dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
2003
MaynardKrebs
We did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17

1 edit

MaynardKrebs

Premium Member

CRTC gets some teeth - finally

»www.huffingtonpost.ca/20 ··· 398.html

»news.gc.ca/web/article-e ··· d=915129

As part of a budget implementation bill, the CRTC has been granted the power to levy fines against telecoms that violate the Telecommunications Act. The broadcast regulator can now fine telecoms up to $10 million for a first violation, and up to $15 million for subsequent violations.

It only took the dicks in power 5 years to partially get things right, except CRTC testimony is still NOT under oath and there is NO personal liability for lying to the CRTC (Bibic).
»An Open Letter to the CRTC
»Re: The Problems with Gov't & Telecom Thread
»Re: Bell Canada's financials and UBB

It remains to be seen whether the CRTC actually has the stones to use these new 'powers'.
69230940 (banned)
join:2014-12-10

69230940 (banned)

Member

said by MaynardKrebs:

It remains to be seen whether the CRTC actually has the stones to use these new 'powers'.

I highly doubt it--well other than more leverage to pad their own pockets.

Guspaz
Guspaz
MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC

1 recommendation

Guspaz to MaynardKrebs

MVM

to MaynardKrebs
Maybe the CRTC can use some of those $10 million AMPs to buy a generator for their servers.

JSE
JSEyo
join:2014-05-16
Nova Scotia
·Bell Aliant Fibr..

JSE

Member

said by Guspaz:

Maybe the CRTC can use some of those $10 million AMPs to buy a generator for their servers.

Okay, I really did lol at that one :P
bklass
Premium Member
join:2012-02-06
Canada

bklass to MaynardKrebs

Premium Member

to MaynardKrebs
Just so you know, the CRTC has the power to require sworn testimony, they just don't exercise it.

TwiztedZero
Nine Zero Burp Nine Six
Premium Member
join:2011-03-31
Toronto, ON

1 edit

1 recommendation

TwiztedZero to MaynardKrebs

Premium Member

to MaynardKrebs

the CRTC can now issue monetary penalties to any company or person that violates the Telecommunications Act as well as related CRTC decisions or regulations.

Ut Ut Oh Oh ... does that mean us too?

Anyways ... Since the CRTC doesn't directly handle Consumer complaints even peripherally will the CCTS get more teefs too 'coz that would be a really good idea.

• Another good idea would be for the CCTS to hold public hearings twice a year! We can call it LAUNDRY DAY! and air all our telecom and broadband grievances.
MaynardKrebs
We did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17

MaynardKrebs to bklass

Premium Member

to bklass
said by bklass:

Just so you know, the CRTC has the power to require sworn testimony, they just don't exercise it.

Yes, they're *supposed* to have the power of a Superior Court yet they never act like they do unless they're grandstanding for Google & Netflix.

One day I just might submit an intervention, go to Ottawa and on behalf of all non-corporate Canada tell them in the language of the common man where they can shove it - and then see if they hit me with contempt charges. I fucking well dare them after all the crap they've put the public through and let the indumbents loot the pockets of Canadians.

Even with their 'new' powers they're still a bunch of gutless weasels.

Perhaps one day I might tell you how I really feel about them - technophobic, incurious, mealy mouthed, kowtowing petty bureaucrats. All I think they want to do is make the trains run on time.
MaynardKrebs

2 recommendations

MaynardKrebs to bklass

Premium Member

to bklass
said by bklass:

Just so you know, the CRTC has the power to require sworn testimony, they just don't exercise it.

The other thing is that the CRTC will never be able to make any kind of lying charge stick because all the indumbent numbers are submitted "in confidence" and hidden by more #######'s than there are atoms in this universe and any number of parallel universes you can think of. It'll come down to a CRTC vs. indumbent pissing match with no possible disinfecting sunlight like there is in a proper trial. The indumbent will claim bureaucratic malfeasance and tie any possible fine up in years of litigation/appeals that it will ultimately make no difference because competition will have died in the interim.

The ONLY cure is structural separation.
It fosters the best possible backbone/last mile possible.
It fosters competition in services - where it belongs.
It reduces the number of and complexity of CRTC hearings, thereby reducing the CRTC to focusing on matters which can easily be decided.
It also reduces costs for everyone - consumers, suppliers, network providers, and government.

The CRTC getting power to levy fines is much like building prisons to harbour perpetrators of unreported crime. In the case of telecom/broadcasting we KNOW there are crimes being committed but the prosecutor will never make the charge stick such that the behaviour is modified/stopped.

jmck
formerly 'shaded'
join:2010-10-02
Ottawa, ON

1 recommendation

jmck

Member

the CRTC has been able to get ISPs/Telecoms to follow regulations even before these new powers, this simply gives them more leverage.

they've also been able to use proper judgement in determining if statements from a telecom is true or false on their own. just because an ISP makes certain claims and lies, it doesn't mean the CRTC is obliged to take their word for it. they've shown they can look at evidence and make proper decisions.
btech805
join:2013-08-01
Canada

btech805 to MaynardKrebs

Member

to MaynardKrebs
telecom companies answer to one thing only and that is shareholders. If the CRTC starts laying multimillion dollar fines and the shareholders' dividends and yields go down, there will be hell to pay. Then you'll start deeing changes.

Davesnothere
Change is NOT Necessarily Progress
Premium Member
join:2009-06-15
Canada

Davesnothere to MaynardKrebs

Premium Member

to MaynardKrebs
said by MaynardKrebs:

....It remains to be seen whether the CRTC actually has the stones to use these new 'powers'.

 
If by 'stones', you mean 'balls', then we're screwed again/still/already.

On a possibly related matter, do these new powers allow them to levy fines retroactively ?

Moot point - no balls.

(and a weakness for 'golf')

mcp
@192.251.134.x

mcp to btech805

Anon

to btech805
Even if they started getting fines they just past those costs by raising prices again. 10 million is peanuts, in their eyes. They can easily recover 10 million by adjusting prices.

Because they don't have to actually compete if one raises prices others follow suit because it makes the shareholders happy.

Acrimonius
join:2014-12-06

Acrimonius

Member

said by mcp :

Even if they started getting fines they just past those costs by raising prices again.

The new powers granted the CRTC is a good thing. It's a step forward. We can't live in fear of the Big 3. We can't allow them to become answerable to no one. Any measures put in place to keep them under control, however minor, can only be a benefit to us in the long run.

And any price hikes blatatantly delivered as a measure to recover fine penalty costs will surely only result in a more massive fine that will force the Big 3 to toe the line. Bell, if I'm correct, got nailed recently for imposing fees/charges that were imposed on their customers for no legitimate purpose.

Sooner or later the Big 3 will get the message. Let's hope it's sooner..........

jmck
formerly 'shaded'
join:2010-10-02
Ottawa, ON

jmck to mcp

Member

to mcp
said by mcp :

Even if they started getting fines they just past those costs by raising prices again. 10 million is peanuts, in their eyes. They can easily recover 10 million by adjusting prices.

Because they don't have to actually compete if one raises prices others follow suit because it makes the shareholders happy.

and it will cause bad publicity and their shareholders at the end of the day will still ask "why do you keep fucking up and can't follow regulations instead of bleeding $10 million x incident per year?!"
MaynardKrebs
We did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17

MaynardKrebs

Premium Member

said by jmck:

said by mcp :

Even if they started getting fines they just past those costs by raising prices again. 10 million is peanuts, in their eyes. They can easily recover 10 million by adjusting prices.

Because they don't have to actually compete if one raises prices others follow suit because it makes the shareholders happy.

and it will cause bad publicity and their shareholders at the end of the day will still ask "why do you keep fucking up and can't follow regulations instead of bleeding $10 million x incident per year?!"

$10MM is 1% of $1B profit.
$10MM is far less than the profit they unjustly retained by fucking over Wind, CNOC, and anyone else you can think of.

$10MM is just another incidental cost of doing business to them.
Nothing will change until a CEO is forced to do a perp-walk in handcuffs.

TwiztedZero
Nine Zero Burp Nine Six
Premium Member
join:2011-03-31
Toronto, ON

TwiztedZero to MaynardKrebs

Premium Member

to MaynardKrebs
said by MaynardKrebs:

It remains to be seen whether the CRTC actually has the stones to use these new 'powers'.

Oh they'll use 'em alright; remember the CRTC is made up of ex-industry executives - its a retirement gig for them, so yeas they're going to prop up their old buddies in the 'network' which means they may go all Order 66 on CNOC and everyone else and these will be their new sith weapons.

PHEER, 'coz the CRTC has a new Death Star!
Cloneman
join:2002-08-29
Montreal

Cloneman to MaynardKrebs

Member

to MaynardKrebs
It's a step in the right direction. This is far better than the previous mantra:

1. STOP! Otherwise, I'll say STOP again!

2. Sorry we messed up and cost your company 2.5 years of competitive advantage. Have a cookie that will be relevant for the next 6 months!

No one likes to pay fines. Believe it or not, bell's entire strategy does not revolve around screwing over Wind and Teksavvy. If they can save 10M$ and find a solution that is reasonable, they'll do it.

It's like someone who makes 200,000$ per year. If you never give him any parking tickets, you're making too easy - buffet mentality. They will take what is available. If you start handing out 75$ parking tickets, most people will stop parking there most of the time.

It's not like Bell makes hundreds of millions of dollars by hurting Teksavvy. Maybe if they hurt Rogers or Videotron. But as consumers, it helps us if they hurt those guys

Davesnothere
Change is NOT Necessarily Progress
Premium Member
join:2009-06-15
Canada

Davesnothere to TwiztedZero

Premium Member

to TwiztedZero
said by TwiztedZero:

• Another good idea would be for the CCTS to hold public hearings twice a year!

We can call it LAUNDRY DAY! and air all our telecom and broadband grievances.

 
I like that.

And make sure that all of the major news services are invited.
MaynardKrebs
We did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17

MaynardKrebs to Cloneman

Premium Member

to Cloneman
said by Cloneman:

It's a step in the right direction. This is far better than the previous mantra:

1. STOP! Otherwise, I'll say STOP again!

2. Sorry we messed up and cost your company 2.5 years of competitive advantage. Have a cookie that will be relevant for the next 6 months!

No one likes to pay fines. Believe it or not, bell's entire strategy does not revolve around screwing over Wind and Teksavvy. If they can save 10M$ and find a solution that is reasonable, they'll do it.

It's like someone who makes 200,000$ per year. If you never give him any parking tickets, you're making too easy - buffet mentality. They will take what is available. If you start handing out 75$ parking tickets, most people will stop parking there most of the time.

It's not like Bell makes hundreds of millions of dollars by hurting Teksavvy. Maybe if they hurt Rogers or Videotron. But as consumers, it helps us if they hurt those guys

I personally know a couple of BCE's directors - one is a former boss of mine whom I got along great with. I can assure you that $10MM is chump change in their minds, and heads will NOT roll if a fine like that was imposed. In their calculus it is simply a cost of doing business as they take the 'long game' view of things.

milnoc
join:2001-03-05
Ottawa

1 edit

milnoc to MaynardKrebs

Member

to MaynardKrebs
said by MaynardKrebs:

One day I just might submit an intervention, go to Ottawa and on behalf of all non-corporate Canada tell them in the language of the common man where they can shove it - and then see if they hit me with contempt charges. I fucking well dare them after all the crap they've put the public through and let the indumbents loot the pockets of Canadians.

Last September during the "Let's Talk TV" hearings, I've learned that if you deliver a reasonable and civil presentation with convincing arguments, the Commission will gladly listen to you.

However, if ordinary people don't even bother to show up, the only testimony the CRTC will hear will come from the incumbents.
btech805
join:2013-08-01
Canada

btech805 to MaynardKrebs

Member

to MaynardKrebs
BUT, with hundreds of thousands of subscribers, $10M fine per incident, say a few hundred times a year, that may change how things are done. I agree though one $10M fine for a "grouped violation", say missing x number of wholesale appointments while completing 100% of 1st party appointments is nothing, but if that because $10M per appointment missed? That will catch their attention.
MaynardKrebs
We did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17

2 recommendations

MaynardKrebs

Premium Member

It'll never be $10MM per missed appointment. The excuses will be legion:
- the dog at the work order
- traffic problems
- truck problems
- the tech got a paper cut and had to go to hospital
- the truck had a flat
- the truck was in an accident
- the tech had to help a woman give birth at the side of the road
- the appointment at a CRTC commissioner's house took longer than expected

TwiztedZero
Nine Zero Burp Nine Six
Premium Member
join:2011-03-31
Toronto, ON

TwiztedZero

Premium Member

Plus consumers, what consumers, we only answer shareholders and corporate hq! All else you send to the toofless CCTS that can't do SFA anyway.
HeadSpinning
MNSi Internet
join:2005-05-29
Windsor, ON

HeadSpinning to btech805

Member

to btech805
said by btech805:

$10M per appointment missed? That will catch their attention.

It would never stand up to appeal in court, so they'd never levy such a fine.

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

elwoodblues to MaynardKrebs

Premium Member

to MaynardKrebs
Click for full size
MaynardKrebs
We did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17

1 recommendation

MaynardKrebs

Premium Member

I refer everyone back to this post
»And you wonder what UBB is really for

and ask that you click on the link to the Globe and Mail article therein, and then ask yourself

"In the nearly 4 years since the Globe & Mail article was written, what has changed? Has anything changed in the market for consumers? Has anything really changed at the CRTC?"

The CRTC's new motto for 2015: All froth and no bite.

Davesnothere
Change is NOT Necessarily Progress
Premium Member
join:2009-06-15
Canada

Davesnothere

Premium Member

 
Froth-bite ?
ings
Premium Member
join:2004-12-22
Toronto, ON

ings to elwoodblues

Premium Member

to elwoodblues
Great cartoon. Captures perfectly my view of the CRTC.
bklass
Premium Member
join:2012-02-06
Canada

bklass

Premium Member

This is more accurate

Rail Baron
@184.162.48.x

Rail Baron

Anon

^ +1

Those look like 19th century tracks carrying that 21st century iron horse (with 20th century wheels), btw.

Guess it's all in the look and how it's labeled.