dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
1320
share rss forum feed


Hm

@videotron.ca

[Wireless] Bell and Rogers State Competition isn't fair

I fail to see the reason why Bell and Rogers would compain to the gov that it isn't fair to not let them buy up the little start-ups that they want to buy?

I mean, It's capped market share that overlaps into Bell and Rogers territories anyhow, and also where foreign investment is capped in terms of market share and investment and ownership.

What's the point?

The only point I can see is that they want no other brand name in the market place.

»www.ctvnews.ca/business/bell-joi···.1382909
quote:
Bell Canada has joined Rogers Communications in calling for Ottawa to change its policy on foreign ownership of Canadian wireless communications networks.

The two rivals say they have been put at an unfair disadvantage by a federal policy that allows foreign carriers to buy small Canadian wireless carriers while denying the big domestic carriers the same opportunities.


Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:23
There are zero restrictions on Bell or Rogers or Telus buying new-entrants or startups. There have never been any such restrictions (foreign ownership rules don't apply because the ownership would be transferring TO a Canadian company, not from it).

Telus *chose* not to buy Mobilicity, that deal was NOT blocked. They were refused the right to buy the spectrum, but they could still have bought the company. They could have offloaded the spectrum and still purchased Mobilicity. They didn't, because they were only buying the company to get the spectrum (they didn't care about the company), but the claims in the BCE letter that incumbents can't buy new entrants is a complete lie.
--
Latest version of CapSavvy systray usage checker: »CapSavvy v4.2 released!


elwoodblues
Elwood Blues
Premium
join:2006-08-30
Somewhere in
kudos:2
Of course it's a lie, spin the truth to suit your agenda, and that agenda is to get all the spectrum the new entrants have for dirt cheap.

koreyb
Open the Canadian Market NOW

join:2005-01-08
East York, ON
Reviews:
·VMedia
·Rogers Hi-Speed
reply to Hm
And now with Bell and Rogers owning majority of the news media, there is total BIAS, Spin and Propaganda.

I just can't believe CITY/CTV/CTV2/CP24 etc anymore on stories that revolve around communications, or their own companies. Also let us not forget Bell has money still in The Globe and Mail.


zong
Premium
join:2005-07-21
Scarborough, ON
I almost vomited when I heard this BS "Canadian Cellular rates are cheaper than the US" commercial-type propaganda on 1010AM the other morning. Big surprise because now Bell owns them.


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

2 edits
reply to Guspaz
said by Guspaz:

There are zero restrictions on Bell or Rogers or Telus buying new-entrants or startups....

 
(1) Can Verizon (for example) start up in Canada WITHOUT first buying out anybody ?

(2) Can they beforehand bid in the next spectrum auction, stating their intent to do a start up ?

If yes to either or both, then what laments could/would Robellus have then ?

(3) If Verizon COULD do that, then what if they were to bid AFTERWARDS to buy out Wind or whoever ?

(4) Would/should it make any difference (to Robellus, to the Federal Government, or to the public) if a smaller player like Sprint or T-Mobile were making the current offers rather than Verizon ?


Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:23
reply to Hm
1) Yes. They can start a wholly owned subsidiary in Canada. The cost is a few hundred bucks for registrations, I think.

2) Yes. Just as above, they can start a wholly owned subsidiary.

3) As long as they're below 10% marketshare, there are no restrictions on who they buy. All "new entrants" combined make up less than 10% of the market.

4) Not really, consider that Sprint and T-Mobile are both individually larger than all of BCE combined, with 56 and 43 million customers respectively. Either of them has a bigger revenue from cell service alone than all BCE operations combined.
--
Latest version of CapSavvy systray usage checker: »CapSavvy v4.2 released!

DanteX

join:2010-09-09
kudos:1
reply to Hm
You guys should check out this site and the pdf presenting the facts as bell calls it

»www.bell.ca/play-fair

Bell is in full blown baby mode

MaynardKrebs
Heave Steve, for the good of the country
Premium
join:2009-06-17
kudos:4
said by DanteX:

You guys should check out this site and the pdf presenting the facts as bell calls it

Thanks, but I really don't want to lose my lunch.


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

1 edit
reply to DanteX
The best part I love is how they list Koodo, Virgin Mobile, Fido, has "competition"
What happen to chatr and Solo?

DanteX

join:2010-09-09
kudos:1
reply to Hm
If the Government caves into the whining of the big guys here then the consumers have no hope

DanteX

join:2010-09-09
kudos:1
reply to Hm
In the PDF Bell claims that the government is preventing them and other Carriers such as rogers and telus from buying smaller start up companies such as wind and Moblicity. The fact of the matter is the government never said the companies could not be bought they said the spectrum must stay available for start up companies for at last 5 years.


Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:23
reply to Hm
Yeah, Telus could still have bought Mobilicity if they wanted. They would just have to have sold/returned the spectrum.

Oh, wait, Telus was only buying Mobilicity to get the spectrum.
--
Latest version of CapSavvy systray usage checker: »CapSavvy v4.2 released!

DanteX

join:2010-09-09
kudos:1
So the Big Canadian guys are trying to weasel around not having the spectrum by potently launching a lawsuit against the Government.

This is going to be some rather entertaining stuff.


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

1) Yes. They can start a wholly owned subsidiary in Canada. The cost is a few hundred bucks for registrations, I think.

2) Yes. Just as above, they can start a wholly owned subsidiary [and then bid on the new spectrum].

3) As long as they're below 10% marketshare, there are no restrictions on who they buy. All "new entrants" combined make up less than 10% of the market.

4) Not really, consider that Sprint and T-Mobile are both individually larger than all of BCE combined, with 56 and 43 million customers respectively. Either of them has a bigger revenue from cell service alone than all BCE operations combined.

 
Interesting; thanks.

So, while we are at it, what are the customer counts for the other big guys in the US - Verizon & AT&T ?

And what % does each of those 4 players have, of the US cell market ?

And, for that matter, what are the related current stats among the Canadian cell players ?


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

You guys should check out this site and the pdf presenting the facts as bell calls it

»www.bell.ca/play-fair

Bell is in full blown baby mode.

 
Think they'll get Frank & Gordon back to help with this ?

I'd hate to see a full-grown beaver cry !

DanteX

join:2010-09-09
kudos:1
Know what That would be truly funny yet disgusting if Bell went as low as that


Davesnothere
No-BHELL-ity DOES have its Advantages
Premium
join:2009-06-15
START Today!
kudos:7
reply to Hm
 
I read his letter and news release, and watched him on CBC.

And y'know what ?

I suggest that they GIVE Bell the things for which Cope asked, especially the auction neutrality !

THEN watch the deep-pockets Southerner outbid everyone else ANYWAY for ALL of the new spectrum !

(not just 1 or 2 parts of it)

AND they'll put up their OWN new towers.

What else could Georgie whine about THEN ?!


LazMan
Premium
join:2003-03-26
canada
The incumbents would love access to foreign capital...

You want to make things really interesting?

Throw open the gates - upto 49% foreign ownership allowed, no set-aside spectrum; it's an open auction.

Let the free market be free...

It's the double standard (new entrants are allowed a different level of foreign ownership; and are allowed to grow through acquisition, not just organic growth) that are upsetting the existing players in the market...

You want competition? Let everyone compete on fair ground...


TwiztedZero
Nine Zero Burp Nine Six
Premium
join:2011-03-31
Toronto, ON
kudos:5
reply to Hm
The Toronto Star
Editorial cartoon by Patrick Corrigan, July 27.


rednekcowboy

join:2012-03-21
kudos:1
They do say a picture is worth a thousand words. That sums this situation perfectly...

NefCanuck

join:2007-06-26
Mississauga, ON
Reviews:
·voip.ms
reply to zong
said by zong:

I almost vomited when I heard this BS "Canadian Cellular rates are cheaper than the US" commercial-type propaganda on 1010AM the other morning. Big surprise because now Bell owns them.

Heard the same thing on the FAN590 in Toronto (Rogers owns them)

Dear god the spin machine is in "tornado" mode (too bad it can't blow these crybabies off to Oz )

NefCanuck


Funny thing

@nexicom.net
reply to Guspaz
said by Guspaz:

There are zero restrictions on Bell or Rogers or Telus buying new-entrants or startups. There have never been any such restrictions (foreign ownership rules don't apply because the ownership would be transferring TO a Canadian company, not from it).

Telus *chose* not to buy Mobilicity, that deal was NOT blocked. They were refused the right to buy the spectrum, but they could still have bought the company. They could have offloaded the spectrum and still purchased Mobilicity. They didn't, because they were only buying the company to get the spectrum (they didn't care about the company), but the claims in the BCE letter that incumbents can't buy new entrants is a complete lie.

That's not what it says here...

»uk.reuters.com/article/2013/07/3···20130730

In June, the government effectively foiled a C$380 million (242 million pounds) bid from Telus for struggling Canadian wireless provider Mobilicity by blocking the transfer of the start-up's spectrum licenses to Telus.


Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:23
That's exactly what it says there. They blocked the spectrum license transfer, the rest of the sale of the company could have gone through, but Telus had no interest in buying the company. They were only buying it to get the spectrum and toss away the rest.
--
Latest version of CapSavvy systray usage checker: »CapSavvy v4.2 released!


Davesnothere
No-BHELL-ity DOES have its Advantages
Premium
join:2009-06-15
START Today!
kudos:7
 
I did not fully read the coverage on this, but would the Mobilicity spectrum have gone back to the gov't if Mobilicity had been bought ?

And if yes, would it have been re-auctioned, along with the new spectra (sp.) at the next auction ?