R0CKY
TSI Rocky
Premium,VIP
join:2005-05-19
Chatham, ON | Do Bell and Rogers have too much control on Canada?
»Got to love the media ownership/relationships! |
|
MaynardKrebs
Premium
join:2009-06-17
| We have 6 major banks (Schedule A) servicing most decent sized communities in the country.
We have a plethora of bricks and mortar Schedule B banks in some of the major centres.
We have a number of virtual banks (ING, Manulife) serving the whole country.
And we have some of which are run using facilities of one of the Schedule A banks but which maintain their own lending and account policies (PC Financial).
In most communities we have two wireline providers of telecommunications services - the incumbent telephone and cable companies - one or both of which can make access to physical plant (poles) or switching centres difficult on other physical wireline or virtual service providers. They can implement restrictive policies and practices without notice or compensation to end users and wholesale customers.
A bank can buy/lease a plot of land and open a branch in one location and provide credible competition to residents and SMB's.
A competitive ISP cannot have the same impact within a defined geographic area when the incumbent telco/cableco duopoly holds most of the cards.
One can make or show exceptions in communities of varying sizes, but the bottom line is that overall the incumbent communications companies hold too much sway in our markets to permit effective and widespread competition to occur at the retail level. |
|
Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC | reply to R0CKY
One of the biggest competitors in the banking industry, at least here in Quebec, are the caisses populaires (co-op banks). Desjardins is probably the biggest one.
That'd be nice in the telecommunication industry... |
|
DKS
Damn Kidney Stones
Premium,ExMod 2002
join:2001-03-22
Owen Sound, ON
clubs:
 ·Bell Sympatico
| said by Guspaz  :One of the biggest competitors in the banking industry, at least here in Quebec, are the caisses populaires (co-op banks). Desjardins is probably the biggest one. That'd be nice in the telecommunication industry... We had that a decade ago with the freenet ISP's. Many were bought out by commercial operations after a couple of years. Some still exist. There is also Telecommunities Canada.
--
Need-based health care not greed-based health care. |
|
jfmezei
Premium
join:2007-01-03
Beaconsfield, QC
·ELECTRONICBOX
| reply to Guspaz
The major 6 do not compete against each other eacept on very large deals.
In the 1980s (not sure if it continued) they had a pre-set order of which bank would be first to announce increases in mortgage/lending rates. This was to ensure that overall, none of the 6 would be spared the bad PR that happens when they are the first to announce increase in rates.
In the past, outfits such as the Caisses Populaires (credit unions) and other non-banks were shut out of the national payment/clearing systems that was operated by the canadian bankers' association (since they were not chartered banks, they couldn't be members of the CBA). The Caisses had to hire one of the banks to clear its cheques for instance.
This was solved via government interventation which forced the CBA to spin off its payments operations into the Canadian Payments Association which was allowed to include non-banks as members. CPA is also in charge of maintaining the database of canadian bank and their branches and transit numbers. Interac was formed in a similar way. This left the CBA to be a secretariat for various committees where the 6 meet to exchange plans, strategies etc.
Intense lobbying happened in the 1990s during the bank act reforms (which lead to banks being able to buy brokerages, sell insurance and what not).
Yeah, if a company like Rogers needs to borrow 200 million, the big banks will bend over backwards to get the business. But for the retail business there is no real competiton since they all offer the same products with minor variations and different names.
Each Bank has also become like a BCE, with a gazillion separate subsidiaries. Credit card are now separate from banking, so is the stock brokerage, insurance etc. However, the branches are used to sell all those products.
Internally, there is competition. For instance, the respective departments that handle the connection to Interac compete on monthly uptime statistics to see which can have bragging rights on the highest uptime for the past month. |
|
dissapbell
@bell.ca
1 edit | reply to R0CKY
Answer is Yes.
But you should not create such topics. You make money on Bell Backbone. You did not help Canada with communication but Bell requiring billions of dollars. TS is always bashing Bell but they use Bell for most. |
|
mlerner
Premium
join:2000-11-25
Nepean, ON
 ·Rogers Hi-Speed
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·Bell Sympatico
| said by dissapbell :
Answer is Yes.
But you should not create such topics. You make money on Bell Backbone. You did not help Canada with communication but Bell requiring billions of dollars. TS is always bashing Bell but they use Bell for most. Hypocrite.
Mmm k. But you do realize without wholesale or GAS etc all there would be is Bell and Rogers who do not innovate or actively try to compete. Bell just bought all the copper lines and started creating a monopoly. TekSavvy and others are trying to break down the monopoly because without it we'd still be on 1 meg for $40/month. Hypocrite? Harsh words. Perhaps you should look at Bell who claims to embrace competition and whom we give to sustain the Bell backbone. Think before you speak. |
|
MaynardKrebs
Premium
join:2009-06-17
| reply to dissapbell
said by dissapbell :
Answer is Yes.
But you should not create such topics. You make money on Bell Backbone. You did not help Canada with communication but Bell requiring billions of dollars. TS is always bashing Bell but they use Bell for most. Hypocrite.
It used to be (until the late 1970's - early 1980's) that a legitimate case could be made for having a monolithic wiring and services provider (ie. a traditional 'telephone' company).
However since that time the writing has been on the wall that what the country needs is a public or regulated neutral wiring provider to building premises. This is the 'natural monopoly' component of the telecommunications equation due the the costs of running wires and the headaches of acquiring rights-of-way either above or below ground from various levels of government or private landowners. This is the exact model that the natural gas system works on.
In the natural gas market you have companies that provide the long-distance transit, like TransCanada Pipelines (in telecom it's the likes of Peer1, et. al.), connecting to local natural monopolies (Union Gas, Enbridge). But here's where things differ - in the gas market, every producer has an unrestricted right to send their gas down the pipe to any end consumer without interference. Similarly each end consumer has the unrestricted right to purchase their gas from any supplier they choose. This is a true common carrier model with distinctive competition in the end-user space.
This is what the telecom market needs most desperately in the so-called 'last mile' space. |
|
sbrook
Premium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
H0H 0H0
·Rogers Hi-Speed
Host:
Rogers
Bell Canada
| disappbell, are you going to stop driving on your city's roads even though you may complain about them being full of potholes, poorly signposted, dangerous etc.? Of course not.
What TS and others are complaining about is really simple ... Bell doesn't provide the services they advertised, and attempting to subvert the terms of the services with the CRTC to almost make the existence of TS and other 3rd party ISPs pointless. |
|
HeadSpinning
join:2005-05-29
Windsor, ON
| said by sbrook : Bell doesn't provide the services they advertised, and attempting to subvert the terms of the services with the CRTC to almost make the existence of TS and other 3rd party ISPs pointless. If Bell really wants to make us independent ISPs pointless, they should simply provide excellent customer service, and reasonable prices - but we know that can never happen, so they take their approach instead. |
|
Sheeple
@videotron.ca
| reply to dissapbell
said by dissapbell :
1. But you should not create such topics.
2. You make money on Bell Backbone. You did not help Canada with communication but Bell requiring billions of dollars. TS is always bashing Bell but they use Bell for most. Hypocrite.
1. Yeah. Don't speak your mind. Its un-canadian. Rocky please adjust and embrace the new Canadian order of stifling speech and freedom to express oneself and beliefs.
Are you "un-Canadian"?
2. Yeah! Bell isn't making money off the wholesalers. You and us don't pay Bell enough for the privilege. Rocky, again you must please adjust and accept.
Are you "un-Canadian"?
 |
|
Cloneman
join:2002-08-29
45436
| reply to dissapbell
said by dissapbell :
Answer is Yes.
But you should not create such topics. You make money on Bell Backbone. You did not help Canada with communication but Bell requiring billions of dollars. TS is always bashing Bell but they use Bell for most. Hypocrite.
I would bash bell too if it was trying to Force me out of business with tyrannic policies and legal manipulation, not to mention reaping thousands (if not millions) each year of our tax money fed to them by government subsidies, given to incubants each year for a variety of reasons, only to extort our money and keep in the stone age.
Sorry to say, but you have a very narrow-minded ignorant view of things. Learn2Think. |
|
HeadSpinning
join:2005-05-29
Windsor, ON
| said by Cloneman : I would bash bell too if it was trying to Force me out of business with tyrannic policies and legal manipulation, not to mention reaping thousands (if not millions) each year of our tax money fed to them by government subsidies, given to incubants each year for a variety of reasons, only to extort our money and keep in the stone age. On the whole, I'm sure Bell pays more in taxes than it collects in subsidies - which is why they have such a big voice in Ottawa.
Remember, the more profitable companies are, the more tax the government gets to collect. Small guys with small profit margins pay less tax. |
|
CanerisErik
Caneris
Premium,VIP
join:2007-10-03
Toronto, ON | reply to R0CKY
Let's not forget all the free municipal access agreements. |
|
dissapbell
@bell.ca
| reply to Cloneman
said by Cloneman :said by dissapbell :
Answer is Yes.
But you should not create such topics. You make money on Bell Backbone. You did not help Canada with communication but Bell requiring billions of dollars. TS is always bashing Bell but they use Bell for most. Hypocrite.
I would bash bell too if it was trying to Force me out of business with tyrannic policies and legal manipulation, not to mention reaping thousands (if not millions) each year of our tax money fed to them by government subsidies, given to incubants each year for a variety of reasons, only to extort our money and keep in the stone age. Sorry to say, but you have a very narrow-minded ignorant view of things. Learn2Think. But Bell is using Legal Manipulation "Legally". They have not committed crime yet as you stated. What I don't like is somebody comes up using Bell Network and going against against Bell because they don't like it. If Rocky had Guts and Money he will build another empire like Google did. Again I stand by my comments Rockey/TS is hypocrite. Now that qualifies him/her for politician. |
|
tomulek
join:2002-05-20
Etobicoke, ON
| Not really, they are not hypocrites. Hypocrite is a smoker who advocates against smoking, priest who has a mistress. I am not a hypocrite when I'm complaining about air quality (and still breathe it), or do not like my transit system (with my budget I have to use it), same as TS we do not have a choice |
|
mlerner
Premium
join:2000-11-25
Nepean, ON
·Rogers Hi-Speed
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·Bell Sympatico
| reply to dissapbell
said by dissapbell :said by Cloneman :said by dissapbell :
Answer is Yes.
But you should not create such topics. You make money on Bell Backbone. You did not help Canada with communication but Bell requiring billions of dollars. TS is always bashing Bell but they use Bell for most. Hypocrite.
I would bash bell too if it was trying to Force me out of business with tyrannic policies and legal manipulation, not to mention reaping thousands (if not millions) each year of our tax money fed to them by government subsidies, given to incubants each year for a variety of reasons, only to extort our money and keep in the stone age. Sorry to say, but you have a very narrow-minded ignorant view of things. Learn2Think. But Bell is using Legal Manipulation "Legally". They have not committed crime yet as you stated. What I don't like is somebody comes up using Bell Network and going against against Bell because they don't like it. If Rocky had Guts and Money he will build another empire like Google did. Again I stand by my comments Rockey/TS is hypocrite. Now that qualifies him/her for politician. They have not committed a crime but they are violating the very rules that the CRTC is supposed to be upholding. Bell and the CRTC are hypocrites in all of this because the GAS tariffs were DESIGNED to entice competition! |
|
Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
·Colbanet
| reply to R0CKY
If you consider the CRTC rulings to be "laws" then yeah, Bell *is* breaking the "law"...
The only problem is that the "lawmaker" isn't enforcing the "laws".
If it wasn't impossible for a small player to build out their own network to compete with Bell, I'm sure that Rocky would. Unfortunately, it *IS* impossible, since Bell has advantages that nobody else can get (like all the easements). |
|
sbrook
Premium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
H0H 0H0
·Rogers Hi-Speed
Host:
Rogers
Bell Canada
| reply to mlerner
disappbell, over the years, murderers have used legal means legally to escape penalty. Fraud artists have used legal means legally to avoid taxes, and penalties. Just because laws can be used to achieve a goal doesn't mean the act is not morally wrong.
This is what it feels like when dealing with big corporations.
For example, if I take on XYZ Corp because they've overcharged me for some service, I can take them to court. Sure they're in the wrong, but by tying up the legal system, they can end up costing me far more in legal costs than the overcharge. What they're doing is using legal means to do something legal and in this case, to cover a wrong.
We have many consumer protection laws that were implemented by various governments over the years to protect consumers from abuse. BUT the people that implemented them are long since gone and often the laws are vaguely enough written that a lawyer can avoid implementation.
Take the competition acts ... amongst other things, they are there to allow regulation of companies that can weild their control over the marketplace. The courts in the US and Europe have done this with Microsoft several times. Right now we're in a position where the regulatory authority and the government department in charge of that authority say "Oh, there's enough competition in the telecomms industry that the market can look after itself without regulation" even though we all know that there is negligible direct competition.
You keep saying that 3rd party ISPs like TSI should build their own network and not rely on Bell. If they were to do that, no-one could afford their service. Remember that Bell is able to leverage expansion on the revenue and cash flows of other business.
Rogers, after taking on the @home ISP business themselves in their service area had their credit rating lowered to JUNK. Why? Because the numbers didn't add up. The margins were too small on their revenue stream to afford upgrades. They needed increased penetration. They needed to show the banks that they could make money and have done so.
The CRTC and DoI recognized that small businesses like TSI do not have that kind of leverage. Remember that Bell have been in the 3rd party wholesale business of providing voice and data over their networks for years and years (ever order a data line from CNCP? Guess whose line it was? Bell) The provision of GAS and HSA is only the next logical extension of those services.
The rules for GAS and HSA were set by Bell and the CRTC and now in the face of growing competition, Bell wants to have it deregulated so they can essentially eliminate GAS and HSA to eliminate the competition. |
|
Peter Principle
@cgocable.net
| reply to HeadSpinning
said by HeadSpinning : On the whole, I'm sure Bell pays more in taxes than it collects in subsidies - which is why they have such a big voice in Ottawa. Remember, the more profitable companies are, the more tax the government gets to collect. Small guys with small profit margins pay less tax. Actually the larger the company the less tax they pay. You and I on the other hand. Well this is a whole other thread. |
|
