Regional carriers acknowledge opportunity exists, though
By Greg O’Brien
TORONTO – It was heartening to hear from a handful of the top Canadian telecom executives on Wednesday when they detailed how their companies have, admirably, responded to the Covid-19 crisis.
Suspensions of overage fees, no disconnects, working with businesses and consumers to defer payments or re-do packages to help as they struggle financially, serious progress on remote health (especially by Telus), self-installs, employees working from home, networks which have remained robust and resilient, and charitable contributions too numerous to count, it has been an 11-week stretch like none of us have ever experienced.
The chief executives of Bell and Rogers and the CFO of Telus told online attendees of the TD Securities Telecom and Media virtual conference on Wednesday all those good things can be traced back to one thing: The long-time commitment of the federal government and the CRTC to facilities-based competition.
Both Bell president and CEO Mirko Bibic and Rogers president and CEO Joe Natale said they were hopeful their companies’ actions during the crisis have burnished their reputations with government and will encourage the legislators to stick with the facilities-based policy.
“We’ve been working closely with the federal government and provincial governments and you see some evidence in public commentary from government officials about the state of our networks and being very pleased with the networks and what the industry has done,” said Bibic.
“We’ve never seen stronger co-operation between industry and government. The networks have performed very well and that hasn’t been the case in many parts of the globe,” added Natale during his appearance. “The government has made some very strong comments around ‘investment matters’ and that’s why we’re here.”
“The relationship and the trust has never been better and that’s always a good thing (but) we will have to wait and see how it materializes.”
There are two major issues overhanging the industry, of course: the rates wholesale broadband providers have to pay incumbents for third party internet access to wired networks, which will go to court virtually at the end of June; and the possibility mobile virtual network operators (MVNOs) will be mandated for the wireless industry. The industry will know where it stands sometime this year when the CRTC announces its new wireless policies, which has been delayed due to the pandemic.
While facilities-based has long been the mantra for carriers, should MVNOs be mandated, or mandated with an expiry date, opportunity exists for certain carriers to take advantage. The smaller, regional carriers, acknowledged that fact on Wednesday.
While both Quebecor CFO Hugues Simard and Shaw Communications president Paul McAleese said they prefer the CRTC stick to facilities-based, both men also see opportunity if the Commission goes the other way.
TD analyst Vince Valentini reminded the virtual attendees Videotron and Freedom Mobile could become MVNOs on the networks of the Big Three in regions where they have not yet acquired spectrum, or just regions in which they might want to expand without building their own network, or plan to build later on.
“We’re not quite there yet, but certainly not closed off to the idea. It might make sense.” – Hugues Simard, Quebecor
“It could be an opportunity,” said Simard. Videotron could also rent its network to fellow Quebecker Cogeco, which wants into the wireless game, too. “It works both ways, and as we’ve said in the past, we’re not closed off to the idea. It could be an opportunity. It’s not something we’re working on actively right now but… we’ve come along on that idea and it could potentially be an opportunity for us in the right circumstances,” he said.
“We’re not quite there yet, but certainly not closed off to the idea. It might make sense.”
Valentini also asked of McAleese: “You can use MVNO to extend your footprint while you gradually build your own network in some smaller markets. You also could be an MVNO for others, regardless of the regulatory environment.”
“The devil is always in the details,” replied McAleese, “and we’re working closely with the Commission and ISED on making sure our point is well served here. We are first and foremost believers in facilities-based providers and that’s the priority… and we want to make sure that message is clear.
“Whether there is opportunity for us, there is certainly that potential, but we don’t go into that file with that priority. We want to ensure the investments made by us and by all the carriers by the last number of decades… are protected and continue to be encouraged.
“I’m less concerned with what the opportunity is coming out of this and making sure we continue to support the networks we have.”
