dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
8911
share rss forum feed


UgotIT

@videotron.ca
reply to elwoodblues

Re: Great news! - CRTC blocks Astral buy by Bell

said by elwoodblues:

The case will be closed when Bhell pays the breakup fee to Astral.

LOL I wonder if this will be another court case on it's own like what happened when Bell didn't go private and they lost hundreds of millions.

heh running to GiC and the courts sure beats dishing out hundreds of millions to Astral. Those two remaining Astral brothers will be dead before they see that money. Again, this is history repeating itself.


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4
Reviews:
·Start Communicat..
reply to WaitNsee

said by WaitNsee :

For all we know it could go back to the CRTC with Bell now bringing in a partner in order to lower those "percentages of stations owned" going against them.

Game isn't over. Game is not case closed, yet.

If Bell brings in a "partner" it will be a drastically different deal from the one now that cannot be compared to what they were originally going for. Furthermore, it wouldn't be a case of bringing it to cabinet. It would be a new deal with a brand new hearing at the CRTC.

Considering all that has happened in the last year, I am confident to say that unless Bell so drastically alters the deal that it is in no way similar to the one originally proposed, it won't happen. Anyone who thinks Bell has a shot at getting cabinet to force this back to the CRTC for review and that the CRTC would come up with anything different than they have now is delusional.


hm

@videotron.ca
reply to elwoodblues

said by elwoodblues:

Fibic is already out there saying he's going to appeal under section 7 of he broadcasting act.

Bell filing under section 7 doesn't give me much of a clue as to what they will be going after, other than the CRTC not adhering to policy. It's huge. Too huge to read and take in in one sitting.

Section 7 is comprised of:
Section 3 (section 1, a to t)
Section 5 (section 2, a to g) plus the Radiocommunication Act, »laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/R-2/
Section 8

Game is on (for Bell)

Will be funny if GiC even accepts the petition after the CRTC and various gov spokespeople said it wasn't possible.


WaitNsee

@videotron.ca

Per Cartt:
»www.cartt.ca/news/14505/Radio-Te···ase.html

...snip...
The telecom will file a request that Cabinet issue a policy direction to the CRTC under Section 7 of the Broadcasting Act, requiring the Commission to “follow its already in-place policies when reviewing change of control transactions in broadcasting.”

"The Broadcasting Act explicitly empowers the Cabinet to issue directions to the CRTC on broad policy matters," said Mirko Bibic, Bell's Chief Legal and Regulatory Officer. "A commission that relies on a 35-year-old working paper to justify rejecting outright the Astral deal, rather than its own policy established in 2008, clearly needs guidance on the broadest of policy matters."

...snip...

"It sets a dangerous precedent if government agencies are left to pick and choose the rules they follow, with many potential consequences not just for the broadcasting industry but for the Canadian financial system and indeed all Canadians," said Bibic. "Under the circumstances, it is incumbent on those we elect to ensure that agencies they oversee exercise the power available to them appropriately."

On Monday, October 22, Bell will submit to the Cabinet a formal request that it expeditiously issue a policy direction to the CRTC under Section 7 of the Broadcasting Act. Bell says that once the CRTC has been directed to follow its Diversity of Voices policy when reviewing change of control transactions, it will re-file its application to acquire Astral.


If I understood this right (my interpretation of it), Bell just more or less said that cabinet will do what we say is right, they will tell the CRTC how to follow policy, and we will refile.

Now we know who calls the shots in the country. Bell.

if GiC even accepts the petition it will make them (the ministers who spoke out and the Harper spokesperson) all look dumb.



WaitNsee

@videotron.ca

The 2008 Diversity of Voices policy that Bell will tell GiC to follow (which in turn, if accepted, the privy council will/could tell GiC to tell the CRTC to follow that policy) can be found here:
»www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2008/pb2008-4.htm

I only did a search of that document for "market dominance" and only found 3 references. Para. 34, 37 and 55. Not much else in there about market dominance (which, I guess, is to Bell's advantage).

Para 82:
82.
The Commission has examined the thresholds developed by the Competition Bureau for measuring competition in relation to banking services.2 In summary, the Bureau set three thresholds in relation to the bank's core services:

If the post-merger combined market share is less than 35%, the Competition Bureau will consider that the merger will not result in a substantial lessening of competition.

If the post-merger combined market share is between 35% and 45%, the Competition Bureau will consider that the merger may result in a substantial lessening of competition.

If the post-merger combined market share is more than 45%, the Competition Bureau will consider that the merger will result in a substantial lessening of competition.


CRTC argued Bell is at the 35% threshold. Bell argues they are 33.5%.

So there will be a calculation argument sent to GiC for sure. Even then it's not needed, since the policy states so.

Seems this paragraph 82 slaps both the CRTC and competition bureau in the face with what they had to say about all this.

Paragraph 87 also touches on this, but in regards to total viewership.
as a general rule, the Commission will not approve transactions that would result in the control by one person of more than 45% of the total television audience share - including audiences to both discretionary and OTA services; ...continues...

Bell may be below that 45% (no clue, anyone have the percentage on viewership?).

So even at 35% market share, and per that policy, I hate to say it, but Bell is right. Seems it should have been only outright rejected at 45%, not 35%. That policy gives wiggle room even if on the verge of total dominance.

Bell is right in pointing out that document (even if I don't agree with it). If we follow policy, Bell is right.


MaynardKrebs
Premium
join:2009-06-17
kudos:4
reply to elwoodblues

said by elwoodblues:

The case will be closed when Bhell pays the breakup fee to Astral.

Fibic is already out there saying he's going to appeal under section 7 of he broadcasting act.

7. (1) Subject to subsection (2) and section 8, the Governor in Council may, by order, issue to the Commission directions of general application on broad policy matters with respect to
(a) any of the objectives of the broadcasting policy set out in subsection 3(1); or
(b) any of the objectives of the regulatory policy set out in subsection 5(2).

In other words, we don't like the decision,we want you tell the CRTC to reverse itself.

It all depends if, and what, dirt Bell has about cabinet ministers. If they don't have any then the deal is toast. If there is a hooker or two in the closet (or another babysitter banger) then Bell might get their day in Cabinet.


SadBUTtrue

@videotron.ca

said by MaynardKrebs:

If there is a hooker or two in the closet (or another babysitter banger) then Bell might get their day in Cabinet.

Sad, but true.

»www.youtube.com/watch?v=xCF19cBWb0I


upload

@videotron.ca

Today Bell will submit a file to GiC.

If anyone spots the filing, or the link the gov gives (if GiC accepts it), please upload it or paste it!



mazhurg
Premium
join:2004-05-02
Portage La Prairie, MB
Reviews:
·MTS

1 edit
reply to epsilon3

Bell's words and demands

Link to copy of complaint:

»www.scribd.com/doc/110812434/Req···ct-Final

I'd put the PDF here, however I will not prostitute myself to Facebook in order to download the PDF from scribd.



Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:22
reply to epsilon3

Re: Great news! - CRTC blocks Astral buy by Bell

I think the most appropriate headline one can take from that filing is:

Bell Canada declares Saturday Night Fever "king of the box office"

Although another amusing and completely accurate headline:

Bell Canada declares Happy Days "TV ratings leader"
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org



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

Re: Bell's words and demands

The Google, Netflix Amazon boogey man

WOW



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

Wow, I just skimmed through that...

So basically Bell is pissing and moaning that they didn't get their way, and their friends with vested interests in the investment industry agree.

What a bunch of arrogant jackasses.
--
Support Bacteria -- It's the Only Culture Some People Have



hm

@videotron.ca

said by El Quintron:

So basically Bell is pissing and moaning that they didn't get their way, and their friends with vested interests in the investment industry agree.

I only just started reading it. I'm on para 20 so far. But, hmm. Well, hate to say it, but Bell does have a point that should be clarified. As stated up above here, »Re: Great news! - CRTC blocks Astral buy by Bell Bell is making that same claim, and they are right to. The Diversity of Voices reg does state all this and Bell is within the standards set in order for this to go through.

Everything else I read so far though is pure horse dodo.

They sure as hell mention the "consumer" a lot. But as a consumer I don't agree to the stance they are taking with me and every other consumer. It's all BS. k... now to finish reading this.

oh, did this petition to cabinet get accepted? Bet it did. If cabinet had it's way they would do everything Bell states, but they are in a political-consumer pickle now. They can't do anything or they will feel a consumer backlash.


En Enfer
This account has been compromised

join:2003-07-25
Montreal, QC
kudos:4

said by hm :

The Diversity of Voices reg does state all this and Bell is within the standards set in order for this to go through.

Everytime a broadcasting company buys another, there's one less independent voice.

Taking news as an example, Toronto market have CTV, CTV Two, CTV News Channel, CP24, and all of Bell Media owned radio stations. These all count for ONE voice. Taking over Astral radio stations, there's one less voice. It doesn't take percentages to figure it out.

Skimming throught the document, Bhell points out on paragraphe 12 and 42 about non-Canadian market shares, per example, CNN, A&E, Spike and TLC... "Indeed, non-Canadianservices have a 13.2% viewing share in Canada" and "there are over 220 non-Canadian services distributed in Canada".

Choose your words and example carefully is what Bhell did.
Only problem, out of the 220 non-Canadian services, how many of them are in english? and how many in french? Only the significant english ones were mentionned in the document, because adding a 13.2% in the share would significantly reduce Bell+Astral share below the treshold, but how many ethnic ones are part of the list (»www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/satlist.htm) and how much share are those hindi, spanish, chinese, etc., are taking?

See, they're trying to tune the numbers in their favor. Bell Canada will use old 1970's policies to obtain gain of favor in any situation, but ourtirght ridicule the CRTC's decision to make a reference to a 1978 policy... because it doesn't swing in their favor. See what happens when your own tricks are used against you: lawsuit.
--
Tell your children over dinner, "Due to the economy, we are going to have to let one of you go."


hm

@videotron.ca

yeah. I am taking Bell's numbers at face value, since I don't know the real figures. No one does.

I also take the CRTC's percentages at face value. And their values are much higher than Bell's.

Both percentages, be it from Bell or the CRTC are still within the norm of that reg.

Let us assume the CRTC percentages are the correct ones, and Bell is just a liar (which we all know they are anyhow).

In one case, one of the highest percentages is around 43%, per the CRTC. The cut off for the CRTC to clearly state no is defined in that regulation as 45%. Below 45% it's supposed to be allowed with conditions. But the CRTC flatly reused it. And that was only one of the percentages, the highest percentage (which I think was total viewership for English channels). Everything else was well below, and even below some of Quebecors own percentages.

Bell does indeed raise the valid point.

I mean, all the values, percentages, and the regs are there for all to see in black and white and Bell is correct. They are below going by CRTC values.

If this goes to court I can see them winning based on the values. The rest of it I have no clue (ie. the other 18 points Bell says never should have been considered since it's not in the reg's).

So let us look at this from a different perspective from the last few years:

In the throttle hearings: Bell lied, and wins
In the UBB hearings: Bell lied, and wins
In this hearing: Bell tells some of the truth, and lost

The CRTC if baffling.

Also, what Bell stated about the reg's not being followed is 100% correct. If it was followed they would have won. The CRTC seems to be relying on non-existant "consumer" reg's.

If they are going to do that, then why not actually have a "consumer" reg within the broadcasting/telecom act that actually has some teeth?

All this goes to show that the CRTC is operated by the "whim of the day" and nothing based in Canadian law or facts. The next CRTC chair will create his/her own laws like KvF did. This also shows KvF was right in concluding the telecom & broadcasting acts are outdated and no longer serve their intended purpose.

Unless someone can actually show me something, this may be the very first time I am in complete agreement with Bell (as it pertains to the reg's).

Let's all face the truth here, the CRTC is a court of baboons with no basis in actual law or regulations. They rule by the seat of their pants (or pay-off). This was seen in the throttle case, UBB, wholesale rates, and now this.



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

If in the end the CRTC says yes the competition bureau probably says no (which they probably should)



LendMEyerEAR

@videotron.ca

Someone help me out here since I'm to very well versed or the bureaucracy of how these things works.

If bells petition gets accepted, should we not find it in this coming Saturdays Part 1 section of the Canadian Gazette?
»www.gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/index-eng.html

Part 2 of the Gazette was published this past Wed and has nothing in it about this petition. So I'm assuming it will be found in part 1, if accepted, this Saturday. Correct??

Or will the notice, if accepted, be found elsewhere in this Canadian Gazette?

Anyone know?



NoGender

@videotron.ca

Kevin Crull on the astral deal that failed:
»m.theglobeandmail.com/globe-inve···e=mobile

And then he said this: “I expect the people who regulate our industry to understand our industry. I expect them to be students of the industry. I expect them to be intellectually open, honest, and curious.” During the hearing, said Mr. Crull, “one of the panelists spent the entire time chiding us for not having a woman sitting at the main table, or not having a woman on the leadership team. It may be a worthy discussion for another time. But I don’t know what that has to do with a multibillion-dollar acquisition of a media company.

and other gems...

For those who missed it, in a single paragraph (and there are a few) Crull states that the CRTC should be students of Bell's vision & version of the telco and media industry.

He goes on to state that women in leadership roles have no bearing on this multibillion dollar deal dominated by the men of Bell. And it's total nonsense to even bring up gender equality with Bell Canada since they, you know, have women in call centres or something.

Talk about putting your foot in your mouth.



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

said by hm :

Let's all face the truth here, the CRTC is a court of baboons with no basis in actual law or regulations. They rule by the seat of their pants (or pay-off). This was seen in the throttle case, UBB, wholesale rates, and now this.

That's what I'm thinking, right?

BCE thinks Astral is taking the big brown envelope over. Astral thinks BCE is taking the big brown envelope over.

Big brown envelope never makes it over.

Application denied.

BCE appeals, sending big brown envelope over.

Appeal allowed, application approved.

It was all just a... you know... misunderstanding.

Mike
--
Cogeco - The New UBB Devil -»[Burloak] Usage Based Billing Nightmare
Cogeco UBB, No Modem Required - »[Niagara] 40gb of "usage" while the modem is unplugged

resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10

All in all, its looking like there's been a major change with Blais being appointed chair.

It seems the consumer is finally being put first, and the 'market forces' (ie golfing) nonsense has finally gone out the window.
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP



FatLadySings

@videotron.ca

said by resa1983:

the 'market forces' (ie golfing) nonsense has finally gone out the window.

It's not "game" over yet. Matter of fact, Bell Canada paid for a CRTC VP at it's hockey "game" in Montreal.

The nonsense is far from over. It would take a corruption inquiry and investigation to even touch base on the "golfing" nonsense.

The proverbial Fat Lady hasn't sung yet. And in Kevin Crulls world, the Fat Lady is a guy student (*shiver*) who sings only when told to sing.

GeoStar

join:2011-02-10
j2e6f5
reply to epsilon3

Re: Great news! - CRTC blocks Astral buy by Bell

its back

»business.financialpost.com/2012/···ral-bid/

So prepare to bend 945 degrees and pay double the last bill



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

said by GeoStar:

its back

»business.financialpost.com/2012/···ral-bid/

So prepare to bend 945 degrees and pay double the last bill

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


FatLadySings

@videotron.ca

From what I see Bell-Astral (their contract together to get this going) is extended till ~Dec 15 with another option for another extension till ~Jan 15.

So if something happens, it should happen the latest by Jan.

So the Fat Lady has a few months to wait while Bell and that CRTC Broadcasting VP take in a couple of more hockey games



elwoodblues
Elwood Blues
Premium
join:2006-08-30
Somewhere in
kudos:2
reply to epsilon3

Not sure which thread this was in, but I finally got back my answer on the who voted which way for the Bell Astral deal.

It's not public information was the response.



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

said by elwoodblues:

Not sure which thread this was in, but I finally got back my answer on the who voted which way for the Bell Astral deal.

It's not public information was the response.

That's interesting; can you file under the FOIA?


Expected

@videotron.ca
reply to elwoodblues

said by elwoodblues:

It's not public information was the response.

Laff


mlerner
Premium
join:2000-11-25
Nepean, ON
kudos:5
reply to elwoodblues

In other words, ### ### ####



Expected

@videotron.ca
reply to Expected

In a way you have to laugh. They are saying they are putting the consumer first and make a bullshit hoopla out of a statement saying companies need to be more transparent.

Then they turn around and tell you, "It's a secret".

This CRTC isn't anything new. It's all smoke and mirrors with some bullsh*t PR and marketing tossed in.



elwoodblues
Elwood Blues
Premium
join:2006-08-30
Somewhere in
kudos:2
reply to El Quintron

It's access to Information, FOIA is American.

And yes you can. 5 bucks I fill out a form and mail it (in this fucken day and age) and then I'll get a nay or yeah response. And if it's nay I can take it further.