|
Rogers begins the rape of FIDO (pg. 5)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| dEsidEL |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
Of course, it's just that most of those industries don't have the authority to create laws. They can lobby, sure, but that's not the same as having direct connections to a regulatory board. |
figure of speech .. (industries that require government regulation of some sorts)
|
|
|
| ShadoWolf |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
What I find most ironic about that graph is how almost all of the top contributions to the Conservatives have been from INDIVIDUALS and almost all the Liberal funds have come from COMPANIES.
Sort of puts the whole "greedy capitalist corporation" stereotype into perspective, eh? Or maybe it's just a small reminder that the LIEberals are always for sale. :p
Also, who the is 55555 Inc and why in the world did they give the Lieberals $3 million!? I can't find any information about them, anywhere. Something about that doesn't smell right. |
55555 Inc. is a company set up by Paul Martin to shift donations from his personal leadership campaign to the Lieberal Party.
He generated almost $12 million in donations - the most in Canadian history, and in violation of party rules.
The question is: who donated to Paul Martin?
Here's a partial listing:
http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/epic/inte...n/oe01374e.html
http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/epic/inte...n/oe01421e.html
http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/epic/inte...n/oe01387e.html
Note the use of numbered companies, and also the fact that most of the donors were companies, and not individuals.
:nervous: :nervous: :nervous: :nervous: |
|
|
| bcope |
rogers also dicked around the people on the $70 unlimited plan
when the merger first occured they told us we would be able to access the rogers network, and we did for about 2 or 3 weeks. then one day we just stopped being able to. with no fanfare and no warning they "changed their minds".
i ing hate that good for nothing piece of company so much. i wish ted rogers would just off already
check out http://www.ihaterogers.ca
awesome |
|
|
| dEsidEL |
| quote: | Originally posted by bcope
rogers also dicked around the people on the $70 unlimited plan
when the merger first occured they told us we would be able to access the rogers network, and we did for about 2 or 3 weeks. then one day we just stopped being able to. with no fanfare and no warning they "changed their minds".
i ing hate that good for nothing piece of company so much. i wish ted rogers would just off already
check out http://www.ihaterogers.ca
awesome |
lol.. sweet site .. kinda reminds me of aolsucks.org ..
|
|
|
| dEsidEL |
| quote: |
Rogers has 'no commitment' to keeping low price for Fido wireless service: CEO
Posted on Canada.com
TORONTO (CP) -- Rogers Communications Inc. has "no commitment" to maintaining the low rates established by its newly acquired Fido wireless service, chief executive Ted Rogers said Thursday.
"We have no commitment to keeping the price levels the same as they were and we've already announced a significant increase in the price for City Fido for new customers coming in late December and early January," Rogers told an investor conference in New York.
"We're not known for having rock-bottom prices. With Rogers it's a premium brand, a premium service, a premium product."
Fido's previous owner, Microcell Telecommunications, had been more aggressive in its pricing strategies that Canada's other three cellphone companies, which have said publicly they didn't want to erode the economic viability of their businesses.
Rogers' subsidiary Rogers Wireless Inc. acquired Microcell for $1.4 billion. As a result, Rogers Wireless became Canada's largest cellphone operator, ahead of Bell Mobility and Telus Mobility.
Fido is best known among consumers and wireless providers alike for offering a $45 flat rate for unlimited calls within the Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal areas. In the past, Rogers and Telus had admitted concerns over the possibility of their wireless businesses feeling City Fido's bite.
Ted Rogers said Thursday his company will keep the Fido brand, but not necessarily the low price.
He also pointed out that despite the $45 flat monthly fee, average revenue per user of the City Fido service comes to over $62.
"That's above what the normal pricing ARPU is, so there must be something going on there," Rogers told analysts in a webcast question-and-answer period after his speech.
Rogers also warned that the future of the mobile phone business is not in simply undercutting the competitors' prices but an "evolution" in which "the wireline phones at home being replaced by, in my opinion, a combination of a phone that will work in the house . . . and then over to the cellular switch," Rogers said.
He said wireless companies have to work on increasing their revenues, because so many customers are using their mobile phones on weekends and in the evenings, when service is free.
His company will aim to do that, he said, by developing a combination wireless-wireline phone, including video, that works through the Internet cable network, which is owned by another Rogers subsidiary, Rogers Cable, when the user is at home.
"There's an opportunity therefore not to just go in and slash prices all over the place but to give greater value by giving better services," Rogers said.
While the wireless-wireline video phone won't be a reality for some time, the company will begin testing its voice-over-Internet phone in April and has set a target date of July 1 for deployment.
Shaw Communications Inc. and Cogeco Cable, the main operating unit of Cogeco Inc., are also working on Internet telephony services.
Rogers owns about 27 per cent of Cogeco Cable's subordinate voting shares and about 21 per cent of all the outstanding shares of its parent, Cogeco Inc.
|
http://www.howardforums.com/showthr...threadid=516742 |
|
|
| tw1tch |
And so it begins, the monopolistic ways. Buy up the competition because they're undercutting you, then raise the prices in order to keep your pockets lined. We use to have competition in the wireless market, we don't anymore.
Premium Service, Premium Brand, are out of your ing mind? Premium compared to what? To the rest of the world, you're the bottom of the barrel. |
|
|
| baystreetboi |
So on the one hand you want increased competition in order to drive prices down. This only results in declining profits for the wireless providers.
On the other hand, people are arguing that Canada's wireless services are behind the times and don't innovate.
How are companies supposed to innovate when they don't have the profit to invest in R&D / network expansion / upgrades? |
|
|
| tw1tch |
| quote: | Originally posted by baystreetboi
So on the one hand you want increased competition in order to drive prices down. This only results in declining profits for the wireless providers.
On the other hand, people are arguing that Canada's wireless services are behind the times and don't innovate.
How are companies supposed to innovate when they don't have the profit to invest in R&D / network expansion / upgrades? |
You're assuming the profits are going into all this innovation, why would they choose to spend money if they don't have to? Companies are in the business of making money, not spending it. They only spend what they have to. If the money keeps coming in, what reason would they have to forge ahead with new services? They just take a simple service like Call Display and raise the price. Call display and voicemail is now $8 instead of the $5 I've been paying for the last year.
It's all driven by competition, the need to innovate and come up with different services and prices all stems from competition. Their profit margins need to be slashed, things change. You use to be able to make like $500 building a PC and selling it for a reasonable market price. You can't make that anymore, the market changed. Unfortunately our wireless market won't change, it's protected, that protection is for the companies and profits, not for us. |
|
|
| dEsidEL |
yup! and get ready to pay more for this ..
| quote: |
More changes ahead as of March 1st aside from the City Fido changes
Call Display: $5
Voice Messaging: $5
CD & VM Bundle: $8
Reflects increase for ALL airtime packages!
|
http://www.howardforums.com/showthr...15&pagenumber=1
i can't wait to enjoy my 'premium' voicemail and caller ID! i hope they make the IVR's voice sound sexier and cooler fonts when those phone #'z come up on my screen .. :rolleyes:
|
|
|
| b4k-oz |
Can ne1 confirm of an offer that fido was doing back in April 2004...when they were calling pay-as-you-go customers that had stopped using their service...offering an open monthly plan with an option to return to pay-as-you-go if u still didn't like it.
It looks as if they've renegged on that deal with those customers and are now claiming the recipients agreed to a 2 yr contract. I may be pursing a case re this.
Has ne1 here had a similar experience? Pls pm me.
Thanx |
|
|
| baystreetboi |
| quote: | Originally posted by tw1tch
You're assuming the profits are going into all this innovation, why would they choose to spend money if they don't have to? Companies are in the business of making money, not spending it. They only spend what they have to. If the money keeps coming in, what reason would they have to forge ahead with new services? They just take a simple service like Call Display and raise the price. Call display and voicemail is now $8 instead of the $5 I've been paying for the last year.
It's all driven by competition, the need to innovate and come up with different services and prices all stems from competition. Their profit margins need to be slashed, things change. You use to be able to make like $500 building a PC and selling it for a reasonable market price. You can't make that anymore, the market changed. Unfortunately our wireless market won't change, it's protected, that protection is for the companies and profits, not for us. |
Rogers Wireless in 2002 spent $465 million on additions to plant, property and equipment (essentially network builds). In 2003, that number was approx $500 million. I'd say that's a large chunk of potential profit being reinvested in improving / expanding the network. Obviously money is being spent.
Profit in 2003 was $138 million, and a $90 million loss the year before. So over this 2 year period, close to a billion has been spent on network builds, with resulting net profit of approx $50 million. For a company the size of Rogers Wireless (now a fully-owned subsidiary of Rogers), $50 million isn't exactly a ton of money, particularly when you compare it to the required investment of $1 billion to earn that.
You say they need to innovate... innovation requires cash! You want to take profit away from them, yet want them to spend more on developing new services / products. Where is this money going to come from? Taking the past 2 years as an example, they could only have invested an additional $50 million into network development before they broke even. How much of an improvement do think $50 million on the $1 billion invested is going to make?
Do you expect investors in Rogers to take a loss so that you can get great new services / products at a cheap price? |
|
|
| fn_xtc |
| quote: | Originally posted by rabbitjoker
Flip = too fragile.
I want a CDMA Sony p910 (tw1tch, quiet with your GPRS bragging!! ;) ) |
I did look at the P910, but I got this instead. (Motorola MPx)
Its not a bad PDA/phone at all (Motorola calls it a smartphone). Its got the windows mobile pc OS. Lets see how long it takes for that to act up! :haha: |
|
|
|
|
