This is a peak shopping season for all sorts of consumer goods. Cellular phones are no exception. As we have written before, there are lots of new handsets on the market this season which should help carriers lock in customers to multi-year contracts in advance of the wireless number portability implementation coming in March.

Are customers concerned about multi-year agreements? Cellular phones were one of the leading sources of consumer complaints in Ontario last year, according to the Ministry of Government Services.

Top 10 Consumer Complaints and Inquiries in 2005
Collection agencies	4,533
Home renovations	2,577
New & used vehicle purchases	1,880
Motor vehicle repairs	1,485
Home furnishings	1,267
Fitness & health clubs	1,067
Credit reporting	1,038
Personal items	1,007
Cell phones	842
Timeshares	688

Perhaps last week’s introduction of legislation to explicitly put forborne services under the Competition Act signals that we should be looking beyond the CRTC to discipline wireless services.

So, what is the best strategy for consumers choosing a cel phone plan and provider? I would say, look as carefully at the cancellation fees as you look at the monthly rates. A 3-year contract will get you the greatest discount off your new phone, but not all 3-year deals are the same.

Look at the penalties for early termination. If you lose or break your phone, you may be better off cancelling your plan, rather than paying full price for a replacement device. Each of the major carriers charges $20 per month remaining in the agreement but Rogers has a maximum $200 penalty to get out of your contract. Bell tops out at $400 while TELUS has $100 minimum and no upper limit.

The added benefit with Rogers, if you cancel early, is the ability to get your phone unlocked at many retailers. That will then make it easier for you to travel to the US or overseas and make use of a local pay-as-you-go SIM card. Unless, of course, you enjoy paying a zillion dollars per minute for roaming.

Or, you could just file a complaint. That would help cell phones move up the charts from number 9 on Ontario’s Top Ten Countdown. Will provinces intervene?

This week, there has been press coverage of the Danish study of the impact of the incidence of cancer among long term cell phone users. The study concludes:

We found no evidence for an association between tumor risk and cellular telephone use among either short-term or long-term users. Moreover, the narrow confidence intervals provide evidence that any large association of risk of cancer and cellular telephone use can be excluded.

In addition, the study found no trend that associates cancer rates with years of mobile phone use.

A couple of interesting notes from this study. First, this week’s publication is actually a follow-up to a study published more than 5 years ago. The 2001 report had similar findings.

In 1968 Denmark adopted a unique 10-digit identifier for each citizen, and a central population register to verify personal data and information. This tag enabled researchers to work with the phone companies to identify more than 420,000 long term users in whom information about mobile telephone use could be linked to a Danish cancer registry. More than 85% of the subjects were men.

Both studies found that cell phone use was associated with a reduced incidence of smoking related cancers (such as lung cancer). Why? The effect is likely associated with the group that was studied: long term cell phone users. As observed by the study, such users appeared to have a higher income and smoke less than the general population.

Maybe smokers are talking instead of inhaling!

Technorati Tags:
mobile, cancer, Denmark

Industry Minister Maxime Bernier introduced legislation in the House of Commons to give the Competition Bureau powers to fine dominant carriers up to $15M in cases of abuse of dominant position.

The proposed legislation seems to open the way for an increased role to be played by competition law in disciplining the behaviour of the incumbents, rather than the CRTC. This is consistent with the elements of the report of the Telecom Policy Review panel. The amendments to the Competition Act are specifically in the part dealing with Abuse of Dominant Position. Section 78 of that part defines a number of anti-competitive acts that should be helpful in a forborne regulatory environment.

Competition Bureau chief Sheridan Scott is already confirmed to speak at The 2007 Canadian Telecom Summit in June.

---

Update: [December 7, 6:25 pm]
I did an interview with Bloomberg this afternoon.