By way of comparison, I'm living in Melbourne, Australia, and pay $55/month for the Nexus S w/ unlimited calls within Australia (including to other mobile phones), unlimited texts (IIRC) and 500 MB of data. That's for a one-year plan w/ Vodafone, and I didn't pay anything up-front for the phone. Needless to say I'm looking forward to upgrading to the Galaxy Nexus soon. :) My wife has the the same phone and same plan for two years and pays $45/month.
The Australian mobile phone market is very competitive, and it has a number of foreign players (e.g., Optus, Vodafone, Virgin). Australian fixed-line telecommunications are much less competitive due to the legacy stranglehold of the former government monopoly, Telstra.
IMO Canadians are far too complacent about government sanctioned monopolies or oligopolies (e.g., car insurance in BC, alcohol sales are provincial government monopolies, dairy product quotas, wheat board monopoly) that means they pay more for less choice, supposedly for their own good, when in reality it just enriches an old-boys network of politically well-connected players and condemns the protected industries to being being unable to compete internationally.
BC insurance, from my experience, isn't really a problem. Most quotes I've received in markets where there is a free(r) market for insurance often are considerably higher than what BC drivers pay through ICBC, especially if the driver is under 25.
Case in point, I renewed my auto insurance today with ICBC and paid $1470 for 12 months of insurance for a 2007 Mazda 3. The policy includes $2,000,000 liability, collision and comprehensive coverage with $300 deductibles, plus rental car coverage. In the last five years I was rear-ended at a stop light and my car was vandalized once. The equivalent quote from Geico was $2385 which only included $500,000 of liability insurance.
The typical Canadian will irrationally defend any policy that differs from the equivalent policy in America, because the typical Canadian's sense of national identity is 10% hockey and 90% 'we're different from the Americans'.
We're never going to deregulate and allow a little free-market competition to lower prices as long as these proposals can be criticized as 'Americanization' or 'the American way'. It's not complacency that ties Canadians to our goofy oligopolies, it's our own misguided nationalism.
I've never understood why in many western industrialized countries telecommunications has not been regulated the same as sewage, roads, electricity, etc. It is a vital piece of infrastructure in the 21st century and it should be the responsibility of the government to manage such infrastructure.
we used to have that, and while the service of providing roads, electricity, or sewerage hasn't changed much in the last 100 years, telecommunications certainly has. while networks might lend themselves to natural monopolies, government sponsored telecommunications monopolies couldn't keep up with the pace of innovation these days and as a result consumers would be left paying high rates for antiquated service.
You're evidently too young to remember when AT&T had a government granted monopoly. Suffice it to say that it was not an era that was known for innovation and value.
I've never understood why in many western industrialized countries telecommunications has not been regulated the same as sewage, roads, electricity, etc
Because the technology required for telecommunications changes quicker than that required for sewage, roads, electricity etc.
Highly regulated markets are slower to react than less regulated markets, and government owned monopolies are usually the slowest of the lot.
In general the model that seems to have generated the best outcome for consumers is government-mandated competition. This takes many forms (eg, local-loop unbundling in the UK and Europe, partial forced access regulation in Australia), but enables companies to compete on services, innovation and price whilst keeping the government involved to enforce consumer interests.
The issue is precisely that regulators are in bed with monopolizers. More regulation will only strengthen their stranglehold on this market. The proper response in this scenario is complete deregulation, allowing international players to drive competition in the currently stagnant market.
I doubt anyone who has ever had to deal with one of the big 3 in Canada (Rogers, Telus, or Bell) would argue against this point. Canadians really need to push for an open system that allows foreign competition to enter the marketplace. Until we do, the status quo is simply going to continue to press the advantage they have at the expense of the Canadian consumers.
This is the one thing in my life where I can't vote with my wallet. I only really have three viable choices for wireless right now: Rogers, Bell, and Telus.
The problem is so many of those inclined to oppose the government-protected big 3 cartel are also the same sort who think the solution to every problem is a government monopoly. Any push for change would not move to a more open system, but would at most replace it with a Crown Corporation.
I have cell service with Bell Aliant (eastern Canada) and my data is horrible!
My phone a Samsung Galaxy SII on Bell's HSPA+ network which from what I understand can be anywhere from 21Mbps to 42Mbps but my phone is only capable of a max of 21Mbps. I don't expect to get 21Mbps or even 15Mbps but most days it's 0.3 or 1Mbps maybe 5Mbps to 9Mbps on a good day. Outright lies or incompetence or both to say such a thing and not have anywhere near what they promise.
Bell's excuse is the network is busy with other users but I test it at all hours of the day and each day and weekend but it's never consistent. They advertise "HSPA+ 21Mbps" but make excuse after excuse once you're a customer that you'll never ever see that.
I complained to the CRTC Donna Shewfelt Client Services wrote back to me gave me a case number 'CRTC Case ID: 548491' but then "The telecommunications industry has established an independent consumer agency, the Commissioner for Complaints for Telecommunications Services (CCTS)"
and
"Given the concerns you have raised, we believe this complaint is more properly within the scope of the CCTS and have forwarded your complaint to them."
That was September 22 of this year (2011) and not one reply since then from any of them.
new zealanders have a rough go with their telecommunications as well. I recall seeing the vodafone CEO on the news saying they made 3-4x as much profit in new zealand as anywhere else (per customer probably). The only competion was the ex-public telecom.
canadians don't have it quite so bad as the new zealanders, but they get a worse deal than the americans for sure.
That graph doesn't even give justice to the true cost. Canada plans are almost always regional, so to call another city, even one nearby is a long distance call. VOIP phones are also rare because numbers are restricted, Skype and Google Phone do not exist here.
Canada's telecom industry can accurately be described as a mafia-style public cartel.
This definitely sucks for Canada. The Telco's and the antiquated regulation that protects them are big gatekeepers to progress and innovation. How do we break out of this deadlock?
One has to fix the prime example of regulatory capture that is the CRTC. This can be achieved by either changing the current management or drafting more legislation.
BC only has one car insurance provider so they're free to set the prices as they see fit. They even try and pretend that they're doing it to help keep prices low as competition would only raise the prices for everyone (yes, they really said this).
It's fascinating that ICBC is so bad. In Saskatchewan, we've got SGI (another government car insurance monopoly), but their prices are quite good, and they run it such that they don't really make a profit (if there's a surplus, they write cheques back to people).
From what I can tell from other peoples' comments throughout this thread, SaskTel seems to be in a similar boat. The population and economy of Sask. doesn't really support, imho, a business case for the level of service SaskTel provides, but the government provides it anyway. I've been extremely happy with my SaskTel service for years, and now that they've moved to GSM, things just keep getting better.
They did it because they made motor insurance mandatory and it would be unfair to force someone to have something that the market didn't have to provide.
In europe it's essentially impossible for anyone under 21 to get insurance ( without tricks like being listed on parent's cover ) even though the law says you can drive at 17. Typical rates for liability-only on a 17 year old are $10K/year
Imagine living in a rural part of BC where work and shopping is 20 miles away and the insurance companies all charge $10K for drivers under 21.
Yes it's unfair that as a middle age driver I pay 2-3x as much as I would in europe in order to cover a west vancouver millionaire's kid in a ferrari. But it's also unfair that I'm paying for elementary schools for someone else's kid or subsidizing somebody else's cancer treatment.
For the most part, maybe. Tell that to the Bell customers who deal with Indian call centres when they need tech support. I know I did, years back (haven't dealt with Bell in a while).
This is meant to be a legitimate question, not sarcasm: Are there any countries where telecom is not "rigged"? That is, places where an entrepreneur could enter the market and the incumbents by and large would play "fair"?
Can you give me some concrete examples of this? I have a lecturer at university who constantly harps on about "canada doing it right" with broadband access and I've always had the feeling that he has no idea what he's talking about. I'd love to go head-to-head with him next year over the topic.
Even worse in canada - all incoming firms have to be Canadian owned and financed. Try raising the money for a nation wide set of phone masts if you aren't allowed overseas investors
[+] [-] jbarham|14 years ago|reply
The Australian mobile phone market is very competitive, and it has a number of foreign players (e.g., Optus, Vodafone, Virgin). Australian fixed-line telecommunications are much less competitive due to the legacy stranglehold of the former government monopoly, Telstra.
IMO Canadians are far too complacent about government sanctioned monopolies or oligopolies (e.g., car insurance in BC, alcohol sales are provincial government monopolies, dairy product quotas, wheat board monopoly) that means they pay more for less choice, supposedly for their own good, when in reality it just enriches an old-boys network of politically well-connected players and condemns the protected industries to being being unable to compete internationally.
FWIW I'm Canadian.
[+] [-] maximilianburke|14 years ago|reply
Case in point, I renewed my auto insurance today with ICBC and paid $1470 for 12 months of insurance for a 2007 Mazda 3. The policy includes $2,000,000 liability, collision and comprehensive coverage with $300 deductibles, plus rental car coverage. In the last five years I was rear-ended at a stop light and my car was vandalized once. The equivalent quote from Geico was $2385 which only included $500,000 of liability insurance.
[+] [-] gyardley|14 years ago|reply
We're never going to deregulate and allow a little free-market competition to lower prices as long as these proposals can be criticized as 'Americanization' or 'the American way'. It's not complacency that ties Canadians to our goofy oligopolies, it's our own misguided nationalism.
[+] [-] unknown|14 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] zmanji|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] snowwindwaves|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jbarham|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nl|14 years ago|reply
Because the technology required for telecommunications changes quicker than that required for sewage, roads, electricity etc.
Highly regulated markets are slower to react than less regulated markets, and government owned monopolies are usually the slowest of the lot.
In general the model that seems to have generated the best outcome for consumers is government-mandated competition. This takes many forms (eg, local-loop unbundling in the UK and Europe, partial forced access regulation in Australia), but enables companies to compete on services, innovation and price whilst keeping the government involved to enforce consumer interests.
[+] [-] FD3SA|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] FreeKill|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] JonLim|14 years ago|reply
This is the one thing in my life where I can't vote with my wallet. I only really have three viable choices for wireless right now: Rogers, Bell, and Telus.
[+] [-] ataggart|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dhughes|14 years ago|reply
My phone a Samsung Galaxy SII on Bell's HSPA+ network which from what I understand can be anywhere from 21Mbps to 42Mbps but my phone is only capable of a max of 21Mbps. I don't expect to get 21Mbps or even 15Mbps but most days it's 0.3 or 1Mbps maybe 5Mbps to 9Mbps on a good day. Outright lies or incompetence or both to say such a thing and not have anywhere near what they promise.
Bell's excuse is the network is busy with other users but I test it at all hours of the day and each day and weekend but it's never consistent. They advertise "HSPA+ 21Mbps" but make excuse after excuse once you're a customer that you'll never ever see that.
I complained to the CRTC Donna Shewfelt Client Services wrote back to me gave me a case number 'CRTC Case ID: 548491' but then "The telecommunications industry has established an independent consumer agency, the Commissioner for Complaints for Telecommunications Services (CCTS)"
and
"Given the concerns you have raised, we believe this complaint is more properly within the scope of the CCTS and have forwarded your complaint to them."
That was September 22 of this year (2011) and not one reply since then from any of them.
[+] [-] snowwindwaves|14 years ago|reply
canadians don't have it quite so bad as the new zealanders, but they get a worse deal than the americans for sure.
[+] [-] pokoleo|14 years ago|reply
That's for a plan with: 200 minutes + 500 mb of data.
[+] [-] wavephorm|14 years ago|reply
http://www.mobilemag.com/2010/08/27/canadians-have-the-most-...
That graph doesn't even give justice to the true cost. Canada plans are almost always regional, so to call another city, even one nearby is a long distance call. VOIP phones are also rare because numbers are restricted, Skype and Google Phone do not exist here.
Canada's telecom industry can accurately be described as a mafia-style public cartel.
[+] [-] wmougayar|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] zmanji|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] deathchill|14 years ago|reply
http://ihateicbc.com/icbcs-dirty-little-secret.html
BC only has one car insurance provider so they're free to set the prices as they see fit. They even try and pretend that they're doing it to help keep prices low as competition would only raise the prices for everyone (yes, they really said this).
[+] [-] tonyarkles|14 years ago|reply
From what I can tell from other peoples' comments throughout this thread, SaskTel seems to be in a similar boat. The population and economy of Sask. doesn't really support, imho, a business case for the level of service SaskTel provides, but the government provides it anyway. I've been extremely happy with my SaskTel service for years, and now that they've moved to GSM, things just keep getting better.
[+] [-] nobody31415926|14 years ago|reply
In europe it's essentially impossible for anyone under 21 to get insurance ( without tricks like being listed on parent's cover ) even though the law says you can drive at 17. Typical rates for liability-only on a 17 year old are $10K/year
Imagine living in a rural part of BC where work and shopping is 20 miles away and the insurance companies all charge $10K for drivers under 21.
Yes it's unfair that as a middle age driver I pay 2-3x as much as I would in europe in order to cover a west vancouver millionaire's kid in a ferrari. But it's also unfair that I'm paying for elementary schools for someone else's kid or subsidizing somebody else's cancer treatment.
[+] [-] loceng|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] noarchy|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 1010010101|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|14 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] napierzaza|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jackvalentine|14 years ago|reply
This guy: http://www.politicalscience.com.au/ http://www.politicalscience.com.au/p/my-media.html
[+] [-] nobody31415926|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] feralchimp|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nobody31415926|14 years ago|reply