MaynardKrebsWe did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee. Premium Member join:2009-06-17 |
CRTC wholesale mobile wireless services hearings on now» news.gc.ca/web/article-e ··· d=888249» www.cpac.ca/en/direct/cpac2/Hearing runs all week. Ben Klass presents today. JF presents on Friday. List of participants & agenda: » www.crtc.gc.ca/telecom/e ··· 9_09.htm |
|
MaynardKrebs |
Sounds like Molnar is attacking the Competition Bureau in order to protect SaskTel & MTS from further competition (ie. if Wind/Videotron were to expand in those markets). She seems to view that Sasktel/MTS already afford "4th national carrier' pricing discipline on the Big 3.
Molar is the CRTC commissioner for Manitoba/Saskatchewan. |
|
GuspazGuspaz MVM join:2001-11-05 Montreal, QC |
to MaynardKrebs
They do provide 4th carrier pricing, but only in their regional market. And there are no regional carriers in some provinces, like Ontario. And Wind appears to have made no impact in the competitive market, seeing as how incumbent prices are so much higher in Ontario. |
|
MaynardKrebsWe did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee. Premium Member join:2009-06-17 2 edits |
The CRTC needs to allow independent MVNO access to ensure that there is at least 5 viable carriers in any market. Loads of competition studies show that a minimum of 5 carriers/ISP's/car manufacturers/etc... are needed in order to sustain competition at the consumer price level.
Thus the competitive landscape would be - the Big 3 (facilities based) - Wind/Videotron/Eastlink - facilities based in their 'local' markets wth MVNO status elsewhere (hybrids) - pure MVNO's who might use a mix of Big 3 and new entrants facilities
If a Wind/Videotron/Eastlink find over time that their efforts beyond their 'home' markets results in significant subscriber growth, then it's highly likely that they would add their own facilities (towers/equipment) in those non-home market areas. |
|
creed3020 Premium Member join:2006-04-26 Kitchener, ON |
to MaynardKrebs
Thanks for the heads up. Have the feed going now to listen in.
Nice to see that JF gets the last word! |
|
|
MaynardKrebsWe did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee. Premium Member join:2009-06-17 |
Yeah, but since JF tends to be long-winded, and the fact that hearings tend to run long, what are the bets that the CRTC wants to wrap things up quickly on Friday night by not asking him nay questions? |
|
elwoodbluesElwood Blues Premium Member join:2006-08-30 Somewhere in |
to MaynardKrebs
Tell you how bad it is up here. When I watch football, there are ads for Verizon, Tmobile and a host of other carriers.
T-mobile is offering 4 lines UNLIMITED, plus 2.5gb of Data/line (till 2016, then 10 bucks a month/per line) for $100.
Then there is cricket (pre paid service) gives you unlimited and 1gb of Data for 40 bucks, and 10gb for $60.
We're seriously getting hosed big time up here. |
|
MaynardKrebsWe did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee. Premium Member join:2009-06-17 |
Molnar is asking why 'market power' as a whole for the Big 3 is important.
If the Big 3 have ~90% of all revenues & profits & subscribers, and that they tend over time to offer the approximately same package at the same prices, and people wonder if there's no overall market power then those people need to give their heads a shake. |
|
MaynardKrebs |
to elwoodblues
said by elwoodblues
We're seriously getting hosed big time up here. I felt like I was getting a colonoscopy every time I opened a bill from Bell / Rogers. |
|
creed3020 Premium Member join:2006-04-26 Kitchener, ON |
to MaynardKrebs
said by MaynardKrebs:Yeah, but since JF tends to be long-winded, and the fact that hearings tend to run long, what are the bets that the CRTC wants to wrap things up quickly on Friday night by not asking him nay questions? Very true. Well time will tell. They've already said they want to treat everyone fairly in this proceeding. Cogeco has been up to bat for what feels like forever... I'm really wanting to hear from Globalive. |
|
MaynardKrebsWe did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee. Premium Member join:2009-06-17 |
Globealive will be explaining what's wrong with the current market.
Mobilicity (following Globealive) will be looking for the CRTC to throw them some sort of veribiage that they can take to bankruptcy court to stave off liquidation. |
|
GuspazGuspaz MVM join:2001-11-05 Montreal, QC |
to elwoodblues
said by elwoodblues:Then there is cricket (pre paid service) gives you unlimited and 1gb of Data for 40 bucks Rogers (via flanker) offers that for $49, which is not a huge difference. But they only offer that in areas where they have a regional competitor. |
|
elwoodbluesElwood Blues Premium Member join:2006-08-30 Somewhere in |
said by Guspaz:said by elwoodblues:Then there is cricket (pre paid service) gives you unlimited and 1gb of Data for 40 bucks Rogers (via flanker) offers that for $49, which is not a huge difference. But they only offer that in areas where they have a regional competitor. This is across the US , big difference, instead of competing where there is real competition (MBTELL, Sasktel) |
|
MaynardKrebsWe did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee. Premium Member join:2009-06-17 |
I think Wind's presentation was the first time in a public hearing that I heard mention of 'gifted' spectrum. About f!cking time. |
|
creed3020 Premium Member join:2006-04-26 Kitchener, ON |
Yeah was just about to post about that zinger. They drew careful attention to that statement and what they're up against. |
|
MaynardKrebsWe did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee. Premium Member join:2009-06-17 |
Menizes is now questioning Wind's right to exist because they don't offer bundles.
Asshole.
Wind should be allowed to compete any way they choose - pure play wireless or not - but they should be able to operate with a fair set of rules. Fair rules ain't what we have now. |
|
creed3020 Premium Member join:2006-04-26 Kitchener, ON |
to MaynardKrebs
Yeah that was a rough go. Questioning why Wind Mobile should even exist because they only offer wireless. With their unlimited data one could forgo a wire-line broadband connection, so in some sense they can be more than one pillar of service. |
|
elwoodbluesElwood Blues Premium Member join:2006-08-30 Somewhere in |
to MaynardKrebs
Wish I could listen to it at work, but that's life.
You can see from the last 2 hearings how the CRTC is firmly in the pockets of the cable/telco's. |
|
MaynardKrebsWe did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee. Premium Member join:2009-06-17 |
to creed3020
Wind's idea of a 10-year mandatory cost+ roaming sunset regime with a 7th year study/review is a decent idea but that concept has to be modified somewhat.
The CRTC could approve a plan like this on say January 1, 2015, which would last until Dec. 31 2024.
But what happens when a *new* MVNO/facilities-based provider wants to start-up in 2021? Is the new start-up limited to only the remaining 3 years of the regime? Why shouldn't the start-up be granted the same 10 year window beginning in 2021? |
|
MaynardKrebs |
Had to switch to the Floor feed on CPAC cuz they put the French translation on the English feed. |
|
MaynardKrebs |
Cost plus is the only way to go. |
|
elwoodbluesElwood Blues Premium Member join:2006-08-30 Somewhere in |
Sure but when cost is ### who knows what they're putting in there. |
|
MaynardKrebsWe did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee. Premium Member join:2009-06-17 |
That's determined by the quantity of ###'s. #### is clearly more than ### |
|
creed3020 Premium Member join:2006-04-26 Kitchener, ON |
to MaynardKrebs
Cogeco was definitely spitting out many ###'s and ###'s this morning when they didn't want to share with the commission how much it would ### for them to #### up as an MNVO. |
|
GuspazGuspaz MVM join:2001-11-05 Montreal, QC |
to MaynardKrebs
Irony: NASA is seeing enormous cost savings by moving *away* from cost-plus contracts :P
Cost-plus (in NASA's case) means they they have to cover any and all costs, no matter how high they go after signing the contract. The savings are from moving to fixed-price contracts where companies bid to provide services at a given cost, and the companies have to absorb any cost overruns themselves. Powerful incentive to keep costs under control. |
|
creed3020 Premium Member join:2006-04-26 Kitchener, ON |
to MaynardKrebs
"Bell argues favorably for golfing whenever possible" whoops did I just hear something in there... |
|
MaynardKrebsWe did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee. Premium Member join:2009-06-17 |
Regarding Bell's 'evidence' (around 6hr 15min. mark today) - net additions on a percentage basis when the starting NUMBER is low is misleading.
If I have 200 customers today and add 100 more by the end of the year, I've had a 50% growth rate, but my 300 customers is 0.0000001% of ROBELLUS's customer base. |
|
MaynardKrebs |
to Guspaz
said by Guspaz:Irony: NASA is seeing enormous cost savings by moving *away* from cost-plus contracts :P
Cost-plus (in NASA's case) means they they have to cover any and all costs, no matter how high they go after signing the contract. The savings are from moving to fixed-price contracts where companies bid to provide services at a given cost, and the companies have to absorb any cost overruns themselves. Powerful incentive to keep costs under control. Also powerful incentive for Bell/Telus & Rogers to accidentally meet in a dark parking garage @ 3am to share bidding prices. The only question I have in that case is which one starts the conversation. |
|
creed3020 Premium Member join:2006-04-26 Kitchener, ON |
to MaynardKrebs
The commissioner is drinking the kool-aid if he thinks the two-year contracts in the Wireless Code are generating more churn. Same costs just less time to pay them off. I see this continually with people who pay $60-$100/month for their wireless plan whereby my Wife's contract less offering is $33.80/month tax in. |
|
GuspazGuspaz MVM join:2001-11-05 Montreal, QC |
to MaynardKrebs
Should it be considered ironic that it is apparently easier to start up a new company send people into SPACE than it is to start up a new telecom company in Canada? Collusion of bids between Bell and Rogers wouldn't be a problem if there were other parties capable of submitting bids with a vested interest in beating out the competition, much like the aerospace industry has its own new entrants (like SpaceX) trying to compete with the incumbents (like Boeing). |
|