I agree with you, RA. You have no idea how furious I am right now about this deal. I am at the point that I am ripping the Rogers SIM card out of my cell phone today, burning it, and getting a Koodo (Telus) SIM and comparable service that's a lot cheaper. Screw Rogers and screw everybody involved with that pathetic excuse for a company, especially their greedy, lazy, unreasonable, selfish, never satisfied, good for nothing shareholders. I knew from the start that this would be a done deal no matter what.

One more thing - it's been really interesting to listen to the various stations as the announcement was imminent. Bell Media's NT1010 was covering it in its headlines, but it wasn't the lead until it was actually announced. Corus has also covered it, with Shaw being a former part of that organization. They seemed to be giving it an even keel.

And Rogers' owned CityNews 680? I was up at 5:30 Friday morning and it was the lead every single half hour. They were mostly subdued but there was an undertone of glee in their coverage that was hard to miss. This is one story where I don't trust the reporting of CityNews. 

I know people who worked at City TV who told me even before Rogers took over, it was all about publicity to make the owners of the company look good. When the MuchMusic Video Awards were being held in the station's parking lot, management let it subtly be known that not only would it be over-covered, but you HAD to lead with it on that night's newscast, even if there were far more important stories happening. Otherwise there would be hell to pay. That cop that got shot? The tornado that hit the city? Not as important as what we're doing!

It's under new ownership since then, but I see that not much has changed.

mace wrote:

I cannot disagree with either of your comments. However, in my case, I have always received reliable service from Rogers. That might change in the future. I intend to keep my Digital/Legacy cable until I receive a final shutdown date. I have heard way too many frustrating horror stories about their Ignite service. The July 8th fiasco last year comes to mind. While I lost my phone and internet, I could still watch basic cable [Toronto, Hamilton, Buffalo, A&E, CNN was about the limit]

OK, but how much are you paying? And equally important, how many increases have you had since you started with them? The other question - how much are you paying for your cell service with them, if indeed you are with them for that. That's where the real gouging has been going on for decades.

Regardless of the Industry Minister's pronouncements, I will be heart-attack surprised if there are any real changes, beyond a few token ones so this government can say they did something. 

So the basics I have seen with this.

Rogers gets Shaw Cable and Dish services.  (Cable isn't even in any Rogers areas, so I don't see a real issue here)  Dish perhaps has some competitive areas that will be lost, but most people don't get Dish if they can get Fibre or Cable now. 

The Mobile parts of Shaw completely leave for others.. Quebecor and Videotron.     No change in media ownership other than Corus doesn't have Shaw to fall back on. 

Do I like the idea of losing a company?  No..    But I think this is exactly how I figured it would play out, because handing it over as originally planned would have for sure caused prices to increase on mobile.    With Cable and Dish?   There is less push because it really wasn't a competition based on geographics.   Rogers now just has more footprint for cable and a Dish choice to play ball with the local phone company.   That's all I see here...  

Last edited by radiokid (March 31, 2023 10:29 am)

I think it is premature to call this a disastrous deal.  The upside would be that Videotron (Quebecor) will  become a national carrier and that is more competition.  Quebecor has traditionally undercut Rogers and Bell in price and have stated they intend to do this in the rest of Canada. 

Radiokid is correct, this seems to be more about cable than anything else.  Radio Aaron had mentioned on another post that this merger passes the current standards and regulations and Rogers had spun off Freedom Mobile. Yes they were told to and they did.

So it makes it hard not to approve if the criteria has been met. Maybe the regs and standards should be changed but they haven't so the merger is approved with lots of conditions and Rogers needing to spend over 3 billion in Western Canada.  

Forward Power wrote:

I agree with you, RA. You have no idea how furious I am right now about this deal. I am at the point that I am ripping the Rogers SIM card out of my cell phone today, burning it, and getting a Koodo (Telus) SIM and comparable service that's a lot cheaper. Screw Rogers and screw everybody involved with that pathetic excuse for a company, especially their greedy, lazy, unreasonable, selfish, never satisfied, good for nothing shareholders. I knew from the start that this would be a done deal no matter what.

Go to Freedom...but hang on a bit if you can. Once you switch to Freedom mobile, maybe you will also get a great deal on Vmedia services also. (internet and TV)
Hopefully one can also put Vmedia services and Freedom mobile onto ONE bill. That would be nice!!

In Phase wrote:

RadioActive wrote:

I know people who worked at City TV who told me even before Rogers took over, it was all about publicity to make the owners of the company look good

so, you're talking about CHUM then?

I don't understand your comment.. 

I have it on pretty good authority from numerous people who there that when City TV was involved in something - an awards show, a premiere, whatever promotional thing it may have been - there was an unwritten rule in the newsroom that you lead the 6 o'clock news with it - regardless of what else may have been going on and even if those other stories were more important.

The thought process seemed to be "we're doing this, it's exclusive to us and no one else can have it, so it leads the show." But I'm enough of a purist to say that's not how you line-up a newscast. Don't ignore it, obviously, but it doesn't have to be the lead just because your station is sponsoring something. This is also, from my experience, how Rogers operates. "It's ours, so regardless of other bigger stories, if we're involved, it's the lead."

I'm not saying don't lead with it, if it's worthy. But honestly, the set-up - not the show, just the set-up - for the Much Awards back in the day isn't a lead - unless the set falls and kills someone. But that was the mindset back then. I just think that's the wrong way to set up your newscast, which, after all is said and done, is supposed to be telling viewers the most important things that happened in their city that evening, with the biggest story always going first. Not some promo for the company.  

RadioActive wrote:

In Phase wrote:

RadioActive wrote:

I know people who worked at City TV who told me even before Rogers took over, it was all about publicity to make the owners of the company look good

so, you're talking about CHUM then?

I don't understand your comment.. 

I have it on pretty good authority from numerous people who there that when City TV was involved in something - an awards show, a premiere, whatever promotional thing it may have been - there was an unwritten rule in the newsroom that you lead the 6 o'clock news with it - regardless of what else may have been going on and even if those other stories were more important.

The thought process seemed to be "we're doing this, it's exclusive to us and no one else can have it, so it leads the show." But I'm enough of a purist to say that's not how you line-up a newscast. Don't ignore it, obviously, but it doesn't have to be the lead just because your station is sponsoring something. This is also, from my experience, how Rogers operates. "It's ours, so regardless of other bigger stories, if we're involved, it's the lead."

I'm not saying don't lead with it, if it's worthy. But honestly, the set-up - not the show, just the set-up - for the Much Awards back in the day isn't a lead - unless the set falls and kills someone. But that was the mindset back then. I just think that's the wrong way to set up your newscast, which, after all is said and done, is supposed to be telling viewers the most important things that happened in their city that evening, with the biggest story always going first. Not some promo for the company.  

I understand.  Of course, you are technically correct from a "news" perspective.

However, CHUM, Rogers, Bell, etc are running a business.  It about eyeballs & ears.  You must take advantage of any advantage you have.

I would like to think that, if a major story was truly unfolding, it would move to the lead.  That would also be a good business decision.



 

Radiowiz wrote:

Time for me to shop around??

porting your number over to a new provider has never been easier

go shopping
 

In Phase wrote:

We may not have great choice, but we do have choice.  Make wise choices 

But do we really? When they all charge pretty close to the same thing for the same service, is that really choice? Or is that something closer to a triopoly? 

It's not really choice if you go down the street to another place only to find pretty close to the exact same gouge. 

They only really seem to give you a "deal" (if it's even that) when you threaten to leave. They should be doing that as a reward for being a loyal customer. But that would never happen. You have to threaten or they'll just keep up the overprice ripoff. I think most consumers know that to be true. 

Good for you. But I would argue that you shouldn't have to threaten them to get a better deal. As a loyal customer, they should just give it to you. But clearly, they only want you for your money - and nothing else. 

Not that Bell is any better. Remember this story from 2021, when a high pressure salesperson sold an 85-year-old with Alzheimer's a two year Bell Fibe contract, a new cell phone he can't use, a landline and a tablet, and then got him to buy a high speed Internet connection even though he doesn't have a computer and has no idea how to use it even if he did? 

The Bell PR flaks immediately insisted they'd launched an investigation and denied they had high pressure sales techniques. But only after the story became public. We've read stories like this countless times before. If they told me today was Friday, I wouldn't believe a word of it. 

These guys are all the same. A pox on all their houses. The government could do something if they really wanted to. Despite the promises about lower prices made on Friday, it's pretty clear they don't want to. 

85-year-old with Alzheimer's sold Bell products and services he can't use after visit to The Source

The MMVAs I'm referring to was most definitely not on the weekend. At least not that year. The people who worked there at the time that I spoke to did not work on Saturday and Sunday. 

We can agree to disagree on this, but my criteria is: 'if this weren't my company, would this still be the lede?' If the answer is no, then there's your answer. 

As for the other stations leading with it, of course at 9 AM they would. The presser was at 8:30 and it was breaking (if not unexpected) news. The fact that it's now down the list in the news run everywhere but CFTR tells me everything I need to know. 

I'll admit it's a big story - a multi-billion-dollar merger most certainly is. But still the lead by 3 PM when other things have happened? When only one station - a corporate shill for Rogers - bothers, that's also very revealing.   

There is no reason for a story that moved at a press conference early in the morning to still be the lead at 4 PM. CFTR just started with it - again. Enough already. It no longer deserves to be positioned that high, even on a Rogers property. But obviously, the word has come down from on high to continually pump this.  

As for Much, I think the time I'm referring to happened on a Friday night. But I know it wasn't a weekend. So does a crowded parking lot with nothing else going on deserve to be the top story simply because it satisfies corporate interests? Not a newscast I would trust. The commercials are supposed to air during the breaks. Not as the main story for hours and hours and hours on end. 

As I say, we'll agree to disagree. If you don't mind corporate shilling as news, then you're welcome to watch or listen. I will go somewhere else where I'll hopefully get unbiased coverage.

The news conference was at 8:30 AM. That's considered early in a world of 24 hour news, not to mention 6 and 11 PM newscasts. Sorry. I've worked in radio and TV news for over 30 years. I think I know something about that particular part of the industry. Can you say the same thing?

Rarely does a story that breaks before 9 in the morning remain the top story at 5 o'clock that same afternoon, espeically if there's nothing new to add.  

Yes, it is a big story, as any deal worth multi-billions that affects so many will be. But to keep hammering on it non-stop all day long simply because it involves your corporate interest is way over the top. Time to change your lead. It is no longer 'new' news eight hours later.  

Yes, the MMVAs were a big story for City. But preparing the parking lot was NOT a lead at 6 PM, especially if they were doing it the day before. Do it later in the cast. Or as a promo. Throw to a reporter outside if you want. Do it as the lead after the show has aired.

If it's a slow day, maybe. But if not, it doesn't belong as your top story, which is traditionally defined as the most important thing you need to hear about that happened that day. Preparing for an awards show that hasn't even happened yet cannot possibly be the most important item of the entire day. 

A TV show that has been scheduled for months is not breaking news. Unless you're shilling for your company. But then, by that point, it's not really news at all. In the case of the employees I was talking to, they complained that on almost every occasion this happened while they were there, there were far more worthy news stories that should have been played higher. 

But no - they needed to shamelessly promote themselves. 

And by the way, I hate pickles. 

radiokid wrote:

So the basics I have seen with this.

Rogers gets Shaw Cable and Dish services.  (Cable isn't even in any Rogers areas, so I don't see a real issue here)  Dish perhaps has some competitive areas that will be lost, but most people don't get Dish if they can get Fibre or Cable now. 

The Mobile parts of Shaw completely leave for others.. Quebecor and Videotron.     No change in media ownership other than Corus doesn't have Shaw to fall back on. 

Do I like the idea of losing a company?  No..    But I think this is exactly how I figured it would play out, because handing it over as originally planned would have for sure caused prices to increase on mobile.    With Cable and Dish?   There is less push because it really wasn't a competition based on geographics.   Rogers now just has more footprint for cable and a Dish choice to play ball with the local phone company.   That's all I see here...  

Yep, there is very little difference in terms of competition from a consumer point of view. Cell subscribers in Ottawa will be down one very small competitor; that's it.

The unimportant thing I'm wondering is how Quebecor will brand its combined cell companies. Freedom seems to have established a positive brand image, so they won't re-name it Videotron (also because that's a terrible name.) On the flip-side, if you're going to re-brand in Quebec, you'd probably want something more bilingual or at least language neutral. Maybe they'll keep both?