By Ahmad Hathout
OTTAWA – Rogers is arguing that the practice of bulk internet billing deals with residential buildings, which it says has been promoted by the CRTC, does not hamper competition, and in fact provides benefits that push forward the policies promoted by the commission.
Fibre service provider Beanfield filed a Part 1 application in late September asking the CRTC to prohibit Rogers from signing those bulk service agreements because it allegedly limits competition. Beanfield’s reasoning is that the multi-year contracts Rogers and others sign with building developers to provide default internet service disincentivizes switching service providers because the cost of the internet is built into their mandatory fees — giving those providers an undue preference.
But Rogers argued in a late October response that bulk billing agreements provide benefits, don’t stop other providers from signing access agreements with buildings and has been a policy endorsed by the commission for years.
“They do not eliminate end-user choice, they do not constitute an undue preference and they are not contrary to the MDU Access Condition,” Rogers said in its submission. “Bulk billing arrangements do not prevent or restrict competing TSPs from directly accessing and serving end-users in MDUs, and such an arrangement is only obtained by a TSP as part of a highly competitive bidding process to provide one or more communications services on a bulk basis to an MDU and its residents.”
Beanfield admitted that it signed a bulk billing contract for a Toronto Waterfront development in 2011 because the request asked specifically for that type of arrangement. At that time, Beanfield said those deals were far less common than they are now.
But Rogers disputes that claim as well. “These arrangements have been common in Toronto and other markets throughout Canada for decades,” Rogers said in its submission. “Broadcasting distribution undertakings (BDUs) have been serving their customers who reside in MDUs under bulk deals for almost as long as there have been cable companies operating in Canada. It is simply false for Beanfield to suggest otherwise.”
Though Rogers does say that over the past five years, the practice of bulk buys has become more prevalent, particularly in new construction projects.
The reason for their popularity, Rogers argues, is that it provides “significant cost savings,” convenience with the billing built in and amenities, such as a common WiFi area in the community and smart city functionality.
Regardless of the merits of the argument, Rogers argued that Beanfield’s application should be rejected solely because it is only targeting one telecom when the commission’s MDU access policy affects a broad swath of players, including other providers and buildings. In other words, a broad consultation would need to be had if the rules are to be followed, Rogers said.
If the commission were to nuke Rogers’s agreements, the cable company said existing agreements would be jeopardized, affecting billions of dollars in condo investments and disrupting connectivity for tenants.
