into the CRTC with this type of sentiment

InvalidError

join:2008-02-03
kudos:5
reply to anakin5

said by anakin5:

My guess is they knew *exactly* what they were doing. Corruption is everywhere in this country.

One of the conditions to the purchase is regulated rates for Bell's new acquisitions. Depending on how the CRTC sets those rates, the rate hike panic may turn out to be baseless.
Expand your moderator at work


PQ Depot

@videotron.ca
reply to InvalidError

Re: And now a message from our dark overlords

PQ will fight Bell's $3.38B purchase of Astral Media
»www.montrealgazette.com/news/wil···ory.html

This should be no surprise to anyone. Reminds me of when the PQ came out swinging in favour of Videotrons vision of copyright reform a couple of years ago.

We know who funds who.

PQ also promised to get their own CRTC if they get elected.

Scarey stuff.



Davesnothere
No-BHELL-ity DOES have its Advantages
Premium
join:2009-06-15
START Today!
kudos:7

said by PQ Depot :

PQ also promised to get their own CRTC if they get elected.

Scarey stuff.

 
What ?

QRTC ?

Why not ?!

It might set a better example for the original one !

One thing on which I think we can agree :

Yes, Quebec does some things differently, but they DO look out for their consumers' rights better than any other province.

And that has happened regardless of WHICH party formed the gov't.

Kinda makes me a bit homesick.

--

We have only 2 things about which to worry :
(1) That things may never get back to normal
(2) That they already HAVE !
-
START Forum »Start Communications
Or you can still use Canadian Broadband.



Dunno

@videotron.ca

I'll disagree a bit with that. In English Canada a few years back the copyright thing and the throttling thing was a big thing. You had some big names writing about it and all english media.

In Quebec it barely got any french coverage at all. And only a few months after the fact. Even the english media made note of this and wrote of this. Even Geists website makes note of this. Even the videotron forum here reflects this.

I can see a couple (Bell videotron cogeco) writing the laws of the land. No heavy swingers in French QC.

Would it be better? It could. But I don't see it happening with the money they have versus no information to the french public.
English Canada versus French Canada is night and day on these matters and in regards to public information.