Pricing Discipline

Wireless service providers in Canada have been described as benefiting from an orderly, disciplined market.

As the regulatory filings start to come in from the industry in respect of the CRTC’s review of the Price Cap framework, the cable industry is calling for order in the wireline business. They concede allowing Bell and TELUS to have separate prices by province, but no targetted pricing. The last thing the cable companies want is for consumers to be caught in the middle of a price war in the communities that have competition.

Ever on the look-out for the interests of consumers in underserved territory, the cable companies are concerned that

This is anti-competitive because competitors only face the lower prices. Competitors do not benefit from higher prices as they do not yet operate in the non-competitive locations.

And besides, it would be un-Canadian to deviate from an orderly, disciplined market. Either everyone gets lower prices, or nobody does.

Three of the cable companies (Rogers, Shaw and Cogeco) put forward their initial position with a 9-page filing. Videotron came in with 13 pages, agreeing on the issues of rate de-averaging and discontinuing the deferral account.

A coalition of consumer groups (Consumer’s Association, PIAC and National Anti-poverty Organization) put forward an 85-page piece of economic evidence (ok – 14 pages of this were made up of the economist’s CV) that calls for a more aggressive productivity factor of 6% and an end to the deferral account mechanism. Translation: lower prices for all.

Bell, TELUS and MTS Allstream all filed their comments late in the day… we’ll talk about their positions at a later time.

It’ll be a battle of economists – not the stuff that makes great TV – but important in determining price competition for consumers and setting a tone for regulation of telecom in these changing times.

Scroll to Top