Telus would cut 5K jobs and $1B in spending if CRTC approves virtual wireless network operators

i6s1 wrote: ↑ I don't see why this is a surprise.

When regulations take the profitability out of an investment, the only logical step is to scale back investment. Reduced profitability will result in a slower rollout. 5g will still come if companies are forced to share with MVNOs, but it will take longer, and won't spread as deep into rural areas.

wearysky wrote: ↑So basically, "if we're forced to be competitive, we'll have to cut jobs in order to maintain our profit levels, rather than taking a little bit less profit and preserving jobs". At least they're being honest. The sooner we get MVNOs in, the better.

Tichi wrote: ↑A pathetic and inept intimidation attempt by Telus...

Does anyone still actually believe this sh*t?

Piro21 wrote: ↑ This is why the government should develop its own ministry of telecom infrastructure, annul the spectrum auction results, and handle the rollout themselves. We don't let some profit-seeking oligopoly build and control all of our national highways, and we shouldn't let one do so with our broadband infrastructure either. All those fired employees would have jobs, we'd have reasonable prices, and the big 3 would actually have a competitor they couldn't buy out like they did with the last round of MVNOs.

Piro21 wrote: ↑ This is why the government should develop its own ministry of telecom infrastructure, annul the spectrum auction results, and handle the rollout themselves. We don't let some profit-seeking oligopoly build and control all of our national highways, and we shouldn't let one do so with our broadband infrastructure either. All those fired employees would have jobs, we'd have reasonable prices, and the big 3 would actually have a competitor they couldn't buy out like they did with the last round of MVNOs.

wearysky wrote: ↑ So basically, "if we're forced to be competitive, we'll have to cut jobs in order to maintain our profit levels, rather than taking a little bit less profit and preserving jobs". At least they're being honest. The sooner we get MVNOs in, the better.

Yindare wrote: ↑ ???
I recall the government limiting your choices to only 4 carriers and have to be Canadian-owned or some bs. Everytime you see a consolidation of industries or companies, it is not the government that you should request regulation from...

"Canada’s rules came into effect in 1993. As it stands now, foreign ownership of a telecommunications company is limited to no more than 20 per cent of a company’s voting shares and no more than 33.3 per cent of the voting shares of a carrier’s holding company, and an effective total limit of 46.7 per cent (as long as the foreign entity doesn’t have control). On top of that, at least 80 per cent of the board members must be Canadian citizens.

Canada kept these strict rules even as international telecommunications market started to shed protectionism in 1997, when 69 countries, including the U.S., committed to opening up markets through a World Trade Organization agreement."

Brother, every single time someone complains why they pay so high, oligopoly bla bla, you can always point to the source.
Lobbyist. Tax revenues. Special interests. Protectionism,

Samshares wrote: ↑ They shed jobs all the time and then add me back, not like most of the retail jobs are of quality anyway..... Wouldn’t be first time, crying wolf shouldn’t be allowed.

Piro21 wrote: ↑ This is why the government should develop its own ministry of telecom infrastructure, annul the spectrum auction results, and handle the rollout themselves. We don't let some profit-seeking oligopoly build and control all of our national highways, and we shouldn't let one do so with our broadband infrastructure either. All those fired employees would have jobs, we'd have reasonable prices, and the big 3 would actually have a competitor they couldn't buy out like they did with the last round of MVNOs.