Shopping Discussion

CRTC chair says it's hard to sustain low wireless, internet prices in long term

  • Last Updated:
  • Jun 26th, 2021 10:03 pm

Poll: Do you agree with CRTC chairman Ian Scott comments?

  • Total votes: 170. You have voted on this poll.
Yes
 
16
9%
No
 
154
91%
Deal Fanatic
Aug 31, 2017
5128 posts
2981 upvotes
The amount of disposable income spent on telecom is stupid. The telecoms basically took advantage of our parents, and grandparents for so many years, and now they can't anymore. Telus especially loved the west in Alberta when the oil was doing well, because they would pay 100's of dollars just for data and voice. In return, Telus would give free upgrades on new phones.
Deal Fanatic
Aug 31, 2017
5128 posts
2981 upvotes
StatsGuy wrote: he's absolutely correct as well. That's why leaches like teksavvy have done nothing other than get rich making money on the spread between mandated low rates and sky high rates they charge customers with zero investments in building their own network.

fttn and fiber connections are stupid expensive to install and put in especially without guaranteed usage from consumer, if companies like the big telcos have to spend Billions on infrastructure and then forced to resell at mandated prices to TPIA who then undercut them, why would they upgrade especially in a quick manner before slowing down if not stop at all and see if it makes economic sense.
Isn't this part of the cost of doing business? I remember Telus and Bell decided to go with CDMA and got burned. Rogers did GSM and got a good chunk of the Canadian population at that time.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Apr 12, 2013
2924 posts
1907 upvotes
Moon
*Looks up the big 3s stock performance*

No I dont think they are struggling...
Koodo, Public Mobile, Lucky Mobile Customer
Deal Addict
User avatar
Dec 3, 2017
3063 posts
2908 upvotes
Guelph
Ian Scott is shit. You can tell he's a former Telus exec through and through because he takes whatever bullshit the telcos spit at him at face value.

He needs to be removed.
Deal Addict
Aug 15, 2010
2363 posts
768 upvotes
StatsGuy wrote: he's absolutely correct as well. That's why leaches like teksavvy have done nothing other than get rich making money on the spread between mandated low rates and sky high rates they charge customers with zero investments in building their own network.

fttn and fiber connections are stupid expensive to install and put in especially without guaranteed usage from consumer, if companies like the big telcos have to spend Billions on infrastructure and then forced to resell at mandated prices to TPIA who then undercut them, why would they upgrade especially in a quick manner before slowing down if not stop at all and see if it makes economic sense.
This guy works for the big 3 for sure.
How can an ant carry twenty times its body weight, but root beer floats are still delicious?
Deal Expert
User avatar
Sep 1, 2005
18592 posts
13408 upvotes
Markham
At the EOD, these are private businesses operating in a regulated industry. If someone wants to make an investment, they should be allowed to price/sell that business for whatever they want and no one should be able to "strong arm" them to sell it to someone else who isn't investing in the infrastructure.

CRTC has over and over again tried to get more players to come into this industry to make it more competitive....and you know why no one is stepping in? It's because of this kind of stuff where the CRTC can just undermine the investment you made 5/10/20 years ago [under one set of rules] by forcing you to sell it at some rate THEY decide today. These large infrastructure investments take a long long time [50 yrs is not uncommon by any stretch] to earn back.

All of the ppl who live in big urban centres would love lower rates but if you live in a small town up north, they just want service and players like the big 3 are the ones building the infrastructure and it's being financed in many respects by the bigger uban customers.

If CRTC [Federal Govt] wants to regulate prices, maybe they should invest the money and rent out the lines to everyone instead.

Buy the stock of the three telcos and then you won't need to complain about this stuff.
We're all bozos on the bus until we find a way to express ourselves...

Failure is always an option...just not the preferred one!
Deal Fanatic
Dec 20, 2018
7718 posts
6907 upvotes
sixteen12 wrote: This guy works for the big 3 for sure.
Nope...just using my mind and some logic?

Does it make sense if say govt wants more affordable housing (true) that they demand/mandate say a developer like Minto sell their lots/homes at a lower price (eg 60% of market price) to another for profit builder (eg teksavvy) who then sells it to the public at a
slightly lower price and profit with none of the risk and capital expenditures ?

How is it any different?

If people/govt want lower internet/Telco prices, they should ask for a crown agency to do it much like in some other provinces..but don't be surprised it's not actually cheaper and/or slower with inconsistent/low investment in upgrades or upkeep (eg Toronto housing corp)
Last edited by StatsGuy on Jun 2nd, 2021 11:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
Deal Fanatic
Dec 20, 2018
7718 posts
6907 upvotes
MyNameWasTaken wrote: Isn't this part of the cost of doing business? I remember Telus and Bell decided to go with CDMA and got burned. Rogers did GSM and got a good chunk of the Canadian population at that time.
Cost of doing business is being forced to sell your products at discount to another for profit private company to resell ? That's what teksavvy is asking for
Deal Expert
Aug 22, 2006
29380 posts
14889 upvotes
ml88888888 wrote: It is due to our population and big area, vs, US. & Europe.
Everyone loves to compare us to the US in terms of population vs land mass, but considering that a good portion of the entirety of the US has cell coverage whereas we have a small percentage of our landmass.

The density of the US is 36 people per sqkm whereas we're a measly 4 people per sqkm.
But how many people live in Yukon/NWT and how much of the total landmass do they make up?
Even looking at the coverage map of BC, it's like 1/3 at best. Most of Alberta as well as half of Saskatchewan is covered due to the sweet sweet oil money but Ontario and Quebec look worse than BC.

I'd love to see the average density of the actual populated areas and not brush.
Or just give me the average density of any area that has cell phone coverage.
Measuring the density of the entire country is ridiculous when 80% of thelandmass in uninhabited.
Do you not have anything else to do rather than argue with strangers on the internet
Nope. That's why I'm on the internet arguing with strangers. If I had anything better to do I'd probably be doing it.
Deal Addict
Aug 15, 2010
2363 posts
768 upvotes
StatsGuy wrote: Nope...just using my mind and some logic?

Does it make sense if say govt wants more affordable housing (true) that they demand/mandate say a developer like Minto sell their lots/homes at a lower price (eg 60% of market price) to another for profit builder (eg teksavvy) who then sells it to the public at a
slightly lower price and profit with none of the risk and capital expenditures ?

How is it any different?

If people/govt want lower internet/Telco prices, they should ask for a crown agency to do it much like in some other provinces..but don't be surprised it's not actually cheaper and/or slower with inconsistent/low investment in upgrades or upkeep (eg Toronto housing corp)
I’m not going to argue your opinion. However, remember that Bell, Telus, and Rogers built large amounts of their networks off of federal and provincial support. Requiring them to open their lines at wholesale prices to third parties doesn’t seem unreasonable to me. Maybe their CEOs don’t get their full 7 figure bonus as a result, but I’m sure they’d survive just fine.
How can an ant carry twenty times its body weight, but root beer floats are still delicious?
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Jan 16, 2011
7205 posts
9195 upvotes
The NORTH
Dhanushan wrote: Calls for federal government to reverse decision on internet wholesale rates, fire CRTC head
Small telecoms and opposition parties pressured the Liberal government to overturn what one group called the CRTC’s 'most anti-consumer decision on record'

https://montrealgazette.com/news/politi ... -crtc-head
And the sound of crickets is deafening...
Newbie
Feb 3, 2021
93 posts
26 upvotes
engineered wrote: Actually, I'm pretty sure they say out population is more concentrated than the USA, as most of us are very near the USA border, whereas people are more spread out over the USA.
It's pretty well known that we have limited competition, and they collude together and have their former VP's appointed to our regulator.
I'm not sure if it's still the case but 5+ years ago it was cheaper for someone from the USA to use their phone here than us.
Don't some more rural parts of America have atrocious internet options though? I've heard some states have issues where certain significant areas don't have access to high speed broadband. I guess that's also true of our really rural areas, however from what I've heard the number of ppl affected is significantly greater due to their larger population... Yeah, I've also heard of ppl getting good rates using USA carriers here. I imagine it helps that they have massive consumer bases by comparison geographical size aside...
Newbie
Feb 3, 2021
93 posts
26 upvotes
sixteen12 wrote: I’m not going to argue your opinion. However, remember that Bell, Telus, and Rogers built large amounts of their networks off of federal and provincial support. Requiring them to open their lines at wholesale prices to third parties doesn’t seem unreasonable to me. Maybe their CEOs don’t get their full 7 figure bonus as a result, but I’m sure they’d survive just fine.
Not to ask a dense question, however if we're going to argue the State should be able to dictate rates they charge to Third Parties due to the fact the public has invested in their infrastructure why not just regulate rates more directly? Is there a legal issue with the latter that isn't present in the former or something? 'Cause I'm inclined to agree with him that Third Parties getting to take advantage of cheap rates to only slightly undercut the competition seems sorta pointless and not that great a solution for consumers...
Deal Expert
User avatar
Feb 11, 2007
19739 posts
23155 upvotes
GTA
GloryFades wrote: Don't some more rural parts of America have atrocious internet options though? I've heard some states have issues where certain significant areas don't have access to high speed broadband. I guess that's also true of our really rural areas, however from what I've heard the number of ppl affected is significantly greater due to their larger population... Yeah, I've also heard of ppl getting good rates using USA carriers here. I imagine it helps that they have massive consumer bases by comparison geographical size aside...
Yes, that's exactly what I'm talking about. It's because they have more competition there. Their rural areas are also bad because there isn't good competition there.
If the women don't find you handsome, they should at least find you handy.
Deal Addict
Jan 29, 2017
3779 posts
2424 upvotes
Heard recently Videotron Prez on a financial show talking about impact of cable cutting but then how they made up the shortfalls and then some with wireless profits.
[OP]
Penalty Box
Jun 20, 2020
17142 posts
22934 upvotes
Toronto
Press Release: TekSavvy provides Liberal Government with clear evidence of CRTC Chair's bias


TekSavvy calls on federal cabinet to fire CRTC chair Ian Scott
It comes after news broke of the telecom regulator having a one-on-one meeting with Bell's chief operating officer in an Ottawa bar

https://www.straight.com/tech/teksavvy- ... -ian-scott
Destiny is all
Deal Addict
User avatar
Aug 16, 2004
2317 posts
1120 upvotes
Toronto
Ian Scott is such an asshole.
LRT: Let's Ruin Toronto
Deal Addict
User avatar
Dec 18, 2007
2291 posts
938 upvotes
Scarborough
gr8dlr wrote: At the EOD, these are private businesses operating in a regulated industry. If someone wants to make an investment, they should be allowed to price/sell that business for whatever they want and no one should be able to "strong arm" them to sell it to someone else who isn't investing in the infrastructure.

CRTC has over and over again tried to get more players to come into this industry to make it more competitive....and you know why no one is stepping in? It's because of this kind of stuff where the CRTC can just undermine the investment you made 5/10/20 years ago [under one set of rules] by forcing you to sell it at some rate THEY decide today. These large infrastructure investments take a long long time [50 yrs is not uncommon by any stretch] to earn back.

All of the ppl who live in big urban centres would love lower rates but if you live in a small town up north, they just want service and players like the big 3 are the ones building the infrastructure and it's being financed in many respects by the bigger uban customers.

If CRTC [Federal Govt] wants to regulate prices, maybe they should invest the money and rent out the lines to everyone instead.

Buy the stock of the three telcos and then you won't need to complain about this stuff.
StatsGuy wrote: Nope...just using my mind and some logic?

Does it make sense if say govt wants more affordable housing (true) that they demand/mandate say a developer like Minto sell their lots/homes at a lower price (eg 60% of market price) to another for profit builder (eg teksavvy) who then sells it to the public at a
slightly lower price and profit with none of the risk and capital expenditures ?

How is it any different?

If people/govt want lower internet/Telco prices, they should ask for a crown agency to do it much like in some other provinces..but don't be surprised it's not actually cheaper and/or slower with inconsistent/low investment in upgrades or upkeep (eg Toronto housing corp)
several news I randomly picked, all within the last year.

gov invest 150million into rural area network:
https://www.itworldcanada.com/article/o ... ent/431741

rogers & gov split cost of boosting wireless service in eastern ontario:
https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/rogers-gove ... -1.1579507

gov and bell invest to bring connectivity to crysler and st albert ontario:
https://mobilesyrup.com/2021/06/09/bell ... t-ontario/

The federal government is putting $1.6 million to bring high-speed internet to almost 700 more homes in Northern Ontario:
https://www.nugget.ca/news/feds-bell-in ... d-internet

gov invest $700,000 to bring high speed internt to 1,111 more homes in bancroft:
https://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/g ... 24385.html

gov invest nearly 1 million to bring high speed internet to 4557 homes in durham region:
https://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/g ... 89588.html


also this
https://mobilesyrup.com/2021/02/09/roge ... am-report/

edit: CRTC tries to get more players, but need the company to be majority be Canadian owned. So foreign company (which have money) won't come in.
Tangerine
Simplii
Freedom Mobile

Top