Court quashes Tory cabinet’s Globalive decision (overturned) - Page 3 - Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

post #31 of 124 (permalink) Old 2011-02-06, 10:41 AM
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Posts: 14,919
Thanks to dalmond for posting the court decision. Paragraph 107 says:
Quote:
The Governor in Council has in many respects adhered to and acknowledged the Canadian telecommunication policy objectives as set out in section 7 of the Act. However, the Governor in Council has stepped outside those provisions by inserting a previously unknown policy objective into section 7; namely, that of ensuring access to foreign capital, technology and experience. Secondly it erred by limiting its Decision to Globalive only.
I'm not a lawyer and I just skimmed the doc, but it looks to me that the court didn't say that Globalive wasn't Canadian-controlled. The court said that one of the reasons the cabinet used was not in the Telecom Act (ensuring access to foreign capital, technology and experience). If the cabinet had just left that clause out and not limited the decision to Globalive, I think could have approved the cabinet decision.

I wonder if the cabinet could modify it's decision and reissue it to comply with the court's ruling.
Dr.Dave is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 124 (permalink) Old 2011-02-06, 12:56 PM
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 4,670
Not sure they can modify the ruling. Not sure they will. I think this is off to the Federal Court of Appeal.

That said, I think the Court got it absolutely right. They authority of Parliament has to trump that of Cabinet. Parliament passed a law and the Cabinet is bound to follow the law.
JohnnyCanuck is offline  
post #33 of 124 (permalink) Old 2011-02-06, 02:20 PM
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 63
Coilin they have had 14 months and 45 days to become compliant. And they have not.
How were they swamped at the call centers? I find that so amusing. Was the network so bad they were called day and nite? Come on! They outsourced to save money.
Globalive did not buy the equipment, Orascom Telecom bought and installed the equipment. At 1 point Tony said that his experts were installing the equipment and he went on about the experts etc.. but the question still stands.. how is it that 3 of the 4 new entrants were able to get the right funding, be compliant, meet both the CRTC and IC standards while Globalive was not able to?

Saving face? You are kidding right? Tony Clement is the one with egg on his face. All this time Globalive could have improved its position and made itself compliant.. I do recall after the back room deal was reached it was stated an appeal would be coming. To me that says hey you dodged the bullet but they are going to take another shot... so lets get all of our paperwork sorted!

Tim this rule was not just for telecom it was for everything. Do think about that for a moment. Any company that sets up HAS to abide by the same rules. It was foreign control not telecom foreign control. So I ask you. How were these and other companies able to comply and Globalive could not?

Vodafone and the others would love to come here! But I think the idea of a carrier owning the frequency is madness. Look at Europe where the government owns the frequency and then the carrier rent space and they all compete.. Why not buy the frequencies from the big 3 make them rent it from you and allow other companies to compete.. Now thats competition.. !!!
Rockjock is offline  
 
post #34 of 124 (permalink) Old 2011-02-06, 04:34 PM
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,981
I don't understand your point. They now have 45 days to become compliant. As I said, the past year or more is irrelevant to their continued existence. I agree with the courts that they weren't compliant, but it doesn't matter. What matters is that now they must somehow find a way to become compliant.

The outsourced call centre to Egypt was absolutely to save money. That was never in question.

The rules for telecoms are very different than other businesses. While they all still have to meet guidelines to operate here, businesses like Honda or Wal-Mart are foreign owned and it's not an issue. They also require far, far less start-up capital than a wireless network.
TorontoColin is offline  
post #35 of 124 (permalink) Old 2011-02-06, 06:38 PM
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 63
Colin I have to say you have no idea what you are talking about. The foreign ownership criteria is the same across the board. My point is Wind knew it was not compliant from day 1. So would you not think it would be prudent knowing that a appeal was filed that you should become compliant? Yet again you do not answer my simple question. How is it the other 3 entrants were able to abide by the rules and come to market? Why must we change the laws to accommodate 1 party while the others easily were able to meet the standards and proceed? So you agree that they were not compliant, but that does not matter now? So you are saying that its ok that they broke the rules and now that they are caught they should be allowed to become compliant? That is like catching someone driving with out a license and them saying oh its ok I have 45 days to get my license, or opening a bar with out a liquor license and telling the inspector that you fully intend to get one eventually. Colin I can not believe you believe what you are saying.


Was Globalive compliant? No
Should Globalive have been allowed to go to market.. No, they were not compliant.
Was it fair the other 3 entrants HAD to abide by the rules while Globalive did not? No
Was it fair that the bad room deal was made and then sealed so the details could be kept secret? No. So now that they have been found non compliant you want the laws to be changed? Colin really?

Colin you can not have it both ways.. you said the call centers were swamped.. this was pre 100k thats a joke! the wait times are still insane.. so what had changed?

clearly you are a wind fan boy on this matter. As matter of law Globalive broke the rules, the apple does not fall from the tree, Orascom the owners of Wind break them all the time.
Rockjock is offline  
post #36 of 124 (permalink) Old 2011-02-06, 09:53 PM
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Winterpeg
Posts: 224
My guess is, Shaw comes in with enough cash to make them "Canadian" enough. Everyone wins, Wind stays in business, Shaw gets a cell phone network for a song, and the government gets to continue doing nothing worthwhile.
sk1d is offline  
post #37 of 124 (permalink) Old 2011-02-07, 12:36 AM
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,981
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockjock View Post
The foreign ownership criteria is the same across the board.
Not true at all. Plenty of businesses are allowed to operate in Canada despite being 100% foreign owned. The difference is that Wal-Mart isn't subject to CRTC regulation. They set up a Canadian division with a Canadian president and CEO, but Verizon could do that and still wouldn't be allowed to operate in Canada.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockjock View Post
My point is Wind knew it was not compliant from day 1. So would you not think it would be prudent knowing that a appeal was filed that you should become compliant?
Of course, and I know they looked for Canadian funding and couldn't find it in the scale they needed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockjock View Post
How is it the other 3 entrants were able to abide by the rules and come to market?
I'm not sure as to which 'three' new entrants you are referring. If you mean Public and Mobile, they were done on much, much smaller scale and needed far less funding. If you're referring to Shaw and Videotron, they represent companies already established in the Canadian telecom sector and can use the funds and assets from their other divisions as the start up capital for their wireless divisions. And again, they're not on the same scale as Wind.

To be honest, I don't really care that they broke the rules, that's for the courts to handle. I have nothing invested in any of them and Wind's presence makes rates cheaper for me. Maybe they should be fined or something, but simply shutting them down obviously isn't a practical outcome. The courts made their decision, now we'll see what happens. I'm hoping for an outcome which favours consumers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockjock View Post
you said the call centers were swamped.. this was pre 100k thats a joke! the wait times are still insane.. so what had changed?
If you want a better timeline, Wind found their call centres were at capacity before they launched in Vancouver, Ottawa, and Edmonton, so they hired a whole bunch of new CSRs. Following those launches they quickly realized that their one call centre wasn't nearly enough so they contracted the second call centre in Peterborough. Pleased with the results, when that one reached capacity they hoped to do the same thing only cheaper by contracting the Egyptian call centre. They aren't pleased with that one, and they're apparently now much more wary of contracted call centres, so they're now trying to add more in-house, but that takes much longer and they are already overloaded. Keep in mind that they're adding subs at a fairly high rate. I'm not saying they haven't made mistakes with the call centres, I'm saying these aren't the actions of a company on the verge of leaving.
TorontoColin is offline  
post #38 of 124 (permalink) Old 2011-02-07, 11:51 AM
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,981
Wind has posted a response on their blog:

Quote:
Many of you have heard the news about the Federal Court's decision this past Friday. At WIND we are pretty used to taking on challenges and we will not shy away from this one. We will not be deterred by our competitors efforts to slow down our business. We have our actions to take to continue to bring competitive choice to Canadians. We plan on providing you great service at a great price for a long time.
Here are the facts of the situation: on Friday, the Federal Court released a decision concerning an application brought by our competitors, Public Mobile and Telus. The Court ruled that the Cabinet decision that confirmed our right to operate back in 2009 contained two errors and so should be quashed. This decision does not have any immediate impact on our customers – it’s business as usual for WIND as we resolve this in the Courts.
As a new entrant, this isn’t the first challenge that we’ve faced. We haven’t backed down when dealing with any of the challenges we’ve been confronted with since entering the auction for our wireless spectrum licenses in 2008, and we aren’t going to start now.
Followed by a list of the things they've accomplished and how they're not going away, it's all mostly fluff.
TorontoColin is offline  
post #39 of 124 (permalink) Old 2011-02-07, 03:48 PM
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Richmond, BC
Posts: 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockjock View Post
C

Was Globalive compliant? No
Should Globalive have been allowed to go to market.. No, they were not compliant.
Was it fair the other 3 entrants HAD to abide by the rules while Globalive did not? No
Was it fair that the bad room deal was made and then sealed so the details could be kept secret? No. So now that they have been found non compliant you want the laws to be changed? Colin really?
Was Globalive complaint - No, Yes, No - When CRTC made their decision - no; at the time the Cabinet made their decision - yes; at the time the Federal Court made their ruling - no. Legally, without any historical perspective they were never compliant, but you make a business decision on the facts at the time with assumptions for certain risk not a crystal ball.

The Cabinet decision wasn't a backroom deal. It is by legal tradition that Cabinet decisions are not public.

Desiring to change a law now that is not in keeping with the competition policy of the gov't with respect to Telecom is perfectly sensible.

Fairness has nothing to do with law, just can't be arbitrary, vague or otherwise unconstitutional. The Telecom Act itself, in particular the clauses that supported the CRTC decision are subjective and vague - perhaps a point that will see them tossed in SC eventually if not amended by Parliament first.
robsaw is offline  
post #40 of 124 (permalink) Old 2011-02-07, 05:39 PM
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 63
Rob they never were compliant. That is clear. They were told by the CRTC they were not.. not just once but twice.. Yes again I have to ask. How where the other new entrants able to proceed while Globalive was not? the backroom deal is just that.. once it happened the details were asked about the it was sealed. That to me is shady. Now it comes to light that Orascom has 90% of the debt. this is just unwinding more and more.. Tony was just on the radio.. 800 employees and 200k in subs? those numbers are different from his last statement... was he mistaken? naaa he got the fax from Orascom..

The law sould apply to them all.. Should Wind get a gimme?? a mulligan..?

Please put your wind handset down.. you are inside and can not get a signal..

Wind is not compliant. So as I see it there are 2 options. 1 Become compliant. Or 2 change the law. They have had more then 14 months to do so and have not.. and why change a law that 3 of the 4 new entrants had no problem with? No name calling just answer that simply.

Last edited by TorontoColin; 2011-02-07 at 05:50 PM. Reason: Removed unnecessary quote
Rockjock is offline  
post #41 of 124 (permalink) Old 2011-02-07, 06:00 PM
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,981
Because Wind is the biggest and most important of those new entrants, and if you really want competition then you need to create an environment in which the competition can survive. Since the money within Canada clearly has no interest in Wind-level wireless ambition, the laws may need to change. Consider that exclusively urban carriers like Mobilicity and Public will not help rural users, and more regional carriers like Videotron, Shaw, and Eastlink will have a more limited market impact than Wind.
TorontoColin is offline  
post #42 of 124 (permalink) Old 2011-02-07, 10:07 PM
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 63
Colin they are the biggest because they were able to get funding outside the rules. I would like someone to be bold enough and answer the question. Why were the other entrants able to get funding and be able to come to market without a problem? Why must we change laws to accommodate 1 malcontent who clearly had a business plan that was not pleasing to the banks and such? I really am not understanding why this is such a hard question to answer. Wind was not on compliance. We agree. So lets change the rules because they are big.. They got big because of the rules being bent.. I say let them burn
Rockjock is offline  
post #43 of 124 (permalink) Old 2011-02-07, 10:19 PM
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,981
I already answered that. Wind couldn't find the money in Canada because they needed more money than the others and, as their build-out will take longer and cost more, they needed more time to pay it back.

Clearly DAVE couldn't raise that kind of capital while following the rules or I'm sure they would have. This means that the current rules do not allow for proper competition and thus need to be changed if proper competition is what the government wants. Think what you want about Wind, but that part is undeniable.
TorontoColin is offline  
post #44 of 124 (permalink) Old 2011-02-07, 11:07 PM
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 63
colin what difference does any of that make? if the rules are for all why do they get extra consideration? So what you are saying is their plans were bigger so they should be exempt? You are clearly biased here. You rational is loopy. they had bigger plans? maybe they should have had smaller plans and built up slowly. I simply can not fathom your logic here. So when you shop for a car do you look at what you clearly can not afford? When you order a meal and have 20.00 in your pocket do you order the most expensive meal and then figure oh well when the bill comes I will simply say I was more hungry than the other bloke .. so thats ok?

Colin you can sit there and tell me what you just makes sense. I am God smacked with your statement.. They were bigger so they had to break the laws.. Bollocks !
Rockjock is offline  
post #45 of 124 (permalink) Old 2011-02-08, 12:00 AM
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Winterpeg
Posts: 224
Wind was the only company that actually tried to buy spectrum for all of Canada. Public and Mobilicity are already operating in all of the markets they bought spectrum. They took the cheap way out, but as a result, they'll never have national coverage and never be that important of a player in the market. Wind is the only one of the new entrants that really has a chance to become as big as Rogers and the others.

That's why Wind needed so much money. And lets face it, Canadian investors are spineless; they don't take risks with their money. So they had to look elsewhere for someone with enough patience and willing to take the risk.

Last edited by TorontoColin; 2011-02-08 at 12:39 AM. Reason: language
sk1d is offline  
Reply

Tags
globalive , wind , wind mobile

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

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

Password:


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

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










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 post new threads
You may 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