dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
1775
share rss forum feed

mikee

join:2012-12-21
Gloucester, ON
kudos:1

Rogers CEO is stepping down

Interested news, Nadir Mohamed is stepping down from CEO of rogers communcations... I wonder what this means for Rogers future?

»www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-in···8712428/


BliZZardX
Premium
join:2002-08-18
Toronto, ON
Reviews:
·WIND Mobile

2 edits
Hard to say until you know who's taking over. Personally I think Nadir Mohamed was their worst CEO. He let Bell take away a fair chunk of TV customers, and wireless customers are running away in every direction to new competitors because they are just tired of being mistreated.

Best case scenario they get someone like George Cope with some balls to make big strategy changes. Bell has gotten a little better since certain people left, not to name drop too many names, but Sabia was definitely setting them back. Remember though Rogers is a family controlled firm, and Edward and Melinda Rogers aren't running, they probably don't feel comfortable running their daddy's company and are only concerned about keeping it alive (not necessarily making it better).
Expand your moderator at work


travisc

join:2001-11-09
Uxbridge, ON
reply to BliZZardX

Re: Rogers CEO is stepping down

You're right about TV customers, but I don't think their wireless numbers went down, did they?

On the TV front, there's not tons they can do on their existing platform to counter Fibe. I don't think that's the CEO's fault, that's the reality of existing technology.


BliZZardX
Premium
join:2002-08-18
Toronto, ON
Reviews:
·WIND Mobile

4 edits
said by travisc:

I don't think that's the CEO's fault, that's the reality of existing technology.

The early adoption of VDSL2 and resulting CellPipe issues (no sync-no surf, limited to 12a profile etc) happened under Sabia's tenure. That should have been straight to GPON. I guess that's what you get when you appoint someone with no previous telecom experience to call the shots. Bell has fast-tracked their FTTH GPON rollouts since Cope came in, and with the exception of Ontario even old homes are being lit up -- many instances of this on the east coast, Quebec City and around Montreal (for some reason Ontario is only greenfield builds, don't ask me why, someone will probably blame it on cables having to go underground even though I don't consider that a valid excuse).

Meanwhile Rogers is still trying to squeeze blood out of rocks with DOCSIS. How long does it take to load Rogers EPGs? Every time you scroll down and it freezes for 15 seconds. They have to abandon that feature-poor and slow platform for IPTV. They have a short term advantage in internet download speeds, but they can't for a second think that makes them bulletproof. They are already years behind the curve for next-gen broadband. I don't have an official source, but considering there is maybe only one person on this forum who has posted photos of Rogers GPON compared to the dozens available for Bell, it's apparent that theirs is happening at a *much* slower pace. You could even say they aren't really taking it seriously.

As for the wireless business, year-over-year growth is consistently slowing as well as ARPU since they are trying to keep customers from running away to lower cost operators - besides Wind/Mobi/Public there are dozens of MVNO's that have popped up since 2008. They also have a smaller LTE footprint than Bell and Telus, Rogers has less cities although service is 'filled in' better.

yyzlhr

join:2012-09-03
Scarborough, ON
kudos:4

1 recommendation

reply to travisc
said by travisc:

You're right about TV customers, but I don't think their wireless numbers went down, did they?

On the TV front, there's not tons they can do on their existing platform to counter Fibe. I don't think that's the CEO's fault, that's the reality of existing technology.

On the TV front, they had a NET addition of 7000 subscribers.

And the TV problems was definitely a result of poor decisions by the company. Fibe is a great product because it uses an excellent platform developed by Microsoft, not because it's delivered over IP. Rogers' NextBox offering was crap because they chose a crappy Cisco product that has never been tried or tested by any other major MSO. If you look at the X1 platform from Comcast or the Horizon TV product available in several parts of Europe, cable TV still has a lot of life in it left.

Although Rogers has publicly stated on several occasions that they plan to switch to IPTV within the next year. However, I'm doubtful that will happen as Cable MSOs are unlikely to abandon the QAM based architecture that they've spent many years to build and is capable of competing with Telco IPTV.

said by BliZZardX:

Meanwhile Rogers is still trying to squeeze blood out of rocks with DOCSIS. How long does it take to load Rogers EPGs? Every time you scroll down and it freezes for 15 seconds. They have to abandon that feature-poor and slow platform for IPTV. They have a short term advantage in internet download speeds, but they can't for a second think that makes them bulletproof. They are already years behind the curve for next-gen broadband. I don't have an official source, but considering there is maybe only one person on this forum who has posted photos of Rogers GPON compared to the dozens available for Bell, it's apparent that theirs is happening at a *much* slower pace. You could even say they aren't really taking it seriously.

DOCSIS still has a lot of life left in it. With proper network management and maintenance it can definitely compete against FTTH in the consumer market. In addition, future technologies such as DOCSIS 3.1 and EPON over Coax will further extend the life of HFC networks. The fact that the Rogers EPG sucks is not due to DOCSIS, it's the horrible Cisco STB software that they've chosen.

Also Bell is only actively deploying GPON in areas outside of the Rogers footprint. In areas where both Bell and Rogers are present, both are deploying FTTH in new developments. You don't hear much about Rogers fibre deployments because the product offerings are the same as non FTTH neighbourhoods. However, the Rogers FTTH areas can be easily converted to GPON by changing the customer premise equipment.


BliZZardX
Premium
join:2002-08-18
Toronto, ON
Reviews:
·WIND Mobile

4 edits
Click for full size
said by yyzlhr:

On the TV front, they had a NET addition of 7000 subscribers

I'm just going by the Q4 2012 release, to me it looks like year-over-year TV revenue is down 1% ($10mm) and TV subscriber count is down 83,000.

Home Phone growth is almost flat (obviously, who has home phone?! Plus their basic package is more expensive than Bell).

The only cable product growing these days is Internet, and that's largely thanks to the speed advantage they have over Bell and TPIA providers.

NextBox is definitely a piece of crap. My favourite part is when you're watching a program during the day and it randomly reboots because it crashed or it's applying some update. I don't know how they're going to sort that out but it needs to be done soon. The Cisco hardware prices are insane too.

I've seen Shaw's new EPG, it still takes 5 seconds to scroll between pages of channels. I'm not convinced the other solutions are much better. But if they can't have or don't want Mediaroom having something custom built like X1 is the next best thing.

said by yyzlhr:

Although Rogers has publicly stated on several occasions that they plan to switch to IPTV within the next year. However, I'm doubtful that will happen as Cable MSOs are unlikely to abandon the QAM based architecture that they've spent many years to build and is capable of competing with Telco IPTV

If you look in the Verizon forum, QAM is a frequent complaint about FiOS. There is always a hard limit on the number of QAM channels you can use. Fiber with IPTV has zero latency and unlimited capacity while a QAM-based provider can do nothing except compress the hell out of the picture and implement slow SDV. As resolution is increasing and bandwidth requirements are increasing, is QAM the right medium for next-gen 4K or 4K 3DTV? My answer is no.

yyzlhr

join:2012-09-03
Scarborough, ON
kudos:4
If Rogers and Verizon move towards MPEG4 and SDV, they would gain lots of capacity to carry more channels. SDV also isn't slow when implemented properly. 4k TV would also be a challenge for telco IPTV as the bandwidth they deliver to the home is quite limited.

And as for IPGs, the quality has nothing to do with whether you're on IPTV or not. There are plenty of terrible IP based IPGs. DirecTV, Dish Network, X1, FiOS, are all examples of great IPGs that run on non IPTV platforms.


jtl999
CEO of Actiontec Dev Team

join:2012-11-24
In the GVRD
kudos:4
reply to mikee
Don't forgot the DPI they are doing to inject stuff in your web pages.


BliZZardX
Premium
join:2002-08-18
Toronto, ON
Reviews:
·WIND Mobile

3 edits

1 recommendation

reply to yyzlhr
said by yyzlhr:

4k TV would also be a challenge for telco IPTV as the bandwidth they deliver to the home is quite limited.

I'm on FTTB and they already hit their limit without 4K. You can't subscribe to IPTV with 50/10 Internet because there isn't enough bandwidth on VDSL2 12a, it maxes out at 68Mbps. They only got 3 years useful life out of this Stinger DSLAM. Complete waste of money. Next step is fiber. Fiber with ethernet-based services everywhere or bust.

Cable was designed for broadcasting, you're competing for uplink mini-slots with everyone on your neighbourhood and upload speed and latency on cable is always going to suck. Also look at how much they waste on plant maintenance trying to clean up signal just so they can get DOCSIS3 working to spec. They are stretching coax beyond what its meant to be and delaying the inevitable which is smaller nodes and glass everywhere including last mile.


elwoodblues
Elwood Blues
Premium
join:2006-08-30
Somewhere in
kudos:2
Reviews:
·VMedia
said by BliZZardX:

Cable was designed for broadcasting, you're competing for uplink mini-slots with everyone on your neighbourhood and upload speed and latency on cable is always going to suck. Also look at how much they waste on plant maintenance trying to clean up signal just so they can get DOCSIS3 working to spec. They are stretching coax beyond what its meant to be and delaying the inevitable which is smaller nodes and glass everywhere including last mile.

Of course they are, rolling out new tech costs money and reduces profitability. Why spend money when the status quo (with major tweaking) will suffice.

That said, they will hit the wall and when they do, it's gong to be a horrible crash, the pennies they saved today not upgrading, is going to cost them many dollars tomorrow. It's inevitable, the problem is most CEO's (telcom experience or not) don't see past the next quarter.

Why reduce the profitability of the company (and your legacy) when someone else is going to enjoy the fruit of your work.

That in a nutshell is the problem with the corporate mentality today, too much focus on today, not enough on tomorrow.
--
No, I didn't. Honest... I ran out of gas. I... I had a flat tire. I didn't have enough money for cab fare. My tux didn't come back from the cleaners. An old friend came in from out of town. Someone stole my car. There was an earthquake.......


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4
reply to BliZZardX
said by BliZZardX:

They are stretching coax beyond what its meant to be and delaying the inevitable which is smaller nodes and glass everywhere including last mile.

There is a *lot* of cable company-deployed fibre out there, and Rogers has been doing it for a long time. The only reason people know nothing about it is because Rogers, Shaw and Cogeco are all using RFoG and inside the home everything is still connected to coax and otherwise behaves identically to full-blown coax. Typically there's a media converter located either somewhere inside the home or in the ped at the side of the road. There's nothing stopping any of these companies at any point in the future from lighting up services specifically for their fibre footprint.

Having said all that, there's still a lot of life left in coax. Return path isn't necessarily limited to just the T-band, and if you move to an entirely IP-over-QAM-based platform you've got roughly 5.4Gbit/s of aggregate forward bandwidth per node to play with on an 860MHz plant. Fibre is great, but it's not the end-all to everything.

I completely agree that Bell should have gone right to fibre, though. Unlike coax, there's not nearly as much life left in POTS without spending almost as much money as you would have on new fibre anyway.

HammerofGawd

join:2012-06-30
23332
reply to mikee
HORRIBLE CEO: under his watch the company has lost its moral compass and employee morale tanked.


sbrook
Premium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
Ottawa
kudos:13
wasn't much better under Ted.

koreyb
Open the Canadian Market NOW

join:2005-01-08
East York, ON
Reviews:
·VMedia
·Rogers Hi-Speed
said by sbrook:

wasn't much better under Ted.

I have to disagree... Ted ran the place much better.. much more vision leading, and was willing to spend money more to make it if required. He also kept moral higher by employees as he valued everyone.

After Ted, it became a faceless company, with no vision.


sbrook
Premium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
Ottawa
kudos:13
It was still crazily focused on MONEY.


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4
said by sbrook:

It was still crazily focused on MONEY.

... isn't that the entire purpose of a business? Earn money and turn a profit?

Seriously, come on dude.


sbrook
Premium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
Ottawa
kudos:13
There's a difference between making a profit and making an obscene profit. One is logical, the other is immoral.


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4
That's all a matter of perspective. There is nothing inherently immoral with the simple act of making lots of money.

If you want to discuss immoral business practices, that's another discussion in of itself.

Viper359
Premium
join:2006-09-17
Scarborough, ON
Reviews:
·voip.ms
reply to mikee
I agree with those who dislike Nadir Mohamed. I think he was a terrible CEO, and Rogers seems to have went from being the front runner that others catch up to, running around like mad men, smashing into the wall.

That new horrible whole home pvr system. Its a failure, and everyone knows it. It was Rogers playing catch up with Bell. Its been hell since they implemented it, showing no signs of it getting better.

Their remote pvr access, a joke, and badly written code at its finest. Anyone that has used it, from the website, tablet, or phone can attest to it.

Their wireless sector has gone from decent service to outright horrible. I don't mean the making calls etc, I mean the actual customer service.

Their home phone, price increase after increase, for something that should be cheaper than their competition at every turn, and by wide margins, since its nothing more than VOIP.

The internet is the only thing that is even remotely positive for Rogers.

People put up with substandard product when its cheap, but when you start charging premium prices for substandard service, you start to feel blow back, and I think its starting. More and more people are leaving Rogers. People are getting sick of the constant price increases, with no increase in service.

This CEO was so worried about sucking the maximum dollar per sub, he hasn't even noticed those who are leaving. It seems all he is worried about is how much each person is paying.

As much as I dislike Bell, I am glad their greed for more money has forced their hand to build out their network and bring new services. Another option is always a positive, even if its the devils son, rather than the devil.


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

1 edit
Actually Nadir Mohamed has been very sucessful, for a guy who does very little compared to other CEOs. If you look at revenue when he started and now, he's even beat Ted Rogers. So the company and I'm sure the investors are happy with him.

However, Rogers and Bell's game of lets suck Canadians out of their wallets is starting to nose dive because they've both become greedy in the face of little to no competition so now they're scrambling to save their client base. This is not unique to Rogers but more apparent.

The thing that Rogers does have is an extensive coax-fibre network, Bell is slower to roll out new service because they have to build it even further in the home so if Rogers were really trying to compete, they would kill off Bell in 5 years.


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4
said by mlerner:

The thing that Rogers does have is an extensive coax-fibre network, Bell is slower to roll out new service because they have to build it even further in the home so if Rogers were really trying to compete, they would kill off Bell in 5 years.

Yup. The shame of it all is that if Rogers was really aggressive, it would force Bell into deploying FTTN in Ontario like they are in Quebec, as Rogers' network is capable of a whole lot more than they are using it for now. Rogers' own complacency is what is leading to the crap we have now in Ontario.


Paolo
Mr. Wireless

join:2004-05-29
canada
reply to mlerner
success should not be measured by profits, it should be measured by a mixture of profits, good customer service, good product offerings and innovation. simply measuring profits alone is a sign of desperation
--
Happiness is like peeing your pants... Everyone can see it, but only you can feel its Warmth!!


CanadianRip

join:2009-07-15
Oakville, ON
reply to mikee
His main job was to offshore and do other general restructuring and he served his purpose.

Now that they've done some good cost containment they're going to bring someone in to try and push their media play harder. Most of these guys see the writing on the wall, that the cable business doesn't have many good years left in it.

Unless they want to become a utility (which is a dirty word in high growth investments) they need to switch gears in a hurry.