About 2 weeks ago, the Federal Cabinet was served with sets of appeal documents filed by three different companies, addressing 4 CRTC decisions. At the time, I called the event a “time for action on broadband policy.”

What is our national broadband vision?

Are we ready to declare that access to broadband service is a right? Have we given sufficient thought to how competition is fostered when programs (such as rural subsidies) are rolled out?

The theme that can be found in all of these pieces is that of competitive access.

The Bell / TELUS appeal deals with mandated speed matching between retail and wholesale bundled internet services. Those companies are arguing against the CRTC requiring them to provide competitors with access to their ongoing infrastructure upgrades. In effect, their argument is that Bell and TELUS shareholders are absorbing all of the risk associated with expensive investments. Shareholders are spending billions of dollars, hoping to see a return on that investment while the CRTC is allowing competitors to be able to gain all of the benefits at a substantial discount and with no risk.

The MTS Allstream appeal is distinct. It deals with the Commission refusing to mandate an unbundled wholesale ethernet access service, which is needed by MTS Allstream when offering its business grade network services.

While some have been lumping the appeals together, the issues are different in a number of respects.

Bell and TELUS say that having to share their access networks changes the business case for continued investment in upgrading their networks.

MTS Allstream argues that there is a severely limited choice of suppliers of alternative access for the business market and absent regulatory action, it is difficult for competitors to offer advanced broadband services to business customers.

Only government action will ensure that Canadian businesses of all sizes have competitive alternatives necessary to fill their business-critical telecommunications needs and thereby meet the challenge of ensuring Canada’s economic success.

The common ground in both sets of cabinet appeals is a call for a policy decision on the kinds of access we want to mandate Canadian telecom carriers to make available to competitors, businesses and consumers.

A coalition of competitive ISPs has called for [pdf, 220KB] the CRTC to register its speed matching decision with the courts in order to permit enforcement through contempt proceedings.

The group is frustrated that the day before tariffs were due to be filed (March 13), the ILECs filed for a stay, which has not yet been granted.

Telus Communications applied for a stay of these decisions on 11 March 2009 and Bell Aliant and Bell Canada applied for a stay on 12 March 2009; however, at law both decisions continue in force and must be complied with unless and until a stay is granted. A party cannot grant itself a stay merely by applying for one.

The letter is signed by executives of Distributel, Yak, Primus, Cybersurf Corp and CAIP.

Last month, I wrote about acting on feedback from customers’ calls.

In the past few weeks, I have dealt with some call centres that don’t seem to get it.

First experience was with Staples. I had received an electronic coupon that provided a hefty discount on printer paper and I decided to order a case. But, the website simply would not accept the coupon:

The coupon number entered is invalid or the coupon has expired. The coupon can not be used.

I called the telephone ordering department and reached an agent who told me that the coupons had not been loaded into the online ordering system and she had been getting calls for the past two weeks from customers complaining. Whew. At least I’m not alone.

But, before she processed the order for me, I asked why any customer-centric company would take more than a couple hours to fix this, once the call centre found out about the problem? I picked up paper at a local discount store instead.

A second experience was with a bank that sent out an email to encourage customers to use direct deposit for tax refunds. I thought that the email looked a lot like a phishing emails we get. I called into customer service and it became clear that there was no place on the agent’s screen to enter such customer feedback, let alone a process to act on it.

How do you make sure you are actively listening to your customers? We have a session at The 2009 Canadian Telecom Summit that is looking at making better use of information about your customers. We call the session Mining for Data Gold. On June 15, we’ll be hearing from leaders in managing customer information. Have you registered yet?

The popular book says that all you really need to know, you learn in kindergarten.

Vodafone and Telefonica have learned that by sharing their networks in 4 countries (Germany, Spain, Ireland and Britain), they can save capital and spend the money on more customer-facing improvements.

This kind of capital saving is hardly news in Canada, with Bell and TELUS having agreements in place to share their mobile networks.

Will any of the new AWS licensees enter into similar agreements with incumbents or other new entrants?

The chief executives for new entrants Public Mobile, DAVE Wireless and Globalive will all be speaking at The 2009 Canadian Telecom Summit in June. Have you registered?

Technorati Tags:
AWS, Vodafone, Telefonica, Dave Wireless, Public Mobile, Globalive, Bell, TELUS

I received a bizarre email last Thursday that tried to appeal to my nationalist sentiments. According to the email, I should be recommending Nortel equipment to my clients because it is Canadian.

Not because it is the best way for service providers to deliver leading edge solutions to their customers; not because it is cost effective; not because it makes my services run faster and jump higher. The appeal says that we should buy Nortel’s stuff because Nortel’s stuff is Canadian; because Canadians created 5000 Nortel patents and Nortel invests pantloads of cash in Canadian R&D.; [You can see a web version of the email here.]

There is a promotion [ pdf, 674 KB] that provides cash incentives to consultants who recommend Nortel business solutions to their clients and I guess it is trying to appeal to my colleagues’ patriotism.

It seems to me that Nortel’s Canadian roots may be an interesting factor, but is it a reason to buy? I used to look to the Detroit 3 automakers because of where my in-laws live, but that loyalty seemed to be a one-way love affair.

How relevant is the flag flying in front of your suppliers’ headquarters?

Technorati Tags:
Nortel, Canadian