# BCE, T, RCI in trouble because of CRTC restriction?



## MoreMiles (Apr 20, 2011)

ARPU will be lower, with cap on roaming, etc. 
Time to short them :chuncky:


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Those charts all look pretty strong. I have a general rule, you don't short a strong chart. (Similarly you don't buy a weak chart)


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

MoreMiles said:


> ARPU will be lower, with cap on roaming, etc.
> Time to short them :chuncky:


I don't see how the roaming caps are going to substantially impact revenue. I don't imagine there are average users with hundreds of dollars in monthly data roaming charges.
It actually looks like the new code will result in minimal revenue loss.


----------



## My Own Advisor (Sep 24, 2012)

I'm pretty sure the CRTC consulted with the big three telcos.


----------



## blin10 (Jun 27, 2011)

they will just charge higher price for a phone on 2 year contract, they won't loose a cent...


----------



## HaroldCrump (Jun 10, 2009)

Also, the loss of revenue because of caps on roaming and data charges will get divided among all the other users.
i.e. users that don't overuse roaming or data will end up subsidizing those that do.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

Apparently the takeover of Mobilicity bandwidth leases has been blocked for Telus. (from BNN)


----------



## Cal (Jun 17, 2009)

blin10 said:


> they will just charge higher price for a phone on 2 year contract, they won't loose a cent...


Same...they won't lose a cent.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

For what it's worth, I think the current selloff in all of these is due more to rising interest rates and people dumping risky assets they chased for yield (e.g. REITs, dividend stocks) -- rather than the CRTC news


----------



## blin10 (Jun 27, 2011)

risky assets ? bell,rogers, telus, rio can, h&r reit, cibc, scotia bank, ppl, ipl, risky assets ? let me ask you then, what do you consider non risky assets ?



james4beach said:


> For what it's worth, I think the current selloff in all of these is due more to rising interest rates and people dumping risky assets they chased for yield (e.g. REITs, dividend stocks) -- rather than the CRTC news


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

They're risky because they're stocks, to begin with. All stocks are risky. The hierarchy of investment risk is a spectrum and goes something like this: cash, bank deposits, government bonds, corporate bonds, junk bonds, preferred shares, general stocks, small/midcap stocks.

Many people have been buying "dividend paying stocks" mistakenly thinking they sit somewhere near bonds in that spectrum. Look around these forums and you'll see lots of posts from people who say, the yield on a bond fund is not enough so I'll go buy some high-yield stocks instead. But stocks are inherently much riskier than bonds.

I'm just observing that the market is dumping various things, and a similarity between these things seems to be that they're all high yielding:

REITs, corporate bonds, junk bonds, emerging market bonds, mortgage bonds, and high dividend paying stocks (e.g. utilities)

All of these are getting sold off. That part makes sense because all of these are desirable for their yields. I'm just guessing that the telecoms are being grouped with those too, since as you know, a big reason these stocks have been so popular in the last few years is because of yield-chasing.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

HaroldCrump said:


> Also, the loss of revenue because of caps on roaming and data charges will get divided among all the other users.
> i.e. users that don't overuse roaming or data will end up subsidizing those that do.


Those that overuse roaming or data will end up paying. They'll turn off data as soon as they stop billing for it.


----------



## MoreMiles (Apr 20, 2011)

Wow. They dropped 5 to 10% in 1 day upon some news. I guess they are not as safe as some dividend buyers would hope. It depends on CRTC to see if they allow Verizon takeover then.


----------



## My Own Advisor (Sep 24, 2012)

The more they drop, the more I buy. Hope to buy more Telus next month, about another 50 shares is what I'd like to buy. Need to save money!


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

From I read on US forums, US guys criticize their VZ, At&T , Sprint ... not less than Canadians criticize our big telecoms.... So, I doubt VZ will bring really good quality...if they coming, they will be trying to get profit and not to satisfy Canadian consumers...


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

gibor said:


> From I read on US forums, US guys criticize their VZ, At&T , Sprint ... not less than Canadians criticize our big telecoms....
> 
> So, I doubt VZ will bring really good quality...if they coming, they will be trying to get profit and not to satisfy Canadian consumers...


I helped a relative in LA call Verizon to sort out an internet issue. 

The differences I noticed were that the phone was picked up quicker, the tech did not have a strong Indian accent & the up sell pitch was less persistent. Except for that - the help was equally useless and if blindfolded, I would have sworn I was on the phone with Bell support.


BTW - downtown San Francisco & LA are the only cities I've had no cell service for two blocks. It's only a couple of instances but it would seem the US carriers are not the end-all-be-all that some have claimed.


Cheers


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> Those that overuse roaming or data will end up paying. They'll turn off data as soon as they stop billing for it.


That would be welcome news to parents with teenagers.

A constant complaint with the telcos, is they have consistently claimed it isn't technically possible for them to cut off data or cell phone use, when the plan limits are reached. Their response was to send out warning text messages to the phone.

Under the new rules, I am wondering how many people will sign up for the cheapest data plans and be willing to pay the $50 overage charge. It would be unlimited data at the cheapest data plan rate plus 50 dollars.

As you say though..........no doubt the telcos will suddenly discover they can turn off the data when the limit is reached.

Surprise........surprise.

I have a suspicion that extra data charges amounts to a lot of money for the telcos.........and they will have to replace the lost revenue from somewhere..............so every plan will go up in price.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

probably they had Mexican accent?! If you don't want speak to Indian, select option "French", and when they answer speak English  Luckily not many indians speak French :0


----------



## Spudd (Oct 11, 2011)

gibor said:


> probably they had Mexican accent?! If you don't want speak to Indian, select option "French", and when they answer speak English  Luckily not many indians speak French :0


I tried this once with Expedia.ca and the French rep refused to speak English. Luckily I speak rudimentary French and I was able to get my point across, but it was extremely slow and awkward!


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

Spudd said:


> I tried this once with Expedia.ca and the French rep refused to speak English. Luckily I speak rudimentary French and I was able to get my point across, but it was extremely slow and awkward!


When I call TDW or investor edge, regardless of question, I select speaking with licenced rep who doing trades, usually I avoid speaking with indians


----------



## MoreMiles (Apr 20, 2011)

Interesting price movements... classic.

I think it is due to hedge funds buying BCE and shorting Telus for protection. They usually pick the stronger one to go long and weaker to short. That is bullying, pick on the weak ones.

It's also very interesting to see BCE dropped from 48 to 40 just within a few weeks prior to the Verizons announcement. Come on, don't tell me it's all "coincidence" that the fund managers decide to dump! What a perfect timing for them isn't it? I wonder why...?


----------



## Cal (Jun 17, 2009)

I think Verizon does have some serious concerns about the CRTC structure for foreign ownership. And have read that they are primarily interested in the Ontario and Quebec market share.


----------



## fatcat (Nov 11, 2009)

if verizon can do a buildout in the say the top 10 canadian cities, it can offer it's american clients a seamless plan for doing business in canada

and for canadians who don't travel much in their own country (meaning they get 99% of their cell service in one area that is well covered like toronto for example) it can offer a great american roaming plan for business of snowbirds

but i bet it isn't going to try to do a whole-country network like telus and rogers
nor can it do bundling and offer tv, phone, internet packages which is clearly where the other 3 are headed


----------



## HaroldCrump (Jun 10, 2009)

fatcat said:


> if verizon can do a buildout in the say the top 10 canadian cities, it can offer it's american clients a seamless plan for doing business in canada


Canadian roaming is not a concern at all for American cell phone users.
Roaming rates for American plans in Canada are a fraction of the cost that Canadians pay for roaming in the US.

I used to be a Verizon Wireless customer over 10 years ago.
I had North America coast-to-coast free roaming, free LD for $35 a month - no BS taxes, fees, etc.
I used to use my US cell phone on my trips back and forth without any concern.

Verizon is not contemplating entering Canada to make it cheaper for Americans to use their cell phones in Canada - they simply want a piece of the action of the most expensive cell phone market in the world.


----------



## doctrine (Sep 30, 2011)

> but i bet it isn't going to try to do a whole-country network like telus and rogers


Concur; BCE and Telus are the two telecom's that I invest in, partially just for this reason.


----------



## My Own Advisor (Sep 24, 2012)

Great point Harold. Besides, might be a good time to own some VZ in the RRSP


----------



## Cal (Jun 17, 2009)

The markets seem to be pricing in a little more than a 50/50 chance that Verizon will enter the CDN telecommunications sector.


----------



## blin10 (Jun 27, 2011)

government knows what's on the line... There are many Canadian funds holding a ton of telecom shares worth hundreds of millions (if not billions) of dollars... it would be a pretty stupid move to destroy Canadian national wealth like that, they will hurt a lot of Canadian equity portfolios... if they let Verizon come in it will show how they are influenced by USA in a huge way


----------



## doctrine (Sep 30, 2011)

Follow the telecom's closely. Telus is again at a 4.5% yield. Bell at 5.5%. I added to Telus in June, and I'm not topping up right now, but another 10% drop would be irresistible.


----------



## dubmac (Jan 9, 2011)

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/glob...hree-face-big-hit-in-verizon/article13651624/
this article may suggest that you wait until Sept 17th before you buy. Suggests that cdn telecoms are in for a cap write-down if/when VZ arrives


----------



## Jungle (Feb 17, 2010)

I noticed there was no dividend increase from BCE earnings today, maybe they are holding back?


----------



## physik3r (Sep 10, 2012)

MoreMiles said:


> ARPU will be lower, with cap on roaming, etc.
> Time to short them :chuncky:


You'd be surprised how often the big 3 provide credits back to customers who 'over roam'. They'd rather keep the client


----------



## physik3r (Sep 10, 2012)

gibor said:


> From I read on US forums, US guys criticize their VZ, At&T , Sprint ... not less than Canadians criticize our big telecoms.... So, I doubt VZ will bring really good quality...if they coming, they will be trying to get profit and not to satisfy Canadian consumers...


What concerns me is the "grass is always greener" effect. We've all been pissed at one of the big 3 only to move to another and have to deal with the same crap. Maybe those customers leave VZ after a few years but there will be an exodus from the big 3 in the short term


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

Telus has an ARPU of $68 whereas Verizon is $44. Let's say they are happy with $55 in Canada (smaller market et al). 20% hit. Give them some premium for bundles (Optix, Internet, Home phone) so they sustain $61 and take a 10% hit. Rogers would take a bigger hit because of their higher ARPU and concentration in the GTA.
Canadian mobile market not competitive, most expensive


----------



## blin10 (Jun 27, 2011)

if they don't let Verizon inside Canada, watch all telecoms fly, wouldn't that be nice but it's never this easy


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

à la longue how is canada going to keep verizon out? we couldn't even keep near-penniless US railcos from running old trains filled with explosive materials plus operators who abandoned them with no brakes, no insurance, first thing in the evening.

that's how much ottawa cares about its federally-regulated industries like transportation & telecommunications.

apparently the next bandwidth auction is set for january 2014.


----------



## fraser (May 15, 2010)

I have no sympathy whatsoever for them. I want to see Verizon on an even playing field. 

Funny, Rogers, Bell, and Telus never seemed to mind the oligopoly. It was all nice and neat with no completion. Time to end that and move forward. 

Their shares will take a hit....if only because they are now facing some credible competiton for a change. And what is even better, especially for Rogers customers, is that this competition may even force them to upgrade their abysmal customer service.


----------



## HaroldCrump (Jun 10, 2009)

humble_pie said:


> apparently the next bandwidth auction is set for january 2014.


The deadline for submitting the applications is 17th Sep, I believe.
We'll know then whether Verizon plans to make a move or not.


----------



## physik3r (Sep 10, 2012)

fraser said:


> I have no sympathy whatsoever for them. I want to see Verizon on an even playing field.
> 
> Funny, Rogers, Bell, and Telus never seemed to mind the oligopoly. It was all nice and neat with no completion. Time to end that and move forward.
> 
> Their shares will take a hit....if only because they are now facing some credible competiton for a change. And what is even better, especially for Rogers customers, is that this competition may even force them to upgrade their abysmal customer service.


How will I benefit from this? Having 4 companies vs. 3 isn't going to make much of a difference. HOw many of you actually took advantage of the better pricing and service options from Wind and Mobility? Not many, I bet. It will be the same thing with Verizon. They're not going to move up here and become the Walmart of mobile, people.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

I agree. Isuspect Verizon will stick to the big urban markets.


----------



## HaroldCrump (Jun 10, 2009)

Verizon isn't coming to Canada to make ARPU of $28 (like Wind). They want to make ARPU in the high $50 or low $60 range by undercutting BCE, T, and Rogers by just a little bit.

It's the same reason that so many US retailers are flocking to Canada in the last 3 - 5 years.
Not because they want to make Canada more competitive, but because they know Canadians are willing to over-pay for their products and services.
In other words, they want to make up their falling margins in the US by fleecing Canadians.


----------



## Sampson (Apr 3, 2009)

HaroldCrump said:


> Not because they want to make Canada more competitive, but because they know Canadians are willing to over-pay for their products and services.
> In other words, they want to make up their falling margins in the US by fleecing Canadians.


Yeah, but that is good no? It means we will be slightly less fleeced than when it was only by Canadian retailers.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

Yea... I don't see how Verizon can do anything that Wind couldn't. Unless the policies suddenly change which sucks for Wind (which was our best hope, far better than Verizon will ever be..) I don't mind raking in divvies to subsidize the retarded cell bills, but technology in Canada is seriously lacking because of this cartel. If we want to be left in the stone age that's fine and dandy but business will suffer.


----------



## dubmac (Jan 9, 2011)

The attack ads that Rogers, Telus and Bell are airing sugggest that Verizon will use (piggyback) on the existing BCE and T intracstructure (cell towers, network, cables etc) to deliver Verizon's services. Most of this intrastructure belongs to T and BCE. My question is: Wouldn't Verizon need to pay (BCE and T) to use their infrastructure? Wouldn't this help absorb any downward pressure on the SP? Also -much of what I am readig indicates that T and BCE are better diversified with Optic TV and other services (TV network) in their list of services.


----------



## fraser (May 15, 2010)

We have actually seen price decreases. When we stopped our cell service in Aug 2012 I think we were paying $47. for a Telus. 200 or so daytime, no long distance. We came back in April 2013 and signed up for $37. with Koodo. It included 400 minutes, no long distance anywhere in Canada, evenings, weekends, and no charge for calling from cities outside of where we live. Since then, it has gone up to 600 minute. A far better deal than a year ago. 

I thank the competition for this. Bell, Rogers, and Telus would not go here unless they competition forced them to do it.


----------



## accord1999 (Aug 9, 2013)

kcowan said:


> Telus has an ARPU of $68 whereas Verizon is $44. Let's say they are happy with $55 in Canada (smaller market et al). 20% hit. Give them some premium for bundles (Optix, Internet, Home phone) so they sustain $61 and take a 10% hit. Rogers would take a bigger hit because of their higher ARPU and concentration in the GTA.


Where'd you get that number? Verizon reports revenue per account ever since they went almost exclusively to share plans. That value is $152.50 and their EBITDA margin easily matches or exceeds the Big 3.

They may start at $55, but they certainly won't be happy with it, not when their subsidized smartphone plans start at $80 in the States.


----------



## Cal (Jun 17, 2009)

Verizon wants a piece of one of the most expensive telecomm markets to be in, in regards to ARPU. It won't drop our cell bills by much though.

I am curious to see how it affects the big 3 in regards to job cuts.


----------



## Jungle (Feb 17, 2010)

Does anyone think this is overblown? Will the big three _really_ suffer that much?


----------



## Cal (Jun 17, 2009)

One indicator over the next year or so, may be how these 3 treat their dividend payment. An above inflation increase, or above their previously trending dividend increase, would be better news than no increase in their dividend at all, as that would be an indication of what BCE, RCI, T feel may be in their future for free cash flow.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

Right. If they feel that their gouging might come to an end, it will be indicated by reduced or eliminated dividend increases!


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

If VZ comes hers and big 3 Canadian telecoms will start cutting thousands of jobs, imho, it will hurt all Canadians much more that probable saving $5 or so on the bill....

btw, do you thing it's worth to buy some VZ stocks for hedging?


----------



## doctrine (Sep 30, 2011)

FWIW, Rogers won't likely have another dividend announcement for another 4-5 months. Telus will have something in 3 months, and BCE didn't raise their dividend but it will be more telling if they don't raise it next quarter or especially the one after.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

I will lol when Shaw ends up buying Wind ...


----------



## MoreMiles (Apr 20, 2011)

gibor said:


> If VZ comes hers and big 3 Canadian telecoms will start cutting thousands of jobs, imho, it will hurt all Canadians much more that probable saving $5 or so on the bill....
> 
> btw, do you thing it's worth to buy some VZ stocks for hedging?


You have listened to those radio ads too frequently.

Without Verizon, Bell and Rogers were outsourcing jobs to India for call centres anyway. Verizon will open up stores, hire a few thousand employees... They will create jobs to benefit Canadians. They will need new brochure printers, business suppliers, tower installers, etc. I bet any Canadian town, other than the big ones like, Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, will be jumping for joy if their town is selected to be the Canadian HQ. Can you imagine Kamloops BC or Windsor ON getting picked? I bet their mayor will do anything to help them create the HQ there... just like how Waterloo supported Blackberry.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

MoreMiles said:


> You have listened to those radio ads too frequently.
> 
> Without Verizon, Bell and Rogers were outsourcing jobs to India for call centres anyway. Verizon will open up stores, hire a few thousand employees... They will create jobs to benefit Canadians. They will need new brochure printers, business suppliers, tower installers, etc.


I'm pretty sure that many Canadians who working now for our telecoms will lose their jobs... I know personally guys who is working for Rogers and Bell...
Regarding outsoursing....if our telecoms oursotsing call centers, you think VZ won't do it?! New brochure printers, business suppliers etc also will be bought from India or china....
P.S. When our company was pure Canadian, nothing was outsourced, but when US bank bought us, they started outsoursing right away and in couple of years just sold us to Indian company.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

MoreMiles said:


> You have listened to those radio ads too frequently.
> 
> Without Verizon, Bell and Rogers were outsourcing jobs to India for call centres anyway. Verizon will open up stores, hire a few thousand employees... They will create jobs to benefit Canadians. They will need new brochure printers, business suppliers, tower installers, etc.


I'm pretty sure that many Canadians who working now for our telecoms will lose their jobs... I know personally guys who is working for Rogers and Bell...
Regarding outsoursing....if our telecoms oursotsing call centers, you think VZ won't do it?! New brochure printers, business suppliers etc also will be bought from India or china....
P.S. When our company was pure Canadian, nothing was outsourced, but when US bank bought us, they started outsoursing right away and in couple of years just sold us to Indian company.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

The other think that I don't undestand...why VZ in not going up on possible entry to our market? It still 10% off 52 weeks high ....


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

gibor said:


> If VZ comes hers and big 3 Canadian telecoms will start cutting thousands of jobs, imho, it will hurt all Canadians much more that probable saving $5 or so on the bill....
> 
> btw, do you thing it's worth to buy some VZ stocks for hedging?


I don't see how it would hurt all Canadians.
If the jobs are doing a useful function, they will keep them.

If the jobs aren't necessary and they're just busywork, they're wasting money and our bills are higher than they need to be, and we're all losing already.


----------



## accord1999 (Aug 9, 2013)

gibor said:


> The other think that I don't undestand...why VZ in not going up on possible entry to our market? It still 10% off 52 weeks high ....


Canada's still small compared to Verizon's operations. Given how profitable Verizon Wireless is, Canada may be a negative for years to come.


----------



## Cal (Jun 17, 2009)

The Canadian market does not really have that much of an impact on VZ. Both the states of Texas and California have populations that are each about the population of Canada. So in regards to subscribers, Canada is pretty watered down in relation to the size of it.

I do think there will be Canadian jobs lost to the big 3, and if VZ buys Wind and/or Mobilicity, they already have their own employees (some of the jobs would even overlap), so I doubt that would have much of a net jobs gain.

Seeing as they are only interested in Vancouver and the Windsor to Montreal corridor, I am doubtful building towers will be a factor in regards to jobs growth.

But I do agree that they have far deeper pockets and will spend much more in advertising than Wind or Mobilicity. Perhaps Rogers or Bell can get some of their lost revenue back by selling them advertising on their TV channels. :biggrin:


----------



## fatcat (Nov 11, 2009)

HaroldCrump said:


> Verizon isn't coming to Canada to make ARPU of $28 (like Wind). They want to make ARPU in the high $50 or low $60 range by undercutting BCE, T, and Rogers by just a little bit.
> 
> It's the same reason that so many US retailers are flocking to Canada in the last 3 - 5 years.
> Not because they want to make Canada more competitive, but because they know Canadians are willing to over-pay for their products and services.
> In other words, they want to make up their falling margins in the US by fleecing Canadians.


when i am in a conspiracy mode i tend to agree with you harold ... we see countless examples of companies that sell their lower quality stuff in canada and keep the better stuff in the usa and they seem to mark stuff up higher and offer less bargains

but i don't think that is the only reason

1) canadians are good consumers and we offer a developed world market that is ready to shop
2) canada gives them a whole new market space, a chance to go "international" and test the waters for how that feels
3) also, canadian health care costs are much more simple, straightforward and manageable
4) yes, i do agree they probably see higher margins though they certainly are incurring higher costs to get stuff up here


----------



## fatcat (Nov 11, 2009)

Eder said:


> I will lol when Shaw ends up buying Wind ...


they damn well _should_ except i believe they either have sold or are selling spectrum that they own signifying they are not interested in mobile


----------



## HaroldCrump (Jun 10, 2009)

fatcat said:


> when i am in a conspiracy mode i tend to agree with you harold ... we see countless examples of companies that sell their lower quality stuff in canada and keep the better stuff in the usa and they seem to mark stuff up higher and offer less bargains
> 
> but i don't think that is the only reason


I didn't mean for this to sound like a conspiracy theory.
All I am saying is that Verizon is coming here to _raise_ their ARPU, not _lower_ our bills.

As I said up-thread, I was a customer of Verizon for many years in the US and was _extremely_ happy with their service and competitive pricing.
Prior to that, I had been a customer of AT&T Wireless and switched to Verizon after hearing that their service quality and packages are better, and it turned out to be correct.
Sprint was the underdog in the market at that time.

Anyhow, Verizon coming here will probably lead to lower cell phone bills for _some_.
But it won't be what the arrival of Wal-Mart did to Canadian retail, for example.
At least not for many years (if at all).

I have been listening to the advertising from the 3 incumbents.
They have really turned up the rhetoric on the radio - everything from appealing to "small town" communities, middle class job losses, Canadian patriotism, family values, motherhood, baby seals, etc.

Did they, by any chance, hire Obama's campaign team from the 2008 election ;o)
This rhetoric is getting ridiculous now, IMO.

I am not against Verizon entering the market, of course, but neither am I in favor of a discounted spectrum auction sale to them.
They should have to pay full price for the auction, as well as pay full usage fees to Bell, Rogers, and Telus for piggybacking on their infrastructure.


----------



## blin10 (Jun 27, 2011)

HaroldCrump said:


> *I am not against Verizon entering the market, of course, but neither am I in favor of a discounted spectrum auction sale to them.
> They should have to pay full price for the auction, as well as pay full usage fees to Bell, Rogers, and Telus for piggybacking on their infrastructure.*


I agree... also denying sale to Telus and allowing it to Verizon is not free market, rules should be same for everyone, let the highest bidder take over mobilcity, simple as that...


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

blin10 said:


> I agree... also denying sale to Telus and allowing it to Verizon is not free market, rules should be same for everyone, let the highest bidder take over mobilcity, simple as that...


Agree. this is the biggest BS not to allow telus and allow to VZ


----------



## blin10 (Jun 27, 2011)

I wonder, to who can i email complaint ? is the some type of website ?


----------



## Sampson (Apr 3, 2009)

gibor said:


> Agree. this is the biggest BS not to allow telus and allow to VZ


I guess it is fair to fear the monopoly or oligopoly more than a foreign company.


----------



## fatcat (Nov 11, 2009)

HaroldCrump said:


> I am not against Verizon entering the market, of course, but neither am I in favor of a discounted spectrum auction sale to them.
> They should have to pay full price for the auction, as well as pay full usage fees to Bell, Rogers, and Telus for piggybacking on their infrastructure.


ditto from me

this is what i wrote to mr. harper (who i think has said he won't do anything to alter current plans to discount spectrum to whoever wants it)



> Sir, Count me as one of those who is 'talking his book', i.e. I own stock in BCE and Telus so I am not to be considered impartial. I am also one who complains regularly and loudly about price and service by Canadian Telco's. Nevertheless, it strikes me as foolish in the extreme to extend discounted entry pricing into the Canadian market to a company with a financial profile like Verizon. Frankly, it's nuts. The idea that Verizon should get discounted spectrum is just crazy and I wonder if this was the intention of your government in the first place ? A small startup? Sure. But a company with Verizon`s pockets ? It makes zero sense to me. Please consider at least giving our 'home' telco`s a level playing field in the spectrum.


 as i read it again i realize i may have perhaps overplayed the _"hey you guys are crazy"_ theme


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

gibor said:


> Agree. this is the biggest BS not to allow telus and allow to VZ


Why? VZ adds competition and T takes it away.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

fatcat said:


> Sir, Count me as one of those who is 'talking his book', i.e. I own stock in BCE and Telus so I am not to be considered impartial. I am also one who complains regularly and loudly about price and service by Canadian Telco's. Nevertheless, it strikes me as foolish in the extreme to extend discounted entry pricing into the Canadian market to a company with a financial profile like Verizon. Frankly, it's nuts. The idea that Verizon should get discounted spectrum is just crazy and I wonder if this was the intention of your government in the first place ? A small startup? Sure. But a company with Verizon`s pockets ? It makes zero sense to me. Please consider at least giving our 'home' telco`s a level playing field in the spectrum.


excellent text. Well put.



> as i read it again i realize i may have perhaps overplayed the _"hey you guys are crazy"_ theme


not at all. it's the short snappy monosyllables that give this text its power. You got away with it!


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

humble_pie said:


> excellent text. Well put.
> 
> 
> 
> not at all. it's the short snappy monosyllables that give this text its power. You got away with it!


I'd sign this letter!


----------



## fatcat (Nov 11, 2009)

well, as of last friday our pm has indicated that he is standing pat http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2013/08/09/harper-telecom.html who knows if he will bend a little ?

here is his email form: http://www.pm.gc.ca/eng/contact.asp?featureId=10

i tend to grouse to the pm and inevitably get referred to the ministry handling whatever i am grousing about (indicating that i am not only a crank but a lazy crank who doesn't take the time to see who is holding the file for whatever issue is sticking in my backside ... but i prefer just starting at the top, scr#w it)

in any event, after thanking me for disturbing his peace and quiet, he referred me to james moore, minister of industry
whose email is here: [email protected]


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

There is only one person who makes these calls, and it's not someone as insignificant as James Moore.


----------



## Synergy (Mar 18, 2013)

Verizon delay, Telus up over 7% this morning....


----------



## fatcat (Nov 11, 2009)

they want to wait for the auction and see if they can get spectrum for decent prices
they need 700 mhz and if they don't get it at good prices they probably won't play

i don't know enough about how the auction works but i wonder if the big 3 can bid aggresively enough to make verizons entry too pricey ?
anybody know how this works ?

i think verizon is feeling the heat of entry into canadian atmosphere


----------



## accord1999 (Aug 9, 2013)

fatcat said:


> i don't know enough about how the auction works but i wonder if the big 3 can bid aggresively enough to make verizons entry too pricey ?
> anybody know how this works ?


There are 4 prime blocks at 700 MHz, known as B, C, C1, C2. In the American auction, the B and C blocks were acquired by AT&T while Verizon got C1 and C2.

The Big 3 can only acquire one block each so Verizon can easily acquire one of the blocks. Currently LTE phones can only use the B/C blocks or the C1/C2. So in theory, if the Big 3 are willing to forgo compatibility with AT&T phones at 700 MHz, they could concentrate on the C1 and C2 blocks and block Verizon's ability to use the same phones on both sides of the border.


----------



## doctrine (Sep 30, 2011)

There is some insight in this cbc article.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/story/2013/08/15/business-verizon-wind-mobilicity.html

It would make sense that Verizon would do no acquisitions before the auction, because a lot can change between now and then. Better to wait out and see what happens rather than start committing billions.


----------



## Synergy (Mar 18, 2013)

Any thoughts on this article - "Union wants Harper government to set up Crown-owned wireless carrier". - interesting.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/business/unio...set-up-crown-owned-wireless-carrier-1.1414447


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

That's hilarious. When pigs fly.


----------



## Jungle (Feb 17, 2010)

Silly article and union asking for that.. Please keep the gov away from the free market..at leass as much as possible. Last thing we need is tax payers subsidized gov telecom company.. 

BTW... with this whole fiasco and the gov stepping in to create more competition, does anyone know how much will be saved on the average cell phone bill? maybe $10-15/ month?????????? Is that monthly amount really big deal for the gov and Canadians?


----------



## jamesbe (May 8, 2010)

Prices will go up not down. Verizon doesn't want in to lower prices, they just want a piece of our high priced market.


----------



## My Own Advisor (Sep 24, 2012)

Probably right jamesbe.


----------



## yyz (Aug 11, 2013)

I think the big 3 would have an advantage of the bundling feature in the markets that they can offer it that Verizon won't be able to offer .
Alot of this hype and the governments unwillingness to budge is the upcoming frequency auction.The Conservatives are trying to drive up the bidding for the auction and rake in as much cash as they can get.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

The unions want to turn the clock back. Do you remember when all the provinces but ON/PQ had government Telco monopolies? Well BC was not government but US-owned. At the time, they applauded the Telus buyout of the US owner. At the time, GTE offered an equipment alternative to Nortel.


----------



## HaroldCrump (Jun 10, 2009)

_Of course_ the union wants a protected, guaranteed, tax-payer funded industry - what else is new :rolleyes2:
This is the same umbrella union that the CAW merged into - protection and suckling at the tax payer is in their very blood.


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

Jungle said:


> BTW... with this whole fiasco and the gov stepping in to create more competition, does anyone know how much will be saved on the average cell phone bill?


Not too concerned about our cell bill. We carry Virgin prepaid phones for emergencies. $100+HST/year for each phone. Not much to be saved there.

What I do worry about is the value of my telco shares. I own BCE and T. I see it as a coin flip. 15-20% downside if Verizon comes in. 15-20% upside if Verizon stays out. In other words, the big 3 are uninvestable at the moment. They don't trade on fundamentals. It's all pure speculation. The disciplined thing to do is to dump the shares. Buffett rule #1: never lose money.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

andrewf said:


> That's hilarious. When pigs fly.


I think it would make a lot more sense to have public telecom infrastructure. Private companies could sell the service and pay for their use of the infrastructure.

What we have instead is an inefficient management of the very limited frequency real estate, and a lame joke for competition. Instead of building a public highway with 4 lanes, we are building 2 or 3 private single lane roads but you can only use 1 at a time and they sporadically reach the small towns if they so chose... The "competition" are resellers at the mercy of the few who control the infrastructure. It would be like privatizing the roads and saying companies have to build yet another adjacent road to compete, or resell at a lower margin. So who is going to build another road to challenge an established monopoly with more than enough infrastructure to handle all the traffic (albeit poorly maintained and overpriced) or even want to resell when the established monopoly can discriminate against their customers. Extending this analogy across a border... you have to buy another car for each country or pay atrocious fees charged by the centimeter.

Telecom isn't as important to everyone as hospitals? Tell me how do you get a job without a telecom service? It's way too late to change now though.


----------



## doctrine (Sep 30, 2011)

The problem with public telecom infrastructure is we're dependent on a government to upgrade it. Would they have gone to LTE as fast as the private companies? How fast would the latest technologies be adopted? How much more would it cost to run than a private company where they are able to use contractors or reduce workforce once the network is built?

The problem with four, five or six telecoms is that every one would have to have their own network and cell towers across the country.

Unfortunately, it's not an easy answer and no solution is as straightforward as you might think. There's only so much wireless spectrum to go around.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

doctrine said:


> The problem with public telecom infrastructure is we're dependent on a government to upgrade it. Would they have gone to LTE as fast as the private companies? How fast would the latest technologies be adopted? How much more would it cost to run than a private company where they are able to use contractors or reduce workforce once the network is built?


Public telecom could adopt technologies for the benefit of the economy, in theory. Just like building roads makes jobs and you need roads for a modern economy, you need modern telecom. I think our oligopoly telecom situation will hold Canada's economy back. Does the entire country have LTE and fiber? Not even close. There's no reason why they couldn't also use contractors (Canadian vs outsourcing) and reduce workforce to less than 3 or 4 competing private companies. When you have an oligopoly like Canada, there is just no incentive for competition. The different would be the huge profits that telecoms rake in would be used to invest in telecom infrastructure across Canada. Just like the roads which are needed as as investment to get to resources, telecom is often needed as an investment to encourage modern business, isn't it?

There is a benefit to privatizing many things. I think most public telecoms have gone private now so that they could globalize and profit by taking their technology around the world... So... Why aren't Rogers, Bell and Telus investing in other countries if they are so good? 


Canada Tells Geeks to Flee Silicon Valley, Head North


----------



## Cal (Jun 17, 2009)

I read in the G&M today that it is estimated that it may be 4-5 years until a Verizon purchase of Wind and/or Mobilicity would become profitable. With the current big 3 upping the discounts for multiple lines, products, and shared data usage, it seems the share price hit that these have taken may not be warranted.

At least not today....


----------



## Jungle (Feb 17, 2010)

I read that too. They also said Verizon will not lower prices enough to steal market share, because they would not be porfitable enough to do this, until 4-5 years later.


----------



## thompsg4416 (Aug 18, 2010)

Public run Telecom infrastructure?? Kinda like public run electrical infrastructure. Works for Quebec not so much for Ontario. "In theory" its a great idea until the public service unions get in there and drive the cost of wages up too high. "In theory" I like unions too just not public service ones In fact if I'm not mistaken the government has even dished out the contract for the new Gov of Can mail system to Bell instead of its own workforce. 

http://www.canada.com/business/Bell...al+government+email+system/8576251/story.html 

400 million over 7 years!!


----------



## webber22 (Mar 6, 2011)

Telecoms could be in an uptrend after Verizon, Vodafone discuss possible $130 billion deal


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

What is interesting is that the government might be off the hook to follow through giving away a sweet deal to Verizon and having to defend their actions in the next election. They might be breathing a sigh of relief.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

Maybe they have just scared the Telco oligopoly into taking some actions, however small, to improve our offerings.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

I'd like to see Wind & friends remain, maybe a Canadian solution is possible,maybe give Quebecor & Manitoba Telephones some help instead..I don't like the idea of profit leaving Canada and I dont like thinking BIG BROTHER will have access to my conversations...surely Verizon would be the last choice we should make for foreign owned Canadian telecom.


----------



## HaroldCrump (Jun 10, 2009)

Eder said:


> What is interesting is that the government might be off the hook to follow through giving away a sweet deal to Verizon and having to defend their actions in the next election. They might be breathing a sigh of relief.


IMHO, if Verizon doesn't file for bidding in Sep, and no other foreign telecom player does, it will be egg on the face of the govt.
After they have gone through this whole PR exercise (and wasted hundreds of thousands, possibly, millions of tax payer dollars on the PR campaign), if _no_ 4th competitor emerges, it is a loss of face for the govt.
And the big 3 will declare a PR victory.

The big 3 have even roped in the Canadian Labor Federation and some of the major unions on their side.
Yeah, we need the labor unions to tell us how to run a competitive industry like we need a hole in our head :rolleyes2:


----------



## Oldroe (Sep 18, 2009)

I look at my rogers bill and can't help but think a little competition would be good.


----------



## Jungle (Feb 17, 2010)

Verizon is not coming check the news reports


----------



## My Own Advisor (Sep 24, 2012)

Just read that. Damn.  I guess low stock prices are gone.


----------



## fatcat (Nov 11, 2009)

My Own Advisor said:


> Just read that. Damn. I guess low stock prices are gone.


be interesting to see where telus rogers and bell open ... and what happens to shaw


----------



## blin10 (Jun 27, 2011)

nice  probably a 10%+ lift


----------



## Jon_Snow (May 20, 2009)

blin10 said:


> nice  probably a 10%+ lift


That will pay for my new hardwood floors. :encouragement:


----------



## favelle75 (Feb 6, 2013)

Jon_Snow said:


> That will pay for my new hardwood floors. :encouragement:


Lucky you....this will bring me back to even  (not including dividends ). I KNEW I should have DCA'd when it tanked.


----------



## Synergy (Mar 18, 2013)

Looks like Telus and Bell are set to open north of 5% this morning. Last night I had planned to add a little to my holdings this morning, but now I think I'll sit back and watch the ride...


----------



## jamesbe (May 8, 2010)

Yeah I planned on buying some more early morning pre-market. But didn't get a chance to sit down and look until about 9:10 and then well.. it was too late the market was already way up.

I'll just enjoy the gains I already had I guess.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

jamesbe said:


> Yeah I planned on buying some more early morning pre-market. But didn't get a chance to sit down and look until about 9:10 and then well.. it was too late the market was already way up.
> 
> I'll just enjoy the gains I already had I guess.



what's this? james4 u know very well your portf strategy limits you to 90% fixed income, 10% equity in the form of XIU-type etfs. It's a bland, bare bones, permanently unappetizing table. Relieved only by an occasional spicy pickle of shorts on the side.

where you been keeping them common stocks? i suppose next you'll be saying how you've secretly been hiding tons of canadian banks all along?


----------



## Toronto.gal (Jan 8, 2010)

:biggrin:


----------



## Spudd (Oct 11, 2011)

humble_pie said:


> what's this? james4 u know very well your portf strategy limits you to 90% fixed income, 10% equity in the form of XIU-type etfs. It's a bland, bare bones, permanently unappetizing table. Relieved only by an occasional spicy pickle of shorts on the side.
> 
> where you been keeping them common stocks? i suppose next you'll be saying how you've secretly been hiding tons of canadian banks all along?


It was Jamesbe who said he wanted to buy them, not James4Beach.


----------



## Toronto.gal (Jan 8, 2010)

Never mind, the post was still good humored. 

J4B does not like strong nor weak charts, and I believe he's not a yield chaser either, so that would definitely have left him out.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

Spudd said:


> It was Jamesbe who said he wanted to buy them, not James4Beach.



Spudd you are so right! Mea culpa! Must be not enough coffee yet this am as post-long-weekend stupor is obviously continuing ...

jamesbe please do forgive me. I'm glad you already own the telcos, they are good solid foundation blocks in just about every canadian portf.


----------



## mrPPincer (Nov 21, 2011)

Telus price never did dip down to where I'd've doubled down for another 100 shares ($29.53 fwiw), just as well, didn't really want to be overweight anyways, and I'm back in the green today.


----------



## Andrew (May 22, 2009)

Why not buy Shaw or Cogeco instead of BCE, RCI and T? Both of those companies will eventually be bought out at a premium.


----------



## My Own Advisor (Sep 24, 2012)

I'm thinking the same thing...Shaw and Cogeco will be eaten up eventually.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

I am more thinking Shaw is a logical buyer of Wind...they have the cash to buy Wind & friends, they can buy more spectrum easily, they can share infrastructure with their Rogers buddy's, they need to grow.


----------



## doctrine (Sep 30, 2011)

I think Shaw and Cogeco are in a long term disadvantaged position because of their lack of wireless exposure, so I would not get involved. A few years ago they did trade at a discounted P/E which would be one reason to potentially own them, but that has pretty much disappeared. I feel BCE/Telus are comfortable 10+ year holds, so I think I'll stick with them for my telecom exposure.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

I think the Shaw family has too big of an ego to sell out, but clearly Jim and Brad love money (as in their annual compensation - totally disproportionate to the size of their company and its complexity). I also do not think they feel they can compete in the wireless game. They recently sold their existing spectrum space.


----------



## My Own Advisor (Sep 24, 2012)

You might be right about the Shaw boys, but if handed enough money, they'd sell. Just a hunch.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

There was a discussion over on digitalhome.ca about Shaw Direct being readied for a sale (by eliminating their US and Mexico only subscribers). It supposes that the Shaw family will not invest the big bucks needed to stay competitive with Bell ExpressVue.


----------



## fatcat (Nov 11, 2009)

i live in victoria and have exposure to telus and shaw so i own them both
when it comes to tv, phone and internet shaw delivers a better product at a better price imo

shaw has sold their wireless spectrum i think which means they are not ready to take on the big 3 and perhaps have made the calculation that there is enough left to build a good business on, i tend to agree

wireless is a long way from delivering the quality and quantity that a wired connection can deliver and i don't think people are demanding a single solution for wireless phone, internet and all the rest ... yet

i agree with those who say that shaw is a good takeover target ... i would think telus would be the logical choice to buy them out

telus needs content and shaw does have content


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

I thought Shaw sold Rogers an option on their spectrum and the CRTC said they will examine the sale closely or even kibosh it....like I said keeping up with all the drama is a full time job in this sector now.
Still with all the help they would get from the Conservatives along with the ability to bundle their products without the build out requirements of the big three I don't think Shaw Cellular is too far fetched.
I agree that they do make a juicy target though...I sold my long term position this Spring to help raise cash but would be back in at a sub $20 price. I love owning businesses like this.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Eder said:


> I agree that they do make a juicy target though...I sold my long term position this Spring to help raise cash but would be back in at a sub $20 price.


I have thought about the same things many times when sub $20. I just have a hangup with Shaw family greed - out of principle... and wonder if their only really growth opportunity is content. 

Maybe if the stock got cheap enough ($15?) due to some company hiccup, I would hold my nose and bite. After all, I am paying them ~$200 a month for almost a complete cable/internet/home phone package with Gateway PVR (some premium channels excepted).


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

To refresh the telcom discussion to this thread. (see some comments yesterday & today in the Election 2019 thread starting about post #394

The Liberals have proposed to cut cell phone fees by 25% if they get elected. Here's a summary article from BNNBloomberg: Mired in regulatory battle, Canadian telcos now hit by federal election.

I'll continue to hold my BCE and T. These are core holdings (I've never held or liked RCI). There is a lot of road to travel before Trudeau ever fulfills this election promise (and I think he is full of sh^t).


The linked article says "Telcos were among the worst performing stocks Monday (23-Sept-2019) with Rogers Communications Inc. sliding as much as 1.3 per cent. Telus Corp. fell 1 per cent, while Shaw Communications Inc. dropped 1.1 per cent. The S&P/TSX Communication Services Index is the biggest sector loser today with a 0.6 per cent decline. The benchmark S&P/TSX Composite Index slipped 0.1 per cent. 

That doesn't seem like a large market reaction to me. It looks like T and RCI may end the day down about 1.1%:


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

OnlyMyOpinion said:


> That doesn't seem like a large market reaction to me. It looks like T and RCI may end the day down about 1.1%


No, but it is headwind for the foreseeable future. The Telcos have to be scratching their heads on whether to temper the pace of their 5G investments or not given this bowel movement from our PM.


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

AltaRed said:


> No, but it is headwind for the foreseeable future. The Telcos have to be scratching their heads on whether to temper the pace of their 5G investments or not given this bowel movement from our PM.


Agreed. They have outpaced the general market (e.g. xic) for an extended period, but there are no future guarantees. 
Total return could become muted for a period of time (years?). 
With my tilt towards dividend income I don't anticipate selling unless that were to become at risk. 

For an investor more aggressively growing their portfolio there may be better choices out there? I can't suggest what they might be.


----------



## doctrine (Sep 30, 2011)

Everyone is proposing cutting fees. This doesn't inherently hurt the telecos, just force capital reallocation. They will dial back their capital investments until they get a positive return on their cost of capital. Usually government compromises by saying "offer x gigabytes at $y and we'll be happy" and they do it. But they will invest if they can offer more for more money and people want it, which it is virtually certain they will. A good example is the $25 television plans. Those are hardly the end of the big media companies. 

The only real threat to the telecos is if the government decides to build cell services for themselves. Because their cost of capital can become negative if they're willing to burn billions. I seriously doubt this will happen. Even foreign competition isn't much of a threat, or at least it's a threat that the telecos can compete against.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

I'm just wondering which telco to go to. Right now I have some Cogeco. So I'd like to add some wireless exposure.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

Liberal BS doesn't add up

from the G&M this morning...

*The telecom industry group, meanwhile, said cell phone and internet rates have already fallen. A CRTC report last month found that mobile prices declined by an average of 28 per cent between 2016 and 2018.
*
*The most significant drop was for services offering five gigabytes of data or more. For instance, the average monthly cost of a cellphone plan featuring unlimited calls and texts and five gigabytes of data fell by 35 per cent, from $78.36 in 2016 to $51.05 in 2018, the report said.

*
*Although figures for 2019 are not available, the CWTA said prices have come down even further. Last July, Rogers Communications Inc. launched a new unlimited mobile data plan, and rivals offered counter-promotions.
*
* “Most likely we’ve already seen even more of a decrease in 2019,”*


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Eder said:


> Liberal BS doesn't add up


Yes it always comes back to politics.


----------



## 1980z28 (Mar 4, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> I'm just wondering which telco to go to. Right now I have some Cogeco. So I'd like to add some wireless exposure.


I sold all my BCE yesterday and half of my BNS,,,across 3 accounts ,,,will buy RCI.B,,,T,,SJR.B,,will buy a couple thousand share each some before election and some after,the pull back is at the right time to pick away,,good luck,,,and just for fun i picked up some wcp small amount yesterday (1000 shares)


----------

