He’s not wrong.

If the government introduces regulations that reduce income, he has to reduce expenses if he wants to remain CEO.

That’s just capitalism.

Bell’s not the problem here.

Skywave wrote:

The other place the heat should be turned up is the outsourcing by Bell of its call centres to Manila. A few months ago my twisted pair copper went down, and the call centre told me I had to migrate to fibre if I wanted it fixed. Refused to open a trouble ticket.  They don't know what to do if you take them off script. I had no phone, no security alarm reporting. Meanwhile, Mirko pockets millions in bonuses every year while Canadians needing jobs can't get them. At least Rogers has their call centres in Canada. 
It is outrageous that, if you roam to the US or Europe, you are automatically dinged with the "roam like home" plans.  If you send one text in Europe, it costs you 15 bucks.  I got a Vodafone "Payasyougo1" sim card, and one text from Canada to Europe costs 8 pence.  An overseas phone call costs 60 pence.  While in Europe, I can send unlimited texts and make unlimited calls, and get 50 MB of data, for 1 UK POUND! per day.
It's very simple: greed.  There's nothing wrong with being profitable, but the fee structures are outrageous.

 

I just spent $180 + tax on “Roam like Home” while on a 2-week vacation in the US last month. I worked it into my travel budget so it was expected but that’s the cost of 2 nights in an AirBNB.

They also tried to charge me for both the $12 US roaming AND $15 International roaming one day I was close to the Mexican border but did not cross. I got that $15 charge reversed when I disputed it.

One can argue that I could turn my data and roaming off, but this really isn’t practical anymore since maps are all online, and I need to stay in contact with family in Canada.

On the other hand, I know people in Mexico who have service with Telcel, that country’s largest mobile provider owned by billionaire Carlos Slim. Their data plan includes free roaming in the US and Canada. I knew someone who went to work in the US for 15 months and was able to keep their Mexican number and use it in the US at no extra charge. Such a thing would cost over $5,000 for a Canadian to do. Of course, unlike Canada, Mexico allows some degree of foreign competition in their telecom sector. The #2 mobile provider there is Spain-based Telefonica (through its Movistar brand).

Last edited by MJ Vancouver (May 29, 2023 6:34 pm)

My gripe with Bell was over TSN's coverage of the IIHF World Hockey Championships from Finland.   They did a solid job carrying all the games, but they were all in low def.  It didn't even look like 480p at times, resembling the kind of video feed I'd expect from a very low bandwidth connection.   When the commercials came on, everything was fine.  The colours were banding, images were fuzzy, it was hard to watch on a 55" screen.   My guess is it's a way to pinch pennies.   Anyway, Canada won!

paterson1 wrote:

I don't know if they can actually regulate change.  Bell and Rogers are not going to give their technology and networks away to the smaller upstarts, and why should they.  It would be like building a new in ground swimming pool in your backyard, and the city telling you that you must give 24/7 access to your pool to the tenants of the low rental apartments down the street. 

The real change will come from competition.  And hopefully it has started... more from Global News..
https://globalnews.ca/news/9723632/freedom-mobile-rogers-shaw-nationwide-plan/

but i have a bit of an issue here...   MVNO's are doing very well in the USA, which use one of the big players networks to reach their customers.  They also jointly work together on tower sites, via a 3rd party tower owner, or renting space from the other company.   The big players get paid for the use, and really act as a win for all involved.   In Canada, unless forced, the big 3 fight to keep any new competitor out.    They are not willing to work together on a business deal with most new startups because frankly, they want the market for themselves.   A MVNO start up could in fact keep money flowing to one of the big 3 companies based on a deal in place OR even tower space they rent over getting nothing.   It's very short term thinking to run like you are a monopoly, not to mention you are limited business deals when you have to be forced to do things, that you could have worked out jointly in the meeting room.     The big 3 will scream they are being freeloaded on, but facts are they are getting cost plus deals and are being paid well for MVNO's to use their networks.    

radiokid wrote:

paterson1 wrote:

I don't know if they can actually regulate change.  Bell and Rogers are not going to give their technology and networks away to the smaller upstarts, and why should they.  It would be like building a new in ground swimming pool in your backyard, and the city telling you that you must give 24/7 access to your pool to the tenants of the low rental apartments down the street. 

The real change will come from competition.  And hopefully it has started... more from Global News..
https://globalnews.ca/news/9723632/freedom-mobile-rogers-shaw-nationwide-plan/

but i have a bit of an issue here...   MVNO's are doing very well in the USA, which use one of the big players networks to reach their customers.  They also jointly work together on tower sites, via a 3rd party tower owner, or renting space from the other company.   The big players get paid for the use, and really act as a win for all involved.   In Canada, unless forced, the big 3 fight to keep any new competitor out.    They are not willing to work together on a business deal with most new startups because frankly, they want the market for themselves.   A MVNO start up could in fact keep money flowing to one of the big 3 companies based on a deal in place OR even tower space they rent over getting nothing.   It's very short term thinking to run like you are a monopoly, not to mention you are limited business deals when you have to be forced to do things, that you could have worked out jointly in the meeting room.     The big 3 will scream they are being freeloaded on, but facts are they are getting cost plus deals and are being paid well for MVNO's to use their networks.    

It is a lot easier for the smaller start up's to do well in the US.  Much bigger and more affluent market, population spread out more evenly, better climate, lower business taxes etc. The big three telecoms in the US have similar market share as Rogers, Bell, and Telus but what remains represents many more millions of potential customers in the US than Canada.

I don't know if Bell, Rogers and Telus are being paid well by the start ups.  The CRTC set the rate and the big three complained that they were not getting market value considering the billions they had invested. The CRTC eventually agreed and the rate was increased.  

Currently Rogers debt is almost $36 billion with a debt to equity of 344%.  BCE has a debt of about $34 billion and a debt to equity ratio of 151%.  So the overall debt for both companies is cause for concern.  Simply Wall St has more detail. 

I used Airalo on a trip to the UK recently. Data only, but $20 for 10 GB that lasted me 9 days. The $15/day “EasyRoam” plan from Telus is just outrageous.

Speaking of overseas call centres, Telus has a huge call centre in Manila (even has a big Telus sign on it). I personally don’t like dealing with them because it seems like they don’t know their own product.

I really wish we weren’t at the whim of our large telcos. The way they gouge us for cell service is criminal and downright embarrassing.

Last edited by ED1 (May 30, 2023 7:10 pm)