Gah... Shaw in Calgary. Very Bad. Interesting comments from - Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

post #1 of 7 (permalink) Old 2002-01-22, 01:21 AM Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Calgary
Posts: 31
Hello everyone...

this is my first post, i hope i dont make myself look like an ass.

I just wanted to take a moment to comment on shaw, in calgary (or alberta) in particular.
I called shaw the other day to order a few of the new digital channels. at the end of the call, i asked why there was a lack of certain channels in the shaw lineup, namely MTV2, TML Network, and both of the new much music channels (loud and vibe i believe).

the person gave me some sort of bunk about CRTC regulations. i am inclined to believe that she didnt even understand that these were channels that were fully liscenced by the CRTC and already in operation on rogers in the east, and BEV nationally.

I tried to explain that to her.. She wouldnt listen... She still held true to her CRTC explanation.
The CRTC, she explained, dictated what each cableco, or DTH provider in canada could carry. They did not tell Shaw that they were allowed to carry the channels, and so shaw did not offer then.
the same reason, she explained, shaw does not carry NHL center ice.

Does this make sense? to me not at all. If the CRTC can liscence BEV or StarChoice (with close ties to shaw i believe) to carry a signal in any market, then i would assume that they would leave it to a cableco to offer it in a specific market.
BEV can easily turn OFF the availability to a specific channel to a certain market, that is after all, why they use a card in the system... to regulate what programming a user can see, based on what they have paid for etc.

i just find that shaw considers itself the only viable option in alberta. perhaps people here have to really go for satellite before shaw will have a change of heart...

i have no idea.

anyone else have an experience with shaw similar to this? is it any better with rogers or cogeco?

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: doktersteve on 2002-01-22 01:22 ]</font>
doktersteve is offline  
Sponsored Links
post #2 of 7 (permalink) Old 2002-01-22, 09:44 AM
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Uxbridge, ON
Posts: 3,601
Yeah, she's lying. They can carry those channels if they want to, they've just chosen not to for whatever reason. Rogers seems to have the fullest slate of the new digital channels of anyone... Everyone else is lagging.
travisc is offline  
post #3 of 7 (permalink) Old 2002-01-22, 09:52 AM
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Alberta
Posts: 152
You should always trust everything that Shaw tells you:

A) The CRTC dictates what Category 2 channels every sat/cable company must carry

B) Lousy customer service keeps the costs down for consumers?

C) HD TV will go the way of the dodo - just like colour tv, cd's and the internet

D) Ralph Klein does not drink as much now (as much beer that is - he's changed to whine)

E) Respectable Canadians will be upset by Pridevision

F) The ever weakening Canadian dollar is good for all Canadians (yah, the Canadians who don't live in Canada that is)

G) Cable rate hikes and poor analog PQ are good for all Canadians

H) Jean Chretien is doing a fine job
Filthy is offline  
post #4 of 7 (permalink) Old 2002-03-01, 06:01 AM
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 1
I called Shaw (in Vancouver) to enquire about the Scream Channel, and was told that Shaw is required to carry only a certain number of channels that are owned by their parent company (Corus). Scream is a Corus owned channel, and it was one that they chose not to offer here.
luxcious is offline  
post #5 of 7 (permalink) Old 2002-03-01, 09:19 AM
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Uxbridge, ON
Posts: 3,601
That's true. But all they would have to do is offer another non-Shaw channel. They're shooting themselves in the foot to spite their competitors to their own channels. I guess when their channels fail, they can crow about how they were right that 50% of the digital channels would fail.
travisc is offline  
post #6 of 7 (permalink) Old 2002-03-01, 10:28 PM
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 499
Simple. If Shaw carries Scream then they will have to carry 5 other non-owned Category 2 channels, which namely limits them to CHUM which they refuse to carry for political reasons
digitalcable is offline  
post #7 of 7 (permalink) Old 2002-03-02, 12:19 PM
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: The Centre of the Universe
Posts: 455
Does Expressvu have to play by those same rules as well? They are owned by Bell Canada who also own a number of specialty channels. So are they required to carry X-# of channels for every Bell Globemedia channel they carry?
condodweller is offline  

Quick Reply

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:


Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome