WIND Mobile Financier Regrets Entering ‘Protected’ Canadian Mobile Market

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

. $85 dollars what is pretty much unlimited everything, on a network (TELUS) that actually can provide coverage where I need it is pretty good.

I don't know how to respond to that, that's awful. The fact that people like yourself, and many others in this country, just accept this, is also one of the problems.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by OilKiller

I don't believe that at all. He's calling a spade a spade. Canada is awful when it comes to protectionism. Corporations make billions, while consumers pay through the nose for inferior products and services.

While I do agree with you, I also think a lot of what he said is posturing. The public needs to be aware of the spectrum auction coming up, and how it needs to be done the right way, so that the big 3 monopoly don't just hoard spectrum and continue to strangle the Canadian mobile user.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

I think we underestimate the impact that infrastructure has on the cost of telecommunications in Canada.

Unlike Europe we do not have large population bases in small geographic areas, which means you have to set up more towers and service areas to actually service smaller numbers of customers.

This is a fallacy. I myself actually used to think that the reason our wireless rates were so expensive is because we had such a large piece of land to cover, but the truth is, 81% of this country's population occupies 4% of the landmass.

Oh, and can we all agree the idea of hooking people with 3 year contracts is frigging archaic? America doesn't do 3-year contracts. Neither does Europe. Don't we consider ourselves to be among their ilk? And if you DO insist on a 3-year term, how about maybe just MAYBE offering something resembling a fair and reasonable upgrade plan? Maybe if you did that, and, you know, conducted business in a fair, above-board sort of manner that gave consumers what we want, deserve, and demand, we'd just stay with you because you're Canadian companies. Then you wouldn't need the government to fight your battles for you, and you'd beat competitors like WIND because you offer BETTER PRODUCTS AND SERVICES.

No, we couldn't have that, could we? #### I hate Canadian telecom companies...

[Azure]

Sask has very good service now that SaskTel rolled out HSPA.

[Azure]

The US does do 2 year contracts. I do believe that is the max though. Which is reasonable enough. No reason why I shouldn't expect to have my current phone for 2 years before I'll even want to buy a new one.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Azure

The US does do 2 year contracts. I do believe that is the max though. Which is reasonable enough. No reason why I shouldn't expect to have my current phone for 2 years before I'll even want to buy a new one.

My bad, I meant 3-year contracts. 2 is fine. After that, I want a new phone.

[Azure]

The CRTC should make it so that 3 year contracts are illegal.

Yeah I know, more big government, but it'll take years upon years before the new cell companies force enough competition that the big 3 will do it on their own.

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by BlackArcher101

Bull . I travelled numerous secondary highways and range roads while storm chasing and most areas have coverage. All while using a variety of phones and connections. Sure data isn't going to be the best, but it was rare when I couldn't make a voice call. If I couldn't, it was probably because I was in a depression and only travelled less than a minute to get out of it.

Now Sask on the other hand, those poor #######s.

On my way to Sibbald Flats - 5 minutes away from HWY 1, no service. Voice or Data.

1 minute outside of Black Diamond / Turner Valley? No service. Voice or Data.

And for some reason those 3 areas are all included on the Rogers coverage map.

Couple others I can't think of when I've been out camping, but all were included on the 'map'.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

I don't know how to respond to that, that's awful. The fact that people like yourself, and many others in this country, just accept this, is also one of the problems.

What rate plans are actually that much better in North America?

In the US comparable plans are just as, if not more expensive.

Sprint: $99 for the unlimited everything plan.

AT&T: $45 for 4G data, Unlimited Nationwide Calling $69.99 etc.

Verizon: Unlimited Voice $69.99, Unlimited Messaging $20, 5GB for $50

T-Mobile: Unlimited Voice + Unlimited Messaging + 5GB data is $89.99

All of the above options in the U.S. are more expensive then the equivalent plans from any of the big three in Canada or their value brands.

As I said we are not comparable to Europe because a much different infrastructure is needed since the population is much more highly densely populated in smaller areas. The U.S. is a much better comparison.

I will feel free to pay a premium because I understand I am paying more for more value and price certainty, while you can join a new entrant that has shoddy coverage areas and no price certainty if you are ever roaming. I would rather not be roaming everytime I visit a friend in Chestermere or go shopping at Cross Iron Mall.

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

This is a fallacy. I myself actually used to think that the reason our wireless rates were so expensive is because we had such a large piece of land to cover, but the truth is, 81% of this country's population occupies 4% of the landmass.

That is only relevant if we only want cell reception in that 4% of landmass. Personally I like having a cell phone that will actually work when I am away from the city and in most of the other 96% of the landmass.

As I said the new entrant make sense if you are a city dweller, but if you travel out of town lots then it makes less sense because you are always roaming anyways. There is a reason the new entrants don't include the areas outside the city and have not built the infrastructure its because it is expensive.

Once the new entrants start to build more towers and expand their coverage area their rates will go up accordingly. They are able to charge unlimited everything for $30 now because they know what they need to do to survive since they can't compete on network or devices so they have to compete on cost.

[opendoor]

Here are some Vodafone prices with an iPhone 4s on a 2 year deal:

UK: http://www.vodafone.co.uk/brands/iph...hone/index.htm

Ireland: http://www.vodafone.ie/df/shop/priceplan/#no_filter

Australia: http://www.vodafone.com.au/personal/...e-4s/index.htm


Some of the deals are definitely better than in Canada. But I don't think the difference is as extreme as some believe.

[Shawnski]

Originally Posted by opendoor

Here are some Vodafone prices with an iPhone 4s on a 2 year deal:

UK: http://www.vodafone.co.uk/brands/iph...hone/index.htm

Ireland: http://www.vodafone.ie/df/shop/priceplan/#no_filter

Australia: http://www.vodafone.com.au/personal/...e-4s/index.htm


Some of the deals are definitely better than in Canada. But I don't think the difference is as extreme as some believe.

Interesting links. The Aussie one in particular shows the handset cost BILLED separately, which always seems to get lost in any of these discussions. In Canada, handsets are subsidized upfront, for both new activations and renewals. That part always muddies the equation.

I do not work for any of the carriers anymore. But I did, and was responsible for paying the handset subsidies back to the retailers. I do know what I am talking about. SuperMatt is pretty much bang on.

I am still contracted to dealers thus I have a current subsidy sheet that I can reference (but obviously not disclose.)

There are different pricing models in each country. One really has to look at the complete packages in order to make a proper measurement.

CPers should ask themselves this... How much would that handset cost by itself? No activation, just the phone?

And don't even get me started on what APPLE "might have" imposed on the Canadian carriers in order to "allow" them to sell their products. (Quoted words used to CMA legally...)

[Gobsgraham]

Why is anyone here complaining about 3 year plans. Walk in to any cell phone provider and ask for a voice/data plan and they will give you one without a contract. If you want a free phone then sign on the dotted line. Don't bitch about something you are choosing to do. It is a waste of everyone's time in this thread. Bitch about coverage, monopolies the weather...fine but don't bitch about stuff that you have control over.

[rd_aaron]

Originally Posted by BlackArcher101

Bull . I travelled numerous secondary highways and range roads while storm chasing and most areas have coverage. All while using a variety of phones and connections. Sure data isn't going to be the best, but it was rare when I couldn't make a voice call. If I couldn't, it was probably because I was in a depression and only travelled less than a minute to get out of it.

Now Sask on the other hand, those poor #######s.

If you're on Rogers this is true. They only cover the major cities and major highways. If you're on Sasktel CDMA, it's pretty hard to find anywhere that doesn't have cell coverage. I'm not sure what the new HSPA network is like but the coverage map is similar to that of the CDMA network.

[OilKiller]

Originally Posted by Gobsgraham

Why is anyone here complaining about 3 year plans. Walk in to any cell phone provider and ask for a voice/data plan and they will give you one without a contract. If you want a free phone then sign on the dotted line. Don't bitch about something you are choosing to do. It is a waste of everyone's time in this thread. Bitch about coverage, monopolies the weather...fine but don't bitch about stuff that you have control over.

I think the point people were trying to make is you can get the same phones offer wise in the States and other countries for signing 2 year contracts and here in Canada, it's 3 years. Just another case of the monopoly at work here.

[BlackArcher101]

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

On my way to Sibbald Flats - 5 minutes away from HWY 1, no service. Voice or Data.

1 minute outside of Black Diamond / Turner Valley? No service. Voice or Data.

And for some reason those 3 areas are all included on the Rogers coverage map.

Couple others I can't think of when I've been out camping, but all were included on the 'map'.

Ah yes, nothing works out that way. I'm out there quite a few times a year, including powderface. Usually everyones phones are spotty, regardless of the carrier. We now rely on the HAM radio network which is also not the best. Too hilly.

[Komskies]

Nothing worse than driving though Sask on a road trip and trying to surf porn on the E-grade internet.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

That is only relevant if we only want cell reception in that 4% of landmass. Personally I like having a cell phone that will actually work when I am away from the city and in most of the other 96% of the landmass.

As I said the new entrant make sense if you are a city dweller, but if you travel out of town lots then it makes less sense because you are always roaming anyways. There is a reason the new entrants don't include the areas outside the city and have not built the infrastructure its because it is expensive.

Once the new entrants start to build more towers and expand their coverage area their rates will go up accordingly. They are able to charge unlimited everything for $30 now because they know what they need to do to survive since they can't compete on network or devices so they have to compete on cost.

81% of the country should not be paying excessive wireless rates so that 19% of the country can get one bar twenty miles away from a metropolitan area.

The solution to this should be pretty simple; charge people in cities less. This may inconvenience some people, but if you want to use the land-mass argument, you're paying extra for a service because it's more difficult to get to you. It's not difficult to supply coverage in Vancouver, Calgary, or Montreal; and there's a far larger population base to draw from. So why then do I have to pay the same rate as someone who lives out in the sticks? If it's a pain in the ass to provide coverage out there, charge more for rural plans. Seems simple enough to me.

Originally Posted by Gobsgraham

Why is anyone here complaining about 3 year plans. Walk in to any cell phone provider and ask for a voice/data plan and they will give you one without a contract. If you want a free phone then sign on the dotted line. Don't bitch about something you are choosing to do. It is a waste of everyone's time in this thread. Bitch about coverage, monopolies the weather...fine but don't bitch about stuff that you have control over.

Because if I want a free/discounted Galaxy S2, Google Nexus, a cheap iPhone 4S in America, the UK, Europe etc, I can sign up on a two year contract. And this way, I'll always have a phone that's relatively new, and by the time I get bored with it, usually around the 18-month to 2-year period, I get a new phone.

Look at any phone from two years ago. About the only one you'd reasonably want to buy today is the iPhone 3GS. That's less of a problem these days with a wide variety of good smartphones, none of which are designed by Blackberry. But the real point is this: I want a new gadget. I would prefer to continue with my carrier (Bell) at a reasonable rate. Switching is a hassle. If you want me to sign a two year plus an option contract, which offers a comprehensive upgrade program, fine. I'm more than happy to do that. But don't make me hold onto my phone until it's nothing more than a paperweight.

Assuming WIND is still around in 13 months, I'll be going with them; I need reception in the city. Bad rural coverage sucks, but it's rarely/never an issue for me.

[photon]

Even though the plan is 3 years, you can sometimes still get new hardware every 2 years, I did it with my iPhone, I got the 3G, then 2 years later got the 4.

[OilKiller]

Originally Posted by photon

Even though the plan is 3 years, you can sometimes still get new hardware every 2 years, I did it with my iPhone, I got the 3G, then 2 years later got the 4.

Yes, but many times you end up paying an early upgrade fee, which still sucks.

After 2 years and before the 3 years is up, my cell phone feels like this:

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by photon

Even though the plan is 3 years, you can sometimes still get new hardware every 2 years, I did it with my iPhone, I got the 3G, then 2 years later got the 4.

Yeah, while paying $150 bucks for a hardware upgrade. Then pay an extra 99 bucks or 200 or whatever your new phone costs, and all of a sudden, your upgrade is costing you upwards of 300 dollars.

Say I've been with a carrier for two years. I want a new phone, but I don't want to switch carriers. The right way to treat long-time customers is not to say 'Oh you can have the Galaxy S2... But not before you give us 250 bucks to let you out of your contract and re-up for another three years so you get the phone at a discount'.

The right way to treat your customers is to go 'You know what... your use of the phone is how we make our money; we don't make much selling the actual devices, and they're all subsidized anyway. Have an iPhone, or a Galaxy S2, whatever. We appreciate your business, and hope this experience encourages you to stay with Bell/Rogers/Telus for a long time'.

And if a wireless company ever did that, I'd be a customer for life. I can deal with some spotty coverage in areas inhabited by four people and a herd of cattle. I have a harder time dealing with the big 3 essentially ####ting all over their customers with the backing of the government. It's not right, it's not fair, and it's something our PM said he'd fix. Get on it, Steve.