The Official I Hate The CRTC Thread

[has_to_be]

so we are back to same the same ole same ole again
not only is it the ctrc decides whats best for us but also a member, instead of having the right of choice (espn vs tsn <<which stinks) a select few decide whats best for the wholeand that we don't need espn

but,everyone luvs a good hypocrit

"It is about time we get a service like this in Canada! I just hope that the monthly fee is similar to what Americans pay and that the offerings will be similar as well!! I will definately pay for this service if it is priced right! I have an ISP which offers me unlimited downloads.... for now!!"

[cptcarter]

It's not being a hypocrit, I gave my opinion just like everyone else does here.

[DSgamby]

Yes, Let's get ESPN so I can not watch any hockey on the weekday.

[cptcarter]

BTW, Netflix is not governed by the CRTC so my comment about hoping to get a good movie database has nothing to do with the CRTC and all about Netflix being able to negotiate with film distributers here in Canada. My ISP is fantastic, yes I enjoy having no caps but in my last 6 months of usage I have used less then 40 gb's, so even if I did have a cap, I'd never go over it for the service that I am paying for. I'm not one for too much government protectionism and interference however some is necessary to protect Canadian jobs.

[has_to_be]

protect canadian jobs my ass
maybe you would like to ask DSgamby how many jobs around the northern ontario area the government has protected, after seeing one mill after another close up, mining gone for a crap
who the hell wants to watch a hockey game followed by a hockey report, followed closely by hockey news followed right up by a hockey forum
so don't tell me we have a good job of reporting sports news, yes if you want to follow the "canadian" sport but otherwise as i said. tsn stinks
espn plays enough hockey to satisfy my needs for hockey

[cptcarter]

That is the great thing about the internet and free speech, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

[DSgamby]

has_to_be:

Regarding the government. Probably none as they don't care about us. Even the Municipal government does not want new businesses to come.

I want to watch as much hockey as possible, and I am not the only one.

ESPN doesn't play any hockey other then the short news. I can't live with that. Others also can't live with that.

Sure, you and others can live with that but most can't. TSN has huge numbers regarding hockey.

What does ESPN show that we don't get here on the 5 Sports Channels?

[Classof83]

TSN does produce some of its own hockey coverage, but a lot of time, it picks up the feed from Versus. ESPN used to hold the US cable rights, so they did used to show a lot of hockey, but they lost the rights to Versus in the States. So you'd need Versus up here too to get the original games back. And other than some CFL games, again, TSN picks up the rest of its sports programming.

The other Canadian sports networks also pick up a lot of their sports programming from the US networks too, especially NBA basketball and College Football / Basketball. For fans of US college sports, having access to the ESPN family of networks would be priceless.

[cptcarter]

I agree with DSGamby, it's all about the numbers. Considering there are huge hockey fans in this country, that is what the sports networks cater to and show more of. In the U.S, it's all about football and a lot of college sports, so that is what they show a lot of. It's simple business... you provide what the marketplace wants.

[Wayne]

Originally Posted by Classof83

TSN does produce some of its own hockey coverage, but a lot of time, it picks up the feed from Versus. ESPN used to hold the US cable rights, so they did used to show a lot of hockey, but they lost the rights to Versus in the States. So you'd need Versus up here too to get the original games back. And other than some CFL games, again, TSN picks up the rest of its sports programming.

I would bet that TSN produces the majority of its top rated shows. This would include regukar season hockey games involving Canadian teams, Stanley Cup playoff games, the World Jr Championship, the Olympics, the CFL, Blue Jays games, and curling.

If Versus was available in Canada the hockey games would not be shown since they don't own Canadian rights to NHL games. They would be blacked-out with a message like "this show is not available in your area"

[noaa2000]

Was going to post this a while ago but just wanted to be sure if this good thing would last.Such a wonderful pleasure it is for me to once again be able to watch Sunday Night Football on NBC without the dreaded simsub monster rearing its
ugly head.For some reason TSN 2 dropped the Sunday night game from their schedule which is find with me.

[Simonizer]

Noaa, in the area where I live, CTV managed to simsub two different standard definition games, even though we only get one CTV standard definition station!!! How unbelievable is that!

[cheadlebeagle]

As I'm new maybe this has been discussed but the CRTC has ruined BBC Canada as it now shows so many Holmes on Homes, and gardening junk and I presume this is to comply with the CRTC regs. I don't understand why I should have to see Canadian content when subscribing to a specialty BBC channel to see British shows.

[gobisbay]

There's no reason TSN couldn't exist with ESPN. There's not a lot of overlap. I understand that TSN airs a lot of popular Canadian sports programming (hockey, curling, WJHC, CFL). But they DON'T air a lot of other sports that I would love to see. Solution? Give us ESPN and I can watch lots of college sports (plus NBA, but I'm not a fan of that - although many are). The people who love TSN can have that too.

Also, there are packages to get most/all games for each sport. It's just that in Canada, this is a debacle. In the U.S., they actually air what they say they will, and plenty in HD.

[Wiremonkey]

How I see it.
The CRTC regulates radio, television and telecommunications in Canada, and is itself reportable to Parliament. But each market is regulated differently.

Telephone service is regulated the most tightly. No foreign ownership is currently allowed over I believe 25% in Telephone or Cellular (the Harper gov’t recently made a precident setting exception for Wind Mobile). There is a requirement for incumbent telcos (TELUS, Bell, Sask Tel , MTS etc) to repair out of service lines in 24 hours or less or there can be fines levied to the providers. This is apparently monitored by the CRTC. I guess this is OK, but if you give crap service people can just leave. Do we really need a telephone Gestapo? Foriegn opwnership is kind of a strange one too. I'm not sure what its for, maybe to make sure the guys at the top stay wealthy. It certainly doesn't protect jobs in Canada. Many companies contract out buying, sourcing, and call centers to outside country providers. TELUS certainly does and thats common knowledge, so the foreign ownership rules obviously aren't intended to protect Canadian jobs or to keep the money in Canada. If they are, HELLO OTTAWA IT AIN'T WORKING!

Internet is not currently regulated, and so ShawPhone, which is not actually a telephone system but an internet application, is not regulated in the same manner as say a TELUS phone line. There are no requirements to restore service in 24 hours or less for Shaw. Likewise there is no regulated requirement to have an out of service internet connection repaired in any time limit, for any Canadian provider. Incumbent telcos instead are required to offer wholesale internet in bulk as it were to independent providers at a CRTC regulated cost. There is no such requirement for Shaw, as being a cable provider makes their regulation entirely different. Shaw is basically 'off leash' to the CRTC when compared to the much more regulated TELUS or any other Canadian telephone company for instance.

This is just another part of the twisted and IMO foolish mandate of the CRTC to ‘encourage competition’ in the industry. I think if you want to be a provider you should set up your own network, not be able to mooch of another company that HAS spent the money to build a network, who then is required by regulation to sell wholesale time to another startup company on thier network at a price set by a third party (the CRTC) who should have nothing to do with it in the first place. All this BS to supposedly enable a competitor to enter the market? Why? If they can’t afford to be competitive on their own dime then perhaps they should find another business. But that’s just my opinion. Government meddling in an industry to try to make the ‘playing field level’ is ridiculous. No one ‘levelled the playing field’ for the original companies when they set up. In addition I’m not sure the gov’t should be in this kind of business, they neither understand the industry or the emerging technology. Hell every few months it seems the gov’t looses some files for confidential information, they can’t keep their own house in order, now they want to run communications companies. Its absurd.

Television is also regulated by the CRTC, but that regulation is mainly the same type as radio. They hand out the broadcast licenses and regulate Can Con (can con, more nanny state BS). They say which channels are ‘basic cable requirements’. It’s the CRTC that decides I get to HAVE the French channels and pay all the expense (federally funded with my tax dollars of course) associated with giving them to me, whether I want them or not.

Conrad Finkenstien and his minions have long outgrown their usefulness. Canadians are not well served, nor do they get good value or any tangible benefit from the CRTC. The sooner it goes the better. Let all the old fuds on the board go find something productive to do. If they want to have good Canadian content for Canadian viewers, then redirect the money we use to keep the CRTC going to creative people and make it.

Ahhhhhh, so purgative. Thanks for the place to rant. I feel better now.


- another TELUS tech