9 ms·

Note that this failure didn’t prevent Rogers from buying Shaw and securing an even larger position in the national telecom system. In BC, for instance, there ar

• lm411 2y ago
  Yep. Allowing Rogers to purchase Shaw was absurd. The Commissioner of Competition was very strongly opposed to the merger, the court ruled against him, and Canadians had to pay Rogers $13 million CAD because he opposed it. I was a Shaw Mobile (not Freedom) customer, and Rogers wanted me to drive 600km (both ways) through the Kootenay mountains in winter to get my new SIM cards. I told them where to go. Rogers is junk and Canada is an oligarchy.
  • nikolajan 2y ago
    What made Canada special died decades ago, were it not for the strict visa process I would be living in the states (Vermont) right now, with a significantly higher salary (as a principal engineer), a lower income tax, healthier housing market, lower cost of living, and better quality of life.
    • snapplebobapple 2y ago
      Canada used to say our healthcare was better but that hasnt been true for atleast a decade. Its more choose your version of crappy. Do you want to oay with your life savings (usa) or your life (canada)
      • lm411 2y ago
        I (born and raised Canadian) moved my family to Canada 5 years ago. We've been on a waiting list for a doctor ever since. My only option to see a doctor here is to go the emergency room at the closest hospital.
        • snapplebobapple 2y ago
          Yah you are paying with your life. Its shockingly stupid because there are lots of good examples to oick and choose from how to do a public payor system correctly (singapore does it best imo but nordics and france are options for examples of better tham here just not best)
        • nubinetwork 2y ago
          If it makes you feel any better, I've been in the healthcare IT field for 20 years. I tried to stay away from the doctors office as much as possible. Last year I started feeling exhausted 24/7 and tried to make an appointment, but got turned away from my doctors office because my doctor retired and the new guy didn't want to let me make an appointment. So here I am on a waiting list, in a city where 10% of the population don't have a doctor either. I've been waiting for over a year. I wish I could change fields, "once you've seen how the sausage is made, you'll want to be a vegetarian"...
      • swader999 2y ago
        Yes. Waited 18 months for a 15 minute cateract surgery that I needed 18 months ago. Should have had my license taken away this past year they were so bad.
    • jszymborski 2y ago
      What makes Canada strong is its people, whom I love very much. I wish our gov't served us better, and I try my best to enact change, but it's a fool who thinks any country is without its faults.
      • lm411 2y ago
        I love Canadians. And Americans. And I've lived in a few different countries in my life. No country is without faults, but, Canada right now is a mess.
    • lm411 2y ago
      Funny thing, I lived outside of Canada for many years though I am Canadian born and raised. I moved my family back for a "better quality of life". Jokes on me. ;) I love the land and the people, but, the country itself is a mess. We have already planned our exit.
      • swader999 2y ago
        Where too? It's crossing my mind more and more lately.
    • ThePowerOfFuet 2y ago
      >were it not for the strict visa process I would be living in the states (Vermont) right now, with a significantly higher salary (as a principal engineer), a lower income tax, healthier housing market, lower cost of living, and better quality of life. Western Europe has all those things, is actually welcoming, has sane healthcare, and you don't even need to own a gun!
      • nikolajan 2y ago
        It doesn't have the salary, eng salaries are significant deflated in Europe when compared to North America
        • HeatrayEnjoyer 2y ago
          Outside of tech it's not too different. Tech pay isn't even bad, it just doesn't exhibit the massively inflated salaries of the US. Software is an easier, less professional job than most professional fields, it doesn't make sense for it to command preposterous sums. Though American devs don't like having this fact pointed out to them.
          • nikolajan 2y ago
            > Software is an easier, less professional job Are you in software development?
            • HeatrayEnjoyer 2y ago
              Yes, why? Coming from a family of actual engineers, I call myself a developer. Software workers haven't earned the title engineer.
              • hyperman1 2y ago
                TBH I call myself and most software devs an engineer. It gives us something to aspire to.
      • 2y ago
  • cperciva 2y ago
    Shaw didn't have enough capital to continue operating, and foreign ownership restrictions prevented them from raising more. The government decided that Rogers buying Shaw was a better outcome than Shaw going out of business, which is a position I'm inclined to agree with. I was a Shaw Mobile (not Freedom) customer, and Rogers wanted me to drive 600km (both ways) through the Kootenay mountains in winter to get my new SIM cards. Weird. They mailed my new SIM cards to me.
    • dmix 2y ago
      > Weird. They mailed my new SIM cards to me. Rogers support is pretty notorious country wide, I'm sure it still varies at a localized level. I had a Rogers internet install technician come to my house (for Teksavvy because the gov mandates they run the networks for small operators) and instead of drilling a hole through a wall he opened a window a crack ran the cable through and went home. The girl on the phone couldn't believe my story but I'm sure nothing happened in terms of punishment. This is the outcome of artificial barriers to competition in the name of national benefit. It doesn't matter how absurd your customer story, neither customers nor the upstart businesses have a choice.
    • voisin 2y ago
      > Shaw didn't have enough capital to continue operating, and foreign ownership restrictions prevented them from raising more. The government decided that Rogers buying Shaw was a better outcome than Shaw going out of business They could also have just eliminated our archaic foreign ownership laws. I am surprised this hasn’t come up in trade negotiations. If we want improved productivity then we desperately need competition. If we don’t get serious about this then we’ll continue to languish economically as a nation.
      • cperciva 2y ago
        Right, that would have been my preferred solution. But for unfortunately that's not something the current government is inclined to consider.
    • lm411 2y ago
  • voisin 2y ago
    Small world - I live in the Kootenays. I am guessing you are in Nelson only because it seems to be 600km from everything :-)
    • lm411 2y ago
      Close enough though a bit more in the boonies. They wanted me to drive to the Rogers store in Cranbrook or Kelowna.
      • voisin 2y ago
        Well next time you are in Cranbrook feel free to drop me a note if you want to grab a coffee or beer. My contact is in my profile.
        • lm411 2y ago
          Sounds good! I'm usually in Cranbrook a couple times a year.
    • grecy 2y ago
      Huh, very small world. Me too :)
      • voisin 2y ago
        I’m in Cranbrook. Perhaps we need to establish the smaller HN IRL meetup :-)
        • grecy 2y ago
          Nelson has a "tech people meetup" pretty often. https://www.facebook.com/groups/kootenayworkers/ https://www.facebook.com/groups/kootenayworkers/
          • cf100clunk 2y ago
            On Facebook? What irony.
• da768 2y ago
  Shaw customer base was acquired by Rogers, but they weren't allowed to absorb Freedom Mobile, which went to Quebecor.
  • lm411 2y ago
    Shaw Mobile on the other hand, did go to Rogers.
    • da768 2y ago
      Thankfully there's still a 3rd player running it's own mobile infrastructure.
      • lm411 2y ago
        If you mean Bell, they are near non-existent in these parts.
    • smnrchrds 2y ago
      Shaw Mobile was an MVNO. It didn't have any towers or network infra. I don't think it going to Rogers reduced competition in the market.
• walterbell 2y ago
  > foreign competitors are still prohibited from coming into the market There is some foreign competition via roaming, e.g. both T-Mobile and AT&T have US mobile postpaid plans with unlimited Canadian roaming, https://www.att.com/international/canada-roaming/ https://www.att.com/international/canada-roaming/ & https://www.t-mobile.com/cell-phone-plans/use-your-phone-in-mexico-canada https://www.t-mobile.com/cell-phone-plans/use-your-phone-in-... For devices with low data (text/email/web) usage, there are vendors of global prepaid eSIMs that last 6-24 months, which roam on Bell and Rogers 5G networks, priced around $5/GB, e.g. Eskimo (Singapore) and AIS (Thailand) eSIMs.
  • voisin 2y ago
    > Some competitors are present indirectly, e.g. both T-Mobile and AT&T have US mobile postpaid plans with unlimited Canadian roaming These aren’t real options as anyone calling you back will be forced to pay long distance.
    • walterbell 2y ago
      If you need inbound PSTN calls and SMS (instead of text+audio messengers like WhatsApp, Facetime, Matrix, Signal), you can get a Canadian VOIP PSTN number for USD $3/month, e.g. https://www.callcentric.com/dids/pay_per_minute https://www.callcentric.com/dids/pay_per_minute, which can "ring" your phone via SIP client app, call forward from Canada to any global number at your expense, or relay audio voicemails as mp3 via email.
      • voisin 2y ago
        Ok, now explain that to enough people that this solution actually works as a real proxy for competition.
        • walterbell 2y ago
          It allows individuals who do care about competition to stop funding oligopolists.
• ilrwbwrkhv 2y ago
  [flagged]
  • jszymborski 2y ago
    Canadians aren't mediocre. Our gov'ts do a poor job of representing us, but that's largely due to our non-proportional electoral system.
    • ilrwbwrkhv 2y ago
      This excuse has happened over many years. There is a reason why their is no competition or investments or any large company in the country. People are afraid of taking risks and think sitting on real estate is investing for their future.
      • jszymborski 2y ago
        There is nothing intrinsic about Canadian people that makes them risk adverse. This is an institutional failing. You are correct that we are not productive as we should be due to real estate being the primary focus of investment, but that's a failing of the banks and of policy. There are lots of policies that can make housing less speculative, including Georgist-style taxes that could be gradually introduced. All I know is that the average person on the street is not responsible for how bankers choose to invest their money.
    • randomdata 2y ago
      > largely due to our non-proportional electoral system. There are a few exceptions, but the majority of ridings are of roughly the same size. For all intents and purposes the electoral system is about as proportional as is reasonably possible. People move around so it can never be perfect. But it really is close enough. Perhaps you are referring to to the fact that the constituents seem to prefer to hire based on the MP/MPP/MLA's labour union affiliation instead of whom will actually represent them, with the representative often being more likely to work for the union instead of the employer, leaving discorporate favour in government towards the unions instead of the employer? That's definitely a thing, but that is not really the electoral system's fault. That's just abject stupidity on the electorate's behalf. They could vote for non-union members who are actually willing to work for the employer, restoring proportionality. There is nothing about the electoral system that stops them. They simply choose not to... ...I expect because they like the union party scapegoat. It allows a place to defer blame. The Westminster system places a lot of onus on the public at large to be involved and the public at large doesn't like that. The public at large doesn't want to be involved at all. Let's face it, the majority don't want to think about it to any degree, while a smaller segment are willing to pick a dictatorial ruler every four years, but nobody wants to embrace the Westminster system as it is meant to be, which leads to all kinds of weirdness – Yet, interestingly, nobody ever suggests getting rid of the Westminster system despite not wanting to use it. It is always only wanting to change how the representatives are chosen, which doesn't actually fix the problem of the Westminster system expecting people to be involved where the people don't want to be.
• b112 2y ago
  It’s a shame on Canada and on Canadians that foreign competitors are still prohibited from coming into the market. No, no it isn't a shame, it's great.
  • voisin 2y ago
    Go on. Why?
    • b112 2y ago
      You should more directly ask, why is foreign competition vital? Preventing domestic mergers, and ensuring domestic competition exists are viable alternatives. With viable alternatives available, when it comes to domestic telco and networking, you want domestic control. A nation is benefited by domestic ownership of its own infrastructure. This is inline with domestic food production, manufacturing of defense products, transportation infrastructure, and on and on. Domestic control is an aspect of sovereignty. Now again, I want competition. The problem isn't foreign competition, it's a lack of domestic. The Harper Conservatives worked on this, limiting spectrum auction to induce competition and so on. I suspect someone had a pet peeve, re domestic cost of services. One thing about government, is that often politicians get into the politicking business because something pissed them off. So I suspect someone was cheesed at costs, or customer service, and made it their thing. Sadly, it was dropped by the next government. Another example would be the Trudeau Liberals overhauling the entire ombudsman process for banks, along with intense investigation into retail banking processes. Prior, the ombudsman was an escalation process that ended up at a provincial ombudsman's office... jointly owned by the banks! Again, I expect someone in the current government was cheesed at banking chicanery. Regardless, we can get competition without foreign competitors. It just takes a government caring enough. And it would take just as much push to drop foreign ownership requirements, as to limit spectrum, prevent mergers, etc.
      • voisin 2y ago
        I think foreign competition has some unique features that are beneficial: — cross pollination of talent, knowledge, technology, etc; — less susceptible to being eliminated when a future government caves on some of the rules you’ve mentioned
• ChumpGPT 2y ago
  >It’s a shame on Canada and on Canadians that foreign competitors are still prohibited from coming into the market. Yeah during NAFTA 2, Canadians were all for protecting high prices and very little choice just to show Trump and the USA that they could take their cheap prices and value and shove it. Rogers, Bell and Telus went on and made Trudeau classify them as Canadian media companies so they would never have any competition from the USA. I guess Canadians like high prices and little choice..