6 ms·

My understanding is that some small telecoms run fiber directly into new condo buildings in downtown Toronto and get a foothold that way. The argument from big

by lhorie 5y ago

My understanding is that some small telecoms run fiber directly into new condo buildings in downtown Toronto and get a foothold that way. The argument from big telecom is that it's extremely expensive to build infrastructure in rural Canada, so obviously don't start there. Maybe also reach out to this guy[0] for advice. This is if you're planning on building your own infrastructure. Another option is just rent the existing infrastructure like TekSavvy does. The business then becomes largely a matter of providing better customer support than the competitors (and honestly, beating Rogers at it is a very very low bar). But I imagine this isn't what you have in mind when you say "disrupt". [0] https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2021/01/jared-mauch-didnt-have-good-broadband-so-he-built-his-own-fiber-isp/ https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2021/01/jared...

version_five 5y ago
You've already said it, any small providers are already playing a rigged game at the expense of the oligopoly. There were a few low cost cell providers that bought spectrum in major cities (all three of them) I'm not sure if any of them still exist or were swallowed up. If you can find a way to bypass the CRTC (like the shadowbanned poster alludes to with starlink) that is the only real method I believe. We have a regulatory structure designed by and for incumbents, and anything within it is playing their game.
personjerry 5y ago
I've seen the existing "competitors" like TekSavvy, but my understanding is they are essentially under the whim of the big companies anyway, is that true? Or will they be able to over take the monopoly in time?
- lhorie 5y ago
  They're sorta at their mercy, yes, because they have no real infrastructure of their own. My understanding is that they get a discounted network usage rate compared to retail customers and that rate is governed by CRTC, but bigcos bully CRTC to increase it year over year when the public interest groups say it should be reduced (the thing about rural Canada is, to my understanding, the stick with which they threaten to stop investment in rural infrastructure if their profits decrease). Also, just a small clarification for posterity, telecom in Canada is comparatively shitty but it's not a monopoly. There are several companies, both large and small, and many things are structured in fragmented fashion both in terms of large and small players (for example, Sasktel is crown-owned and unionized, Telus only deals w/ wireless, Fibrestream only deals with condo fiber, etc etc)
  - sbarre 5y ago
    > they have no real infrastructure of their own I think I know what you're trying to say here but this statement is not really accurate. They don't have their own last-mile infrastructure but they definitely have their own network infrastructure to support their customers. Competitive providers (like Teksavvy) use the incumbent's last-mile infrastructure (the cables that run into all the customer houses or buildings), but once the traffic gets into the telco's network, it exits that network ASAP and the wholesale provider takes over and is responsible for setting up their own peering and carrying the customer's traffic beyond the telco that is providing the fiber/copper loop. They're not just white-labelling the telco's service. Also another small correction: TELUS only sells wireless in Ontario, but in Quebec and in BC/AB they are quad-play (wireless, Internet, TV, phone) just like Bell and Rogers are in Ontario. And in fact Bell and Rogers out west are the other way around, they only sell wireless. Although now that Rogers has bought Shaw, Rogers is looking to become a national quad-play provider next year.
    - lhorie 5y ago
      Thanks for the corrections, I haven't lived in Canada for a few years now and it's a bit hard to keep track of it all in my head anymore :)

by lhorie 5y ago

version_five 5y ago

You've already said it, any small providers are already playing a rigged game at the expense of the oligopoly. There were a few low cost cell providers that bought spectrum in major cities (all three of them) I'm not sure if any of them still exist or were swallowed up. If you can find a way to bypass the CRTC (like the shadowbanned poster alludes to with starlink) that is the only real method I believe. We have a regulatory structure designed by and for incumbents, and anything within it is playing their game.

personjerry 5y ago

I've seen the existing "competitors" like TekSavvy, but my understanding is they are essentially under the whim of the big companies anyway, is that true? Or will they be able to over take the monopoly in time?

lhorie 5y ago
They're sorta at their mercy, yes, because they have no real infrastructure of their own. My understanding is that they get a discounted network usage rate compared to retail customers and that rate is governed by CRTC, but bigcos bully CRTC to increase it year over year when the public interest groups say it should be reduced (the thing about rural Canada is, to my understanding, the stick with which they threaten to stop investment in rural infrastructure if their profits decrease). Also, just a small clarification for posterity, telecom in Canada is comparatively shitty but it's not a monopoly. There are several companies, both large and small, and many things are structured in fragmented fashion both in terms of large and small players (for example, Sasktel is crown-owned and unionized, Telus only deals w/ wireless, Fibrestream only deals with condo fiber, etc etc)
- sbarre 5y ago
  > they have no real infrastructure of their own I think I know what you're trying to say here but this statement is not really accurate. They don't have their own last-mile infrastructure but they definitely have their own network infrastructure to support their customers. Competitive providers (like Teksavvy) use the incumbent's last-mile infrastructure (the cables that run into all the customer houses or buildings), but once the traffic gets into the telco's network, it exits that network ASAP and the wholesale provider takes over and is responsible for setting up their own peering and carrying the customer's traffic beyond the telco that is providing the fiber/copper loop. They're not just white-labelling the telco's service. Also another small correction: TELUS only sells wireless in Ontario, but in Quebec and in BC/AB they are quad-play (wireless, Internet, TV, phone) just like Bell and Rogers are in Ontario. And in fact Bell and Rogers out west are the other way around, they only sell wireless. Although now that Rogers has bought Shaw, Rogers is looking to become a national quad-play provider next year.
  - lhorie 5y ago
    Thanks for the corrections, I haven't lived in Canada for a few years now and it's a bit hard to keep track of it all in my head anymore :)