It’s nearly 18 months since the launch of a review of foreign investment in Canada’s telecommunications sector. The file was derailed a year ago in the wake of a completely unrelated file: the government’s rejection of BHP Billiton acquiring Saskatchewan’s Potash Corporation.

When the consultation was announced at The 2010 Canadian Telecom Summit, it was said that “We will have a relatively short, but important discussion period commencing with the release of that report in the next few days so we can get the feedback from both the industry and Canadian consumers.”

At the time, I spoke with Canadian Press:

Industry analyst Mark Goldberg, who also organizes the telecom summit, praised the government’s initiative but also said it is prudent to quickly advance the plan, because the leaving the future uncertain could actually hurt all of the carriers.

“Once you open a process and there’s uncertainty as to which direction is going to be followed, it creates an overhang for the capital markets. The ability of companies to raise capital during that interim period of uncertainty can’t be overstated,” he said. “It could be extremely damaging to small players and large players alike to have a lengthy period of uncertainty when you’ve got such a capital intensive business.”

It is painful to see this issue continue to drag out. A year ago, the issue was attached to the 700 MHz spectrum auction consultation for no really good reason. As I wrote at the time, we need clarity on foreign investment rules in advance of the auction, but these changes are for more than just the wireless sector.

In fact, we would have had a better, more informed spectrum consultation had foreign investment been resolved, either way, before the consultation took place.

When can we expect some clarity?

 

It is launch day. Be sure to visit Xplornet’s website with the countdown to the launch of Canada’s 4G satellite for rural and remote broadband.

I’ll have photos and video when I return from Kazakhstan.

A group of 12 rural ISPs has published an open letter to the Industry Minister seeking changes to the way spectrum is typically auctioned.

A year ago, I wrote:

The way spectrum has been getting auctioned, rural areas are bundled in with the urban centres. So, the carriers who buy more spectrum to serve the densely populated big cities end up controlling the less dense areas as well – in a sense, they get the rural licenses for free. How can we ensure that rural spectrum isn’t being hoarded without being deployed to the benefit of rural residents?

The letter from the rural ISPs says: “The solution is remarkably simple – set aside rural areas from urban areas and deal with them separately.”

The open letter has been appearing in The Hill Times.

As this post gets published, I should be landing in Moscow, en route to the Baikonur Kosmodrome, to watch the launch of Xplornet’s 4G satellite.

On Friday, I wrote about how this new satellite is designed to bring faster and more affordable broadband connections to more Canadians in rural and remote areas, those who live and work beyond the reach of terrestrial facilities.

Xplornet is also making significant investments in regional infrastructure to support connectivity to its satellites. Last week, Xplornet announced the successful completion of a multi-million dollar 4G satellite ground station near Fort McMurray, Alberta. Xplornet is Alberta’s leading provider of rural broadband service. The Fort McMurray gateway announcement comes on the heels of a similar facility being completed near St. John’s.

This week’s launch of Viasat-1 will be streamed live. Early next year, a second 4G satellite, Jupiter, will be launched to complete the coverage. Xplornet is investing hundreds of millions of dollars in Canada to bridge the urban/rural broadband divide.

This week’s launch should be celebrated by all who have been working to advance Canada’s digital agenda.

Some of the initial write-ups of Bell’s 4 screen coverage of the Montreal Canadiens suggested that we are seeing a test of the CRTC’s new Vertical Integration rules.

I disagree.

Recall that the CRTC said:

Following its examination of consolidation in the broadcasting industry, the CRTC has decided to:

• …
• Allow companies to offer exclusive programming to their Internet or mobile customers provided that it is produced specifically for an Internet portal or a mobile device. This includes supplementary programming such as behind-the-scenes video clips of a television program, as well as original content.

From the Bell press release:

“Bell customers now have preferred access to new HabsTV videos on the screen of their choice, whenever and wherever they want.”

HabsTV goes behind the scenes with the players of hockey’s most celebrated team to offer Bell Mobility, Bell Fibe TV, Bell Satellite TV and Bell Internet customers special access to new video, broadcast twice a week.

The CRTC specifically identified “behind the scenes” as a permitted class of exclusive programming, so it is hard to see how this is “a test case on the CRTC’s new regulations for vertically integrated companies.” This does not appear to be content that was primarily made for broadcast TV.

Are we going to let companies compete in developing and offering enhanced value and differentiation to consumers, without calling for the regulator to interrupt each service to enter the marketplace?