Friday March 19, 2021

March 26, 2021 by Graeme MacKay

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday March 19, 2021

A big deal threatens bigger cellphone fees

There are two things you can bet on when it comes to this week’s $20.4-billion bid by Rogers Communications to snap up rival Shaw Communications.

First, the deal would be very good for both of these telecommunications giants, and not least members of the Shaw family who would personally pocket $920 million in cash for their troubles.

Second, the current takeover plan threatens to be very bad for Canadian consumers, and that probably means people like you.

Think your monthly cellphone fees are sky-high today? They could blast into the stratosphere if this deal goes through as is. Because if one of Canada’s four biggest telecom companies is bought up by one of the others, there will be even less of the competition so urgently needed to keep some kind of a lid on prices.

Let’s hope Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is watching this one closely. Let’s hope even more that he’s ready to stand up for the interests of ordinary Canadians. The fact is, cellphone users in this country are already saddled with some of the most bloated cellular fees in the industrialized world. On average, Canadians spend 20 per cent more than Americans and an eye-watering 120 per cent more than Australians for cellphone plans that offer comparable service.

Canada’s “Big 3” telecom companies — Rogers, Telus and Bell — defend the high prices as the cost of providing a first-rate service in a vast land, though the U.S. and Australia are also pretty big places where bills are a lot lower than here. It’s also worth noting that a review by Canada’s Competition Bureau found that those Big 3 telecom companies, however they excuse their pricing, were racking up far stronger profits than their Group-of-Seven or Australian counterparts.

One of the problems industry analysts consistently point to is the lack of competition for providing wireless services in Canada. Today, Rogers, Telus and Bell control nearly 90 per cent of the market. If Rogers is allowed to gobble up Shaw, the Big 3’s market share will rise to 95 per cent.

Federal government after federal government has agreed more, not less, competition is what this sector needs. And they were all correct. Freedom Mobile, which was started by Shaw in 2016, has been credited with driving wireless plan prices down to at least some degree in Ontario, Alberta and British Columbia.

So what happens if big-fish Rogers swallows up smaller-fish Shaw and takes over not just Shaw’s cable and internet operations in western Canada but its Freedom mobile business? Rogers has tried to silence concerns about its takeover plans by promising not to raise cellphone fees for three years. However sincere that offer is, it would do nothing to stop a whopping fee hike on Day 1 of Year 4.

While Trudeau knows that telecommunications companies need to earn enough money to underwrite expensive investments in internet and wireless networks, he and his party declared they would lower cellphone fees by 25 per cent by the end of 2021.

Given that both the Competition Bureau and the Canadians Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission will now take a year or more to review this deal, Trudeau has time to think this one out carefully. But at the end of the day he should be willing to intervene strongly on behalf of consumers. One option among many would be to approve the deal — if Rogers agrees to sell Shaw’s Freedom Mobile business to a company such as Cogeco, which is interested in expanding into the cellphone business.

Such a deal between Rogers and Shaw might not be as big. Almost certainly, neither would the cellphone bills be in this country. (Hamilton Spectator Editorial)

Friday October 7, 2016

October 6, 2016 by Graeme MacKay

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday October 7, 2016

Blue Jays beer-tossing incident: Who threw that brew?

Amateur sleuths have joined Toronto police in the investigation into who threw a can of beer that narrowly missed Baltimore Orioles outfielder Hyun Soo Kim at the Rogers Centre on Tuesday.

But, while police have named their suspect, the Internet is not so sure.

On Wednesday, police released a photo of an unnamed man who they said was the beer-thrower. That man turned out to be Ken Pagan, a journalist who works for Postmedia.

Pagan acknowledged being the man in the photo.

“I contacted Toronto police earlier this evening, around 7 p.m., and identified myself as the person in the photo,” Pagan wrote Wednesday night in an email to The Canadian Press, adding he “cannot say much else.”

That’s when the Internet kicked in with videos shared on Reddit and YouTube.

Starting from a wide-angle shot showing section 139 of the Rogers Centre, one video shows a silver streak crossing the frame. While it’s impossible to identify any faces in the video, Pagan is clearly identifiable when the grainy images are cross-referenced with photos shot by Canadian Press photographer Frank Gunn.

“Fairly clear video of him throwing it backhanded like a Frisbee,” wrote Twitter user Melanie Harrington.

Case closed?

Not quite.

Other photos of Pagan show him holding a plastic cup, not a can of beer.

Then more video surfaced, in which some people claim to see a woman hurling the brew before disappearing from the scene.

Both videos are so grainy, it’s almost impossible to deduce what is taking place exactly.

ther photos show a hole in the crowd just behind and to Pagan’s left, which some argued was the real thrower’s location. They suggest the villain ducked out of sight as soon as the sudsy shot was fired.

In the style of the infamous Zapruder film, both videos of the flying drink are grainy and difficult to make out.

Const. Jenifferjit Sidhu said Toronto police would not comment on the conflicting theories.

“However, we are confident we have made a positive ID and we will continue to work with the Rogers Centre to further the investigation‎,” Sidhu wrote in an email to the Star.

As of early Thursday afternoon, there was no word on charges against Pagan. (Source: Toronto Star)

Tuesday, March 11, 2014

March 11, 2014 by Graeme MacKay

By Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Tuesday, March 11, 2014

George Stroumboulopoulos to host Hockey Night in Canada next season

George Stroumboulopoulos said it will be a “dream” to anchor next season’s Hockey Night in Canada.

Rogers Communications introduced Stroumboulopoulos at a press conference on Tuesday as one of the new faces of Hockey Night when the telecom and media firm takes control of Canada’s NHL broadcasting rights.

The multiple Gemini award-winning talk show host of CBC’s George Stroumboulopoulos Tonight will join Hockey Night’s Ron MacLean and Don Cherry, along with Sportsnet’s Daren Millard and Jeff Marek as the “cornerstones” of the new hockey coverage, Rogers said in a release.

Stroumboulopoulos said that a big role in the hockey media world was a long-standing dream of his and Marek’s since they started their careers in promotions at the Fan 590 radio station.

“It took 20 years to get to this place,” Stroumboulopoulos said. “What a dream.”

The hiring of the fast-talking Stroumboulopoulos as the new face of Hockey Night is the first major personnelchange made by Rogers after acquiring the NHL Canadian broadcasting rights in a blockbuster 12-year, $5.2-billion deal in November.

Scott Moore, president of Sportsnet and NHL properties for Rogers, introduced the “top line” of his hockey broadcasting scene during a live telecast from the CBC studios. While the CBC may have been “where the tradition of broadcasting hockey began,” Moore said, he’s hoping to bring a “fresh face” to the game.

Hockey fans can look forward to big games being broadcast on different channels such as Citytv and on additional days, including Sunday, Moore said. More announcements to come will include new technology for mobile devices.

“You do have to be aware that people are watching hockey differently. They’re watching it with two, three or more screens.”

Moore also faced a sharp question about the absence of women on a broadcast team he called “the face of hockey on Rogers.” (Source: Hamilton Spectator)

SOCIAL MEDIA

Shared on Yahoo News Canada and National Newswatch. Also, on Yahoo Canada’s Facebook page:

Post by Yahoo Canada.

Wednesday, November 27, 2013

November 26, 2013 by Graeme MacKay

By Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Wednesday, November 27, 2013

What the new Rogers-NHL deal means for the CBC

National broadcaster to earn no revenue from hockey

The CBC is in trouble. It is losing all of its hockey revenue – but keeping about 320 hours a year of hockey, including Hockey Night in Canada – under the NHL’s new Canadian broadcast rights deal.

Rogers is making big moves to control ever more Canadian media and the announcement on Tuesday that they’re essentially taking over hockey rights across Canada is an enormous move.

Losing hockey is a big deal for the CBC. They’ll keep Hockey Night in Canada for four years on a sub-contract from Rogers, but they don’t own the content anymore. They will not even get the advertising revenue from the broadcasts. They also will not pay for the rights to the games. All that falls to Rogers.

CBC President and CEO Hubert Lacroix acknowledged that the next season of Hockey Night in Canada will be very different.

“Starting next year, Rogers will assume all editorial control (all editorial decisions with respect to the content, on-air talent and the creative direction of HNIC – we have the right to be consulted and there is a commitment to excellence) under the new agreement,” he wrote to CBC staff in an internal memo.

“While this deal will result in job losses, the staffing impact would have been much greater had we lost hockey entirely, as CBC is still producing hockey. Preserving HNIC also allows CBC to maintain a capacity to execute a sports strategy and fulfil lits existing contractual obligations (i.e. Olympics, Pan-Am, FIFA),” he continued.

Lacroix was unclear on which jobs, and how many, would be cut as a result of this deal.

Later, in a press conference with Rogers, Lacroix tried to remain positive but had little to add.

“Rogers takes on all of the revenues from all of the properties. We have no costs that come with that. We don’t pay any broadcasting rights,” he said. “Our friends at Rogers pick up all of the revenue.”

Asked what CBC gains from the deal, he said the CBC has maintained the right “to promote some of our programs through the iconic Hockey Night in Canada.”

That was it. Rogers refused to comment on any specifics of Don Cherry’s future. (Source: Canada.com)

Wednesday September 4, 2013

September 5, 2013 by Graeme MacKay

Verizon’s exit leaves Harper with tricky wireless file

With the deadline to sign up for a spectrum auction looming and a major U.S. company out of the running, it looks doubtful anyone will burst onto the scene to compete against Bell, Telus and Rogers.

So with Verizon out, what now for a Conservative government that has long staked its ground on getting a fourth player into Canada’s wireless market?

Companies have until Sept. 17 to put down a deposit to participate in the auction of wireless spectrum, which will be held in January.

One route might be to delay the auction — an option Industry Minister James Moore’s office says it isn’t considering.

Canaccord Genuity analyst Dvai Ghose says putting off the auction would be a politically tricky move since it has already been postponed.

“I think that’s politically very, very difficult to do. The government has already delayed the auction once,” he said.

Indeed, the consumer-oriented Conservatives have already been in the awkward position of being pitted against private companies who claim the auction process was rigged to favour foreign competitors over Canadian incumbents.

So the government may instead look at regulating things such as roaming fees, Ghose said.

Last week, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission asked cellphone companies for data on their roaming fees. It will eventually fall to the commission to decide whether to regulate roaming rates if it finds companies are gouging consumers or limiting their choices.