Bell to acquire CTV - Page 5 - Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums

Costa · 2010-09-10, 10:51 PM

We dislike the CRTC for a reason, for being limited on content mainly (imo). CRTC is overvalued and most of their decision making doesn't need a commision.

billhome · 2010-09-10, 11:45 PM

"Everybody needs to stop with the whole get rid of CRTC talk because they are going nowhere anytime soon, so deal with it!"

The probability of it happening is greater if we all speak our minds, and do it loudly. If Harper ever gets a majority, he will do something about the CRTC.

Rock On · 2010-09-10, 11:45 PM

Now would be a good time to acquire CTV while they still have monopoly licenses . Monopolies are money makers.
The only question would be if Bell has any relatives in the CTRC to maintain these monopolies?
Best Regards!

vjose78 · 2010-09-11, 12:02 AM

Slightly off topic, but Harper WILL never get a majority because he's a moron and nobody trusts him. Even if he did get a majority he probably wouldn't give a damn about the CRTC. It's only the wishful thinking of some of you that Harper would do that with a majority. If he wanted to do that he would have brought it up by now, but it hasn't happened, what makes you think it will happen?

drazi_guy · 2010-09-11, 02:46 AM

Let them buy CTV and burn it to the ground, really.

All of this gouging and rigmarole from the Cable, Internet and Cellular providers is just pushing the market towards alternatives.

It's worth noting that none of these companies really controls the market, we control the market. Technology moves too fast to be suppressed for long. As each option gets more expensive, less money will be spent on them. If the average person doesn't perceive value in what they're getting they won't keep getting it.

What I'm trying to say is that there's a maximum people will pay to be entertained. If they start trying to hose the consumer too badly, we'll get it somewhere else. For me, cable already got too expensive. I'd rather pay some overage fees to download all my TV shows than pay the cable company 80 bucks a month to get them. And I don't think the market will bear it if they try to price video downloading out of the market with caps and fees. Nearly every TV show is available on DVD, and often for 15-20 bucks a season if you look around.

So let them all consolidate and plot ways to increase fees. At the end of the day, the majority of people have a fixed limit on what they are able/willing to spend to be entertained. We'll collectively make sure that we pay what we can afford and no more.

billhome · 2010-09-11, 03:44 AM

If he wanted to do that he would have brought it up by now, but it hasn't happened, what makes you think it will happen?

He's already overruled the CRTC on Wind Mobile. Harper loves low-hanging fruit, and that is what attacking the CRTC is to him - high political reward, low effort.

nakedgord · 2010-09-11, 05:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billhome

If he wanted to do that he would have brought it up by now, but it hasn't happened, what makes you think it will happen?

He's already overruled the CRTC on Wind Mobile. Harper loves low-hanging fruit, and that is what attacking the CRTC is to him - high political reward, low effort.

I disagree. If Harper was going to do anything to reform TV he would have decrimalized Dish and Direct TV by now. Not legalized it but it would have been simple as pie for him to decrimalize it based on free speech issues.

PFD · 2010-09-11, 09:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nakedgord

I disagree. If Harper was going to do anything to reform TV he would have decrimalized Dish and Direct TV by now. Not legalized it but it would have been simple as pie for him to decrimalize it based on free speech issues.

And why would that be in his best interest to do that? I imagine the CEOs and shareholders of Rogers/Bell are supporters of his.

peano · 2010-09-11, 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nakedgord

I disagree. If Harper was going to do anything to reform TV he would have decrimalized Dish and Direct TV by now. Not legalized it but it would have been simple as pie for him to decrimalize it based on free speech issues.

Impossible with a minority government. The Libs and NDP would call an election over it. Guaranteed. It was the Libs that ensured it was criminalized. Remember Sheila Copps?

Now the providers own virtually all of the media outlets. Any attempt by the Conservatives to allow competition will result in extremely skewed coverage to ensure that party loses the election. Unless the CBC offers balanced coverage. Fat chance.

gretzky · 2010-09-11, 10:34 AM

time for the CRTC to scrap the category 1 must carry channels
now that the BDUs force us to pay for THEIR channels

nakedgord · 2010-09-11, 10:41 AM

First decrimalizing something is alot different than legalizing it. The only thing that's brought the wrath of the opposition parties was when Harper tried to revoke their federal fundings. I seriously doubt Iggy and Jack would have brought down the gov't over decrimalizing US TV. They're not even doing it for the gun registry now.

Second I never said it would be in Harper's best interest - only that if how horrible our TV is was on his radar he would have done *something*, anything, by now.

All he's shown an interest in is forcing Sun TV News on our dial.

grog · 2010-09-11, 11:29 AM

I can't see them decriminalizing Dish & DirecTV simply because the government gets no tax revenue from grey market. The average cable or satellite subscriber probably pays something on the order of $100/yr in taxes and multiple that by the millions that could potentially jump ship and that's a pretty serious revenue loss.

mactools · 2010-09-11, 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vjose78

At least these deals all but kill fee for carriage which is possibly the one of the biggest reasons for the deals, as Shaw and Bell will not have to negotiate with CTV/Canwest for FFC anymore. .

Yes, FFC is the biggest reason for the deal. It is a revenue stream which the BDU's can milk for all it's worth. Remember that the BDU's have 40 years of expertise gouging CRTC mandated ideas. Just think, even if Shaw or Bell was to get just $1 each FFC for their OTA properties, they would rake in $8 million a month. And all because the CRTC said so. Shaw and Bell will just say, the CRTC made us do it.

Yes, the BDU's were against the FFC at the hearings, but thoughts of guaranteed revenue streams make strange bedfellows. And they know all about guaranteed revenue streams.

Paolo · 2010-09-11, 01:38 PM

what is this gonna mean? more of those beaver commercials on ctv channels. as if we get enough of those guys. what were their names? frank and gordon?

slipperbomb · 2010-09-11, 02:28 PM

Not a big deal. Bell bought back the company they had control over from 2000 -2006, held a minority stake since, and now decided they wanted full control again to better compete with Shaw and Rogers.

On another note, this should effectively kill the FFC fiasco. The whole thing is a wash now.

2010-09-11, 10:41 AM	#71
nakedgord Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 605	First decrimalizing something is alot different than legalizing it. The only thing that's brought the wrath of the opposition parties was when Harper tried to revoke their federal fundings. I seriously doubt Iggy and Jack would have brought down the gov't over decrimalizing US TV. They're not even doing it for the gun registry now. Second I never said it would be in Harper's best interest - only that if how horrible our TV is was on his radar he would have done something, anything, by now. All he's shown an interest in is forcing Sun TV News on our dial. __________________ OTA Free: CBC, CTV, CHCH, PBS, PBS World, TVO, WNLO, Global, OMNI1, CityTV, OMNI2. Premium TV: R2 DVDs (Cheaper)

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

2010-09-10, 10:51 PM	#61
Costa Join Date: Oct 2009 Posts: 520	We dislike the CRTC for a reason, for being limited on content mainly (imo). CRTC is overvalued and most of their decision making doesn't need a commision.

2010-09-10, 11:45 PM	#62
billhome Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 248	"Everybody needs to stop with the whole get rid of CRTC talk because they are going nowhere anytime soon, so deal with it!" The probability of it happening is greater if we all speak our minds, and do it loudly. If Harper ever gets a majority, he will do something about the CRTC.

2010-09-10, 11:45 PM	#63
Rock On Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 48	Now would be a good time to acquire CTV while they still have monopoly licenses . Monopolies are money makers. The only question would be if Bell has any relatives in the CTRC to maintain these monopolies? Best Regards!

2010-09-11, 12:02 AM	#64
vjose78 Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 1,318	Slightly off topic, but Harper WILL never get a majority because he's a moron and nobody trusts him. Even if he did get a majority he probably wouldn't give a damn about the CRTC. It's only the wishful thinking of some of you that Harper would do that with a majority. If he wanted to do that he would have brought it up by now, but it hasn't happened, what makes you think it will happen?

2010-09-11, 02:46 AM	#65
drazi_guy Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 32	Let them buy CTV and burn it to the ground, really. All of this gouging and rigmarole from the Cable, Internet and Cellular providers is just pushing the market towards alternatives. It's worth noting that none of these companies really controls the market, we control the market. Technology moves too fast to be suppressed for long. As each option gets more expensive, less money will be spent on them. If the average person doesn't perceive value in what they're getting they won't keep getting it. What I'm trying to say is that there's a maximum people will pay to be entertained. If they start trying to hose the consumer too badly, we'll get it somewhere else. For me, cable already got too expensive. I'd rather pay some overage fees to download all my TV shows than pay the cable company 80 bucks a month to get them. And I don't think the market will bear it if they try to price video downloading out of the market with caps and fees. Nearly every TV show is available on DVD, and often for 15-20 bucks a season if you look around. So let them all consolidate and plot ways to increase fees. At the end of the day, the majority of people have a fixed limit on what they are able/willing to spend to be entertained. We'll collectively make sure that we pay what we can afford and no more.

2010-09-11, 03:44 AM	#66
billhome Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 248	If he wanted to do that he would have brought it up by now, but it hasn't happened, what makes you think it will happen? He's already overruled the CRTC on Wind Mobile. Harper loves low-hanging fruit, and that is what attacking the CRTC is to him - high political reward, low effort.

2010-09-11, 10:34 AM	#70
gretzky Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 737	time for the CRTC to scrap the category 1 must carry channels now that the BDUs force us to pay for THEIR channels

2010-09-11, 11:29 AM	#72
grog Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Streetsville, ON Posts: 823	I can't see them decriminalizing Dish & DirecTV simply because the government gets no tax revenue from grey market. The average cable or satellite subscriber probably pays something on the order of $100/yr in taxes and multiple that by the millions that could potentially jump ship and that's a pretty serious revenue loss.

2010-09-11, 01:38 PM	#74
Paolo Veteran Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Regional Municipality of Durham Posts: 2,709	what is this gonna mean? more of those beaver commercials on ctv channels. as if we get enough of those guys. what were their names? frank and gordon?

2010-09-11, 02:28 PM	#75
slipperbomb Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Toronto, ON Posts: 16	Not a big deal. Bell bought back the company they had control over from 2000 -2006, held a minority stake since, and now decided they wanted full control again to better compete with Shaw and Rogers. On another note, this should effectively kill the FFC fiasco. The whole thing is a wash now.