Canada’s telecom giants want you to keep paying them some of the highest wireless telecom rates in the world. Bell, Rogers and Telus have set aside their differences and are campaigning together to restrict American telecom giant Verizon Wireless from entering the Canadian marketplace.
Together, the Bell, Rogers and Telus oligopoly control 94 per cent of Canada’s wireless market. This have stifled competition and innovation in the marketplace at great cost to the everyday Canadian consumers.
In mid-May, the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) confirmed that Canadians pay some of the highest prices for some of the worst telecom services in the industrialized world.
The OECD’s 2013 Communications Outlook findings are rather depressing with the Canadian marketplace landing high in the top ten most expensive countries categories with only the U.S. being nearly as deplorable. Canadian telecom revenue is also the third highest in the G8 and the fourth highest among all of the OECD member countries.
This is compounded by the findings of another recent report by J.D. Power & Associates: Canadians paid 13 per cent more for their wireless telecom services, although Canada’s inflation rate has been holding steady at just one per cent annually. The same survey also found that customer satisfaction was the highest with standalone brands Koodo Mobile and Virgin Mobile, even though they are owned by telecom giants Telus and Bell.
It is no secret that better service and fairer prices for the Canadian consumer lies largely with allowing and stimulating competition in the telecom market. However, the “big 3” telecom companies are campaigning to the federal government and the general public to restrict Verizon from becoming the fourth major player in the marketplace.
Their ‘Fair For Canada’ propaganda campaign oddly claims that more competition will lead to more expensive prices and, as a fear tactic, massive job layoffs in their companies. In reality as seen in other industries, more competition is much more likely to increase innovation, which will increase sales and the need for their companies to increase its employment over the long-term.
The campaign also states that “sweetheart deals for U.S. giants are a bad call for you.” Sweetheart deals for a telecom company – as if there’s nothing hypocritical about that when the federal government has for far too long gone with the oligopoly’s preference of restricting the competition and maintaining the status quo.
Image: Metro New York