ARCHIVÉ - Transcription
Cette page Web a été archivée dans le Web
L’information dont il est indiqué qu’elle est archivée est fournie à des fins de référence, de recherche ou de tenue de documents. Elle n’est pas assujettie aux normes Web du gouvernement du Canada et elle n’a pas été modifiée ou mise à jour depuis son archivage. Pour obtenir cette information dans un autre format, veuillez communiquer avec nous.
Offrir un contenu dans les deux langues officielles
Prière de noter que la Loi sur les langues officielles exige que toutes publications gouvernementales soient disponibles dans les deux langues officielles.
Afin de rencontrer certaines des exigences de cette loi, les procès-verbaux du Conseil seront dorénavant bilingues en ce qui a trait à la page couverture, la liste des membres et du personnel du CRTC participant à l'audience et la table des matières.
Toutefois, la publication susmentionnée est un compte rendu textuel des délibérations et, en tant que tel, est transcrite dans l'une ou l'autre des deux langues officielles, compte tenu de la langue utilisée par le participant à l'audience.
TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE
THE CANADIAN RADIO‑TELEVISION AND
TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
TRANSCRIPTION DES AUDIENCES AVANT
CONSEIL DE LA RADIODIFFUSION
ET DES TÉLÉCOMMUNICATIONS CANADIENNES
SUBJECT:
FORBEARANCE FROM REGULATION OF LOCAL
EXCHANGE SERVICES /
ABSTENTION DE LA
RÉGLEMENTATION DES SERVICES LOCAUX
HELD
AT:
TENUE À:
Conference
Centre
Centre de conférences
Outaouais
Room
Salle Outaouais
Portage
IV
Portage IV
140
Promenade du Portage
140, promenade du Portage
Gatineau,
Quebec
Gatineau (Québec)
September
29, 2005
Le 29 septembre 2005
Transcripts
In
order to meet the requirements of the Official Languages
Act,
transcripts of proceedings before the Commission will be
bilingual
as to their covers, the listing of the CRTC members
and
staff attending the public hearings, and the Table of
Contents.
However,
the aforementioned publication is the recorded
verbatim
transcript and, as such, is taped and transcribed in
either
of the official languages, depending on the language
spoken
by the participant at the public hearing.
Transcription
Afin
de rencontrer les exigences de la Loi sur les langues
officielles,
les procès‑verbaux pour le Conseil seront
bilingues
en ce qui a trait à la page couverture, la liste des
membres
et du personnel du CRTC participant à l'audience
publique
ainsi que la table des matières.
Toutefois,
la publication susmentionnée est un compte rendu
textuel
des délibérations et, en tant que tel, est enregistrée
et
transcrite dans l'une ou l'autre des deux langues
officielles,
compte tenu de la langue utilisée par le
participant
à l'audience publique.
Canadian
Radio‑television and
Telecommunications Commission
Conseil de la radiodiffusion et des
télécommunications canadiennes
Transcript / Transcription
FORBEARANCE FROM REGULATION OF LOCAL
EXCHANGE SERVICES /
ABSTENTION DE LA
RÉGLEMENTATION DES SERVICES LOCAUX
BEFORE
/ DEVANT:
Charles
Dalfen
Chairperson / Président
Richard
French
Commissioner / Conseillier
Michel
Arpin
Commissioner / Conseillier
Stuart
Langford
Commissioner / Conseillier
Joan
Pennefather
Commissioner / Conseillère
Andrée
Noël
Commissioner / Conseillère
Elizabeth
Duncan
Commissioner / Conseillère
Rita
Cugini
Commissioner / Conseillère
Barbara
Cram
Commissioner / Conseillère
Ronald
Williams
Commissioner / Conseillier
Helen
del Val
Commissioner / Conseillère
ALSO
PRESENT / AUSSI PRÉSENTS:
Marielle
Girard
Consultation Secretary /
Secrétaire de la
consultation
James
Wilson
Legal Counsel /
Shelly
Cruise
Conseillers juridiques
Chris
Seidl
Project Manager /
Gestionnaire des projets
HELD
AT:
TENUE À:
Conference
Centre
Centre de conférences
Outaouais
Room
Salle Outaouais
Portage
IV
Portage IV
140
Promenade du Portage
140, promenade du Portage
Gatineau,
Quebec
Gatineau (Québec)
September
29, 2005
Le 29 septembre 2005
TABLE
DES MATIÈRES / TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE / PARA
PRESENTATION
BY / PRÉSENTATION PAR
Cogeco
Cable Canada Inc.
1058 / 5600
Shaw
Communications Inc.
1105 / 5873
Rogers
Communications Inc.
1185 / 6341
Québecor
Média Inc. / Vidéotron Télécom ltée 1268 /
6844
EastLink
Telephone
1329 / 7227
Gatineau Quebec / Gatineau (Québec)
‑‑‑
Upon resuming on Thursday, September 29, 2005
at 0930 / L'audience reprend
le jeudi
29 septembre 2005 à
0930
5595
THE CHAIRPERSON: Order,
please. À l'ordre, s'il vous
plaît. Good morning,
everyone.
5596
Madame la secrétaire...?
5597
THE SECRETARY: Thank you,
Mr. Chairman. Bonjour, tout le
monde.
5598
Please note that Panel 14, Rogers Communications Inc., traded places
with Panel 16, Cogeco Cable Canada Inc.
5599
Nous allons procéder maintenant avec Cogeco. Thank you.
PRESENTATION
/ PRÉSENTATION
5600
MR. MAYRAND: Thank
you.
5601
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Commission. I am Yves Mayrand, Vice-President
Corporate Affairs, Cogeco Cable Inc.
With me today are, on my left, Ron Perrotta, Vice-President, Marketing
and Sales; on my immediate right, François Audet, Director, Telecommunications
and, to his right, Michel Messier, Director, Regulatory Affairs,
Telecommunications.
5602
Merci de nous recevoir dans le cadre de cette importante audience
publique.
5603
As you probably know, Cogeco launched its digital phone service last June
in the cities of Burlington, Oakville and Trois-Rivières. We have since rolled it out to Windsor,
Drummondville and St-Hyacinthe.
This new service is essentially offered to residential customers. At this time, we plan to extend it
gradually to most cities served by Cogeco, hopefully by December 2006, but
obviously only where we can have a reasonable expectation that the service will
be economically viable in the long run.
5604
The outcome of this proceeding is just as vital for us as the outcome of
the VoIP proceeding. We waited for
your decision and we relied on it for our own decision to enter into the
residential local telephone market.
5605
In that decision, you confirmed that local VoIP services, dependent or
independent of access, should be regulated as local exchange
services.
5606
Of more direct relevance for the current proceeding, the Commission
decided to deny the ILEC requests for forbearance from the regulation of local
VoIP services. Without ambiguity,
the Commission based its determination on the fact that eight years after local
competition was officially introduced the ILECs continue to be the dominant
providers of local exchange services in Canada.
5607
The local market data recently released by the Commission has confirmed
this undeniable fact. Indeed, at
the end of 2004, the ILECs accounted for 97 percent of revenues for local
residential services on a national basis and continued to hold almost
100 percent market share in several local residential
markets.
5608
There is no guarantee of financial success in the local telephony market,
nor are we seeking such a guarantee from the regulator. All we are asking for in this proceeding
is predictability and consistency of the rules set by the Commission and a fair
chance to roll out our service throughout our service area and to capture a
sustainable position in the market as a new entrant before you leave it all to
market forces.
5609
Competition should have a decent opportunity to take hold in the local
telecommunications market before forbearance occurs. Indeed, you must consider not only the
establishment of competition but also the continuance of competition. The benefits of that competition should
extend to all regions of Canada, not just the largest cities in the
country. That is what the
Telecommunications Act clearly contemplates, and it makes
sense.
5610
The public interest would not be served if you did not make the right
call the first time and you had to re-regulate because competition, and
particularly facilities-based competition, did not take hold in the local
telecommunications market across Canada.
5611
As a member of CCTA, Cogeco fully supports CCTA's proposed local
forbearance framework and criteria.
We would like to focus our presentation today on the barriers that we
must still overcome for effective entry into the core residential market of the
incumbent telephone companies.
5612
François...?
5613
MR. AUDET: Thank you,
Yves.
5614
Cogeco operates cable systems dispersed throughout the provinces of
Québec and Ontario, that embrace 83 exchanges in 41 LIRs, involving
some metropolitan, but mainly mid-sized and smaller urban and rural areas. This geographic diversity creates a
particular challenge for Cogeco to expand its telephony offering throughout its
serving territory.
5615
While urban metropolitan areas are likely to provide reasonable
penetration and yield satisfactory economics, smaller centres remain a
challenge. Cogeco plans to roll out
its telephony offering gradually to most of its territory by the end of 2006,
but smaller markets will likely remain unaddressable under the current
interconnection regime.
5616
Further, Cogeco needs to obtain PSTN connectivity to all ILEC exchanges
where it wishes to provide its telephony offering. Instead of establishing its own local
interconnection LIR by LIR, exchange by exchange, Cogeco has opted to obtain its
PSTN connectivity through an arrangement with a third party, namely Telus, in a
manner that assures compliance with Decision 2005-28.
5617
Cogeco believes that direct interconnection is an option in the long run,
as it may provide better control over costs and more operational
flexibility. However, despite the
improvement brought by the establishment of LIRs, Cogeco is still of the view
that the current local interconnection default model would have been
uneconomical for Cogeco in almost all the local markets that it services due to
higher initial capital cost and insufficient returns.
5618
This remains a high barrier to entry for a carrier that primarily serves
the residential telephony market, particularly outside of the large metropolitan
areas. In smaller markets, it has
become critical to create synergies with a partner whose business model is
highly complementary to our own.
5619
In this regard, Cogeco submits that it is urgent that a new VoIP-to-VoIP
interconnection model be implemented to reduce the barrier imposed by the
current default local interconnection model. VoIP-to-VoIP interconnection should be
inspired by the highly successful and efficient IP peering model that has
developed between nearly all ISPs, where no compensation is paid, and where
traffic is exchanged in neutral third-party controlled
locations.
5620
It should be noted that Telus does not operate as a CLEC throughout
Bell's territory and, therefore, significant time and effort is required for
Telus to establish the necessary interconnections with Bell. As a result, Cogeco's deployment
schedule is lengthy, and one of its critical elements is
Bell.
5621
It is a priority at Cogeco to assure telephony service reliability. To this end, we are improving electrical
powering of HFC network active components, we are building redundancy in key
telephony network elements, including headend equipment, softswitches, trunking
gateways, routers, and servers.
Likewise, we are splitting a number of optical nodes to increase network
capacity. This represents
significant reinvestment in our networks.
5622
In order to be able to provide telephone service meeting CLEC
requirements, Cogeco has also had to implement several business processes
related to the portability and activation of telephone numbers, the provisioning
of the emergency services database, the availability of equal access, directory
listings, and the list goes on.
5623
These business processes have had to be developed, put in place, refined
and automated. These processes are
new to Cogeco and require major modification, development and testing of our
provisioning systems on an ongoing basis, as well as substantial learning for
our staff.
5624
In light of these challenges, the contrast with Bell is
overwhelming. Last March Bell
launched its Digital Voice Service, renamed Digital Voice Service Lite, in three
cities in the Province of Québec.
Six months later, not only did Bell announce that this service will be
available throughout the provinces of Ontario and Québec, but it also announced
that its new Digital Voice service, offered initially in Toronto and Hamilton,
will be extended within a month in major Ontario and Québec
cities.
5625
This demonstrates that Bell has a deployment capacity that is vastly
superior to that of a new entrant in the local market such as Cogeco. It is currently impossible for a cable
company like Cogeco to deploy competitive services at the same pace throughout
the same footprint.
5626
Ron...?
5627
MR. PERROTTA: Thank you,
François.
5628
We are entering a mature market still highly dominated by an
incumbent carrier with a 125-year heritage in telephony. The incumbent as also had eight years to
prepare for real competition in the field.
5629
The real question is this:
Will new entrants be able to build a critical mass of customers for their
alternative telephony offerings in order to be in a position to compete on a
sustainable basis against the incumbent telephone
companies?
5630
Despite the initial interest for voice over IP and cable telephony
services, nobody can really predict at this time how long it will take for
sustainable penetration levels to be achieved by new cable entrants. Consider some findings of the POLLARA
consumer research filed by Bell, conducted across Canada this year, at the end
of January, with regard to VoIP service.
5631
The vast majority of respondents, 95 percent, have at least one
concern with voice over IP services; 60 percent cited reliability of
service; 56 percent security; 42 percent quality of connection; and
42 percent cited the costs of purchasing the necessary
equipment.
5632
Only 47 percent of respondents expressed an interest in acquiring
VoIP services for their home if the cost was the same or less than their regular
telephone service, but 73 percent of these respondents said they would
replace their primary line service.
5633
44 percent of respondents believe that VoIP services will be less
expensive than their current phone service and the average discount they expect
is 43 percent.
5634
Finally, 40 percent of Québec respondents and 39 percent of
Ontario respondents cited Bell Canada as their first choice for voice over IP
service provider, far ahead of any other providers which ranged between 1 and
20 percent individually.
5635
These findings are instructive.
First, they confirm once again that VoIP services are clearly considered
by consumers as substitutes for traditional local phone
services.
5636
Second, concerns about the quality, reliability and security of voice
over IP services held by the vast majority of the population must be overcome
for voice over IP services to gain critical mass as a replacement for their
traditional local wireline phone service.
5637
Third, the findings confirm that customers are very reluctant to switch
unless offered significant savings in their decision to replace their phone
services. The conclusion is clear,
to make inroads in the residential telephony market, new entrants need to offer
substantial savings for a comparable service offering to a potential customer's
current phone service.
5638
Finally, and perhaps most striking of all, is the high level of customer
inertia to switch to an alternative voice over IP telephone service
provider. Almost three-quarters of
respondents are inclined to stay with their traditional telephone company,
either with a traditional service or a voice over IP
service.
5639
The initial pace of growth for competitive voice over IP services is
fuelled primarily by a limited pool of early adopters and dissatisfied telephone
company customers. To build
critical mass, alternative voice over IP providers will need to educate,
convince and convert a fair portion of the generally satisfied mainstream
customers of traditional phone services.
This will no doubt require expensive customer acquisition efforts and
costly mass marketing campaigns.
5640
But educating and converting consumers is not the only marketing
challenge. A major challenge is
also overcoming the ILECs' retaliatory marketing efforts designed to impede the
progress of competitive VoIP providers.
5641
Consider Bell marketing tactics deployed to counter the emergence of
competitive VoIP services:
5642
With the 1,000 minutes of North American calling for only $5.00 per month
launched in June 2004 and only recently discontinued, aiming to increase the
loyalty of its customers through bundling and reduce the attractiveness of VoIP
offerings, Bell succeeded to lock up 406,000 customers on two-year
contracts.
5643
Two months before the release of the Commission voice over IP
decision, Bell launched its own voice over IP service. This month, Bell announced a price
reduction of approximately 10 percent for its initial digital voice
service, renamed Digital Voice Lite.
5644
Simultaneously, Bell also launched its new Digital Voice service in
Hamilton and Toronto. By
positioning this offering as a digital service delivering "superior quality and
reliability", Bell now tried to retain customers who are interested by the
features offered by VoIP services by capitalizing on customer concerns about
VoIP services.
5645
Finally, in addition to the pricing flexibility provided by the approved
confidential ranges of rates which enable Bell to quickly respond to
competition, Cogeco notes that Bell is further trying to obtain the ability to
better target customers by province before it can do it by local
markets.
5646
It is clear that Bell will expand its retaliatory marketing efforts to
protect its market share if it is given the means to deploy more aggressive and
narrowly targeted marketing strategies.
5647
Bell has already proven in the past in other markets that it is capable
of developing efficient winback campaigns with targeted pricing and promotions
to defend its position.
5648
Clearly, current competitive safeguards related to marketing activities
are more than ever necessary to permit new entrants to overcome the barriers
related to customer inertia and the ILECs' targeted retaliatory marketing
efforts where nascent competition is the most vulnerable.
5649
Furthermore, an immediate all-out price war should be avoided in the
local telephone market. It will
only lead to the implosion of competition and the remonopolization of the local
residential market.
5650
Since residential customers are very price sensitive and the operating
margin to permit the recovery of fixed capital costs in a reasonable period of
time is low, there is no manoeuvring room for competitors to survive such a
preemptive strike by incumbent telephone companies, specifically against a "deep
pocket" competitor like Bell, which is 50 times ‑‑ yes, 50 times larger than
Cogeco.
5651
It is therefore critical that the Commission prevent targeted low pricing
and winbacks by incumbent telephone companies from stifling the establishment of
sustainable competition in local residential markets.
5652
Certainly in order to create the conditions for the emergence of
sustainable competition, new entrants must have the opportunity to demonstrate
the quality and reliability of their services and to get a viable foothold in
residential local telephony markets before the incumbent telephone companies are
deregulated.
5653
Forbearance was never intended as a licence to kill off competition, with
an ex post autopsy of dead competitors taking place once the bodies are
cold!
5654
Michel...?
5655
MR. MESSIER: Thanks.
5656
In its recent past decisions the Commission recognized that significant
barriers to entry remain in the local market, limiting the ability of
competitors to effectively resist anti-competitive behaviour by incumbents. Specifically, Cogeco notes the
following:
5657
The winback rules were extended in the residential market to 12 months,
recognizing that the winback activities increase churn, which is especially
detrimental to CLECs as they do not have a large stable base of customers
capable of funding the CLECs' ongoing operations.
5658
Several competitive safeguards were imposed with respect to the ILECs'
promotions, recognizing that the ubiquitous nature of the ILECs' operations
enables them to offer lower promotional prices to target the customers of
competitors in areas where competitors have introduced local services, with
major consequences for competitors and little risk to
themselves.
5659
The rate de-averaging policy which precludes targeted pricing reductions
in small geographic areas within a rate band was reaffirmed, recognizing that
this practice could deter entry into the local market where the ILECs continue
to be the dominant service providers.
5660
These competitive concerns are still relevant
today.
5661
At the 2005 Canadian Telecom Summit, held last June, you stated,
Mr. Chairman, that while price deregulation is the Commission's intended
end-game in local telephone services, it was also important for the Commission,
since VoIP offers the prospect of real competition:
"... to stay the course and to ensure that the market is not prematurely
deregulated ..."
5662
Given that:
"... incumbents are so dominant and capable of nipping that competition
in the bud."
(As read)
5663
Cogeco partage entièrement cette position. Cogeco reconnaît qu'à terme, les forces
du marché elles-mêmes devront réguler les marchés locaux. Mais pour le moment, reconnaissons que
nous sommes encore loin de l'atteinte de cet objectif.
5664
Dans la Décision 94-19, le Conseil a conclu que "des preuves confirmant
l'élimination des principales entraves à l'entrée en concurrence et l'existence
réelle de la concurrence ou son établissement dans un délai d'un à deux ans"
devaient être examinées, afin d'établir si la concurrence dans un marché
s'annonce durable et suffisante pour protéger les intérêts des usages. Cette condition est toujours d'une
grande pertinence.
5665
Précis, simple à administrer, forçant l'établissement d'une base
factuelle appropriée, et cohérent avec le cadre d'abstention réglementaire en
place, Cogeco soumet que le cadre d'abstention proposé par l'ACTC pour les
marchés locaux rencontre parfaitement cette condition.
5666
MR. MAYRAND: Let me
summarize our position.
5667
First, the incumbent telephone companies clearly dominate the local
telephone market in our footprint by any yardstick. That is simply an undeniable
fact.
5668
Second, competition in that market has just started to deploy in the
field, eight years after you adopted an official competitive framework for that
market. Competition must not just
get started for forbearance to occur, it must be able to
continue.
5669
Third, for competition to continue and be sustainable, new
facilities-based entrants such as Cogeco must be able to roll out throughout the
areas covered by their facilities within the incumbents' pervasive footprint,
which they can only do local market by local market, and they must have a
reasonable expectation of return on the investment required to roll out and grab
a sustainable market share.
5670
Forth, a number of very real technical, marketing and behavioural
barriers must still be overcome by new entrants before completing that roll out
and grabbing a sustainable market share, and that is also an undeniable
fact.
5671
Fifth, the rules of competitive engagement must remain clear and
consistent, including on forbearance.
You set the basis rules in 1994 under the authority of the same
Telecommunications Act that governs us today.
5672
The final point, you should not roll the dice and hope that competition
will take hold based on academic theories, you should make sure, in our
respectful submission, that actually happens.
5673
Thank you very much. We will
be pleased to answer your questions.
5674
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank
you.
5675
Vice-Chair French.
5676
CONSEILLER FRENCH : Merci, monsieur le président.
5677
D=abord,
bienvenue à ces auditions, messieurs Perrotta, Mayrand, Audet et Messier. Très
heureux de vous avoir avec nous.
5678
Je voudrais d=abord
vous faire parler un petit peu plus de votre entreprise puisque vous êtes un peu
dans une situation assez unique. C=est-à-dire
que vous opérez dans deux grands marchés : Québec et
Ontario.
5679
Je voudrais d=abord
vous demander de nous décrire un petit peu plus vos zones de desserte et vos
différents réseaux et le défi qu=est
le vôtre, soit d=opérer
dans des marchés assez distincts.
5680
M. MAYRAND : Je vais demander à Ron de vous brosser un tableau aussi
succinct que possible parce que c=est
relativement varié, effectivement, comme situation.
5681
Ron ?
5682
M. PERROTTA : Merci.
5683
Oui, comme vous avez constaté, nous avons des territoires assez dispersés
à travers le Québec et l=Ontario.
Des marchés secondaires. Nous n=avons
pas des grands marchés comme Montréal, Toronto, Vancouver, Calgary, et
cetera.
5684
Alors, nos zones de desserte principales, disons, dans le Golden
Horseshoe, Burlington, Oakville, Hamilton, St. Catharines. Nous avons aussi une
présence à Windsor, Kingston, Belleville. Comme marchés principaux en
Ontario.
5685
Au Québec, Trois-Rivières, Rimouski, St-Hyacinthe, Drummondville. Ce sont
nos plus grands marchés au Québec. Et nous avons aussi comme zone de desserte
certains systèmes dans les Laurentides, Valleyfield, et cetera. Et le Bas
Saint-Laurent, certains réseaux aussi.
5686
Alors, notre clientèle, elle est un petit peu variée aussi. Elle est
différente que celle dans les grands marchés.
5687
Elle se porte un petit plus âgée, un petit peu moins technologiquement
ouverte à des nouveaux changements et développements.
5688
Et cela nous amène à considérer des stratégies de mise en marché très
particuliers pour nos clients cibles, qui sont essentiellement un petit peu
différents au Québec et en Ontario.
5689
Alors, ce sont les grandes lignes de nos défis.
5690
CONSEILLER FRENCH : Est-ce que les caractéristiques les plus distinctives
se désagrègent par les frontières provinciales ? Ou est-ce qu=il
y a des différences à l=intérieur
du marché ontarien, par exemple ?
5691
M. PERROTTA : Nous avons fait des études de marché pour bien connaître
toute notre clientèle, et ce que nous constatons essentiellement, c=est,
ce qui est le plus important, ce n=est
pas nécessairement les différences entre le Québec et l=Ontario
comme tels, mais plutôt entre les grands marchés et les plus petits
marchés.
5692
Et nous avons ce genre d=information
sur lequel nous nous fions pour axer nos communications parce que, comme
j=ai
expliqué, notre clientèle est un petit peu plus âgée et un petit peu moins
technologiquement ouverte à des nouveaux développements.
5693
Mais la différence primaire, ce serait entre, je dirais, la grandeur du
centre par rapport à sa population.
5694
CONSEILLER FRENCH : D'accord.
5695
Alors, la segmentation est surtout par la taille du marché
?
5696
M PERROTTA : La taille du marché parce que, étant donné que nous
occupons, que nous avons des zones de desserte différentes au Québec et en
Ontario et nous avons deux divisions d=opérations,
le Québec et l=Ontario,
nous avons voulu essayer de développer une vue commune à travers l=ensemble
de nos marchés pour voir essentiellement quel est le potentiel de chacun de nos
marchés pour nos services.
5697
Alors, nous avons établi une segmentation commune. Et c=est
de cette segmentation là que nous faisons le constat que je vous ai expliqué ce
matin.
5698
CONSEILLER FRENCH : Maintenant vous avez introduit les -- ce
n=est
pas le bon mot en français -- vous avez offert, vous avez décidé d=ouvrir
le marché du *
voice over IP +
pour vos différents marchés.
5699
Est-ce que le packaging, le prix des différents aspects du produit est
identique dans tous vos territoires qui sont actuellement sur IP ?
5700
M. PERROTTA : Nous avons deux prix. Nous avons un prix pour les marchés
en Ontario et un prix pour les marchés au Québec.
5701
Et ceci relève du fait du * purchasing
power +
relatif de chacun de nos marchés, et c=est
consistent avec le *
pricing +
que nous avons pour nos services télévisuels et nos services Internet, qui sont
un petit peu moins chers au Québec aussi, en reconnaissance du *
purchasing power +
relatif de nos marchés québécois par rapport à nos marchés
ontariens.
5702
CONSEILLER FRENCH : Alors, est-ce que vous diriez que c=est
non seulement un avantage pour vous, mais également pour les clients
?
5703
M. PERROTTA : Un avantage ? Dans quel sens ?
5704
CONSEILLER FRENCH : Vous avez la possibilité de tailler vos produits pour
les clients à partir de leurs caractéristiques particulières
?
5705
Et cela est un avantage pour vous parce que vous vendez davantage parce
que l=utilité
marginale et le pouvoir d=achat
diffèrent entre les différents marchés ?
5706
Vous êtes capable de rencontrer les attentes des clients différemment
dans les différents marchés ?
5707
M. PERROTTA : Si le sens de votre question c=est,
est-ce que nous avons une contrainte du type d=un
prix moyen sur une bande de services définis qui recoupent les deux provinces,
sans doute.
5708
Je vous dirais que nous l=approchons
d=une
perspective tout-à-fait différente, qui est que pour nous, en fait, nous devons
nous adapter à une contrainte de pouvoir d=achat
moindre dans le marché québécois, de façon générale, qui nous force, en fait, à
encourir dans certains cas des coûts additionnels pour avoir une offre
différenciée.
5709
Idéalement, je pense qu=on
souhaiterait avoir une offre aussi uniforme que possible. Mais en réalité, le
marché nous impose des contraintes. Et ce sont des contraintes qui nous imposent
des coûts également.
5710
CONSEILLER FRENCH : Et je vous dis qu=en
économie, on dirait que c=est
un avantage non seulement pour vous, mais également pour les clients qui ont des
*
packages +
appropriés à leur pouvoir d=achat.
5711
M. PERROTTA : Je ne prétendrai pas débattre avec vous sur le terrain
économique, parce que je ne suis pas économiste, mais sans doute que nos clients
apprécient les niveaux de prix que nous leur offrons respectivement en Ontario
et au Québec.
5712
CONSEILLER FRENCH : Alors, en abordant la question de l=abstention
de réglementation, c=est
important pour le Conseil de considérer les différents aspects du marché que
vous dites essentiellement hétérogène ou hétéroclite.
5713
Nous devons donc considérer cette grande concurrence que vous avez
évoquée à plusieurs reprises dans vos commentaires initiaux, soit le face-à-face
entre vous et l=ILEC
en question (c=est
Bell).
5714
On doit se poser la question, Ne serait-il pas avantageux pour les
clients d=avoir,
tout comme les vôtres, les clients de Bell, d=être
adressés par les *
packages +
et les offres de services particuliers à leurs caractéristiques
?
5715
M. PERROTTA : D=abord,
permettez-moi de préciser sur la question de l=homogénéité
ou de l=hétérogénéité
des marchés.
5716
Je pense qu=on
a parlé strictement de petites variations de prix dans notre offre de services
qui est émergente -- Ça fait trois mois à peine qu=on
offre le service téléphonique -- entre deux provinces.
5717
On n=a
pas parlé d=absence
d=homogénéité
ou de problème d=hétérogénéité
à l=intérieur
de chacune des provinces, et certainement pas entre circonscriptions
locales.
5718
Alors, je voulais faire cette précision là pour commencer.
5719
Ceci étant dit, je pense que, bien que nous comprenions que le Conseil
soit assurément préoccupé par les bénéfices que la concurrence doit apporter aux
utilisateurs, aux usagers -- donc, aux consommateurs.
5720
À notre point de vue, la question fondamentale de toute cette procédure,
de cette audience publique, c=est
quel est le compromis, s=il
en est, qu=il
faut accepter sur les gains de prix à court, même à très court terme, pour
certains petits groupes de consommateurs par rapport aux avantages plus larges
de la concurrence sur une période plus durable.
5721
Je pense que c=est
ce que la loi vise à obtenir dans le cadre de l=abstention
de réglementation. Pas des gains très ciblés de prix pour certains consommateurs
choisis par l=entreprise
dominante pour de courtes périodes de temps.
5722
CONSEILLER FRENCH : Je pense que vous avez très bien saisi l=enjeu.
Et c=est
là où je veux en venir.
5723
Il y a évidemment un coût à court terme pour les clients qui sont privés
d=offres
de services de la part des entreprises que vous dites dominantes qui ne
pourraient -- qui n=ont
pas la liberté et la flexibilité complète d=offrir
de tels * packages
+,
de telles offres de services.
5724
J=aimerais
vous faire parler un petit peu de ce genre d=échange,
de *
trade off +,
que vous venez d=évoquer,
puisqu=il
me semble important, et c=est
un peu injuste envers vous puisque vous êtes les seuls qui ont cette situation
de concurrencer une entreprise en selle, en place, une entreprise titulaire,
dans deux marchés qui sont, dites-vous, très différents et donc où vous
revendiquez à juste droit la possibilité d=établir
des prix qui sont taillés pour les différents marchés.
5725
C=est
tout simplement de discuter cette question là, qui est devant nous
essentiellement, puisque les entreprises de téléphonie traditionnelles nous
disent que nous privons, nos contrôles privent, les clients de bénéfices que,
vous dites si bien, sont à court terme, mais sont néanmoins importants, au nom
d=un
rendez-vous avec le destin quelque part dans l=avenir
où on serait en mesure de permettre, d=après
vous, une pleine concurrence.
5726
C=est
justement notre question. Où est ce rendez-vous avec le destin et quels seraient
les critères nécessaires pour l=identifier
quand il arrive ?
5727
M. MAYRAND : Bien, voici notre perspective sur le rendez-vous avec le
destin.
---
Rires / Laughter
5728
M. MAYRAND : Vous savez, nous avons, grâce à vos décisions de 1994, et
particulièrement celle de 1997, un cadre officiel pour la concurrence dans les
marchés téléphoniques locaux.
5729
Alors, nous avons eu ce cadre là pendant une période de huit ans. Je
pense qu=on
en a fait abondamment référence au cours des procédures.
5730
Et vous êtes à même de constater, et c=est
strictement un constat, nous ne faisons pas de jugement, nous ne portons pas de
jugement sur les raisons qui ont fait qu=au
cours de ces huit années la concurrence sur le terrain a fait défaut de se
réaliser.
5731
Nous avons donc eu une longue période d=attente.
À partir du moment où le feu vert a été lancé par le Conseil, et je vous dirais
que nous sommes -- nous arrivons précisément au point de jonction que le
Conseil envisageait en 1997, c=est-à-dire
au point où l=entreprise
concurrente qui dispose d=installations
de télécommunications, telle que le câblodistributeur est effectivement en
mesure de commencer son entrée sur le marché.
5732
Alors nous sommes exactement à ce point là. Les annonces d=entrée
en concurrence sont récentes. Dans notre cas, ça fait un petit peu plus de trois
mois que nous y sommes. Dans certaines parties géographiques de ce
marché.
5733
Et je pense que le sentiment en général que vous pouvez avoir de ces
procédures -- il y a des commentaires des différentes parties -- c=est
que le marché évolue assez rapidement avec les avantages que procure, entre
autres, la téléphonie sur IP.
5734
Cependant, nous devons, nous, les nouveaux venus avec des facilités de
télécommunication, nous devons établir un glacis -- en anglais, a *
beach head +
-- que nous pouvons soutenir face à la concurrence des grandes entreprises
établies telles que Bell Canada.
5735
Et je vous dirais que ce glacis, il faut le tenir, si nous voulons
étendre notre offre de services le plus rapidement possible à l=intérieur
des zone de desserte que nous desservons et que les compagnies établies
desservent.
5736
Alors, je ne vois pas un horizon tant infini pour y arriver. Je vois
cependant une situation où il y a dominance des compagnies établies. Clairement,
partout. Toutes les mesures possibles et imaginables, au moment où nous nous
parlons.
5737
Et je vois une période relativement courte -- je ne peux pas la
quantifier exactement en termes de mois ou d=années
- où le glacis doit être établi, et doit être solidement
établi.
5738
Alors, c=est
ce qui fait pour nous, les nouveaux venus, la différence entre une campagne
réussie ou un désastre. Et sans sombrer dans le dramatique, il n=y
a personne en tant que nouveau venu, et certainement l=entreprise
que je représente, qui veut passer à l=histoire
comme ayant eu son Dieppe plutôt que son Normandie. Hein ? On se
comprend.
5739
Alors, ce n=est
pas --
5740
CONSEILLER FRENCH: Merci
beaucoup, Monsieur Mayrand. C=était
très clair.
5741
M. MESSIER : Si je peux me permettre d=ajouter
un commentaire avec le rendez-vous avec le destin, sur cette
question.
5742
Récemment Bell nous a un peu forcé la main à ce rendez-vous avec sa
demande récemment sur laquelle on a eu à se prononcer dans une procédure assez
rapide, à savoir d=avoir
la possibilité d=offrir
des prix différents pour son nouveau service, son * digital
voice service +.
Des prix distincts pour l=Ontario
et le Québec.
5743
Et notre première réaction a été fortement de voir une grande réaction
sur la possibilité de, quelles sont les conséquences ? Vers où on se
dirige ? À partir du moment où on fait se premier pas
là.
5744
Notre grande préoccupation, et là est le compromis puisque dans nos
interventions nous avons finalement reconnu que, oui, il pouvait y avoir des
prix distincts pour les provinces et que Bell était la seule entreprise au
Canada qui ne pouvait pas pratiquer des prix différents pour les provinces --
mais là, pas que nous ne voulons pas franchir.
5745
C=est
celui d=avoir
des prix distincts dont l=objectif
ne serait pas de rencontrer les besoins ou des particularités des consommateurs,
mais bien plutôt strictement de protéger ses parts de marché face à un nouveau
venu qui entre dans le marché.
5746
Et cela, les pratiques au niveau du * winback
+,
au niveau la possibilité d=avoir
des prix très ciblés par marché, ouvriraient cette porte là et pourraient mettre
en cause la concurrence qui semble présente.
5747
Alors, cela est un niveau de compromis que nous n=acceptons
pas présentement.
5748
CONSEILLER FRENCH: Monsieur
Messier, je vous remercie beaucoup.
5749
Cela a été un jugement nuancé, et c=est
apprécié, ces nuances là.
5750
Là où je vous trouve moins nuancé, c=est
la comparaison entre vous et Bell, où Bell est 50 fois plus grand que
vous.
5751
N=est-il
pas le cas que, essentiellement, Bell concurrence non seulement vous, mais
quelques autres compagnies quelque part ?
5752
Et êtes-vous seul contre ce géant ?
5753
Donc, est-ce que cette comparaison là est vraiment légitime ou non ?
5754
M. MESSIER : En ce qui concerne ce qui se passe dans notre territoire,
elle est très légitime parce que nous, bien entendu, on fait concurrence avec
une grosse machine.
5755
Chaque matin que je me lève, je sais que mes dépenses marketing seront
dépassées grandement par mon concurrent. Alors, *
it is a fact of life.
+
On vit avec.
5756
Mais, la comparaison, pour nous, parce que c=est
nous qui travaillons dans nos marchés, elle est très juste, à mon
avis.
5757
CONSEILLER FRENCH : La comparaison est peut-être très juste pour vous
motiver le matin, mais maître Michael Sabia ne se lève justement pas en pensant
à vous. And that is the point.
5758
Tout ce que je vous dis, c=est
que c=est
un morceau de rhétorique qui sied mal avec la subtilité et l=honnêteté
avec lesquels vous avez répondu à mes questions.
5759
Encore une fois, ils concurrencent Vidéotron, ils concurrencent Rogers,
ils concurrencent Mountain, et cetera. Pas juste vous.
5760
Cette comparaison là est hautement trompeuse, dans la mesure où elle est
supposée de nous informer sur les décision de réglementation d=un
marché.
5761
MR. MAYRAND: Alors, Monsieur
French, je suis tout-à-fait, d=emblée,
prêt à reconnaître que Bell a d=autres
concurrents dans sa zone de desserte que nous.
5762
Je pense que ce que nous exprimons, et en fait, dans la mesure de temps,
on a rajouté une note qu=on
n=a
pas lue évidemment lorsqu=on
a fait la présentation.
5763
Mais on réfère en fait au concept de * deep
pockets +,
excusez l=expression
anglaise. Et c=est
vraiment l=image
d=EBITDA
comparative.
5764
Alors, quelque soit la façon dont vous feriez une répartition des marges
bénéficiaires respectives, notre constat à nous, et nous vous soumettons, le
problème que nous avons, c=est
que la compagnie établie a énormément de latitude financière pour dépenser
sélectivement sur les quelques clients que nous réussirons à obtenir dans la
première phase de déploiement de notre service
téléphonique.
5765
Voilà le sens de l=argument.
5766
CONSEILLER FRENCH : Oui, je
le vois.
5767
Justement, je veux vous poser une question sur la page 9, où vous dites
:
"Bell has already proven in the past in other markets that it is capable
of developing efficient winback campaigns with targeted pricing and promotions
to defend its position."
5768
I don't deny that for a minute, but I would like to know more about
exactly what you were referring to, if you could tell us what you had in mind
when you raised that.
5769
MR. PERROTTA: A recent
example would be in the Laval area, in the Montreal area, of ExpressVu pricing
we believe in response to Videotron Voice over IP service where the outbound
telemarketing offers to satellite customers for ExpressVu two‑receiver solution
was, I believe, as low as $17 or $18 for a regularly priced $35 or $36
product. That was selectively
offered in a very specific area.
5770
That is the first one that comes to mind. I think some of my colleagues here with
longer corporate memories in the telecommunications industries would harken back
to the long distance example.
5771
COMMISSIONER FRENCH: The
$5.00 for a thousand minutes, for example.
Or are there others?
5772
It is a matter of information.
I am not trying to ‑‑
5773
MR. PERROTTA: It would be
others. The $5.00 was basically
offered to everyone.
5774
COMMISSIONER FRENCH: It is
the targeting, Mr. Perrotta, that I am trying to get a grip on. It is important for us because everyone
who comes before us with your set of interests is going to tell us the kinds of
things you have told us, and much depends on how much we believe that an
incumbent has the opportunity to genuinely target on small demographic slices
and small slices of market.
5775
In practice, if all we are doing is being told that they will fight us on
their market against our market, we say that is called competition. You really have to make an additional
case. The additional case is that
the very large resources of an incumbent generated by history will be unduly
focussed on a very small set of markets in order to explicitly deny the
opportunity to establish the beachhead that Mr. Mayrand
evoked.
5776
I am absolutely not trying to take a position on this question. I am just saying this is absolutely at
the core of this case. So anything
you can tell us about it is helpful.
5777
You have given us one good example.
Are there any others that come to mind?
5778
MR. PERROTTA: In our other
product categories, high speed internet and television services, when we compete
against Bell Canada there is one advantage that Bell has that we don't
have. They have a complete
telephone record of the entire customer base.
5779
By and large all of our customers are Bell customers, but the inverse is
not necessarily true.
5780
Consequently, a lot of the targeted winback offers occur on an outbound
telemarketing basis, so there seldom is ever any printed material
available. It is very targeted
insofar as they are working with their database of customers. They know what the history has been, so
they can put together a targeted offer.
5781
Consequently, there is always reports we get from the field of what is
happening. We try to do some
mystery shopping, and it is hit and miss in terms of what is a rogue agent in
the fog of war offering something versus what is a conscious
strategy.
5782
There are numerous examples of attractive pricing on internet or
attractive pricing on ExpressVu in our other services offered on an outbound
telemarketing basis that leads us to believe that this is certainly a well‑oiled
machine.
5783
COMMISSIONER FRENCH: How do
they bill that, Mr. Perrotta? With
a billing requirement of, I don't know, 7 or 8 million residential customers in
the two provinces, how would they bill those precise specified focussed
offers?
5784
MR. PERROTTA: I think you
would have to ask them that question in terms of their billing systems. If they are like most other operators,
CSRs or supervisors have opportunities to make manual adjustments on
invoices.
5785
Beyond that, I really couldn't comment on how they go about
it.
5786
COMMISSIONER FRENCH: I wish
I had had that when I was the Vice‑President of Residential Services for Bell in
Quebec.
5787
Mr. Messier.
5788
M. MESSIER : Sur l=efficacité
des campagnes de *
winback +
de Bell, le seul exemple que je voudrais apporter, et puis pour l=avoir
vécu personnellement et pour avoir eu plusieurs témoignages dans les fonctions
que j=occupe,
on sait au niveau du marché des appels interurbains que Bell, aussitôt que
quelqu=un
a décidé de passer chez un concurrent, en moins de 48 heures, il va recevoir ou
il peut recevoir un appel chez Bell directement lui offrant soit, parce que déjà
on a son pattern d=appel
-- donc, lui proposant un plan qui est davantage adapté à son profil, lui
proposant aussi des montants forfaitaires pour revenir chez Bell dans une
période très courte.
5789
Alors, si on applique cela dans le marché local, où on est en train -- on
est entré -- où on a démontré à nos clients qu=on
a un service qui est fiable, principalement si vous regardez les perceptions
dont on a fait part par l=étude
POLLARA sur cette forme alternative que représente le *
voice over IP +,
que ce soit offert par un câblo ou par d=autres,
bien vous avez là des clients qui sont très réceptifs et très fragiles et qui
sont très sensibles aussi à leur motivation pour avoir changé de fournisseur à
un escompte de prix.
5790
Alors, si Bell revient très rapidement et rapidement lui offre exactement
ce qu=il
faut pour sécuriser le client, bien écoutez, on va avancer à petits pas. Sinon,
on va reculer.
5791
CONSEILLER FRENCH : Monsieur le Président, cela termine mes questions.
J=apprécie
beaucoup la franchise avec laquelle vous avez répondu.
5792
Je veux juste dire, avec votre permission, Monsieur le Président, que --
je vais prendre l=occasion
publique de dire à monsieur Audet que votre père est un grand homme des
communications au Québec. J=ai
beaucoup de respect pour lui, et puis il a contribué énormément au développement
des communications.
5793
Merci beaucoup.
5794
M. MAYNARD : Nous lui
transmettrons ce message.
5795
Merci.
5796
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank
you.
5797
Commissioner Cram.
5798
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Welcome,
gentlemen.
5799
In your three‑four month life of VoIP, I am assuming you have had some
churn. Did you find the reasons for
the churn? When people leave you,
did you ask them?
5800
MR. PERROTTA: We have been
obviously monitoring this. In terms
of the reasons why people have left, some have been change of mind. Some have been moves. It is very early
results.
5801
There is not enough of a base to establish sort of key drivers at this
point. Quite frankly we have had
some SNAFUs on installation on our side where people have said they have just
cancelled because we couldn't get there on time because we have a lot of other
things happening.
5802
So it is a little early to say what are the key drivers at this
point. I suspect that over the life
of the product, it will settle in pretty much like the rest of our products in
terms of reasons for churn.
5803
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Mr.
Audet?
5804
MR. AUDET: If I may add, one
thing that we have seen happen from time to time is because of the backlog for
LNP transactions at Bell, we typically find out ‑‑ we take an order
today. We schedule installation for
a week from now. Normally, we would
expect that halfway through that period we know that we will be able to install
on the projected date.
5805
As it turns out, we usually find out in the evening of the day
before. If we don't get the
confirmation in time, we have to cancel and that is a contributor to
churn.
5806
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Thank
you.
5807
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank
you.
5808
Monsieur le vice-président Arpin ?
5809
CONSEILLER ARPIN : Merci, Monsieur le Président.
5810
Vous avez répondu à monsieur French, à une question concernant vos
différences de prix entre l=Ontario
et le Québec.
5811
Est-ce que vos coûts sont aussi différents entre l=Ontario
et le Québec ?
5812
M. AUDET : Certainement. Au Québec, la composante d=appels
que d=autres
traitent interurbaine, voyez-vous, nous, on ne fait pas cette distinction
là.
5813
Notre prix inclut les cinq services accessoires les plus appréciés dans
le marché. Les plus répandus.
5814
Et la zone de couverture locale qui est offerte est le Canada au complet
et les 48 États contigus des États-Unis. C=est
une zone d=appels
locale très étendue.
5815
En pratique, on observe que, au Québec, il y a une nettement plus grande
proportion des appels qui se limite au territoire du Québec, comparativement à,
disons, en Ontario, où il y plus d=appels
vers d=autres
provinces ou vers les États-Unis.
5816
Donc, effectivement, oui, Monsieur, il y a une différence de
coût.
5817
CONSEILLER ARPIN : Est-ce que c=est
une des raisons pour laquelle vous motivez votre différence de prix ? Ou si
c=est
la capacité de payer des abonnés ?
5818
M. AUDET : Cela fait sans doute partie aussi de l=équation,
Monsieur.
5819
M. MAYRAND : Je voudrais juste ajouter, Monsieur Arpin, que ce sont
évidemment des prix d=entrée
que nous avons mis de l=avant
pour depuis, en fait, un petit peu plus de trois mois.
5820
Alors, je réserverais le jugement sur la solidité de la structure des
prix et des différences qu=il
pourrait y avoir, mettons, entre nos zones de service au Québec et celles de
l=Ontario.
5821
Et je vous rappelle que, évidemment, ce sont des prix qui ne sont pas
différenciés à l=intérieur
de l=une
ou de l=autre
province.
5822
CONSEILLER ARPIN : Merci.
5823
LE PRÉSIDENT : Merci.
5824
Madame Noël ?
5825
CONSEILLÈRE NOËL : J=ai
juste une question, une petite question.
5826
Vous offrez un service, comme vous avez dit, Monsieur Audet, avec les
cinq capacités les plus --
5827
M. AUDET : Populaires, oui.
5828
CONSEILLÈRE NOËL : -- ce que les gens préfèrent et vous offrez cela pour
un prix global alors que Vidéotron qu=on
va voir tout à l=heure
offre un produit qui est tout nu.
5829
M. AUDET : Hm-hmm.
5830
CONSEILLÈRE NOËL : Ils offrent un service à 14,99 $ et toutes les options
sont effectivement en option.
5831
Est-ce qu=il
y avait une décision -- comment vous êtes arrivé à ce choix d=option
ou d=offre
de services ?
5832
M. AUDET : On a examiné la chose depuis, en fait, plusieurs années. En
fait, depuis très longtemps, comme vous le savez.
5833
On avait déjà fait un essai de téléphonie IP qui a couru de 1999 à
2001.
5834
CONSEILLÈRE NOËL : Je me rappelle. À partir de
Trois-Rivières.
5835
M. AUDET : Ça fait très longtemps qu=on
étudie le modèle d=affaire
de la téléphonie. À mon sens, et c=est
peut-être relié à la grosseur de nos marchés, je ne le sais pas. Vidéotron
pourra vous dire si son expérience est différente pour la grosseur de marché
qu=ils
contemplent.
5836
Mais certainement, dans notre cas, un service à ce niveau là, on
n=en
voyait pas l=intérêt.
5837
Je dirais, philosophiquement, l=attitude
qu=on
a pris est qu=on
aime mieux offrir plus de valeur à notre client pour un prix donné que
d=essayer
de juste jouer sur le prix.
5838
Enfin, c=est
une approche qu=on
a pris corporativement.
5839
CONSEILLÈRE NOËL : Est-ce que le fait que -- bien, Rogers n=avait
pas annoncé sa -- ou est-ce que Rogers avait annoncé sa façon de pénétrer le
marché quand vous avez lancé votre produit ?
5840
M. AUDET : Notre prix avait été établi avant le lancement de
Rogers.
5841
CONSEILLÈRE NOËL : Je vous remercie.
5842
LE PRÉSIDENT : Merci.
5843
Madame Cram ?
5844
COMMISSIONER CRAM: I am
back; I'm sorry.
5845
Commissioner French and I were discussing the cable penetration
rate. In Quebec, isn't it 57
percent?
5846
MR. AUDET: Basic cable
penetration in our market is 53 percent now.
5847
COMMISSIONER CRAM:
Fifty‑three? In all of your
markets, including Ontario?
5848
MR. AUDET: Ontario is 50
percent.
5849
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Fifty
percent and 53. Thank you very
much.
5850
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank
you.
5851
Counsel.
5852
MR. WILSON: Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
5853
I have three questions that I want to follow up on: your experience in the marketplace thus
far, although taking into account, as you discussed with Commissioner Cram and
Vice‑Chair French, that is a small slice of experience, at least as far as the
telephone business thus far.
5854
I will start with churn rates, following up on your discussion with
Commissioner Cram.
5855
This is a small slice of data yet, but have you noticed whether there
appears to be any relationship between the churn rate in the telephony business
and the churn rate in the cable business in the sense of if a customer turns
from telephony, if you lose them for telephony, are you noticing that you are
also losing them for the cable side of the business?
5856
MR. PERROTTA: It really too
early to tell that. I couldn't
answer that question.
5857
MR. WILSON: We have had some
discussion in particular in the CCTA, whose approach you have indicated that you
agree with, about the notion of measuring market share in terms of households
served.
5858
In your experience, does a household generally speaking get all of their
services from one provider or are the services likely to be splintered across
two or three providers?
5859
MR. MAYNARD: It is a little
hard to answer that question in terms of understanding what basket of services
underlies your question.
5860
MR. WILSON: I am thinking in
terms of the kinds of services we have been talking about here: so your basic
telephone service, your video service, the internet service, that basket of
services that we have been discussing in the hearing.
5861
On a household basis do those tend to come from one supplier or is more
of a heterogenous kind of situation?
5862
MR. PERROTTA: The
multi‑service households with one supplier is clearly the Holy Grail that all of
us are trying to achieve. I think
there have been a number of statements made by various different operators in
telecom space in terms of their progress in going from single services to multi
services. I think the reality is
that the second service that you add is a good one. I don't think a lot of people have made
great progress on three and four services.
There is probably a healthy dose of first service and double service
households. I am not entirely sure
that there would be a preponderance once way or another, depending on which
supplier you are looking at.
5863
MR. WILSON: I have one final
question, and I may know the answer to this based on the discussion that you had
with respect to local number ports.
5864
The kinds of customers that you are getting, are those generally former
ILEC customers or are you attracting a lot of what I will call new customers,
maybe young people that are moving into the telephony market for the first
time?
5865
MR. AUDET: I would say that
any measurable sales are with customers transferring from Bell to us. Brand new customers would be such a
small percentage. It is not
something that has bubbled up to our attention.
5866
MR. WILSON: Those are my
questions, Mr. Chairman.
5867
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you,
gentlemen.
5868
We will take a very brief break now, five minutes, and resume with the
next panel after that.
‑‑‑
Upon recessing at 1027 / Suspension à 1027
‑‑‑
Upon resuming at 1035 / Reprise à 1035
5869
THE CHAIRPERSON: Order,
please. À l'ordre, s'il vous
plaît.
5870
Madame la secrétaire.
5871
LA SECRÉTAIRE: Merci,
monsieur le Président.
5872
We will now proceed with panel No. 15, Shaw Cable
Systems.
PRESENTATION
/ PRÉSENTATION
5873
MR. SHAW: Good morning, Mr.
Chairman and Commissioners. My name
is Jim Shaw and I am CEO of Shaw Communications.
5874
With me today on the panel are Peter Bissonnette, President of Shaw; Ken
Stein, Senior Vice‑President, Corporate and Regulatory Affairs; Michael
D'Avella, Senior Vice‑President, Planning; and David McKeown, Consultant to
Shaw.
5875
Let me start by thanking the Commission for this opportunity to present
our views on the development of a competitive and vibrant local
telecommunications market. We and
other participants in this proceeding have filed extensive comments on the
framework and criteria the Commission should consider to determine when it is
appropriate to forbear from regulating the local exchange services of the
incumbent, monopoly telephone companies.
5876
We consider this a critical proceeding and the framework and criteria the
Commission establishes for local forbearance will have a significant impact on
how successfully competition evolves in the local telephone
market.
5877
What we would like to focus on today are the business and operating
realities of entering the local residential telephone market and what our
company has to do in order to enter this market with a reliable, credible and
competitive telephone product.
5878
We would also like to address some of the ongoing challenges we face in
rolling out our telephone service and provide the Commission with a sense of the
significant capital and operating investments we are making to ensure we have a
viable and successful service offering.
5879
Let me say at the outset that our company is committed to providing a
reliable and credible phone service.
Our customers want an alternative to their local provider and we are
answering the call.
5880
On February 14th, or Valentine's Day, we launched Shaw digital phone in
Calgary, our first telephony market, followed by Edmonton on April 20th and
Winnipeg on July 28th. With these
markets launched, about 35 percent of our basic customers will now have access
to Shaw digital phone.
5881
In the next year or so, we will be launching digital phone in most of our
major markets including Vancouver, our single largest operating unit. We also plan to offer Shaw digital phone
in smaller communities like Red Deer, Canmore, Prince George and
Cranbrook.
5882
By any measure we are still in the early stages of our telephone
deployment, with less than eight months of operating experience. While we are encouraged by the initial
results, it is far too early to judge how well this market will evolve and
whether our customers will have the continuing confidence in us to provide them
with local telephone service.
5883
As you know, the start‑up of a new business is not a new undertaking for
Shaw. Our experience with new
start‑ups such as Star Choice, which took us into the satellite business, and
new service offerings such as high speed internet, have been positive examples
of the ability of our people to launch new products and services that have
gained the support and confidence of consumers across
Canada.
5884
It took over five years to put Star Choice on a solid financial footing
and the company has only recently begun to generate a return on the billion
dollars we invested in Star Choice.
We now have close to 840,000 Star Choice customers and about 1.1 million
high speed internet customers.
5885
We have been pleased with this success and the lessons learned have been
put to good use in the launch of digital phone. This is, without a doubt, our largest
challenge to date.
5886
Peter.
5887
MR. BISSONNETTE: Mr.
Chairman, Commissioners, our decision to launch a competitive local telephone
service was motivated largely by the need to ensure that we had the ability to
provide our customers with a package of voice, video and data services. In this new competitive environment our
success is increasingly driven by our ability to package various products and
services and to provide customers with a steady stream of new and innovative
products and services.
5888
It took us two years to conduct the business analysis, assess
technologies and back office systems and understand the investments and
operational requirements that would be needed to offer a competitive local
telephone service.
5889
In developing and launching our local phone service, we faced significant
challenges in implementing interconnection arrangements with the incumbents,
striking agreements with local authorities for E911 services, developing
processes for local number portability and establishing a long distance carriage and termination
agreement. The process is
complicated and lengthy.
5890
The incumbents are effectively the gatekeepers to the PSTN and they
determine when and how you, as a new entrant, can offer a competitive local
service. Even with all the
Commission's policies, regulations and rules governing these interconnection
arrangements, the telcos ultimately determine your launch date. Remember, the incumbent telephone
companies are not only the incumbents, they are also a monopoly, and they run
the system.
5891
For over 100 years they have done an excellent job and the system they
built enjoys the confidence of all Canadians. But that's exactly the point: they run
the system. So not only are we
trying to compete with them, we have to compete on their terms and we have to
operate in an environment that they control.
5892
As we considered our options and the process of becoming a CLEC on our
own, we quickly came to the conclusion that we simply could not put ourselves in
a position where the incumbent set the timetable for competitive entry. We decided, therefore, that in order to
get our telephone product to market on our timetable, we would use the services
and facilities of an established CLEC.
So we chose BellWest to provide us with interconnection to the PSTN, to
help us port numbers and provide long distance carriage and
termination.
5893
If we tried to perform all of the functions of a CLEC on our own, we
would probably still be negotiating with the incumbents for
interconnection.
5894
MR. D'AVELLA: Thank you,
Peter.
5895
There is no question that the development of PacketCable specifications
by the cable industry, primarily through CableLabs, has made telephony services
over cable networks an economically viable and technically sound
proposition.
5896
As we continue our Digital Phone deployments and as the customer base
grows, over the next several years we will be investing well over $350 million
in rolling out this new service.
5897
Telephony will continue to be our single largest capital project for at
least the next four to seven years.
5898
We have also made significant investments in human resources, hiring and
training over 650 new employees to support our entry into the telephone
business.
5899
These investments are being made, in part, on the understanding that the
Commission will continue to ensure that competition in the local exchange market
can develop and take hold.
5900
Our greatest concern is that premature deregulation of the phone
companies could kill local competition before it gets
started.
5901
In our view, the Commission must ensure that local competition is firmly
established, vibrant and sustainable before the telcos are forborne in the
provision of local telephone services.
We can't see this happening for at least another three to five
years.
5902
In developing our telephone services, we took the view that in order to
be competitive with the incumbents we would have to offer a primary line service
that would be as reliable as theirs.
This meant that we would have to make investments in plant upgrades,
backup power supplies, new provisioning and back office systems, customer
premise equipment, softswitches and, on top of all of that, we had to overlay a
new PacketCable network.
5903
My point is that this is not a simple voice application riding on an IP
network. Shaw Digital Phone is a
replacement for your local telephone service, and customers expect the same
level of reliability and quality, at a competitive price, if they are going to
switch their telephone provider.
5904
MR. STEIN: Let me deal with
the competitive response of the telcos to this point. We have found that telcos use every
means, tool and tactic at their disposal to stymie competition. We know this from our experience in
competing against them in the internet access business and, more recently, in
the video market.
5905
We understand where they are coming from. None of us wants to lose any
customers. Even in these early days
of local competition, though, we are seeing the results of telco
anti-competitive behaviour.
5906
Aggressive winback campaigns that include offers of free services for up
to a year.
5907
Telemarketing campaigns designed to win back customers that have recently
switched to Shaw, within days.
5908
Misinformation about the quality and reliability of our telephone
product. Some telcos have been
telling our customers that Shaw Digital Phone does not support E911, that the
service doesn't work in a power outage and is unreliable because it makes use of
the internet.
5909
This is another reason why I believe it is critical that we have all of
the tools and vehicles at our disposal, like local avails to inform our
customers about our products and services.
5910
There are delays and outright denials in porting
numbers.
5911
There is inadequate and inconsistent capacity within the LNP
process.
5912
There are refusals to port the numbers of customers who also take other
telco products like internet and television.
5913
There are unacceptable delays in interconnecting contiguous
exchanges.
5914
In the city of Calgary, for example, we have not been able to offer Shaw
Digital Phone in Airdrie and Okotoks, two communities that are essentially
suburbs of Calgary.
5915
We have similar problems in Edmonton, where Telus delays extending
interconnection to St. Albert and Sherwood Park, leaving large gaps in our
coverage area.
5916
On average, it takes Telus 97 days to respond to an application from Shaw
for access to Telus support structures.
That is 67 days longer than the tariffs permit.
5917
On average, it takes 259, or eight months, to have an application
approved and work completed.
5918
Finally, last week we heard of a winback offer by MTS to a customer that
signed up with Shaw. Our customer
was offered a $73.31 bundle, including local phone service, five calling
features, high‑speed internet and long distance throughout North America at no
additional charge. Needless to say,
this bundle was not filed for approval and is not generally available to MTS
customers. We are still
investigating.
5919
This is only a partial list, and these are early days, of the telcos
anti-competitive tactics. The
Commission is well aware of the litany of access issues we face on a day-to-day
basis, including local number portability.
5920
MR. BISSONNETTE: "Local
Number Portability" -- LNP -- is an acronym we learned as we entered the telecom
business. From our experience, the
telcos' acronym for that is "Let's Not Play".
5921
The current LNP mechanism is ineffective. The system is inefficient and subject to
the vagaries of the telco's LNP process.
5922
We effectively need the incumbent's approval to port a customer's
telephone number. Without it we
can't install a customer. We
believe that the telcos need to be removed as the arbiters and gatekeepers of
the LNP process.
5923
In a world where we are competing with the telcos for voice, video and
data customers, the telcos require nothing from Shaw in order to acquire a video
or data customer.
5924
In the video business, for example, the telcos can build out their
networks, acquire programming and customer premise equipment, and provision and
service customers without seeking Shaw's approval for anything. Their entry into the video business is
completely unfettered and unencumbered.
5925
The management of the broadcasting system is much more diverse, with
numerous players, none of whom control the system. The only issue that had to be dealt with
to encourage competitive entry was the inside wire. The CRTC decided that it belonged to the
homeowner, and that was that.
5926
The success and growth of the Canadian DTH market, with 2.5 million
customers, is a direct result of the CRTC's active role in ensuring that
competitive entry would be facilitated.
5927
MR. SHAW: Historically, the
Commission has opened up monopoly-based telecommunications markets to
competition in a gradual and orderly manner. As a result, we have healthy, vibrant,
and sustainable facilities-based competition in a variety of telecommunications
and broadcasting services.
5928
The local phone market is not among them.
5929
We believe that the Commission is taking the right approach in
establishing a framework and criteria for local forbearance, but it is far too
early in the game to consider local forbearance.
5930
Local competition has just started.
Only 35 percent of our customers even have access to Shaw Digital
Phone.
5931
We have been in the telephone business for only eight
months.
5932
We have significant investments ahead of us to complete our deployments
of Digital Phone, including deployments in small communities that may never see
a competitive alternative if the telcos are forborne.
5933
These investments are being made on the assumption that the Commission
will ensure that local, facilities-based competition will evolve and take
hold.
5934
The telcos have the opportunity, incentive and capabilities to delay,
impede and deny competitive entry.
Our real world experience is clearly evidence of telco anti-competitive
behaviour.
5935
The telcos control critical elements of the business, including access to
the PSTN, interconnection, local number portability, and access to support
structures.
5936
We need access to all communications tools at our disposal, particularly
local avails, in order to inform our customers of our products and ensure they
know that we can provide them with a reliable service all the
time.
5937
The telcos don't need any transitional measures. They already have them. They compete in every market segment --
voice, video, data, wireless, residential and business. They have ubiquitous service offerings
and the ability to bundle services and target specific market segments. They have substantial cash flows to
compete on any level and in any market, and have no barrier to entry in any of
our markets.
5938
Nothing precludes them from offering a VoIP service. Bell's launch of Digital Voice
demonstrates this.
5939
We are not asking for protection.
We are confident in our abilities to compete
successfully.
5940
Shaw's culture has always emphasized growth, customer service and
entrepreneurship. We are prepared
to take the risks and make the investments to provide our customers with
choice. All we are asking for is an
opportunity to compete fairly. Let
the local market evolve and let competition take hold before you unleash the
telcos.
5941
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, that completes our remarks
today.
5942
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank
you.
5943
Commissioner Williams.
5944
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Good
morning, Mr. Shaw and Shaw panelists.
Welcome to this hearing.
5945
I will be asking a variety of both specific and general questions this
morning. If some of my questions
are of a nature that you feel your response would include competitively
sensitive material, you can certainly file this information with the Commission
on a confidential basis.
5946
Let's begin.
5947
In your oral presentation this morning you gave us the general overview
of your entry into the telco arena.
Could you please discuss your experience to date, outlining the variety
of uncompetitive barriers that you have experienced within the first eight
months of this new business venture?
5948
MR. SHAW: We have been
involved in the hearing, and earlier this week we listened to Manitoba Tel, who
has promised us number porting for weeks and weeks and weeks. I think they even told the Commission
the other day that they are porting numbers.
5949
I am glad to report that yesterday we got four ports done in one day, and
we have been at it since July.
5950
I am not saying that they are not working on it, but they come up with
things like: The person who was
hired to be in charge of number porting is a retired MTS employee and works
half-time, one week on, one week off.
5951
There are various delays.
5952
We see all sorts of problems in the local area, where they just really
don't want to deal with us. If you,
in turn, are a data customer -- a DSL customer, let's say -- that port is denied
because you are a DSL customer.
5953
If you are a TV customer, that port is also denied because you are a TV
customer.
5954
What we are seeing is, any way to take advantage of the rules to slow
down what they would be perceiving as a competitor in the local arena, or what
they would be perceiving as us taking away their customer, seems to be happening
across the board.
5955
MR. BISSONNETTE: It is
interesting, because from the beginning -- of course, we have a softswitch, the
PacketCable softswitch, and just in the testing of that softswitch the first
response was, "That is not a traditional switch, so it will probably take us two
months to garner confidence that the switch will actually work on our network,"
even though that switch is certainly being used by others in the
industry.
5956
Jim mentioned that it took us eight weeks to have somebody actually doing
the SS7 signaling tests, because that person had retired and they had nobody
else in the whole company who could actually do SS7
signaling.
5957
It is interesting, on the porting, as you mentioned, we have certainly
expressed that to the Commission.
We continue to have problems.
We continue to see porting.
5958
As Jim mentioned, we had four the other day. They are doing just enough to ride on
that line that they are doing something.
They are very nice people, but they are doing everything they can to
stymie us.
5959
Interestingly enough, the day after we launched the service the Winnipeg
Police came out and said that they have a concern about VoIP services in general
because E911 doesn't work.
5960
When the power goes out, this happens.
5961
You are competing with the internet.
5962
All of that misinformation is being promulgated by
MTS.
5963
Our customers who are in the porting process are sitting like fish on the
docks, waiting to be pulled back by MTS.
They say, "We can't get you their number." In the meantime, they are trying to win
back these customers.
5964
I have a litany of examples, if you want specific customers and specific
dates, where the customer has said, "We would like to come over to Shaw and try
your Shaw Digital Phone service."
In the interim, when their number is not being ported -- we have to
identify to them that, unfortunately, there is going to be a timeframe beyond
what we would expect to be normal for the number to be ported -- there are
direct winbacks that are being made to those people.
5965
We get calls from them saying, "We have changed our mind. MTS has offered us free long
distance. They have offered us a
$10 discount on their wireless product."
5966
So every conceivable way of either deferring or coming back with winbacks
we have experienced with them.
5967
The other incumbent that we deal with, of course, is Telus in Alberta and
in British Columbia, and we have a backlog of over 5,000 customers who have told
us that they want to come and enjoy our service, but they cannot be accommodated
because their numbers can't be ported.
5968
We have met with senior people within the company, and they have said
they will do their best to try and improve that, but, frankly, the numbers they
are now porting are about half of what would be necessary just to keep up with
the kind of transitions that customers from Telus to our Shaw Digital Phone are
experiencing.
5969
So constant delays.
5970
We launched, as we mentioned, in Edmonton. Sherwood Park is an integral part of
Edmonton. Sherwood Park can't get
our service because the interconnections between ourselves and the incumbent
can't be accommodated.
5971
When we launched in Calgary, Okotoks and Airdrie, and when we launched in
Vancouver -- half of Vancouver is not available because we can't be accommodated
on their interconnections.
5972
So an LIR, which we have talked about, is important, but we can't even
get an LIR interconnected.
5973
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Let's
continue with this topic of porting.
5974
What percentage of your customers want to retain their numbers, so that
you in fact need porting?
5975
Are there any other actions you are taking to deal with your
backlog?
5976
You have customers who want service.
5977
MR. BISSONNETTE: Initially,
about 40 percent of our customers were prepared to take a new number, but 60
percent -- as you know, some people have had their number for 10 or 15 years,
and it is a very important part of their lives.
5978
They have said, "We want to come over to Shaw -- "
5979
You should know that we talk to our customers every day. Jim calls five customers a week. Michael does. I do. We are hearing directly from
them.
5980
The reason we do that is because we want to make sure that when we launch
our service our customers see that service as being reliable, and if they have
any issues, they can talk to one of us, and we can certainly facilitate any cure
for any problems they might have.
5981
The number is sacred to them.
5982
Since we have seen the delays in our launches in Alberta, some customers
are saying, "I can't wait any longer.
I am going to take a new number."
5983
The ratio now is that 60 percent of our customers are prepared to take a
new number, but 20 percent of them are doing it begrudgingly. They would love to have their old number
back.
5984
We have met with Telus and we have suggested: Because you have a manpower issue, a
constraint with your strike, why don't we preserve that number for our
customers, have them come over to us, and they will take a new number, and when
your strike is over, let's give them the old number back.
5985
That doesn't work for them.
5986
Customers that are now taking new numbers -- as you know, part of the
tariff of a telephone company is to put a recording on that number, which says,
"The number you have called is no longer in service. The customer's new number is
this."
5987
They aren't doing that, so those customers are going into a bit of a
vacuum, and you can understand why there would be a reticence to take a new
number.
5988
It is a frustration, and what is happening now is that the customer is
saying, "I can't be bothered to wait any longer. I am not even going to bother. I am going to go back to the
incumbent." We have lost an
opportunity.
5989
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: When
you lose the opportunity, a potential phone customer going back to the
incumbent, I understand that some of your packages are offered in a bundle, so
do you also lose other parts of the bundle or risk other parts of the bundle or
risk damage to your brand?
5990
MR. BISSONNETTE:
Absolutely. Customers are
really attracted to our service by virtue of our bundles, and many customers are
coming to us and they are bringing those other services with
them.
5991
The reverse happens, of course, when we can't satisfy their need to
maintain their number, so the services that they had chosen to also bring over
as part of the bundle are lost to us.
5992
We, essentially, have no place in their home.
5993
MR. SHAW: We call these
customers, really, to get a feel of the marketplace, to know what the competitor
is doing. Because we can mess up
too.
5994
One of the things that customers say to us that we find encouraging is,
"This is really great." They think
that competition in the local arena is great. They think that you, as the Commission,
have got it right. For once, it is
something that gives them a better option and better pricing and more
features.
5995
What we are finding is that they then get frustrated by the process and
say, "The thing is messed up like it used to be," when we in Canada and the
Commission and the players have a chance to get it really right, so that it
works well. We lose that
opportunity, to some degree, and I don't think it looks good on us, or on the
regulatory system in Canada either.
5996
But right now, when we talk to them, they are supportive of the
group. They think that you guys
have made good decisions, and they are seeing some results in the
marketplace.
5997
Guys in the smaller towns are saying, "I have never even seen long
distance competition" ‑‑ in Fort MacMurray or Prince George or Red Deer. They are dying for it to come there, yet
we still can't get the big city to run right.
5998
So it is going to be really hard for us if we can't get the area,
generally, like Calgary, Edmonton, Vancouver, Victoria, to run right. Then, it will be really hard for us to
make the next move out to the smaller guys, who want it even more desperately
than they want it in Calgary and the other larger centres.
5999
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What
has the effect been of the Telus labour unrest in the west in regards to your
ability to attract customers? Then,
I guess, once you have attracted them, to get them connected and convert
them.
6000
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What
has the effect been of the Telus labour unrest in the west in regards to your
ability to attract customers, and I guess once you have attracted them to get
them connected and convert them?
6001
MR. SHAW: I guess that we
have taken the approach that Peter has met with senior people at Telus and I
have talked to Darren at various times.
We have done a couple of things.
6002
We said that we weren't going to what I call "pile on". So we haven't done a lot of advertising
about our telephone service, because it is just too frustrating for somebody
that wants to port their number and
we can't and we can't fulfil them and it just looks bad on
us.
6003
We have probably slowed the process down to some degree. There is some demand there. We are conscious of their labour dispute
and are supportive of where they are going with that.
6004
So we are really kind of, Peter, on hold to some degree, aren't
we?
6005
MR. BISSONETTE: We
are.
6006
Recognizing that there are some manpower constraints, we have actually
proposed a methodology with respect to LSCs and LSRs that would require as
little manual intervention as possible.
There is a process with the Canadian Numbering Association that would
allow us to do that, but unfortunately it hasn't been
embraced.
6007
We really would hope that ultimately there is absolutely no reliance one
on the other for number portability, because that is the huge stumbling block
that we have right now.
6008
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Back
to the number portability, are you doing anything innovative to try to sign up a
customer in the event that you can't give them a number? Do you offer any incentives? Do you do anything in that
area?
6009
MR. BISSONNETTE: Yes. We have called all of those 5,000‑plus
customers that are still waiting for their number to be ported and we have
offered them an opportunity to come onto our service for a month for free, try
it out, take a new number.
6010
Some have actually been attracted to that. But again, it just goes to the sanctity
of the number that many have still said "no".
6011
September is our busy season.
New homes are being constructed or finished construction, people are
moving in and they have said, "I have to have a phone". So they are taking our number because
they really, truly want to come and enjoy our service. They take our internet service and they
take our other services and this just makes sense to them.
6012
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: How
fast is this backlog building in terms of, say, a percentage or an actual
number?
6013
You can use your discretion on how you answer that.
6014
MR. BISSONNETTE: Yes. We are being satisfied now at a level of
about 50 percent of what the demand is.
We have a backlog of over 5,000 customers which will take, at the rate
that they are being ported now, some several months to deal with in the absence
of any other sales.
6015
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So
will these customers wait several months?
Is your service that attractive to them?
6016
MR. BISSONNETTE: Many
aren't. Many are going
back.
6017
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What
are the key attractions of the Shaw service versus the current
alternatives?
6018
MR. BISSONNETTE: We offer
same-day/next-day service. We can
do that. When a customer takes a
new number and they phone us today, tomorrow in most cases we have actually
installed their telephone service along with any other services that they might
have.
6019
They tell us that they love the long distance that goes with the
services. We have many customers in
our areas that come from Newfoundland and now they can talk to their parents in
Newfoundland unlimited whether it is Saturday, Sunday, three in the morning, two
in the afternoon. They love the
plan.
6020
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: So
you have unlimited, what, free long distance?
6021
MR. BISSONNETTE: It is
unlimited long distance, North America included; that's
right.
6022
Service calls are included.
We don't charge customers.
If they have a problem with any of our services, it is included with
their subscription with our services.
They really like that. They
call us up and we will dispatch a technician to address their
concerns.
6023
If they have concerns with their internet ‑‑ many people load new
software and something goes wrong ‑‑ we have technical support staff there
24 hours a day to help them.
6024
That is a really integral part of our brand, the service orientation of
our company. That is attracting
companies to our telephone services.
6025
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What
is the typical take‑up in each household?
Do they just call you for a phone or are they already a cable
customer?
6026
MR. BISSONNETTE: It is an
interesting ‑‑
6027
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: What
do they want when they call?
6028
MR. BISSONNETTE: Many are
already cable customers who take our internet services and take all of our other
video services and they trusted us because they have had our internet service
for some time and they want to try this new Shaw digital phone
service.
6029
Interestingly enough, there is a portion of customers that are now coming
to us that have never been a customer of Shaw and are taking our bundled
products because they have heard about them. The telephone product was what
essentially moved them into our direction and they said, "We have never really
had a need" but when they are coming on they take
everything.
6030
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Your
historical churn rates in cable you are familiar with.
6031
Is the churn rate in your new phone business similar or are there any
differences?
6032
MR. BISSONNETTE: The churn
rate between when we get a customer and when they get ported, that is in
question right now. Once our
customers come on I think it is probably too early. There is a traditional churn rate that
goes to people moving from their homes, so you are going to churn from one
address to another.
6033
MR. SHAW: We would think it
would be pretty close to the same as cable once we kind of get operating, which
is going to be in 1.5, 1.8 percent a month.
6034
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: 1.8
percent a month. That is of
‑‑
6035
MR. SHAW:
Basic.
6036
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: ‑‑
the two million customers you have?
6037
MR. SHAW: That will be of
the percentage we have.
6038
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS:
Yes.
6039
MR. SHAW: So if we are only
35 percent deployed ...
6040
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS:
Yes.
6041
MR. SHAW: Now is the easiest
time in the market because you get all the people that are the early adopters
who want to try it. No different
than when satellite came, all the people who didn't like their cable provider
moved right away. No
different. That is probably what we
are seeing with RBOCs.
6042
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: You
talk about within 35 percent of your cable marketplace.
6043
Will you eventually offer service in your entire cable operating
area?
6044
MR. SHAW: Yes, we will. The one fact, we just finished on our
high-speed. We have been at it, I
think we were talking seven years and a bit, really, really hard at it. We just finally moved the deployment
down to a level where communities with 1,000 homes have high-speed. So it has taken us that long to get down
to that far.
6045
In in the small reaches of Alberta and Saskatchewan and British Columbia
and all these little towns, it will probably take that long in Shaw's whole
network, but what will happen in the first probably two to three years is that
95 percent of our market will be deployed.
It is the last 5 percent that will take us some work to get to as we have
little fibres and little different interconnects and switches and
stuff.
6046
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: At
what percentage of the phone market or percentage of your current customers that
take phone do you believe your company will achieve breakeven in the phone
business?
6047
What percentage is required to get a return on this, I guess, $350
plus‑million you spoke about earlier?
6048
MR. SHAW: Yes. I can answer that question. It is a little bit hard in that you are
layering on lots of products onto one line so it is like trying to find where
actually the profit comes.
6049
We have stated our goal. We
think as long as the regulations ‑‑ and we can fix this number porting thing a
little bit up, we think we will be at 20 percent penetration of markets deployed
three years after they are deployed.
So from a three‑year date ‑‑ and I think we have gone public with that
number ‑‑ I would think that we start showing what I will call positive EBITDA,
I would say right around the 10 percent level, which we think is very
achievable, whether that is in year one or two. Probably not in year one but maybe in
year two.
6050
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS:
Okay. Can you now please
discuss some of the challenges that your company has also experienced in the
area of access to municipal rights‑of‑way and access to support structures in
rolling out your phone business?
6051
MR. BISSONNETTE: Access to
support structures obviously is fundamental for us, particularly as we are
launching our telephone business where it is really important that we continue
to segment our nodes. I know that
the folks from Cogeco talked about that.
But node segmentation: the
smaller the node, the higher the quality, the more reliable the
service.
6052
What we are running into now ‑‑ and this is not a phenomena of the labour
dispute in Alberta or British Columbia ‑‑ over the last two years the access to
support structures is becoming more and more difficult. The reasons for not providing access to
support structures are becoming more and more vague.
6053
Typically, we have a process called a P408 process where we apply to the
telephone company to run our cable from point A to point B. Within a timeframe of about 60 days we
should hear back from then saying, "Yes, we have facilities there and, yes, you
can access those support structures".
6054
What we are hearing now is, first of all it is taking upwards of a year
to hear back from a telephone company about an application. What they are saying now is a new twist,
it is that, "The make-ready will have to be done, but it is not in our best
interest to do that. Even though
you are going to pay for the cost of making that make-ready and overlashing that
cable, we decided it is not in our best interest to do
that".
6055
So that is one. That is a
very vague response and we don't know what the response to that is. We have to look for alternative
routes.
6056
The other one is our capacity induct systems. We have now done a 50‑year plan and
because of that plan we think we might need those support structures in 20 years
from now and so therefore we can't afford to give you access into those support
structures. So find an alternate
route.
6057
There are just more and more ways of putting roadblocks in our way to
have infrastructure that is absolutely critical to us providing our telephone
service. So that's a
problem.
6058
We met with the Premier of B.C. the other day to talk about our role as a
third party usually leasing facilities from a hydro company or from a telephone
company and the need for us to have interconnections to serve the kind of
communities that Jim just talked about in some of the smaller communities. We need to have support structures. We need to have some kind of status, if
you will, on those support structures in order to place our
facilities.
6059
So we have a situation, as you know, in Vancouver where the City of
Vancouver had denied us access to critical facilities to launch our telephone
products in the city.
6060
Thunder Bay is another example, where we have been whipsawed between the
hydro company and the telephone company, who happen to both be owned by the
city, with respect to getting access.
So when we launched our internet services in Thunder Bay, we had to
actually use creative approaches like AML microwave, digital microwave that
would allow us to use wireless approaches to get into critical hubs as opposed
to being able to place fibre optic networks.
6061
We don't want to sit here whining in front of the Commission. We have challenges. We are prepared to deal with those
challenges.
6062
Where you can help us by maintaining regulations that force incumbents to
at least act in a certain way, that is going to help us to make entry into the
market in a meaningful, meaningful way.
6063
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS:
Okay. That is a perfect
segue into the final set of questions that I have.
6064
In order to rule out your competitive product, what would be the ideal
regulatory environment that the Commission could provide to ensure that, one,
when we did forbear, as is our eventual goal, that it is at a time that is fair
to all, that would produce meaningful and sustainable competition. With what specific criteria do you
think?
6065
What advice can you give us from your company's point of view for the
ideal environment in order for your company to grow in this new competitive
marketplace?
6066
MR. SHAW: Well, I guess the
first thing we think is that the Commission does have this right. So we are not here saying you have it
wrong; we are here saying you have it right. The stuff that you have in place now,
with some minor tweaking, can take this to the next level.
6067
I think our number one issue that we are always most frustrated with is
when there is a problem between us and the RBOC and the customer is in the
middle, because we value that relationship. At the end of the day I guess we are all
just here because of those customers and because of Canadians and that is why we
do what we do.
6068
So probably the most frustrating would be the number porting issue. If we had to rank them, I think the
facilities, while it is frustrating, some of the approaches that are taken we do
find ways around that. We are
pretty creative. We can always dig
in our own fibre if we have to.
While it is more money and maybe not how we should go, we tend to do
that. So we have been able to find
ways around those things.
6069
So I think any time we can err on the side of the consumer in Canada we
are going to win. The whole system
wins.
6070
These companies are of larger size.
Telus won't kill Shaw and Shaw won't kill Telus. I think there is lots of market for
everybody here.
6071
We have seen some market expansion just by these products across the
board so I think we are pretty good there.
6072
I guess we really think that it is time in this area that consumers
benefit. We need a little more time
just to get a little more footing under us. We are not the protectionist type so we
think there will be a time to forbear and we just think that it is just a little
bit early now in our recognition of this.
6073
Ken, do you want to add anything to that?
6074
MR. STEIN: I think the basic
point to be made from a regulatory point of view is that people try to come up
with simple models, whether they are amoebas or charts as to the competitive
environment. It is actually, as we
found when we entered into the DTH business, the Commission actually did that
correctly, because the issue wasn't just a simple 5 percent/100 percent kind of
rule. There are a whole range of
other things that were put in place.
6075
It's interesting, the telcos are asking for transitional arrangements and
more flexibility. Actually, what
happened in the DTH market was that the entrant got all the flexibility and the
incumbent, the cable companies, actually the Commission tightened up on us. So the telcos are asking for the
reverse.
6076
I think the key issue that seems to be ignored in the competitive models
is the fact that they run the system.
The thing we have learned over the past couple of months is that all the
rules, all the regulations with respect to interconnection and LNP, et cetera,
don't mean very much, that really you have to build a relationship in order to
try to make it work and all the rules and regulations don't really
help.
6077
I know Telus complains ‑‑ not complains, but basically says they do have
a labour issue and we are very sensitive to that in terms of resources, but yet
they have the resources to put in the telemarketing.
6078
So we find that within days of people being ported that they are being
phoned by a Telus telemarketing firm saying, "Geez, you switched. Why did you switch?" and "How would you
be incented to come back?"
6079
They have the resources to do that, but they don't have the resources to
have somebody sit at a terminal and do a number port. That just seems to me to be just
strictly anticompetitive.
6080
So how the Commission can help in that is to basically do as it has. The Commission has had a tremendous
success record in introducing competition to this country.
6081
When you look at Winnipeg.
Winnipeg is the most competitive television market in the world. People
have seven choices as to how they get their television in Winnipeg, they have
fundamental choices as to how to get their high‑speed internet, and they are
going to have fundamental choices about how they are going to get telephone
service. This is going to be the
best example of competition in a telecommunication and broadcasting system in
the world and we are getting screwed up by number
portability.
6082
Two days after we launched the service MTS says, "Oh, we can't port
high‑speed internet customers. We
can't port television customers".
Well, I mean, Jim went in there a month before to give them kind of a
hint that we were coming.
‑‑‑
Laughter / Rires
6083
MR. STEIN: So they have
reacted. Then when you see the
emails that we get from people about the offers. I have got some. They tell my sister that she had to
change all her inside wire, which is wrong.
6084
So I think the thing is that it is that specific targeting. If they came at us with huge promotions
and we were able to deal with it on that basis, that would be fine. That would be a real fair competitive
thing. But it is the targeting that
they are able to do and the running of the system in a way that is to their
advantage and to our disadvantage and the targeting of the customers who are
lost that is a real disadvantage.
6085
I think that the more that the Commission can just basically indicate to
them that the system has to be managed in a way that encourages new entrants in
competition and that customers have to be treated equally, that the more the
Commission takes that approach and doesn't get bound up with simplistic rules ‑‑
you know, an amoeba is a single‑cell animal with no brain and I think that that
kind of approach just doesn't fit.
6086
The Commission has it right.
The Commission has it more right about competition in this business than
in most other businesses in this country.
So we don't want to go the route of the airline business or other kinds
of businesses which have followed theories which have failed. The Commission's experience in this area
has been very good and applying that experience to this area is what is
required.
6087
Thank you.
6088
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Thank
you very much, panellists.
6089
I think that concludes my questions, Mr. Chair, although I may think of
one or two more. I reserve the
right to come back later.
6090
Thank you.
6091
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank
you.
6092
Commissioner del Val...?
6093
COMMISSIONER del VAL: Thank
you.
6094
I found your presentation very helpful in the examples you gave of
customers expressing interest, changing, sort of the hurdles that you face, but
it sounds like you do have a lot of interest in the service that you have
offered in Alberta.
6095
MR. SHAW: Yes. There is a fair amount of interest, but
understanding there has been no local competition and really no ability. Edmonton has never really had any
competition in the local arena, to a large degree. So there is a lot of pent‑up, I would
say, in the early days of launch of these products, as well as in Calgary. Plus, we are probably a little more
advantaged by the fact that Alberta is experiencing quite a large boom right now
and so cities like Edmonton and Calgary are really, really building out
fast.
6096
COMMISIONER del VAL: So
inertia isn't really a problem for you as a cableco, is it, but but for your
complaints about violations of winbacks.
6097
Inertia isn't really a problem for the cable company. That wouldn't be a problem you face
then?
6098
MR. SHAW: It might not be a
problem short term, but longer term it will be sustainable. It's just like if you go to a store and
you order some clothes and they don't come for two months and they don't come
for four months. You go back to the
store and say, "Well, gee I would like my money back". How many people are you going to tell
about that experience or that store?
That is kind of what we are dealing with. We are dealing with the fact that we
come, we promise we can port your number.
6099
You know, before we used to say we could have it done ‑‑ I forget, 10
days, Peter, something like that ‑‑ and we were pretty well on track. Then the next thing you know we are
phoning you back to say "Well, it's two weeks", then we are phoning you back to
say "Well, it's three weeks", then we are phoning you back and saying "Well, we
have an offer, do you want to take our number"?
6100
We were getting so creative in the end, we were going "Okay, we will let
you pick your number". So if you
have family you could be, you know, 2221, your brother could be 2222, and you
could be 2223, that kind of thing.
It is kind of just to come up with something that we could offer and, of
course, we could put that in in a day or two. The other one they go, "No, but I want
my number."
6101
I always say this to my mom and dad ‑‑ I shouldn't say this but they are
not here so I can say it ‑‑ you finally talk a senior citizen into coming over
and then they have a senior's moment, which means they basically forget
everything you have told them, and they don't understand. They say, "Well I don't understand why
you can't port my number here.
6102
COMMISSIONER del VAL: But
all those examples are examples of the difficulty in actually getting the
customer and retaining. It is not
inertia. It is because there is a
lot of talk about just inertia, people not even considering
switching.
6103
So that is not really a problem that you as an established cableco
faces.
6104
MR. SHAW: Right. Not that we have seen
yet.
6105
COMMISSIONER del VAL: Okay,
thanks.
6106
The Competition Bureau proposed dividing the product market into primary
lines and secondary lines. I also
note in your presentation your goal to be a replacement for local telephone
service.
6107
I will try to break this down.
6108
First, what do you think of the Competition Bureau splitting the products
market for residential service into primary and second
lines?
6109
The second question will be:
Do you think that there is a good market for you in the second line
residential market?
6110
MR. SHAW: We initially have
looked around at other companies that launch what I would call a secondary line
offering first, converting over to a primary line. We felt that in marketing that with an
inferior product and just trying to compete on a second-line basis would not be
where our company should go. So, in
turn, while we might offer you a second line that restricts long distance on it,
because you want it at a discount, we think our service should be totally
primary line with all the features that any other line should
have.
6111
Ken, I don't know if you have ‑‑
6112
MR. STEIN: I think the model
just gets too complicated, because as you try to apply that model in any given
circumstances people use secondary lines in a whole bunch of different ways and
there is a lot of change that goes on.
There are also different features.
You can have the same telephone number and get a secondary fax line with
using a feature rather than having a secondary line.
6113
So there is a lot of different ways of achieving a secondary line and
there is probably a lot more change within households in terms of how they do
that.
6114
So we felt that in terms of entering into the market what we wanted to go
after was the market that is there and that market is the primary line
market. AJim says, it also gives
you the quality features.
6115
But to try to trace through secondary lines would be trying to judge
whether the cell phone is a primary line or the secondary line as well. So I think it just gets overly
complicated and I don't think people really look at it that way. I don't think people look at there is a
primary market or a secondary market.
Maybe economists do or academics do, but I don't think individual
homeowners do.
6116
COMMISSIONER del VAL: It's
funny that you say that, because in my simple mind as just a consumer in a
household I actually thought that first line and secondary line, you know, it
actually had some appeal, because you would think that, okay, if there is the
inertia with the primary line with the incumbent telco and then, you know, say
if I have the computer ‑‑ most households have computers ‑‑ with high-speed
internet from cable, the secondary line would be the perfect place to try out my
teen phone.
6117
So I don't see that as an economist's view, I am just seeing it as a
simple consumer's view.
6118
MR. SHAW:
No.
6119
COMMISSIONER del VAL: So I'm
just wondering, am I missing something?
6120
It strikes me that sort of we don't want competition until we want it
perfect, we want the perfect scenario, we want the primary
line.
6121
MR. SHAW: No, no, no, and we
offer primary line now, that is all we offer. You can use it as a secondary line if
you want, that is your choice. You
might pull it into your household and say, "Well, I'm keeping my main Telus
number and I'm using Shaw as my long distance number, so when everybody makes a
long distance call they walk over to the other number and use it. It is mainly outgoing when you do long
distance, so does it really matter that the other one is for
incoming?
6122
So I think lots of people do that.
It is just we made the decision that we are not going to have someone go
and say, Well, I tried to call 9-1-1 on that service and it didn't work" or "I
tried to call 4-1-1 and it didn't work".
So we want it fully featured, but by no means has that slowed us down at
all.
6123
COMMISSIONER del VAL:
Okay. Those are my
questions. Thank you very
much.
6124
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank
you.
6125
Commissioner Cram...?
6126
COMMISSIONER CRAM: I see Red
Deer is on the map. I guess my
brother will be pleased.
6127
Why isn't Saskatoon on the proposals too?
6128
MR. BISSONNETTE: Saskatoon
is on our radar map.
6129
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Oh,
okay.
6130
MR. BISSONNETTE: It is a
matter of getting the interconnects that are necessary to provide us, as a CLEC,
with interconnects to the telephone network in Saskatoon. So they are clearly on our map. They will be launching. We are doing the kinds of things we have
to do now, the lead time ‑‑ I think we talked about two years to announce the
telephone switch, the lead time typically has been in a year to get those kinds
of things resolved with the telephone company.
6131
MR. SHAW: I would say that
of Shaw's major systems ‑‑ let's go with a cable system above 20,000 to 30,000
‑‑ above that everyone will be launched within a year. So Saskatoon is on there, we didn't
write it in the thing, but it is on the list.
6132
It is a little more complicated one because Bell doesn't have an
interconnect agreement, so it is one of the ones we have to do directly with
SaskTel. We have held talks with
them already and that process is starting to get under
way.
6133
So it is more just a function of the ability to get the interconnection
agreement, get our status and then work ahead and then you will see actually
Prince Albert and Moose Jaw and Swift Current and all those place
launch.
6134
COMMISSIONER CRAM: So you
are partnering with BellWest, but you are also competing with BellWest in
Alberta.
6135
Is that right?
6136
MR. D'AVELLA: Bell West is
essentially a wholesale provider of access services and a variety of other
things. Their focus is largely the
enterprise and small and medium sized business markets. So they are not really in the
residential telephony market. They
see this largely as a wholesale business for them, which they are very happy to
have.
6137
COMMISSIONER CRAM: When I
get to some of these questions I wonder if you could file, I guess on a
confidential basis, your basic penetration rate in Calgary, Winnipeg, Saskatoon,
and then your high-speed penetration rate as a percentage of the
basic?
6138
I know you have high penetration in your internet, but it is just it
would be ‑‑
6139
MR. SHAW: Do you want us to
file all the systems? It is
just as easy to file them all.
6140
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Is
it? If it is just as easy
‑‑
6141
MR. SHAW: All the bigger
ones or all the Class 1's.
6142
COMMISSIONER CRAM: The
bigger ones.
6143
MR. SHAW: How about all
Class 1's?
6144
COMMISSIONER CRAM:
Sure.
6145
MR. SHAW:
Okay.
6146
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Thank
you.
6147
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
6148
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank
you.
6149
Commissioner Langford...?
6150
COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: Thank
you, Mr. Chairman. I don't have
many questions.
6151
Welcome, folks, to beautiful downtown Gatineau.
6152
I was wondering what your plans are for competing in the central business
core of some of these large cities you talk about. I'm not really up to speed on your cable
footprint in some of the western cities, but I know that in some of the eastern
cities it is not as strong right in the central business
core.
6153
I wonder if you could just bring me up to speed on where you are on
that?
6154
MR. SHAW: I guess that is
certainly a longer term picture.
6155
Short‑term cable's main strength is in the fact that it is a residential
provider and that it has very good extensive fibre optics throughout almost all
residential areas in Canada to a large degree, all the bigger ones for sure, and
that it has always resisted a bit going downtown because you have had a lot of
costs and certainly not as many subscribers and some people frown on the idea of
having a TV in their office. I
certainly don't, but some other people do.
6156
So gradually, as we wire in what I will call our high-speed SO/HO,
small-office/home-office, we start to penetrate these areas around the edge,
mainly the industrial areas and stuff.
So it is a growing factor.
6157
I think once we have reached competition on the local side or in what I
call the residential side you would see the next move would be some more
competition come into probably the small and medium business side, with some
creative type offerings for probably businesses with under 10 employees, maybe
under 20 and work from there.
6158
I wouldn't see cable as being a great provider of the large enterprise
units at this time. But, you know,
if you would have asked me five years ago if we were going to go head-to-head in
local with the local incumbent I would have probably told you no
also.
6159
COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: What
would it take to get in to some of these large officer towers now? Would you have to work some kind of
agreement with someone else, one of the other CLECs, or how would you do it if
you did decide to do it?
6160
MR. D'AVELLA: Access is
certainly part of it. As Jim said,
we do have fairly extensive fibre networks throughout our major
centres.
6161
But the bigger issue for us is selling a large business is a completely
different undertaking. We don't
really have the culture and the resources to do it. We would obviously have to staff up to
do it and hire the right expertise.
6162
The switch that we bought, the softswitch platform that we have for our
residential customers, will probably do some of the small business type
applications up to a certain number of lines, but if you are going to provide
services like IP Centrex and start dealing with more complicated enterprise
offerings, it is another investment in a switch.
6163
COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: So
who would be the competitors for that sort of business in the big cities where
you are doing residential?
6164
MR. D'AVELLA: Well, it is
the incumbents. In our territory,
it is obviously BellWest. I believe
SaskTel has a venture out there called Navigata that competes against
us.
6165
We do some business through our Big Pipe division that essentially
provides bacall fibre but that is a large pipe business, it is not really a very
sophisticated switching type business.
6166
COMMISSIONER LANGFORD:
Another question totally unrelated, but when you get down the food chain
on the questioning it is pretty hard to get them coherent.
6167
You have been talking about selling VoIP to people who are interested in
doing long distance. You talk about
your customers who are Newfoundland families.
6168
How many service request have you gotten for area codes that are not the
area codes in which the phone is located?
In other words, perhaps for Newfoundland's area code or for something
somewhere else in the world or in Canada.
6169
MR. D'AVELLA: I don't think
we have had any, Peter, or very few.
6170
We have been very very careful in our marketing message that this is a
primary line service that replaces your local line. So I think we finally got it through
most peoples' heads that this is not Vonage or any VoIP offering or anything
like that where you can port a different area code.
6171
We could certainly do that.
It is an offering that we could provide if we wanted to, but as Jim and
Peter have said that is not where we thought our customers' hearts were at
initially. All of this stuff is
certainly going to evolve and there will come a time when we can certainly
provide that offer if we think there is a market for it.
6172
COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: So
you are not providing it now, though you could?
6173
MR. D'AVELLA: No. It is tied to a specific address, it is
a land line, it is a fixed land line.
6174
COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: Now
for kind of a complicated and vague question, but at least it will be the last,
mercifully.
6175
When the kind folks from the Competition Bureau came in the other day to
give us some insights into how they operate they talked about one of the aspects
or one of the negative fallouts from possible forbearance that they thought we
should look at or would be one of the things they would look at if they were in
our shoes.
6176
What they talked about was the notion that if we forbore too early it was
conceivable that the incumbents could drive one or more competitors right out of
the market. But they thought that
might be countered in the case of the cableco competitors in the sense that you
and the other cable companies have so much of your invested infrastructure
utilized already for other products.
You named them today, internet and television and
whatever.
6177
So I guess my first question would be can you imagine a scenario ‑‑ you
have only been at this for eight months I know, but you have some customer base
‑‑ can you imagine a scenario under forbearance where you would look at this new
business venture of yours, look at your 600-and-some new employees and just say
"This is no longer worth it" and go back to your core businesses which are
television and internet providing?
6178
MR. SHAW: Only one example
comes to mind, it was back in the early days. We talked Michael here into moving out
to Edmonton and we were going to start‑up what was called MetroNet, which later
became a different kind of company.
We created this company and in turn it was going to deliver wireless
internet, wireless phone and wireless video. Well, after about a year of torturing
ourselves, or maybe it was two years, we finally turned it
off.
6179
Also, we were a big component in GT Telecom, which was a bypass provider
in the large arena. It also failed,
costing us multimillions of dollars.
Basically the pricing model just couldn't work. As I look through that model, I don't
see any of those guys around any more.
The only people who seem to buy them are the guys who want their tax
losses because they have lost so much money that it helps MTS' balance sheet to
buy Allstream or otherwise no one would even buy them.
6180
I think you would have to ask Bill about Sprint, but certainly a lot of
damage was done in that arena.
6181
So I would think that you need to give the incumbent, no different
probably than the satellite guys, enough time to just have enough inertia that
the business can grow and then gradually just pull away.
6182
COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: That
is what you would like but it hasn't quite, with respect, answered my
question. Perhaps you can't. If you can't, that's
fine.
6183
Can you imagine a scenario at this point ‑‑ you must have sat around kind
of blue‑skying when you got into this and I assume when you do that you look at
all the pluses and you look at all the negatives. Assuming, just for the sake of argument,
forbearance today, you go back to your headquarters in the west, what could
happen that might ‑‑ and if nothing, I mean if you are in forever that's
fine.
6184
MR. SHAW: No,
no.
6185
COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: What
might happen that could drive you out of this aspect of the
business?
6186
MR. SHAW: I think what would
happen is that you would probably maintain your existing base and work with
that, but it might preclude future investment so you would have to ‑‑ I and
Peter and the boys sit in front of the Board and we have to justify to our
shareholders our investment and hurdle rates and things like that. So what it will do is probably it will
limit expansion more than it would pull back the initial
investment.
6187
I would think that initially we are already deployed. We have the work services up and
running. I tend to think that we
would either slow it down so it was a lot slower deployment and/or we wouldn't
deploy markets and then we would have to make a decision on which markets, was
it economical and which markets wasn't.
Saskatoon might be, but Moose Jaw might not or Red Deer might
not.
6188
So we would start making market-to-market choices, depending on how close
you are ‑‑ a whole bunch of technical things like how close you are to the
fibre, what the switch can handle, can the Calgary call centre handle it, how do
we hook you up? So it will just
force a different level of decisions.
6189
I think what we have initially deployed here won't ever go
away.
6190
COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: Thank
you very much.
6191
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank
you.
6192
Commissioner Pennefather...?
6193
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
6194
Good morning, gentlemen. I
have a somewhat related question. I
thought at first it was the same question, but it is the timeframe again. You proposed on page 10 of today's
presentation:
"We can't see this happening for at least another three to five
years."
6195
I am assuming the "this" is a point at which we could forbear. Correct?
6196
MR. SHAW:
Yes.
6197
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Was that the meaning?
6198
MR. SHAW:
Yes.
6199
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER: In
your discussion with Commissioner Langford I think what you were describing, Mr.
Shaw, is a point of sustainable competition.
6200
Is that correct?
6201
On what basis do you choose the three to five‑year
timeframe
6202
MR. D'AVELLA: The three
to five‑year timeframe is really a collection of things that essentially says,
"Look, we have still have to build this out, we still have to deploy some of our
larger systems, we have real issues in terms of
interconnection."
6203
Those of you who are familiar with Edmonton, not being able to serve
Sherwood Park, which is a very, very large component of Edmonton, is a real
deficiency in terms of our ability to provide service in that city. So we have got to get these problems
solved.
6204
Quite frankly, we have been at this interconnection issue with both our
partner and with Telus for well over a year and we still have no date as to when
Sherwood Park is going to get interconnected.
6205
That is just one example. We
have a series of holes in Vancouver that have to be filled before we can provide
service in the entire city. We have
yet to deploy our largest system in Vancouver.
6206
So there is a lot of work that has to take place over the next call it 12
to 24 months before we can confidently say, "Yes, we have got a functioning
system here, we have the interconnection agreements in place. LNP actually works, or it works better
than it does now, and we are confident this business is going to build out and
grow.
6207
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Would you describe that period of three to five years as a
transition regime and, if so, would you see any other safeguards or any other
steps the Commission could take?
6208
I think, Mr. Stein, you were saying that we have it right. The panel is saying we have it right,
but that all the rules don't mean very much, as I heard you
say.
6209
Could you just clarify that for me and if that would be steps in
a ‑‑ as you know, a transition regime has been
proposed.
6210
MR. STEIN: Right. Well, I think that for us part of this
is the fact that the ILECs over 120 years really have come to the point where in
terms of dealing with municipalities and rights of ways and their own structures
that they do manage that system and that what we have to make sure of, with the
help of the Commission, that we get into a position where that system is being
managed for the benefit of all and that it is being managed for the benefit of
competition. In our view, there are
a lot of issues that we are going to have to go through that are going to take
the time to be able to sort that out.
That is not going to happen in the next two years, it seems to us, it is
going to take a period of time.
6211
Second, it is the same thing with dealing with municipalities. The Commission has been an immense help
in dealing with municipalities, but when it comes down to it you still have to
negotiate with the mayor and the city council, and you still have to deal with
their lawyers and you still have to work it out.
6212
When it works, it works really, really well on that basis. That is what we mean. That is the kind of working relationship
we want to get to.
6213
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
One last point.
6214
There has been considerable discussion about market share as an indicator
or a trigger for either steps in a transition period or a point of
forbearance.
6215
Do you have any comment on market share?
6216
Mr. Shaw, I heard you say 20 percent penetration after three years
of service being deployed would be considered to be a sustainable position, as I
heard you.
6217
Generally speaking, is that a step we can take?
6218
MR. SHAW: I think a
market share penetration step is a better step than a date picking one, because
the date picking one is always open to so much manipulation, maybe even on both
sides. I don't know
that.
6219
I think market share argument worked well in the satellite cable
thing. I think with such dominance
in local and wanting to bring competition in so much the number needs to be
quite a bit higher than that number, the old 5 percent deregulation rule, but I
would think 20 percent would be a pretty fair number.
6220
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Thank you very much.
6221
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
6222
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank
you.
6223
Commissioner Duncan.
6224
COMMISSIONER DUNCAN: Good
morning. I just have three quick
questions.
6225
I was interested, following the discussion over the last few days, to
just get your reaction on whether a duopoly is going to be sufficient to ensure
the degree of competition in the market that we need or whether it is going to
take more than two facilities‑based competitors.
6226
I was told that in the cellular market it actually took the entry of a
third competitor to really ensure that the prices got to the best level ‑‑
prices and service, I'm sure.
6227
MR. SHAW: I guess we
are kind of viewing it as we have to walk before we run. Certainly in video, as we were talking
about in Winnipeg, there are two illegal competitors, two legal satellite
competitors, a telco competitor, and a cableco competitor, over the air and
sky.
6228
As I said, that is a lot. So
I don't know how many actually we need and I do not know the perfect model, but
I do know that this is a very, very positive step and all the responses that we
have received from consumers have suggested that it is a positive
response.
6229
So whether a third one would help bring even more? Possibly. I don't know. But I think let's get one started well
and then if the third one could come in I guess that would be a good move,
too.
6230
COMMISSIONER DUNCAN: All
right, great. Thank
you.
6231
With respect to the Competition Bureau, as I understand it they are
suggesting that we would have to give careful consideration to the variable
costs of the competitors, the facilities‑based competitors. I'm curious to know whether you think
that we will confidently be able to arrive at numbers, or get numbers that we
can rely on that would prove that your variable costs were less, for example,
than the Bell, assuming that was the right answer.
6232
But are we going to be able to get numbers that can be relied on that
would be comparable?
6233
MR. McKOEWN: I think
there is a great concern about any new costing methodology. The Commission has had lots of
experience with introducing costing methodologies. Phase 2 and Phase 3, you know, come to
mind. The Commission has spent a
lot of time looking at those, and not only after implementation but examining
whether or not they are doing the proper job.
6234
I think you need to take that as an indication of the difficulty it is in
determining the costs. It is not a
precise art. There is no precise
number. I think the best you can do
is get a feel for the relative costs for companies, but that may not be enough
for the type of thing that the Competition Bureau is
doing.
6235
So we don't think that is the right criteria to examine the
market.
6236
COMMISSIONER DUNCAN: I
appreciate that. Thank
you.
6237
One last question. The
resellers suggested yesterday that they should have access to your video service
in order for them to be able to bundle and offer a truly competitive
service.
6238
I understand there would be lots of hoops to go through to get to that
point, but I'm just sort of wondering your initial reaction to
that.
6239
MR. SHAW: One, it would
be pretty hard to decouple that, just in the nature of the distribution network,
but there is lots of ability for them to partner up with a video
partner.
6240
Bell ExpressVu partners up all the time. I'm sure StarChoice would partner with
them as the video provider to complement their signal. Some of the wireless guys. I don't see any reason why the telco
would not do it as part if they wanted.
I think there is lots of opportunity for them to
bundle.
6241
They can also go to a form of delivery on their own where they lease a
line and deliver their own product.
So I think they have some options there.
6242
We don't tend to feel that resellers will be sustainable over a longer
period of time just because as the market gets more competitive we feel that
margins are going to squeeze down and there won't be enough margin for someone
to incrementally resell your service.
So we think that down the road it is going to just be based on the
facility‑based.
6243
They also can build facilities, too. We saw lots of people do it in the old
days with MetroNet in the City Vancouver and lots of people getting in. There are lots of new wireless
technologies with all the WiFi and that that they can look
at.
6244
So I think they have lots of opportunities,
Commissioner.
6245
COMMISSIONER DUNCAN: I
appreciate that. Thank you very
much.
6246
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank
you.
6247
Gentlemen, just a few questions or maybe comments. Mostly these questions are on
Mr. Stein's portion of the presentation.
6248
Included in there, particularly in respect of winbacks and
interconnection, it is difficult to know how to calibrate these points. On the one level they are general
statements, aggressive winback campaigns, and so on.
6249
I guess I am not inviting more precision here because this really is not
a fact‑gathering dispute settlement process, and yet we do have those processes
at the Commission where if you do have specific concerns about the rules being
violated you can go to. We have the
good offices ever Mr. Godin and company to try to minimize the formality of
that, to try to work out as much as we can on an ongoing basis. I know from your feedback on other
occasions that has been helpful.
6250
So I guess what I'm really saying is, I'm just not sure how in this
proceeding we can deal with those points.
If they are meant to be a general description of the difficulties in the
marketplace, I understand. If they
are meant to be allegations that there have been violation of the rules I'm not
sure this is the proper forum. So I
don't know.
6251
Naturally the ILECs whom you interface with will have an opportunity to
comment in the next phase, but I don't want to dwell on that for both those
reasons, the comments are general and because this isn't probably the
appropriate forum.
6252
I would just like you to address that to perhaps clarify what this
presentation was really intended to do.
6253
MR. STEIN: Okay. We have tried to resolve these issues,
with respect. We have had
discussions with both MTS and with Telus with respect to the particular
issues. They come up on a daily
basis. They
vary.
6254
At the beginning of the MTS there was quite a bit of misinformation and
after some discussion with the Commission and with MTS that stopped and then it
sort of came back again. So it is
an ongoing type of issue.
6255
The difficulty is. when you get into the market your processes
necessarily have to take time and effort and filings to deal with. So what we have tried to do is deal
directly with the companies. After
this session ‑‑ Mr. Peirce, for example, the other day announced that we
had in place a process to deal with the porting issue with respect to internet
and television services.
6256
I think MTS did agree in our discussions with them that this was probably
an oversight on their part and it was their
responsibility.
6257
But what I'm saying is, all the rules and regulations, even though the
CRTC had very clearly laid out that that was not to be a barrier to number
porting, and even though Allstream itself had made filings in that regard over
the past years, still that day of launch it was an issue.
6258
So I think it is more that we are not raising it, we recognize this is a
consultation and we are basically saying that these are ongoing issues that
indicate that rather than the incumbents saying here is how the system can work
best so that we can do this, they are going the opposite way. That has been a bit of a shock to us in
terms of how it operates.
6259
MR. SHAW: So they were
just really to give a general parameter of just what is happening in the
marketplace. We wanted to come
really from a consumer and a functional point of view rather than brought up as
a specific problem with something we wanted to file on them or
anything.
6260
THE CHAIRPERSON: I guess if
you have specific complaints about violations ‑‑
6261
MR. SHAW: We will deal
with that.
6262
THE CHAIRPERSON: ‑‑ of the winback rules then you should be dealing
with us separately and raising those and giving an opportunity for parties to
comment.
6263
MR. SHAW:
Right.
6264
THE CHAIRPERSON: We set up
the expedite process and I think that has worked rather well. Below that, the good offices process
that helps to skate a lot of these disputes in to the boards, which I hope works
also.
6265
So I am basically taking the bulk of your material, Mr. Stein, as
basically saying: Quite apart from
the rules and the criteria this is what it is like in the trenches and you
should know that so that as a background to what you are doing, we still will
face a lot of these problems that may not be caught on the radar screen of rule
violation in the letter, but may well go to the spirit of it and you should know
that.
6266
Is that a fair summary?
6267
MR. STEIN: Yes, it
is. If I could just make a
general point on the winback rules, et cetera, that in the broadcasting
side we were not removed from the winback conditions as cable companies until
the DTH had about two million subscribers.
6268
So it wasn't like when we had thousands or right at the beginning of the
market entry. I think what we were
trying to point out is that these specific examples are examples of things that
happened in the early days in the trenches, as you say, but they are indicators
that it takes time to sort these things out and come to a balance in terms of
how it works.
6269
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank
you. I have that
point.
6270
Zeroing in in particular on the interconnection point on page 12, Airdrie
and Okotoks and so on ‑‑ Okotoks, I am informed by Commissioner Cram ‑‑
that is all within the Calgary LIR and that was your point. You are saying that notwithstanding that
it is within the Calgary LIR that interconnection isn't complete and so
accessibility to all points in that zone is not available.
6271
MR. STEIN: Yes,
exactly.
6272
THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay. I guess turning that on its head, does
this raise a question as to the suitability of the LIR as the geographic area
for market forbearance?
6273
MR. STEIN: No, we
still ‑‑
6274
THE CHAIRPERSON: ‑‑ indeed
in addition to the cost of rolling out your network, which we have established
yesterday you have, you don't even have interconnection at this
point.
6275
So supply conditions in that LIR are really not equal. That is the other side, the
flip side of the same coin of what you are saying, is it
not?
6276
MR. STEIN: We think the
LIR is the best because it is the one that we have experience with for
administrative reasons, et cetera.
There are going to be issues, obviously, within that, but we felt that
the LIR, combined with a commitment to make the system work and to make the
interconnection arrangements work properly, whether with BellWest or as a CLEC,
would be the way to go.
6277
Sure, it is going to take time to do that, but you are not going to
forbear immediately anyway, so hopefully we will have it sorted out by the time
you do that.
6278
THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Good to hear that.
6279
One of the parties ‑‑ and I can't recall who it was now, I can't put my
finger on it ‑‑ suggested that one of the reasons for not adopting the LIR
was that Shaw, for example, was only serving the city of ‑‑ I think it was
Calgary, if my memory serves me.
6280
Your answer would be that "We can't get interconnection in the balance of
the LIR"?
6281
Would that be fair?
6282
MR. D'AVELLA: The only
reason why we launched it in Calgary is that is the only place the telco would
actually allow us to launch. They
would not do an interconnection in Airdrie or Okotoks.
6283
We did raise the issue of what about this LIR concept that the Commission
has come up with? Shouldn't we be
fine with the interconnect in Calgary?
6284
Well, they are not buying it.
They are insisting on interconnects in both Airdrie and Okotoks. Those are like suburbs of Calgary. It is not like we are going, you know,
50 miles out of the city.
6285
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank
you.
6286
My final question is on your page 14, Mr. Bissonnette, where you
reference the LNP mechanism.
6287
I take your point about the difficulties in porting. You acknowledged also in the case of
Telus at least labour issues were part of the problem.
6288
But you make a more general point, that you say
that:
"We believe that the telcos need to be removed at arbiters and
gatekeepers of the LNP process."
(As read)
6289
Of course at one level the number is assigned to a telco customer and
therefore it has to be ported, so they have to be involved in the
process.
6290
What else do you mean and would you elaborate on that particular
point?
6291
MR. BISSONNETTE: I
think if we think in the ideal world where LNP-ing is not a difficult process
and where in fact there is a neutrality to that process so that it does'nt
become an opportunity for some other behaviour, aside from just transferring a
customer from one provider to the other provider.
6292
So if we remove all of what we will call Machiavellian behaviour from it,
if we could feel comfortable that when a customer says "I want to move from
provider A to provider B", that number portability is absolutely not an
issue. When we feel comfortable
that is taking place, as we do when a customer moves from one video provider to
the other, we have dealt with any of the issues that may be barriers. This one is a huge
barrier.
6293
There are ways of doing this.
We have made a proposal to the incumbent that would really smooth out, if
you will, some of that behaviour and it essentially becomes just a pro forma
process.
6294
We go to the Numbering Association, "This customer wants to move". There is a confirmation a that the
customer wants to move and the number is reassigned through the Canadian
Numbering Association from the incumbent to ourselves. There is no opportunity for the other
kind of behaviour that we are seeing now.
6295
THE CHAIRPERSON: I see. So the Numbering Association is now not
involved is what you are saying?
6296
MR. BISSONNETTE: They
are involved, but through our CLEC partnership. They could be involved directly with
ourselves. All that has to happen
is that the incumbent has to say "We endorse that
process."
6297
MR. D'AVELLA: They are
involved, but they are not the final arbiters. It is the incumbent who says, "Yes, I
see this local service request that you have made. Peter Bissonnette is now moving to Shaw
Digital Phone. He lives at this
particular address." They actually
send back information saying "We confirm that two of three of the pieces of
information are correct. It's
good."
6298
What we suggested is, "Well, there is no need for you to confirm
that. We already know where
Mr. Bissonnette lives and we will take responsibility for the data, because
the issue is, when you inform the PSAPs of Mr. Bissonnette he still has to
be at that particular address. We
are responsible for that, "we" Shaw and "we" Bell ‑‑ "we" Bell our partner that
is.
6299
So we suggested to them, "Look, you guys don't even need to be involved
in this process. As long as NPAC
has effectively announced that that number now resides on the Shaw switch versus
the Telus switch, it should work, provided we take responsibility for the
data.
6300
They are just not there yet, although we are
trying.
6301
THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Well, hopefully this information will
prove useful for the staff of the Commission to examine further. Telus will obviously have an opportunity
to comment as well.
6302
I think those are my questions.
6303
Counsel?
6304
MR. WILSON: Just two quick
questions, if I may.
6305
First, to follow up on your discussion with Commissioner Langford where
there was some discussion in terms of the business market. I think I understood from that
discussion that while there may be some opportunities for your type of service
in the sort of smaller businesses, the SOHO market, as we have heard, or that
small business market, the larger business market just really isn't feasible for
the type of service that you offer.
6306
For the Commission's purposes in looking at the service market for
businesses, does that argue that rather than treating the business market as one
market we should be looking to divide it between that smaller business customer
segment and the larger business customers segment?
6307
MR. SHAW: I don't know if we
have done enough work to really answer that question for you totally, whether it
should be segmented or not.
6308
Certainly, at initial blush, we will easily move into the small and
possibly medium, but the large ones, there are just so much more complex in
their requirements.
6309
We certainly right now are designing the system as residential-base
services, meaning that the softswitch we picked and some of that stuff is more
geared for a residential type of customer so we would have to start
reconfiguring the network.
6310
I'm not saying we won't go there.
I'm saying I don't know if we have done enough work to give you the right
answer.
6311
MR. WILSON: My final
question, just to follow up with respect to the information that you have
undertaken to file in response to Commissioner Cram's question, can you just
indicate when you will be able to file that information with the
Commission?
6312
MR. SHAW: In a week. Within a week,
yes.
6313
MR. WILSON: Mr. Chairman,
those are my questions.
6314
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank
you.
6315
Commissionaire Cram?
6316
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Thank
you.
6317
I don't know if you were here the other day when Yak was here, but they
were discussing what the British Telecom regulator is doing, and that was doing
a process to ensure implementation of an effective wholesale and interconnection
before considering forbearing.
6318
Would you agree with me that what you have written on pages 12 and 13
seems to be precisely the reasons why we should do the
same?
6319
MR. STEIN: I'm always a bit
reluctant to use the British examples only because it is such a different
structure and their attempts to get at competition have had different rates of
success than ours. So I'm not sure
I would --
6320
COMMISSIONER CRAM: We have
been a sterling success, for sure.
---
Laughter / Rires
6321
MR. STEIN: Well, we have in
areas. They have different
issues. I always find these
structural comparisons between ourselves -- you know, comparisons were made
between Canadian cable and U.S. cable, which does make sense in some ways, but it is not
always the best comparison to make.
So it is difficult.
6322
We would look more at that model in terms of how it fits with this, but I
wouldn't be willing to buy into it right off the top.
6323
COMMISSIONER CRAM: The
question is, though: Should we be
looking at the effectiveness of our rules on the wholesale business and
interconnection and ensuring its effectiveness before we even look at
forbearing, given what you have here?
6324
MR. STEIN: I'm not exactly
sure I understand what you mean in terms of wholesale?
6325
COMMISSIONER CRAM:
Resale.
6326
MR. STEIN:
Resale?
6327
COMMISSIONER CRAM:
Yes.
6328
MR. STEIN: I would think
more to what our point is that we are more concerned about how the system
operates from our point of view of being able to offer it at a retail level and
how we can work out the interconnection arrangements and the system arrangements
more than resale options.
6329
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Yes. That is why I was talking about
effective interconnection and then also the wholesale side
too.
6330
MR. STEIN: Yes. But we would look at it more from the
interconnection point of view than from a resale point of
view.
6331
COMMISSIONER CRAM: So my
question then is: Do you think we
should be looking at ensuring adherence to our interconnection requirements and
perhaps tweaking some of the rules and ensuring that works before we get into
forbearance?
6332
MR. STEIN:
Absolutely.
6333
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Thank
you.
6334
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank
you.
6335
We will take our lunch break now and resume at 1:10. Nous reprendrons à 1 h 10.
---
Upon recessing at 1206 / Suspension à 1206
‑‑‑
Upon resuming at 1313 / Reprise à 1313
6336
THE CHAIRPERSON: While we
are waiting for the rest of the panel to join us, the Secretary asks that I
request of parties who do not wish to make a final statement tomorrow to let her
know so she can do some planning.
6337
So if you do not intend to make a statement tomorrow ‑‑ we will assume
you do unless you let her know.
Thank you very kindly.
6338
Order, please. À l'ordre,
s'il vous plaît.
6339
Madame la secrétaire.
6340
THE SECRETARY: We will now
proceed with Rogers Communication Inc.
Thank you.
PRESENTATION
/ PRÉSENTATION
6341
MR. ENGELHART: Mr. Chairman,
Commissioners, my name is Ken Engelhart with Rogers
Communications.
6342
I am happy to have with me today Bill Linton, at my right; Dave Watt
beside Bill; Jean Brazeau to my left; Don Bowles to his
left.
6343
I am going to ask Bill to speak first about the experience of a CLEC
operating in a Canadian market, and then I will address the important public
policy issues at stake in this proceeding.
6344
MR. LINTON: Mr. Chairman,
Commissioners, as you know, I was the President of Call‑Net, which is now Rogers
Telecom.
6345
Consistent with the local competition framework established by you,
Call‑Net uses ILEC local loops to provide service. Now that we are part of the Rogers
family, we have started to provide service over cable facilities where they are
available.
6346
However, it is our intention to be a national service provider, and
therefore we will continue to use ILEC local loops for the foreseeable
future.
6347
This afternoon I am going to describe both a good day and a bad day as a
local service competitor. By a good
day, I mean a day when the networks and the systems are all working and the
ILECs are providing essential services and facilities in line with the quality
of service standards that you have established.
6348
On this good day I sign up in the neighbourhood of a thousand customers,
and that costs over $200,000. Of
these customers, about 100 do not get switched over correctly or on time by the
ILEC. This requires us to recontact
these customers and face their ire.
6349
I also discover that about 20 of these customers are served by what is
called ILEC remotes, and that we will either not be able to serve them at all
or, if we can, it will take several months for the ILEC to install the required
equipment.
6350
Also on this good day, out of my total base I have about 750 existing
customers who are completely out of service for various reasons, but mostly
because of loop problems. Of these
750, about 150 have been without service for greater than 24 hours. These people are mad and they are
phoning us constantly.
6351
That is a good day. Now let
me tell you a little bit about a bad day ‑‑ and there have been a lot more bad
days lately than good days.
6352
On a bad day I have had to scale back my marketing activities because of
the difficulties I am experiencing in obtaining loops importing customers. So I am signing up fewer customers to
begin with.
6353
As many as 50 percent of the people I am signing up and that I have
persuaded to take my service do not get transferred because the ILEC systems are
not working properly. So that is 50
percent.
6354
Today I have a backlog of about 5,000 customers that are waiting to get
transferred, and the backlog is growing daily. I can't even tell these customers when
they will get transferred, so a good number of them lose patience and they
cancel our service even before it has commenced.
6355
I have customers who have been without service for over a week and are so
mad that they are going to cancel not only their phone service but also any
other service they receive from Rogers.
6356
This description doesn't even begin to deal with the ILEC's aggressive
winback campaigns. We often lose as
many as 500 customers a day for this reason alone.
6357
Some before you are going to argue that our experience reflects the
operation of a normal competitive marketplace. Others will argue that cable telephony
will change everything. I
disagree.
6358
First, in a normal competitive marketplace there is no incumbent provider
that starts with all of the customers while we have to win them from him one at
a time. Because they started with
all of the customers, the ILECs know who they are, they know where they live and
they know what they value in telecommunications services.
6359
In a normal competitive marketplace it is not difficult to use a better
deal to pry a customer loose; yet in the local telephone market the ILECs have
customer inertia working for them.
There is a segment of customers who are price sensitive and open to
switching. However, local phone
service is an essential service. The substantial majority of customers are not
looking to switch, which means we must work harder to open their minds to
competitive alternatives.
6360
In a normal competitive marketplace, one so‑called competitor does not
control essential inputs to another's business. The ILECs are increasingly using remote
switching technology in many areas.
6361
This means that our customers have to wait months for the ILEC to install
the necessary equipment to use our service. That is where the ILEC co‑operates. Where it refuses to co-operate, we are
simply unable to serve those customers.
6362
Cable companies are not immune from this dependence on ILECs. With all of the customers, the ILECs
start with all of the phone numbers.
6363
When a number must be ported, it must be ported from an ILEC, and that is
where the normal competitive process can become abnormally slow and
unreliable.
6364
In a normal competitive marketplace, one so-called competitor is not able
to hold on to virtually all of the customers simply by targeting its marketing
campaigns at the very few customers that have left the
monopoly.
6365
The Commission has found many of the ILEC winback tactics to be
anti-competitive, and has put in place a number of
safeguards.
6366
Unfortunately, on many occasions the ILECs have been found wanting in
their adherence to these rules. At
last count, there are at least six formal applications which have been brought
before the Commission to deal with this problem.
6367
There is an attachment to our remarks today that you will see, which is
this card. This is the latest
example of an ILEC winback activity.
It is a little card that Bell Canada is sending to those customers who
have switched to a competitor, and they are not waiting any length of time to
send this card.
6368
I am not sure whether this is onside the rules or offside the rules, but
it does demonstrate the lengths to which the ILECs will go to retain each and
every last customer they lose.
6369
Before I turn you over to Ken, I would like to relate a recent
incident.
6370
One of our customers called to cancel his local service with us. As is our practice, we asked why. The reason he gave is one we are used to
hearing. He was given an
irresistible offer by Bell.
6371
But this offer even caught us off guard. Bell offered to waive his activation fee
and provide a $75 credit and three months of local service for only
$40.
6372
We are pretty sure that they aren't supposed to do that, but we, of
course, lost that customer.
6373
When confronted, the ILECs like to put these excesses down to the
existence of what is called rogue agents within the ranks of their customer
service agents. Given how often we
are encountering this behaviour, they must be employing more rogue agents than
they are normal agents. This is not
a normal competitive behaviour.
6374
From where I sit, this market is not ready for transitional measures, let
alone forbearance. While the ILECs
have a variety of proposals, all of them would result in deregulation, in a
situation where they maintain an overwhelming incentive and ability to maintain
their market share.
6375
I want you to think of what my day would be like if the ILECs in an
unregulated environment could target customers immediately and offer them any
sort of incentive not to switch.
The high level of customer churn that would result would be disastrous
for all competitors and for competition.
6376
MR. ENGELHART: We have had a
lot of discussion in this proceeding about anti-competitive conduct, and a lot
of economic analysis on whether anti‑competitive conduct makes sense. You have heard a lot of information from
the ILECs and from the Bureau, saying that anti-competitive conduct doesn't make
sense. The theory as to why it
doesn't make sense is that it costs a lot of money to drive a competitor to exit
the business, and then afterwards you have to raise your prices, or, in other
words, recoup the money you have lost, and you can never recoup, because if you
do try to raise prices, the people who exited will come back in or they will
sell their assets to someone else.
6377
That is the theory you have been presented with.
6378
We feel that this argument is flawed for five reasons, as I will
explain.
6379
The first flaw in the theory that you have been presented is that most of
the models -- all of the models that this is based on start in a world where
there are, in the words of economists, no economic rents, no super-normal
profits. Companies are just making
a normal profit.
6380
Then they predate. Now they
are making less than a normal profit.
6381
After they finish that, the company exists, but they can't just go back
to the pre-predation level. If they
go back to that level, they are just making a normal profit again. They have to raise prices above the
pre-predation level in order to recoup those losses.
6382
That is the theory. That is
why the Bureau even said in their remarks that you could cure predation for all
time by just passing a rule that would say that you can't ever price above the
pre-predation level.
6383
But all of those models are not the situation we are dealing with. The situation we are dealing with
involves phone companies that have 97 percent of the residential market, and 94
percent overall. They are sitting
on $4 billion a year of EBITDA.
6384
The last time we had a look at what that profit level represented was at
the end of the first price cap hearing, and then it was over 16 percent return
on equity.
6385
We no longer keep a split rate base of competitive and utility, so nobody
knows if it has gone up or down.
But if it has stayed the same, that is an economic rent. That is a juicy $4 billion block of
EBITDA, and all they need to do, all they want to do, all they are trying to do
is hang onto it.
6386
There is no need ever to raise prices above the pre-predation level. That is not what you are trying to
do. You are trying to hang onto
that $4 billion of profit for another year, another month, another day. You are trying to hang onto that
monopoly.
6387
A numerical example. Say
that you spent $25 million on an anti-competitive pricing campaign, and that
delayed the decrease in the profit level by 10 points. That $25 million investment would get
you $400 million in profits each year.
So it can be a very productive strategy.
6388
The second point. This
strategy really only works at the outset of competition. It really is true, as the ILECs'
economists and as the Bureau say to you, that once the competitor is established
in the market, it is really expensive to dislodge them. It takes a lot of money and a lot of
effort, and it is probably never going to work.
6389
The time to do it is now.
The time to do it is at the outset of competition. That's when you have an opportunity to
persuade a few entrants to exit, or even just to not expand, just to stay where
they are and retrench their efforts.
6390
Three. The theory that all
of our costs are sunk is really not true.
People have talked to you about, "Ted Rogers said that this didn't cost
very much." Our public statements
are that we spent $200 million on the initial capital to get started. Believe it or not, in our world that
isn't a lot of money. We spend, in
many years, $1 billion on network.
6391
So it is true that the initial going‑in cost, which needs a refresh at
some point as you get more subscribers, is not a huge amount of money, but the
variable costs are quite high with our architecture. You have to spend incremental variable
capital with each subscriber you add.
Our public statements put that at $300, including the truck
roll.
6392
Another point, as was raised the other day, is that every new entrant has
those variable costs of sales and marketing. You have to spend $100, $200, $300 per
additional customer.
6393
That is something the incumbent doesn't have. The incumbent already has all of the
customers. They have to spend a little money to get the switchers back, but it
is not that $300, $200, or what have you, of variable sales and marketing
costs.
6394
Then we have normal variable costs ‑‑ cost of sales, technical
support, maintenance, engineering, operations and billing.
6395
I haven't sat down and done the comparison between us and them -- and
that comparison of variable costs is very important in the Bureau's methodology
-- but if you look at Aliant/Bureau-36 in this proceeding, it says that their
prices are 70 percent above their short-run marginal
costs.
6396
So the ILEC's variable costs appear to be fairly
modest.
6397
The fourth point is a very important point. This is something that Professor Ross
talked about yesterday. It probably
really is true that if you had to predate by lowering all of your prices
everywhere by 30 percent, it probably would be so horrifically expensive for the
incumbents that it never would work.
That is why targeting is so critical. Targeting is the key to make this thing
work. You don't lower everyone's
prices, you just go after the areas where the new entrant has gone and, most
importantly, you just go after the people who have already left. That's called
winback.
6398
This is precisely why the Commission's rules are designed to avoid this
type of conduct. You have rules
against de-averaging which prevent geographic targeting, and you have rules
against winback which prevent them from going after each and every customer that
leaves.
6399
If you are spending $300 on variable cost, and half of your customers are
captured in a winback campaign, that means $600 per net add. Now your business plan really starts to
go down the drain.
6400
This is why we see the ILECs talking about really nothing other than
getting rid of the winback rules and getting rid of the rule against
de‑averaging. They talk about it in
this proceeding, in the telecom policy review, there are court applications, and
there are speeches in other proceedings.
This is precisely why they are so fixated on this
issue.
6401
Fifth. The idea that we are
going to keep our network lying fallow, in case prices go up, having exited the
business, is something that economists say in textbooks. It is not the way the real world
works. Once you have shut down a
business, you have shut down a business, and you put that channel into some
other application or service.
6402
The idea that we are going to sell a channel on our cable network, again,
this is not the real world. That is
not the way it works.
6403
I want to leave you with the position of Bell ExpressVu on winback,
because that is the part of the Bell organization that has acted like a new
entrant.
6404
Unlike the part of the Bell organization that is here, they are
enthusiastic supporters of the winback rules.
6405
It was Stentor that asked for them in 1998. Bell ExpressVu supported them in
2003. They have asked for an
extension to 12 months. They have
asked for rules against promotions.
6406
Here is a description from this year's Canadian Communications Reports
from a Bell ExpressVu official:
"You invest a lot of money in a building to put a facility in there, to
market to the building, and so on.
When you make that investment, you have to count on a certain penetration
just to break even. It really
doesn't matter if it's a TV service or anything else. When you're selling to a building, you
have to count on a certain penetration level just to break even. If you open a donut store or something
in the lobby, you have to assume a certain volume of sales to make your presence
worthwhile. And if the donut store
next door came along and suddenly said, 'Don't buy donuts from him. I'll give them to you for half price,'
you have no opportunity then to make a business.
So are you going to
go into another building and lose money there too? The cable company can chase you all over
town until you run out of money.
(The revised winback rule) is another measure that the Commission has put
in place to give competition an opportunity to get
established."
6407
THE CHAIRPERSON: I take it
that you are available for questions at this point.
---
Laughter / Rires
6408
MR. ENGELHART: Yes, we
are.
6409
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank
you.
6410
Commissioner del Val.
6411
COMMISSIONER del VAL: Thank
you.
6412
I will direct most of my questions to the panel, and then you can decide
who amongst you is best to answer.
6413
You have the benefit of having heard many parties go before you, so I
think I will probably organize my questions in dealing with the questions
arising from the parties' different responses in the oral part of the hearing
first.
6414
Yesterday Chairman Dalfen asked questions of the CCTA, and I see that in
many of your written submissions you support the CCTA's position. I want to know whether you agree with
CCTA's responses yesterday to Mr. Dalfen's questions, generally. Would you have answered any of those
questions differently, or would you like to add to any of those
answers?
6415
MR. ENGELHART: Absolutely,
we agree with all of their responses.
I would not have anything substantive to add.
6416
It is a small point, but I would emphasize the point they made that our
30 percent test, based on households, is administratively really simple. If you are just saying, "How many houses
no longer have the ILEC service," it is much simpler than having to get
everybody in the business to file monthly or quarterly reports, which is really
complicated.
6417
We really think it measures the thing you are looking at, which is how
many people have exercised a choice.
6418
COMMISSIONER del VAL: On
that note, I want to understand a little bit more about your business, following
up on what you said about households.
6419
Do you find that the customers you acquire on local service are mostly
your existing customers for cable service?
6420
MR. ENGELHART: Yes. The service is available to any home
that our plant passes. So you might
not take any service from us other than telephony, but typically, yes, it is
people who get cable from us.
6421
MR. WATT: I would like to
add one thing. In this situation,
as you know, Rogers Communications acquired Call-Net at the beginning of July,
so we really have a two-pronged approach to the local telephone market. We have a large operation outside the
cable footprint territory making use of unbundled local loops, which Bill can
speak to.
6422
Then, as Ken has said, within the cable franchise area we have begun to
roll out in the Toronto/Mississauga/York region, and the Oshawa
area.
6423
COMMISSIONER del VAL:
Yes. Thank you. That's a good
point.
6424
On the switches -- you are taking over the Call-Net part of the service,
and your own, Rogers. Are most of the customers that you are acquiring switching
from the ILEC, or are they new?
6425
MR. LINTON: The vast
majority of customers are switching from the ILEC. There are some moves who are new
numbers, but the majority are migrates from the ILEC.
6426
MR. ENGELHART: To add to
that, if you see someone porting their number, that is a pretty good sign that
they have migrated from the ILEC, and it is 75, 80 percent or more that are
porting their number, so that is a pretty good indication.
6427
COMMISSIONER del VAL: That
was exactly my next question.
6428
The percentage of churn in the local service, how does that compare to,
say, the percentage of churn in cable?
6429
MR. LINTON: Traditionally --
and we have been in the local business for a couple of years now, unlike some of
the other cable companies -- our churn is somewhat higher than normal cable
churn.
6430
Normal cable churn is between 1.5 to 2 percent, and telephone churn has
been 2 and sometimes as high as 3 percent per month.
6431
COMMISSIONER del VAL: I
suspect that I know the answer to the next question, but I will ask it
anyway.
6432
Why do you think the churn is higher?
6433
MR. LINTON: One of the major
reasons is coverage. Because the
facilities for local service are mostly in urban areas, as people move out to
the suburbs, sometimes we don't cover those areas. So we lose a percentage because of move
out of an area that we can service.
6434
Secondly, whenever you get into a new market like this, you get very
price conscious customers first, and some of those price conscious customers are
so price conscious that they decide not to pay you. We probably have a slightly higher churn
in that area than the traditional cable base or the telephone
base.
6435
COMMISSIONER del VAL: I am
trying to break it down in terms of the takers of your local service. What percentage of those would be taking
it on as a standalone and what proportion would be as part of your cable
packaging?
6436
MR. LINTON: On the Call-Net
or Sprint Canada side, where the largest base is, there are over 350,000 local
lines. That was the main
product. So the people who
originally signed up for that service were taking local and long distance, and a
few of them were taking a wireless offering from Fido.
6437
Now, on the cable side we are finding the vast majority of them are just
bundling it into their existing services with Rogers. I don't think, because it is early in
the market, we have a lot of statistics on whether it is just cable only or
people with Rogers cable and Rogers wireless. So I think that would come out and in
the future we would have better information.
6438
COMMISSIONER del VAL: Thank
you.
6439
Following up on your oral presentation, I grouped the problems into three
areas: the local number
portability, violation of winback rules and loop problems.
6440
Could you comment on of the three what is your biggest problem or are
they equally big?
6441
MR. LINTON: The problems we
have vary based on almost the month.
It is not so much ‑‑ I think you have hit the nail on the head. These are issues that for the most part
there are rules in place now. If
those rules and the quality of service standards were being followed, then we
wouldn't really have a problem with any of these things. As Jim Shaw said, we would be able to
work around them.
6442
So our difficulty with each one of those things is where the ILECs are
not following the established rules of service, whether it is winbacks, whether
it is loop available, LSRs, et cetera, et cetera.
6443
COMMISSIONER del VAL:
Okay. Also, then, would you
agree with Mr. Shaw that as a computer operator for you the biggest problem ‑‑
inertia is not really a problem, it is just retaining?
6444
MR. LINTON: No, inertia is a
problem. Remember that it is an
enormous market. Every Canadian
household has a phone. I think
there have been statistics provided to you in this hearing that says based on
work that Bell has done there are over 50 percent who really don't have any
intention of looking at an alternative.
So we are really looking at the other 50 percent.
6445
So inertia is a big issue and to get over inertia we have to
differentiate ourselves. We do it
right now through bundling with other products. We do it certainly through promotions
and pricing. In the future we are
going to have to do it with differentiated features.
6446
COMMISSIONER del VAL: How
did you ‑‑ sorry.
6447
MR. ENGELHART: Sorry. If I could just add to
that?
6448
I think Mr. Shaw said they haven't seen it as a problem yet and that is
probably fair.
6449
When you first launch these things you see a different profile of
customers. When the phone lines
first open you always get a few hundred calls from your competitors and the
consultants and then the next wave is ‑‑ you do get, bless them, a small
proportion of the people who just hate your competitor and have been dying for
that choice. But once you get
through that fairly small group you get into a group that are very, very price
sensitive and they just want the deal.
They are the people who are really susceptible to winback campaigns, too,
because they are just after the deal.
6450
Then, after you get through those price‑sensitive people, you start to
hit that sort of inert group of customers that are just very reluctant to
switch. To some extent it is a
credit to the incumbents that they have managed to build up this reputation and
this brand name that people do not want to switch their phone service from
them.
6451
COMMISSIONER del VAL: Thank
you.
6452
Back to Mr. Linton.
6453
You mentioned 50 percent, I am wondering what that number is based
on.
6454
MR. LINTON: Bill was
speaking first from Call‑Net experience, but with respect to the record in this
proceeding I believe that Bell filed the Decima survey result. I believe it was in response to a Bureau
question. They went out in a fairly
large sampling and asked people how interested they were in voice over
IP.
6455
That is a little bit different than what Bill has been selling with
the unbundled local loops.
6456
I won't have these numbers absolutely precise, but I believe the
numbers were in the order of 10 percent of the people were very interested,
25 percent of the people were somewhat interested and then the remainder
were either indifferent, to not interested, to absolutely opposed to the
idea. That is the source of the
information so it is on the record.
6457
COMMISSIONER del VAL:
Great. Thank
you.
6458
The competitor's footprints.
Back to the Telus model. I
just wanted to explore that with you.
6459
The competitor's footprint, if you were in a development like Concord
Pacific, Pacific Place in Vancouver, the old EXPO site, and you had wired the
buildings for cable, and you are getting the buildings, building by building,
despite the fact that you have wired every building, what would you consider
your footprint? The fact that you
have wired them all or would you see your footprint as just one building on the
site if you just got that building?
6460
This is also following up on Commissioner's Langford's own
question.
6461
MR. ENGELHART: It does get
sort of philosophical at some point.
How many angels can dance on the head of a drop
wire?
6462
Having announced that we are going to provide service throughout all of
those buildings and having wired them, you could really say at that point that
is your footprint, or you could say, as your question suggested, it is only as
you flip on the switch building by building that it really becomes part of your
footprint because it is only at that moment that you have customers and
sales.
6463
You could take it back a step and say, just the fact that it is in your
serving territory makes it part of your footprint before you have launched
it.
6464
So I would say that if you are going to do that Telus model I think it
has to be the place where you are actually able to sell is your footprint. I think for the purposes of what they
are talking about that makes the most sense.
6465
COMMISSIONER del VAL: I
think it was MTS in their oral presentation sort of said, "We wouldn't want to
provide that type of information" about competitor's footprint and
all.
6466
What would your response be to that?
6467
MR. ENGELHART: I guess just
stepping back a bit, for our Ontario systems it doesn't make as much difference
as it does for a lot of other people.
The most dramatic example is Metro Toronto. It is an exchange. ot is an LIR and it
is an overlapping area, and it is an amoeba, too.
‑‑‑
Laughter / Rires
6468
MR. ENGELHART: So no matter
what test you were using, Metro Toronto would be part of the
market.
6469
In a lot of our areas because our cable systems are so heavily clustered
we sort of cover most of the LIR.
For us in Ontario it doesn't make that much difference. In New Brunswick and Newfoundland we get
some of those big host remote maps like EastLink have where the question gets a
little bit more dicey.
6470
But in Ontario, I think the way we have looked at it is, as the CCTA
said, you have to start by defining what the market really is. What really is the market? People don't launch phone service in an
exchange. Although Metro Toronto is
one exchange, there are five exchanges in Mississauga. Nobody would launch a phone service in
the Clarkson exchange.
6471
So a market in the sense of where are buyers and sellers interacting to
exchange products and services, typically you would think of a very big
community or a local calling area or something like that. There are problems with local calling
area. So it seemed to us that the
LIR was the best, crispest way of doing it, certainly in our Ontario
systems.
6472
So I have stepped back a bit and I'm not sure if I have answered your
question, but if I haven't please repeat it and I will drill
down.
6473
COMMISSIONER del VAL: I was
asking could you comment on MTS' position on if the criteria was the footprint,
that the cable companies may be reluctant in providing that type of information
and how would you feel about that?
6474
MR. ENGELHART: Regulators
are pretty good at getting information out of regulated companies and we provide
a lot. I don't think that would be
an overwhelming problem.
6475
As I did say in response to your first question, with all of these
methodologies it does get extremely messy and extremely awkward and a lot of
people are giving a lot of information.
That is why in our view saying 30 percent of the households that the ILEC
passes but no longer serves is way easier, but could we get you that
information, I'm sure we could.
6476
COMMISSIONER del VAL: Thank
you.
6477
Still on the issue of the footprint, I think Ms Blackwell of CCTA
yesterday was talking about the shifting sands of the footprint and said the
member companies would be able to sort of elaborate on the
problem.
6478
Could you please?
6479
MR. WATT: What I think Ms
Blackwell was referring to was the expansion of our roll out. For example, a comment was made on
Monday that in the case of Rogers with the information we filed it looked like
we were serving 55 percent of the exchanges in the LIRs that we had
identified.
6480
We went back and looked at that number that evening and what we found was
that with respect to the four LIRs that we launched on July 1st ‑‑ the four I
have named already, one of them York region ‑‑ showed us in 15 exchanges out of
26 exchanges in that LIR.
6481
However, on September 1st we filed plans to expand to another eight
exchanges in that LIR and the only two we are not going to serve are places
where we don't have cable plant.
Uxbridge is owned by another cable company, et
cetera.
6482
So certainly for the next two to three years I think the Commission is
going to be faced with expansion, probably on a monthly even bi‑weekly basis,
with exchanges being added to fill holes in as we expand.
6483
So I think that was really what Ms Blackwell was getting at, that
this would be an ever‑changing geographic territory over the next ‑‑ it could be
longer than three years. Mr. Shaw
this morning said it might take him five to get to some of the smaller locations
in British Columbia, et cetera.
6484
COMMISSIONER del VAL: On
that issue of the shifting sands and expansion of the footprint ‑‑ and I believe
Mr. Dalfen on Monday was having a discussion with Telus, using the Telus test,
still on that issue if you have reached 5 percent ‑‑ then if you expanded your
footprint a little bit you would no longer reach the 5 percent. So this is the whole fear of gaming
issue.
6485
Why don't you comment on that, first, the fear of
gaming?
6486
MR. ENGELHART: I guess if
the test is 5 percent the game might be over anyway.
6487
But, in general terms, these ideas that the regulatory department tells
the marketing people how to sell their product and when to flip off their
efforts. It is a myth. It is not the way the real world
works.
6488
So no, if you are in a business to get customers you are trying to get
more and more. I find this whole
notion that people are going to game the system this way and that way to be
doubtful. Never say never, people
can do things, but I don't think it is that big a concern.
6489
I do think that you do have these constantly‑shifting sands and it does
get to be a bit of a mess, but I am doubtful that people are going to be gaming
it.
6490
COMMISSIONER del VAL: While
we are still on the issue of geographic market, on your comments just
earlier: Do you think we are
looking at a situation where the geographic area for ‑‑ we couldn't have the
same sort of definition of geographic market for the entire country? Do you think maybe, say for Nova Scotia,
we are going to have to use something different from an LIR but we could for
Ontario or parts of Ontario?
6491
MR. ENGELHART: Let me use
New Brunswick so the EastLink people don't get mad at me, but I think
you are looking at kind of a big extended community area. To me, that is the market for local
phone service.
6492
If you are going to provide local phone service in the Toronto area you
would provide it in the GTA. That's
what you would do. You wouldn't
launch in Clarkson and then have to advertise in the Toronto Star. Your ads would be going all around the
city just to serve that little small area.
6493
You would never build up any kind of reasonable scale if you were just
doing it in an exchange. It would
be kind of a non‑starter.
6494
The area that people would enter, the kind of areas where I think
economists would say the local market likely is taking place, is some sort of
big community and sort of the surrounding areas.
6495
Toll free calling area, if it didn't have the sort of administrative
problems, would work and LIR I think works in places like
Ontario.
6496
In New Brunswick, if you want to stick with that idea of an extended
community, then because of their host‑remote architecture and what that has done
to the LIRs, the LIR probably won't work.
6497
COMMISSIONER del VAL:
Okay. Still on the issue of
geographic market, I think by now you have heard everyone's views on each of the
proposals and their weaknesses and strengths.
6498
Firstly, I wonder whether you, one, have anything different to add to
what has been said already.
6499
Second, which is more important for me, can you think of any fixes for
any of the proposals, you know from footprint to be in a province, because we
have heard all of the problems from the unserved pockets to the administrative
problems.
6500
Do you have any fixes for any of the proposals?
6501
MR. ENGELHART: First of all,
I agree with the comments that the CCTA made that you have got to start with
some notion of what a market really is.
You don't start with the economic players in the market because that is
the second part of the test.
6502
So you really have to first ask yourself what the market is and, as I
described it, it would be some sort of a large community.
6503
In New Brunswick, where that doesn't work, I would go to toll‑free
calling area and just pick the big city as the home base and use toll‑free
calling area for my test.
6504
The problem with the holes I think is something you address in Oart 2 of
the CCTA test. Part 1 is: Are we at 30 percent? If we are, you go to Part
2.
6505
Part 2 is you look at the situation. Is this working? Is this something we really could say we
should forbear? It is in Part 2 of
that test that you would look at the holes and you would go, "What is going on
in these holes?"
6506
Some of the parties in this proceeding say, "Well, in a year or two
mobile wireless substitution is going to be huge and access‑independent VoIP is
going to be huge". I am not one of
those people, but I could be wrong.
Those things might be huge in a couple of years and you might be able to
look at the holes and say, "Well, there is enough competition from those other
sources that we don't have to worry about it" and lest I not forget the
unbundled loop providers that are also going to be serving those
holes.
6507
So you might be able to conclude, "Well, we don't think the holes are a
big problem". If you conclude that
they are, the only fix that I have heard in this proceeding that would work is
some sort of a cap, some sort of a price cap.
6508
I think it is a reasonably practical solution. It seems like cheating, sort of, to say
we are forbearing but we are putting in a cap. It seems something less than
ideologically pure but I think it would solve the problem.
6509
COMMISSIONER del VAL:
Okay.
6510
Going back to the Telus two-facilities and the 5 percent test, if we were
to adopt that test where in your jurisdictions, the jurisdictions served, the
markets served by Rogers, would you already be there
already?
6511
MR. ENGELHART: So that would
be 5 percent of the customers have migrated to our facilities‑based
platform?
6512
COMMISSIONER del VAL: Lines,
5 percent have lines.
6513
MR. ENGELHART: Oh, well no
where. I mean, we just launched on
July 1, so it wouldn't be ‑‑
6514
MR. LINTON: Well,
facilities‑based. Nowhere on the cable plant and quite a few places on the
unbundled loop plant, if you call it that.
6515
For instance, in Brampton, which is the place that we have the highest
penetration, we are in excess of 10 percent penetration, but there is less
inertia in Brampton than there is in Forest Hill.
6516
COMMISSIONER del VAL:
Okay.
6517
MR. ENGELHART: Bill, like
any good salesman, likes to brag about his product, but I think in terms of the
Telus test it does not include those unbundled loop
vendors.
6518
COMMISSIONER del VAL:
Yes.
6519
MR. ENGELHART: So in terms
of the Telus test it would only include those customers that are on our cable
plant.
6520
COMMISSIONER del VAL: Yes,
exactly.
6521
Based on the full facilities‑based, that part of the test you are saying
that none of your markets have reached that threshold yet?
6522
MR. ENGELHART: Not at all,
no.
6523
COMMISSIONER del VAL:
Okay.
6524
MR. WATT: No but, frankly,
actually at the current time, having just started July 1st, the majority of our
customers are employees on our cable plant telephony service. We are just getting going and there have
been the usual start‑up problems and issues and we are working through those and
are progressing, but we have minimal penetration.
6525
COMMISSIONER del VAL: Are
there any ‑‑ a lot of winbacks happening with your
employees?
‑‑‑
Laughter / Rires
6526
MR. ENGELHART: Actually,
it's interesting you should mention that, because Edward Rogers did bring in a
brochure that he had gotten a week later and asked me if this was allowed and I
said, no. So we have contacted our
employees and asked them to send us any material that they have received and so
we are working on that.
6527
COMMISSIONER del VAL: I have
to give credit where credit is due, that was Mr. Williams'
humour.
6528
I believe it was Cybersurf, in their presentation, that said that your
Call‑Net does own some access, that have the last mile of
that?
6529
MR. LINTON: The only last
mile we have is in the business market, the commercial areas. It is not in residential
areas.
6530
COMMISSIONER del VAL:
Okay. Then, on the business
side, I guess this is not ‑‑
6531
Just thinking of the cable, would you be using the cable plant? Is that part of your strategy in terms
of attacking the business market?
6532
MR. ENGELHART: Yes, it
is. Commissioner Langford the other
day alluded to Willie Sutton saying that you rob banks because that is where the
money is. The cable industry is
strange in that it mostly targets its efforts on residential areas, even though
there is a lot of money in the business areas. So historically, we have had a very poor
footprint into the business areas.
6533
Because you don't bill to all those business locations when you first
roll out your service it can be very expensive to hit those areas. You know, you have a couple of customers
who want a couple of circuits in a strip mall and the engineers tell you, "Well,
it will cost us $20,000.00 to tunnel down and build across". It is just crazy sometimes. Sometimes it is very
cheap.
6534
So we are moving into industrial parks and we are moving into the
commercial areas that interlace the residential areas, but it is very slow. The footprint is still very
poor.
6535
Of course, bringing the Call‑Net, now Rogers Telecom Group, into it with
the facilities that Bill mentioned and their business sales force and their
expertise and their systems we think will help accelerate that process, but it
is very much still a work-in-progress.
6536
COMMISSIONER del VAL: Thank
you.
6537
On the business market I think Aliant had proposed four product markets,
the basic business service, which is single‑line, multi‑line and then small
Centrex, 30 or less.
6538
Are you familiar with the four groups?
6539
MR. ENGELHART:
Yes.
6540
COMMISSIONER del VAL:
Yes. Aliant submitted that
the relevant market determination must be based on the market structure in the
area under consideration and that this may not be the same in all
markets.
6541
First, do you agree with Aliant's proposed segmentation of the four
product markets?
6542
That is the first question.
6543
Did you want to answer that first?
6544
MR. ENGELHART: Yes. Dave?
6545
It makes sense to me. I
don't know if you have anything to add, Dave.
6546
MR. WATT: We supported the
CCTA proposal in our proposal, which was a simple breakdown between residential
and business.
6547
We didn't feel we had a deep enough understanding of the business market,
Bill certainly has a deep understanding of it. But our belief was that there is some
flexibility granted at the current time in the enterprise market area and we
were concerned about actually making the product market so small that again
targeting would be easier for the telephone companies to accommodate from a
financial perspective.
6548
MR. ENGELHART: If I could
just add one comment to Dave's on the subject of Centrex. I may be a question or two ahead, I;m
not sure, but I worry about Centrex resale being counted as part of the market
share loss, especially when Centrex is its own market
definition.
6549
Centrex resale has always seemed to me to be not really competition, in
the sense that it is not something that was allowed in the local competition
decision. It is something that has
been allowed since 1987. It doesn't
really involve much other than an arbitrage opportunity.
6550
I think the Centrex resale is a big part of the 12 percent of the market
that is registered in the Commission's annual report to the Governor in Council
on competition in the business sector.
It is probably 25 percent of the business loss that you
see.
6551
As I say, it is more just some bookkeeper in an office ordering a bunch
of lines and parcelling them out than it is a real form of competition. So I worry about
that.
6552
COMMISSIONER del VAL: That
sort of makes me think more that the just business local exchange service
category seems very large. The
segmentation of the different services with products within that market, the
competition for those may not be the same from ‑‑ period may not be the same ‑‑
and then they may also vary from jurisdiction to
jurisdiction.
6553
MR. ENGELHART: In the sort
of business world it is not unusual to have in a telecom company a senior
vice‑president of consumer services, a senior vice‑president of enterprise and a
senior vice‑president of small and medium business. Those are very often seen as very
different segments.
6554
You have a different type of sales force, you have a different marketing
channel to go after small and medium business. For the enterprise segment it tends to
be a lot of RFPs, it tends to be a lot of personal
contact.
6555
For the small and medium business segment it is very hard to have the
channels to reach them if you are a new entrant. You can do telemarketing and you can do
different things, but it is an awkward segment to reach. So in that sense I take your point that
the entire business segment in one fell swoop may be a bit big for what we would
call a market.
6556
MR. WATT: One thing that
would have probably helped us in starting this is if we did have more
information with respect to what the market losses have been in differentiated
business markets. There are
something like 800,000 lines being served by competitors in total, a couple
hundred thousand resold Centrex included in that 800,000.
6557
We don't really know whether that 600,000 or that 800,000 is principally
located in the large business, which would indicate that there is a greater
degree of competition, or whether it is spread more uniformly across the small
and medium sized business.
6558
You may well have that information, so you would have more insight into
that. I think as you think about
this the break point, picking up on Ken's point, probably would be from a single
product market down to a two‑product market differentiated by
size.
6559
COMMISSIONER del VAL:
Okay. I think on your final
argument you propose breaking the market down into Centrex and digital trunk
services.
6560
Is that a change? I just
want to clarify what your proposal is.
6561
MR. WATT: We suggested that
you would want to look at that.
6562
COMMISSIONER del VAL:
Okay. I
see.
6563
MR. WATT: Our position that
still stands is to keep it simple and have it residential and business, a
two‑product market, but having regard to our imperfect knowledge about the
business market we thought we should leave it open to you.
6564
COMMISSIONER del VAL: Thank
you.
6565
MR. BRAZEAU: Just to add a
little bit on the Centrex issue. of you look at Centrex, Centrex has very
similar characteristics as a local line.
So if you look at product characteristics you would probably want to
include Centrex as part of your local line.
6566
That is sort of why we thought that you would include them in that
category.
6567
COMMISSIONER del VAL: Thank
you.
6568
In Shaw's oral presentation this morning they suggested three to five
years before they ‑‑ in a nutshell, how I read it was that they need three to
five years at least.
6569
How much time do you think you need?
6570
MR. ENGELHART: I think Jim
Shaw said really a market share test would be better. I think it would be better than a
timeframe.
6571
So the market share does two things really. It tells you that that percentage of
customers in that market have exercised a choice. It is not a theoretical thing. They have said, "Yes, I like this
alternative better than that alternative."
So it gives you some confidence as a regulator that consumers are
protected, because what could be better evidence that consumers have choices
than that they have exercised those choices?
6572
COMMISSIONER del VAL:
Yes. I am just referring to
Mr. Shaw's presentation on page 10 that says:
"In our view, the Commission must ensure that local competition is firmly
established, vibrant and sustainable before the telcos are forborne in the
provision of local telephone service.
We can't see this happening for at least another three to five
years."
6573
My question was: How long do
you think? Do you see also three to
five years or do you think it is longer or do you think it is
shorter?
6574
MR. ENGELHART: It is very
hard to predict how well our services will be received, but to get to the 30
percent level that we think is appropriate I think Jim has about the right
timeframe. It could be more, it
could be less, but he is certainly in the ballpark.
6575
COMMISSIONER del VAL:
Yes.
6576
MR. WATT: Just bearing in
mind, of course, with regard to our test that it includes not just our market
share, but wireless, people who only use wireless in the home, VoIP providers,
et cetera. It is a combination of
all the substitution.
6577
COMMISSIONER del VAL: Thank
you.
6578
MR. ENGELHART: I will give
you the reference in your final submission if you need it, but your proposal was
that 30 percent should be the threshold if the relevant market is the LIR and
that if the geographic market is smaller, for example, in exchange a higher
share threshold would be needed.
6579
So if the geographic market was the exchange, what do you propose would
be your threshold?
6580
Would 30 be still appropriate?
6581
MR. ENGELHART: Bear in mind
that Ms Yale on behalf of Telus said that across their operating territory they
are already 10 percent of the homes that they have passed that are not served by
Telus lines. So they appear to
already be at 10.
6582
So we thought 30 was appropriate for the LIR. If we went down to an exchange, as we
said, it would be something higher than that, so I would say something like
35.
6583
COMMISSIONER del VAL: Thank
you.
6584
MR. WATT: One of the
considerations you are going to have to deal with here with respect to LIRs is,
you you do have, as Ken mentioned earlier, a LIR like Toronto which is one
exchange which is over a million households. In that case, the exchange and the LIR,
the market share, the 30 percent is going to be the same in a territory of that
size.
6585
The concern is, with exchange, that in a small exchange it would be
relatively painless for the telephone company to target in that exchange. So you want to have a fairly sizeable
population base so that there is some discipline imposed
there.
6586
COMMISSIONER del VAL: Thank
you.
6587
Where you have rolled out local exchange service, have you used the same
local calling area as the ILECs?
6588
MR. WATT: Yes, we
have.
6589
COMMISSIONER del VAL: Was
EastLink's proposal was that it was so as to lessen the burden arising from
interconnection arrangements.
6590
Was that also your reason?
6591
MR. WATT: Excuse me. I answered from the cable telephony
perspective. We are using the same
local calling areas. Bill has
pointed out that Rogers Telecom uses different local calling areas and he can
elaborate.
6592
MR. LINTON: For example,
when we launched Barrie we made it a local calling area with Toronto, so our
differentiation was that you could make a local call to Toronto from Barrie and
that was how we promoted the service and attracted
customers.
6593
COMMISSIONER del VAL: I see,
okay.
6594
MR. ENGELHART: So in answer
to your last question, the interconnection decision and the definition of the
local calling area are probably independent decisions. So you interconnect where you are going
to interconnect and then what you define as your local calling area is really
how you program your billing software.
6595
COMMISSIONER del VAL:
Okay. I wasn't referring to
the interconnection decision, but I have your answer anyway. Thank you.
6596
On the first day, The Companies, when Mr. Bibic in his presentation ‑‑
this was again talking about the 5 percent. At that time I think we said perhaps you
would like to comment on this. I
will read you what was said:
"And in terms of an example where regulatory authority ‑‑ mind you,
it is not a competition authority, but a regulatory authority finding a market
workably competitive at 95 percent, I would say that the Commission itself has
found markets to be workably competitive at 95 percent and I will give you two
quick examples."
6597
I will just quote the first example here.
"The cable deregulation test, the Commission has found time and again
since 1998, including twice last year, that cablecos are dominant in the cable
BDU market, yet that customers nevertheless have competitive alternatives
sufficient to allow for cable basic rate deregulation."
6598
Can you comment on that? Did
you want the reference to the transcript?
6599
MR. ENGELHART: No, no. I remember.
6600
I don't like to say anything disparaging about our brother in the
broadcasting sector, but when they use the word "dominant" in those proceedings
they are not using it in the sense of market dominance as it is used in the
telecom sector. I think what they
generally mean is "big". They are
big.
6601
There is no question cable is big, so I don't think that the fact that
the broadcasting decisions have used the word "dominant" a few times is really
that relevant of a question.
6602
I think the issue, as we have discussed in our evidence, is that when
that test was passed there were already 20‑25 percent of the homes that were not
served by cable and that 5 percent brought us up to 25
percent.
6603
I believe Mr. Bibic's comment was that this was a clever argument that
had been invented after the fact, but Mr. Watt was at that hearing so he can
tell you what he said at the time.
6604
MR. WATT: Yes. You can go back and check the
transcript. I will give you the
reference.
6605
Basically, the Commission was well informed as to what the market share
coverage of homes passed was by the cable industry at that
time.
6606
It was October 9, 1996. It
is page 700 of the transcript, and I will quote
myself.
"We currently only have a 76 percent market share of television
homes. So for whatever reason, 24
percent of the homes in Canada choose to use an alternative to the cable
network. Many people think that we
have 100 percent market share."
6607
So certainly the Commission at that time understood the market position
that we were in. We are not
presenting revisionist history in our argument to you here
today.
6608
THE CHAIRPERSON: Mr. Watt,
nobody on the Panel was here at that time.
Can you refresh my memory as to whether the Commission picked up those
words of wisdom in its decision.
6609
MR. WATT: I would have to go
and check to be absolutely certain.
6610
THE CHAIRPERSON: You only
checked the transcript.
6611
MR. WATT: Absolutely. That is what I had with
me.
6612
You should never speculate when you are testifying, but I would speculate
that specific reference wasn't made to that. I believe it was pretty much just the
decision as to what the test would be, which is fairly typical of many of the
broadcasting decisions, and then it goes on to the rule-making
phase.
6613
COMMISSIONER del VAL: In the
Competition Bureau's proposal that the residential market be divided into
first-line market and then another market that includes second lines, mobile
wireless services and VoIP, what do you think of that
proposal?
6614
MR. ENGELHART: I think they
are bringing a degree of scientific rigour to what is sort of disappearing as a
relevant group of customers, which is the second lines. So second lines really spiked up when
fax machines got popular and when dial-up internet got popular. Now, as those two technologies are
waning, the second line market is crashing.
6615
It doesn't seem to me to be that important.
6616
It does, however, reinforce just how messy things are when you are
working in lines and how it is a little bit cleaner when you are working, as we
propose, with homes.
6617
MR. WATT: I think the Aliant
panel said the second lines are only 2 percent penetration in their
territory. I believe Bell and Telus
at one time were up around 8 or 9 percent but that has declined to 5 or 6
percent. It is not a large enough
market to make an economic business plan on.
6618
COMMISSIONER del VAL: The
Competition Bureau also proposed that it may be appropriate to compare the
incumbents' and the entrant's operation cost in a forbearance
determination.
6619
Can you comment on that, please.
6620
MR. ENGELHART: They seem to
be very focused on variable costs.
That seemed to be what they said was the thing that they worried about
the most.
6621
As I indicated in our presentation, just because of the nature of our
network architecture and the fact that we are a new entrant, our variable cost
is fairly high. It is just the way
the cable telephony works.
6622
You harden the plant and introduce various components and back-up power,
but then you have to add incremental capital as you sign up each customer. So the variable costs are significant
there.
6623
The other thing that you cannot overlook is that any new entrant in the
communications business has these big variable sales and marketing costs. It is something that just can't be
ignored, that you are in a very different position when you are the incumbent
and you start with all those customers.
6624
Do you need to do the full‑blown thing that the Bureau does, where they
get all of your business plans and all of your financial statements and
everything, and you sit down with your accountants and all
that?
6625
I am not sure you need to do that.
It probably is worth you having some understanding of the differential
underlying costs of an incumbent twisted pair provider and a new entrant cable
telephony provider.
6626
COMMISSIONER del VAL: What
do you think of the proposal by the Consumers Group of that transitional
regime?
6627
MR. ENGELHART: It troubles
us quite a bit. In cable we saw
that after we were forborne the winback rules still continued on. In the MDU market we still have those
rules. Then last year, or this
year, a brand new rule was added. A
brand new winback rule was added in the cable MDU market, which prohibits us
from talking to any customer in a building, whether they were ever our customer
or not, for 90 days after ExpressVu signs an access agreement. And that is in addition to the 90-day
winback rule that exists in those buildings.
6628
We are still living with those rules. As Mr. Stein said this morning, that was
in an environment where satellite had some real advantages over cable. They were allowed to offer time-shifted
signals; we were not. They, because
they were digital, could provide theme packs; we couldn't.
6629
They had a lot of regulatory and technology based advantages to their
service, and despite that, after forbearance we continued to have these winback
rules.
6630
I am troubled by the idea that you would get rid of the winback rules or
the rule against de‑averaging before forbearance takes
place.
6631
Market power is market power.
If the phone companies have market power --
6632
COMMISSIONER del VAL: Yes --
I'm sorry.
6633
MR. ENGELHART: I was
rambling on.
6634
COMMISSIONER del VAL:
No. I was referring to the
Consumers Group's proposal on the transitional regime where you have the two
thresholds: below a certain threshold, don't even come here; and then
above. That
regime.
6635
I don't know whether we got a bit sidetracked
there.
6636
MR. ENGELHART: You are
right. I was thinking you were
referring to their stepped regime for elimination of the
rules.
6637
I will let Mr. Watt respond.
6638
MR. WATT: Actually, I do
believe that the stepped approach is sort of a transitional approach leading
through to the end game at 10, 15 and 20 percent removing certain tests along
the way.
6639
We think the problem with that is that you won't actually get to the end
game. So we don't agree with the
Consumer Group's transitional proposal.
6640
COMMISSIONER del VAL: I
think we heard the flip side of the coin earlier from the ILECs, and I think
there was also a discussion regarding why EastLink has made inroads and no one
else has. And one of the responses
was that is a business decision that the other cablecos chose to
make.
6641
What would you say to a suggestion that the continued sort of status quo
and forbearance for an indeterminate period of time with no end in sight could
actually be a disincentive for the cablecos to invest in
telephony?
6642
You can wait for as long as you stay under a threshold. You have time.
6643
MR. ENGELHART: Like I said
before, I think this idea that the regulatory department is going to gain the
system by telling the marketing department what to do is a myth. They are going to go out and sell as
much as they can, as fast as they can, and they are not going to worry about
it.
6644
If we get to the forbearance threshold, that is where we
get.
6645
I certainly believe that when it is appropriate, forbearance is the thing
to do. Let market forces
operate.
6646
We had transitional rules in the wireless market to prevent the
incumbents from exercising market power, the no head-start rule, the no joint
marketing, the structural separation rule.
Once we got to a certain critical size, those rules were gotten rid of
and competition has worked well. I
think it can do the same here.
6647
MR. WATT: The one thing I
would add with respect to the EastLink experience is we must always remember
that they have achieved this success with the safeguards that have been in
place. We can't assume that that
type of success would be achieved in the absence of those
safeguards.
6648
COMMISSIONER del VAL: How is
it that they have been able to achieve that success with so much more speed than
elsewhere in the country? Why is it
not happening here?
6649
MR. ENGELHART: The
technology that they use is circuit switched. The way it works is that the telephone
switches the telephone companies have are looking for twisted pairs coming into
them. So using the Nortel
cornerstone product, you can convert a coaxial plant to look to a Class 5 switch
as though it is a bunch of twisted pairs.
6650
So they have entered using that circuit switch technology, as has Cox in
the United States. Both Cox and
EastLink feel they made the right technology choice and are happy with
it.
6651
Every business case that we put together looking at that technology ended
up looking really bad, and we felt we simply had to wait for IP as our entry
point. With IP we were able to
leverage on the internet platform that we had already built for our high speed
internet business, and we were able to use soft switches instead of traditional
telephone switches.
6652
So it seemed to us, and to most cable operators, to be the appropriate
thing to wait for that technology.
6653
That is how EastLink has got out ahead of everyone
else.
6654
MR. WATT: EastLink, as Ken
said, was not alone. A very large
corporation in the States, Cox, took the same route, the same path. As Ken said, we looked at the market
from our perspective over the last ten years, and we have entered when we
did.
6655
I know Lee Bragg is testifying later this afternoon. I think he would be able to explain
why.
6656
COMMISSIONER del VAL: Thank
you.
6657
What do you say about switching from retail to wholesale regulation of
local services?
6658
MR. ENGELHART: Well, it
doesn't really make any sense. The
Commission's regulatory plan has facilities-based competition at its core. We think that the work that Bill is
doing and Jean is doing and the work that Rogers Telecom is doing is very
important. We intend to keep using
those unbundled loops all across Canada, and we are going to keep that platform
in place; so not to take away at all from the importance of wholesale
regulation.
6659
If I could draw a strange analogy, I would say that wholesale regulation
is the icing on the Competition cake.
You still need facilities-based competition as the bulk of that
cake.
6660
If competition is going to work, it has to have at its core
facilities-based competition.
Wholesale regulation does nothing to protect a facilities-based entrant
that is being confronted with anti-competitive conduct, nothing at all. It probably doesn't do anything for the
vast bulk of customers who, let's face it, only 3 or 4 percent have taken
advantage of the unbundled loop offers that they have
received.
6661
COMMISSIONER del VAL: Thank
you.
6662
When we are talking about market entry, do you think the nature of the
entrant, whether it is a cableco, a standalone non-facilities-based provider,
should they be treated differently?
6663
MR. ENGELHART: To me, when
you are talking about safeguards against anti-competitive conduct, what counts
is the incentive and ability of the incumbent. I don't think the Commission looked at
Bell ExpressVu and examined their characteristics when they put in the cable
winback rule. I don't think the
safeguards depend really on what the entrant looks like. It depends on what the incumbent's
abilities and incentives are.
6664
COMMISSIONER del VAL: On the
safeguards, do you think the safeguards should be the same in all forborne
markets? Do you think they can be
identical across all markets?
6665
MR. ENGELHART: I would think
so, yes.
6666
COMMISSIONER del VAL: In a
forborne environment, do you foresee selling basic local service on a standalone
basis?
6667
MR. ENGELHART:
Absolutely. If somebody
calls up today and wants a local phone from us and doesn't want cable or
internet or anything else, we will provide it. And we would always do
so.
6668
COMMISSIONER del VAL: On
consumer protection, I think it was Aliant's Ms Tulk who said all providers
should share in the obligation of providing services to the less abled, the less
fortunate of our society, for example, phone bills in
braille.
6669
What would Rogers say about assuming that
obligation?
6670
MR. ENGELHART: I believe we
already do that for our able customers.
I agree with Aliant that social obligations should apply to all market
participants.
6671
COMMISSIONER del VAL: So in
a forborne market you would have no problem in having exactly the same sort of
social obligations as an ILEC would.
6672
MR. ENGELHART: That is
correct. We see that even after
forbearance there is a role that remains for the Commission to enforce those
social obligations.
6673
COMMISSIONER del VAL:
Good.
6674
MR. WATT: Actually, you
could look at our response to ARCH, No. 3, where we describe what we do for
Rogers wireless now.
6675
I don't believe that these are mandated by regulation, but I could be
wrong on that. There is a good
description as to what alternatives we do provide there.
6676
COMMISSIONER del VAL: I
think those are my questions.
6677
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
6678
THE CHAIRPERSON:
Commissioner Langford.
6679
COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: Thank
you very much.
6680
I have just a couple of areas.
You have been very patient with us, and we are grateful, but there are a
couple of areas I want to touch on.
6681
I have a couple of clarifications first.
6682
Mr. Engelhart, in talking about the footprint problem with my colleague,
struggling with the sort of Telus notion and where it might fit in, and she
brought up the example of Pacific Place, if you roll out to one tower or if you
roll out to two towers, you used an expression I didn't understand and I would
be grateful if you could clarify it.
6683
You said it has to be the area where you are actually able to sell. I don't think I quite understand
that.
6684
MR. ENGELHART: If you take
the three layers I talked about with Commissioner del Val, you could talk about
where you are going to enter, where you have plant and where you have actually
flipped the switch and turned on that building.
6685
It is that latter group where you could actually sell. It is when you have live circuits going
into that building that you could actually sell to those
customers.
6686
COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: So
simply having a network, fibre and coaxial, or whatever rolled out, wouldn't be
enough. You would actually have to
have sold one or be almost on the cusp of selling to your first
customer?
6687
MR. ENGELHART: I am
interpreting what I think Ms Yale means, because we are talking about the Telus
test.
6688
COMMISSIONER LANGFORD:
Yes. We interpreted it
differently. That is why I am
interested.
6689
MR. ENGELHART: I think what
Telus means is that the reason they are promoting their version is that it is in
that place that a customer actually can choose between A or B, where supplier A
and supplier B are both selling to that customer.
6690
That is why I believe that the Telus test would imply or would mean that
you are actually live and selling to that customer.
6691
COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: All
right. We will find out. They will be back tomorrow and maybe
they will clarify that point. It
could also be, of course, that everyone else in this room understands it but you
and me -- and that wouldn't be unprecedented either,
probably.
6692
I have another question on the notion of this footprint, and really the
confusion only arises with your company.
That is not your company's fault.
It is just the way it is made up.
6693
I am not quite sure how it would work, in the sense that they are talking
about a footprint of a facilities-based producer. I don't have any problem with that with
your cable footprint and where it is actually functioning, but I don't quite
know -- and maybe you don't either -- what would happen as you tag on the
Call‑Net parts of it, which are facilities-based for some places, particularly
in the business sector, but only facilities-based up to the last mile in other
places.
6694
I don't know whether you could give me any idea, with a specific example,
of where it might be possible, using the Telus test, to take your normal cable
footprint and then add on a piece that would come from the traditional CLEC
side.
6695
MR. ENGELHART: I think the
Telus panel was fairly candid that their test probably wouldn't operate in the
business market, that it really was there for the residential
market.
6696
So I am not sure that the presence of those facilities that Rogers
Telecom has in the business market would mess up the Telus
test.
6697
In the residential market they really are an unbundled loop provider, and
as I understand the Telus test, we would just ignore that part of Rogers Telecom
in mapping the geographic market that Telus has proposed.
6698
COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: But
there are some buildings that you would have that are business, even though it
is "probably". I didn't feel that
in answering Commissioner Noël's question on business versus residential that Ms
Yale was categorical, and I think there was a sense of "probably" as
well.
6699
Are there buildings, for example ‑‑ whole buildings -- where
Call-Net, if I can call it that for the sake of this discussion, has a
facilities base and more than 5 percent of the customers?
6700
MR. ENGELHART:
Yes.
6701
COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: There
are.
6702
So conceivably, then, that could be an area, as they call it, in which an
application for forbearance could be made.
6703
MR. ENGELHART:
Yes.
6704
COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: Thank
you.
6705
I have one last question which is totally unrelated to the last
discussion. I put this question to
the CCTA yesterday, and I think that Mr. Hennessy suggested, having valiantly
tried to answer it, that I put it to you, so I will.
6706
There has been much discussion, both by learned and distinguished
economists and by mere mortals such as ourselves, about the whole notion of the
mischief of predatory pricing in forbearance situations, where the big guy eats
the little guy, or tries to, and you spoke about it at length
today.
6707
One of the examples of forbearance that I can think of -- and, I suspect,
after yesterday's discussion that you can too -- is the forbearance in the cable
market, where, in fact, prices didn't go down, they went up, and the big
consumer benefit -- unless it is going to be defined in some way that you
brought comfort and succour to them through new offerings or something, but in
terms of cash in their pockets, the consumer benefit never happened. The big fight never happened, and prices
went up.
6708
One, is there some way you can explain that to me? Two, explain why it isn't a relevant
precedent for the proceedings we are dealing with today.
6709
MR. ENGELHART: I suspect
that Mr. Watt will probably want to add a bit, and maybe I can't give you a
complete answer, but let me identify some of the factors that you would want to
consider.
6710
One which Dr. Crandall pointed out to you was, you really probably can't
look at just the price of the service, you have to look at it on a per‑channel
basis. So you add TVA and APTN and
OMNI 1 and a couple of other local channels, and if you have 20 channels and you
have added five -- it is a bandwidth business. We are selling bandwidth, so you have
just increased the cost considerably.
That is one factor.
6711
Another factor, I think, which came out in questioning from Commissioner
Williams, is that when you have, as we had, the rate regulation applying only to
basic and not to the other parts of the service, you would expect that when the
cap came off, basic might float up a bit to get more in line with costs. I think that the ultimate package and
things like that have not gone up in price nearly as much as
basic.
6712
I think the third thing is, when markets operate, the pricing looks more
like what markets look like than what regulated prices look
like.
6713
So you have things like bundle discounts and other discounts that have
come in, which are more market-type rate reductions than they are ones that
regulators would put on.
6714
Those are three factors. I
am not sure it is a complete answer to your question. I don't know if Dave has any other
points.
6715
MR. WATT: I would probably
add two other points for consideration.
6716
One is that basic subscribers, on a standalone basis, are only about 20
percent of our cable base. The
other 80 percent subscribe to one or more tiers, so they are in a package of a
sort.
6717
As Ken mentioned, the prices of those packages -- sometimes they went up,
sometimes they stayed the same. So
there wasn't a uniform increase.
6718
The other point I would make is that we have standardized a lot of our
basic rates. We had a great many
systems, with widely divergent rates, based on the CAPEX regime of earlier years
and the number of channels being carried, et cetera. So we tend to pretty much now
standardize all of Ontario at one rate.
6719
New Brunswick and Newfoundland are at different
rates.
6720
COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: Did
anybody see their rates go down in that standardization
process?
6721
MR. WATT: I can't say for
sure.
6722
COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: What
is your best guess?
6723
MR. WATT: My best guess is
that there might be one or two systems, and that would have been the extent of
it.
6724
COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: There
was no profit in this. It was all
just necessary because of things like OMNI being foisted on you, and just
because you needed to be administratively a little more
nimble.
6725
MR. WATT: You would be
familiar with the Rogers' financial statements, and bottom line profit has been
a fleeting item over the years.
---
Laughter / Rires
6726
COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: Yes,
I know. Maybe you should do less
baseball and more cable.
6727
Is there anything to learn from this? In the proceeding we are doing now, will
this be bad news for people who don't have a bundle down the road, for people
who only want local service? Are
they going to find things, to use the term of Mr. Engelhart, floating up because
they have been constrained?
6728
MR. ENGELHART: If you want a
lesson, I would say, certainly, when you are going to forbear you should be
comfortable. That is why we
proposed the 30 percent share test, followed by the second part of the test,
where you take a look at it.
6729
We are not big fans, just like the ILECs are not big fans, of
re-regulation. I think when you do
it, you should be confident that this is the right thing to do, and market
forces will protect people.
6730
COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: So
that is a yes, things could go up for the equivalent of the basic
subscriber.
6731
MR. ENGELHART: Oh, yes. I disagree with the phone companies when
they say, "Oh, those cable guys.
This whole thing is about rates going down."
6732
I could see the ILECs raising their rates if they were forborne today,
and using winback to come after us.
That wouldn't surprise me.
6733
COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: Could
you see big discrepancies between low income subscribers who really can only
afford basic and people who can go for the platinum package in some big
bundle?
6734
MR. ENGELHART: Cable is a
bit different from a lot of businesses, because all of the channels come to your
home whether you buy them or not.
So cable operators have a kind of natural economic incentive to get you
to buy the big package.
6735
Now, people often don't want to, and they hate you, so you have to,
obviously, make a bunch of smaller packages available if you are going to be a
responsive supplier. But there is
that kind of natural tendency to want to sell more rather than
less.
6736
Telephone is a bit of a different architecture. When you talk about bundles of totally
different services on different architecture, I am not sure that the same kind
of incentives exist. But when
markets operate, they don't operate like regulators operate, they operate like
markets operate, and the pricing will be different.
6737
COMMISSIONER LANGFORD: Thank
you very much.
6738
Those are my questions, Mr. Chair.
6739
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank
you.
6740
Commissioner Noël.
6741
COMMISSIONER NOËL: I have a
short question for Mr. Linton.
6742
Mr. Linton, Mr. Engelhart mentioned in answer to a question by
Commissioner del Val that the footprint of cable in the geographic business
centres, in downtown locations, was not very wide, but could
expand.
6743
Do you foresee that the more CLEC‑type footprint of the former Call-Net
would be the vehicle of choice to compete in the business market, as opposed to
increasing the cable footprint in the downtown core of business
activities?
6744
MR. LINTON: The plan is to
use both.
6745
We have acquired all of Group Telecom‑sold assets in eastern Canada
through a very complicated transaction that gives us thousands and thousands of
miles of fibre and access to, I think, 1,800 buildings in the urban areas in the
cities in the east.
6746
So we will use our facilities to get into most industrial
buildings.
6747
For small business, we will use the cable plant, wherever it is
available, as the last mile access for those types of
customers.
6748
COMMISSIONER NOËL: Thank
you.
6749
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank
you.
6750
Commissioner Cram.
6751
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Thank
you.
6752
Footprints. I don't think
anybody has talked about this. What
is the footprint of Inukshuk?
6753
I saw that it was going to cover 40 cities and 50 towns, one of which, I
hope, is Indian Head.
6754
Would you like to give that information on a confidential
basis?
6755
I would just like to know what the footprint is going to
be.
6756
MR. ENGELHART: We certainly
can identify it on a confidential basis.
I can tell you that there is a very aggressive roll-out schedule in place
that is going to cover a lot of places.
6757
COMMISSIONER CRAM: And it
would be a facilities-based fixed to mobile?
6758
MR. ENGELHART: That is
correct.
6759
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Fixed to
wireless.
6760
MR. ENGELHART: Yes, thank
you. Fixed to wireless,
yes.
6761
COMMISSIONER CRAM: It is
Thursday already.
---
Laughter / Rires
6762
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Are you
giving access-independent VoIP? Are
you selling that, or is it access-dependent VoIP, your own internet and
VoIP?
6763
MR. ENGELHART: On the
Rogers' cable platform it is access-dependent. There is nothing
access‑independent.
6764
In fact, it is not being sold or marketed as a VoIP service at all. It uses VoIP underlying technology. It does not use the internet in any
way.
6765
There will come a later phase where we will start adding things like an
area code from Vancouver or Montreal or Hong Kong.
6766
So we will start doing those things in a later
phase.
6767
I will let Bill address the Call‑Net platform.
6768
MR. LINTON: Last year we
launched a VoIP product, which we haven't put much marketing behind, but it is
access-independent, similar to Vonage.
6769
COMMISSIONER CRAM: On the
cable side, can you also give me your basic cable penetration and your
high-speed penetration as a percentage of your basic on a confidential basis in
the top 10 markets?
6770
Is that possible?
6771
MR. LINTON: Yes, we could do
that.
6772
Basic cable is about 69 percent overall, and then internet high-speed is
about 43 or 44 percent of our basic penetration. But we will give it to you by the 10 top
systems.
6773
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Thank
you.
6774
MR. ENGELHART: We can sell
telephony to someone who is not buying the high-speed internet. It runs on a similar IP platform, but
you don't have to be an internet customer to get our telephone
service.
6775
COMMISSIONER CRAM: The
issue, then, is just bandwidth, the amount of bandwidth you have to have for
it.
6776
MR. ENGELHART: That's right,
but in our case, as a matter of fact, the telephone channel is a separate 6 Mhz
channel. But even if they shared a
channel, you could provide someone with telephone service without necessarily
selling them internet service.
6777
In fact, as I indicated before, you could buy no cable, no internet from
us, and we could, and would, sell you telephony.
6778
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Thank
you.
6779
On the household versus second lines ‑‑ or lines ‑‑ another penny
dropped when you were talking, Mr. Engelhart, about second lines
crashing.
6780
If the number of second lines are decreasing because people don't need
them for their fax or their dial-up, any model that is predicated upon a loss of
share of lines, that loss of share could easily be somebody dropping their
second line.
6781
MR. ENGELHART: Yes. If you move away from households and
work with lines, it is messier for you as a regulator to calculate the share
loss.
6782
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Because a
person simply not wanting a line would be a loss to the ILEC, and if that is how
we count it --
6783
MR. ENGELHART: That's
right.
6784
Putting words in my colleague's mouth at the ILEC, they might say: If someone does disconnect their second
line because their teenagers don't need a teenager line because they are all
using their cellphones, that is substitution and it should
count.
6785
We are saying: No, it
shouldn't count, because that house still has a phone line from the
ILEC.
6786
So in terms of making a competitive choice, they haven't made it. They haven't made it until that house is
no longer served on a wireline basis by the ILEC.
6787
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Before,
with Commissioner del Val, I think you said that if all of the rules were in
place, and if you had quality of service in accordance with the standards, life
would be wonderful.
6788
Are you asserting, as MTS Allstream is, that there should be a record of
good quality of service, and there should be a record of being a good boy, or
girl, in the sense of no complaints being filed and approved for a certain
period of time?
6789
MR. LINTON: I
believe ‑‑ and someone will tell me that I am right or wrong -- that there
are records right now. The quality
of service standards that we get from the ILECs are measured on a monthly basis,
or a quarterly basis, and are provided to the Commission.
6790
COMMISSIONER CRAM: No, what
I mean is, are you saying that, as a precondition to us forbearing ‑‑ that
is what MTS Allstream is saying ‑‑ as a precondition, there has to be a
good record of adherence to quality of service standards, and there has to be a
record of complaints, or no complaints, for a certain period of time before we
would consider forbearance?
6791
MR. ENGELHART: I think what
we said was that that is one of the package of things you would look at in the
second part of the test.
6792
Having passed the 30 percent threshold, you would look at those
things.
6793
Dave is pointing me to paragraph 85 of our argument, which talks about
this.
6794
Yes, it says that that is a bunch of the things you would look at in the
second part of the test that you would want to be satisfied
on.
6795
COMMISSIONER CRAM: What
would satisfy us, then?
6796
Two years of good quality of service? Up to standard? No complaints in a year? Or no substantiated complaints in a
year?
6797
MR. ENGELHART: We didn't
specify a rule like that. I think
it is a question of looking at it and saying, "Is this part of the market
working," so that we are satisfied that this is an appropriate thing to do, to
do forbearance.
6798
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Thank you
very much.
6799
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
6800
THE CHAIRPERSON: Mr.
Engelhart, I am wondering if I have heard your answer to Commissioner Cram
right.
6801
If I have two Bell lines in my house, one for a phone and for a fax, and
I decide to take off the second line because I don't use fax much anymore and
switch to Rogers' service, that still gets counted as an ILEC household and the
fact that I now have Rogers' second line service gets zero in the competitor's
column?
6802
MR. ENGELHART: That's
absolutely correct, but I think that if you had made that choice ‑‑ you know,
there aren't very many people who are doing that. I just think that's an extraordinarily
small sub‑set and not worth worrying about. Most people are getting rid of a second
line.
6803
The typical story would be you just realized it is silly to have a fax
machine in your basement and you are getting rid of the fax machine completely;
unlikely that you are replacing it with a Rogers line.
6804
THE CHAIRPERSON: But in
fairness, we are trying to consider competitor market share and you are not
giving the competitor column any share there where in fact there has been a
substitution in effect made.
6805
MR. ENGELHART: You are
absolutely correct. But on the
other side of that coin, if you were that consumer who got rid of your fax line
just because you didn't like the fax machine anymore, then on the ILECs test
that would count as a loss of market share, which perhaps it shouldn't. So you are sort of weighing those two
inappropriate or unfair aspects when you are looking at the two tests and I
think that latter category is much more prevalent and therefore a much bigger
concern to worry about.
6806
THE CHAIRPERSON: I am not
understanding your point.
6807
MR. ENGELHART: If you looked
at lines only, then when people got rid of their fax machine just because it is
an old technology, it would look like the ILECs were losing market share. They weren't really. No one is substituting anything. It is just people were getting rid of
their fax machines and people are getting rid of their dialup,
period.
6808
So by looking at lines it is as though the ILECs are losing market share
but really they are not. So that's
wrong and that's a reason to reject lines as an appropriate
test.
6809
On the other hand, as you have correctly pointed out, if you look at
homes as we do, then in the scenario that you posited, the ILECs share loss
would be underrepresented because someone ‑‑ you have just got rid of your fax
line from Bell, replaced it with a fax line from Rogers and that wasn't counted.
I guess what we are saying is, looking at the likelihood of those two errors you
get into a lot less trouble when you use the homes test because there is lots of
shrinkage of the second line market and, I would say, substitution of second
lines would be very rare.
6810
THE CHAIRPERSON: Well, rare
or not, I don't understand how you could not count it, because we are talking
about the same market as you have defined it. You are just not counting any gain to
the competitor there or any loss to the ‑‑
6811
MR. ENGELHART: Well, it is
the simplicity of the homes test.
You know, you are saying, "Is this a home that's not served anymore by
the ILEC?" I suppose we could add a
layer of complexity and try and figure out, you know, second line losses but it
gets very complicated.
6812
So I agree with you that it is not methodologically pure, but I am saying
that it is very practical, it makes the measuring very easy and it is a very
small source of error.
6813
THE CHAIRPERSON: Believe me,
methodological purity is not what I am concerned about here. I am concerned about establishing
fairness.
6814
But I think I have your point.
6815
Commissioner Noël.
6816
COMMISSIONER NOEL: I don't
think anybody mentioned it, but what is happening with City Fido? Are you still using that product to gain
market shares in the residential market?
6817
MR. ENGELHART: Yes, City
Fido, which is based on zone‑based pricing, we still have zone‑based pricing to
zones and the prices were changed.
I believe there are plans afoot to change them
again.
6818
It is interesting, and I don't think the numbers are public, but looking
at the number of people who actually ported their lines to City Fido, ported
their phone numbers to City Fido, I was sort of surprised by how small it
was. So if you take porting as a
proxy for substitution, I was really surprised by the fact that it doesn't look
like there was that much substitution.
6819
I think a lot of City Fido customers thought, "This is just a great
package of minutes that I can use in the city as a cell phone". Not that many of them were getting rid
of their wireline phone.
6820
COMMISSIONER NOEL: And it
was where, Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal?
6821
MR. ENGELHART:
Yes.
6822
COMMISIONER NOEL: Thank
you.
6823
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank
you.
6824
Counsel.
6825
MR. WILSON: Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
I
just have a couple of questions.
6826
If I can take you back to your discussion of sort of the composition of
the business market that you had with Commissioner del Val? I want to focus just for a second on
sort of what we have described as the enterprise customers, the big ones. I think, Mr. Engelhart, you referred to
them, normally the people that are going out with RFPs and so
forth.
6827
With sort of respect to that sort of segment of customers and, if you
were here when MTS Allstream did their presentation, they talked about how they
felt that the ILECs had a stranglehold on these customers and it was very
difficult if not impossible to get them to migrate away from the
ILECs.
6828
With the experience that you have in the business market, I wonder if you
can comment on the possibility that in part that stranglehold may come because
of the various sorts of terms and conditions in terms of termination penalties;
length of contract that are inherent in the ILEC tariffs, and for that group of
customers, in fact, forbearance may stimulate competition because those
customers may then be able for themselves to negotiate terms and conditions that
allow them to migrate more easily.
6829
MR. LINTON: I think
everybody, or we would certainly agree with MTS Allstream that that very high
enterprise market has been dominated by the ILECs and it is a very difficult
market to crack, especially on local services. I don't think it is a regulatory thing
and I don't think it is really contractual.
6830
The issue there is more relationships and that is that the very largest
customers are doing business with the very largest telephone companies. It would be very difficult for one of
the large banks to give all of their business to MTS Allstream. Now, that doesn't mean that we don't all
get a little bit of the business to keep the ILECs honest and pricing right, but
the large enterprises are not suffering from lots of competition and low pricing
and that sort of stuff.
6831
I don't know if that answers your question.
6832
MR. WILSON: No, I think that
does.
6833
The only other question was with respect to the information that you
undertook to file in response to Commissioner Cram's question. Can you just give me a sense in terms of
timeframe of when you will be able to file that with the
Commission?
6834
MR. WATT: We will say
Wednesday now and if we can't do it ‑‑ next Wednesday and if we can't do it we
will get back in touch with you quickly.
6835
MR. WILSON: That's
fine. Thank you very
much.
6836
Those are my questions, Mr. Chairman.
6837
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank
you.
6838
We will break now for 15 minutes.
Nous reprendrons dans 15 minutes.
‑‑‑
Upon recessing at 1508 / Suspension à 1508
---
Upon resuming at 3:31 p.m. / Reprise à 15 h 31
6839
THE CHAIRPERSON: Order,
please. À l'ordre, s'il vous
plaît.
6840
Madame la Secrétaire.
6841
THE SECRETARY: Thank you,
Mr. Chairman.
6842
Nous allons maintenant poursuivre avec le panel numéro 17, Québecor Média
Inc./Vidéotron Télécom ltée.
6843
Merci.
PRÉSENTATION
/ PRESENTATION
6844
M. GINGRAS : Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Vice-Président,
Télécommunications, membres et personnel du Conseil, mesdames et messieurs,
bonjour.
6845
Je suis Yvan Gingras, Vice-Président exécutif, Finances et Opérations, et
Chef de la Direction financière de Vidéotron ltée, filiale à part entière de
Québecor Média.
6846
Comme vous le savez, Vidéotron est le plus important télédistributeur au
Québec et, depuis peu, un joueur dans le marché de la téléphonie locale
résidentielle.
6847
Mon équipe et moi représentons également Vidéotron Télécom, une
entreprise de services locaux concurrente, spécialisée en télécommunications
d'affaires.
6848
Permettez-moi maintenant de vous présenter les personnes qui
m'accompagnent.
6849
À ma droite, Manon Brouillette, Vice‑Présidente, Marketing et
Développement de nouveaux produits, de Vidéotron; à mon extrême droite, Philippe
Wauthy, Directeur, Développement de produits de téléphonie, de Vidéotron; et à
ma gauche, Dennis Béland, Directeur, Affaires réglementaires,
Télécommunications, de Québecor Média.
6850
Il y a environ un an, mon collègue Serge Gouin, alors Président de
Québecor Média, comparaissait devant vous à l'occasion de la tenue des audiences
publiques du Conseil sur les services de voix sur IP. Il vous a alors parlé de notre vision en
téléphonie locale, de l'importance d'un cadre réglementaire approprié afin de
nous permettre de mettre en oeuvre cette vision.
6851
Depuis, le Conseil a émis une série de décisions qui nous apparaissent
sages et équilibrées.
6852
Vous avez, notamment, statué que les services de voix sur IP, qui
ressemblent à de la téléphonie locale, remplissent les mêmes fonctions et sont
mis en marché de la même façon, sont effectivement des services de téléphonie
locale et devraient être réglementés comme tels.
6853
Vous avez, par ailleurs, raffiné et réaffirmé un certain nombre de
garanties spécifiques pour préserver la concurrence, en particulier, ce qui
touche les prix planchers, les regroupements de services, les promotions et la
reconquête de clients.
6854
Vous avez, en outre, instaurer une série de procédures administratives
simplifiées conçues pour aider les titulaires à concurrencer de façon plus
efficace sur le marché de la téléphonie locale.
6855
En ce qui nous concerne, après des années d'attente, Vidéotron a
finalement décidé de faire le saut en téléphonie
résidentielle.
6856
Nous sommes ici, aujourd'hui, pour vous dire que jusqu'à maintenant, ce
projet va bien. Beaucoup de
consommateurs apprécient notre offre, et plusieurs d'entre eux ont choisi de
couper leurs liens historiques avec le titulaire.
6857
Pour ces personnes, la véritable concurrence en téléphonie locale est
finalement arrivée, mais nous sommes encore loin du jour où l'extrême domination
des titulaires actuels sera chose du passé, et nous sommes encore bien loin du
jour ou nous n'aurons plus besoin de garanties contre les comportements
anticoncurrentiels.
6858
En date du 31 août dernier, nous comptions 75 000 clients aux
services de téléphonie par câble de Vidéotron. C'est un bon début. Nous sommes encouragés. Toutefois, ceci représente moins de 1
pour cent du nombre de lignes résidentielles en service chez
Bell.
6859
Ne soyons pas dupes. Une
seule campagne de reconquête bien financée est bien ciblée de la part de Bell
dans un environnement déréglementé, et notre base de clients pourrait fondre
comme neige au soleil. Voilà la
réalité.
6860
Bell et les autre titulaires ont tenté de cacher cette réalité de
diverses façons. Par exemple, ils
ont fait valoir que Vidéotron fait partie d'une famille corporative beaucoup
plus large, contrôlée par Québecor, laissant ainsi entendre qu'une entité de
cette taille est dotée de la solidité financière nécessaire pour résister à
toute tentative de Bell de maintenir sa dominance. À notre avis, un tel argument manque de
perspective.
6861
Afin de clarifier la situation, il suffit de mentionner que 78 pour cent
des revenus totaux de Québecor Inc. proviennent de Québecor World, la société
d'imprimerie du groupe. Québecor
World a des usines dans 17 pays en Amérique du Nord, en Europe, ainsi qu'en
Amérique latine.
6862
Les sociétés Québecor World et Québecor Média, bien que toutes deux des
filiales de Québecor, possèdent des actionnaires sans contrôle important et
distinct, soit de nombreux investisseurs dans le cas de Québecor World et la
Caisse de dépôts et de placements du Québec dans le cas de Québecor Média. Cette structure corporative fait en
sorte que les fonds d'une filiale ne peuvent être utilisés pour financer les
activités de l'autre filiale.
6863
Comparons, alors, des pommes avec des pommes.
6864
Ainsi, pour Bell et Vidéotron, respectivement, nous avons additionné les
revenus provenant de la téléphonie locale, de la téléphonie sans fil, de l'accès
internet, et de la télédistribution, soit le quatuor des communications de
l'avenir.
6865
Dans le cas de Bell, les chiffres incluent Bell Mobilité et
ExpressVu. Dans le cas de
Vidéotron, ils comprennent Vidéotron Télécom.
6866
Les résultats sont assez convaincants. En 2004, le poids financier total de
Bell dans le marché des communications représenterait près de 18 fois celui de
Vidéotron, 16,8 milliards de dollars contre 950 millions de dollars. Aucune analyse sérieuse de
l'environnement concurrentiel ne pourrait être menée sans prendre en compte une
asymétrie financière de cette ampleur.
6867
Certains économistes vous diront que Bell ne dispose d'aucun incitatif
pour mettre sa puissance financière au service d'objectifs
anticoncurrentiels.
Malheureusement, une telle perception ne correspond pas à la
réalité.
6868
À cet effet, voici un exemple puisé de mon expérience
personnelle.
6869
Le printemps dernier, j'ai assisté au Salon de l'habitation à
Montréal. Je me suis rendu au
kiosque de Bell ExpressVu, où l'on m'a fait l'offre suivante, sur papier, pour
un contrat de deux ans, incluant plus de 100 canaux de qualité numérique pour
seulement 17 dollars par mois, location gratuite d'un récepteur de base,
location gratuite d'un récepteur vidéo personnel ou haute définition, un bon
d'essence PétroCanada d'une valeur de 100 dollars, et un crédit égal aux frais
initiaux de 49,99 dollars.
6870
Vous trouverez, en annexe à notre présentation, une copie de cette
offre.
6871
En plus, on m'a aussi offert un téléphone cellulaire prépayé gratuit,
accompagné d'une valeur initiale de 30 dollars en temps
d'antenne.
6872
D'après mes calculs, avec une telle offre, Bell perd environ 500 dollars
pour la durée totale du contrat.
6873
Si Bell est prête à faire une telle offre pour gagner des parts de marché
dans un marché qu'elle ne contrôle pas, imaginez ce qu'elle sera prête à faire
pour conserver ses parts dans un marché qu'elle contrôle.
6874
Il est tout simplement illusoire de penser qu'une analyse de la
déréglementation puisse être menée dans l'abstrait, sans égard à la position
concurrentielle des joueurs actuels dans le marché, en particulier, le
titulaire.
6875
Dans l'est du Canada, le poids géographique et financier de Bell
représente la principale caractéristique du marché. Ce fait devrait, à notre avis, être
déterminant lorsque viendra le temps pour le Conseil d'établir les règles
concernant les marchés géographiques et les critères de
déréglementation.
6876
Un autre domaine où des théories économiques nébuleuses, sans rapport
avec la réalité pratique, pourraient s'avérer dangereuses est celui des coûts
irrécupérables.
6877
D'une part, il y a ceux qui soutiennent que ces coûts irrécupérables sont
négligeables dans un nouvel environnement de voix sur IP. Ces derniers évoquent des images de
fournisseurs de voix sur IP lançant leurs services à partir de leur garage. L'idée est, évidemment, de plaider pour
une déréglementation immédiate puisque, selon eux, le marché fait déjà l'objet
d'une vigoureuse compétition provenant de toute part.
6878
D'autre part, il y a ceux qui reconnaissent que les coûts irrécupérables
peuvent, en effet, s'avérer substantiels, mais qui affirment du même souffle
qu'une fois irrécupérables, ces coûts ne représentent plus une barrière à
l'entrée.
6879
Ces personnes vont même jusqu'à suggérer que, toute proportion gardée,
plus les coûts irrécupérables sont élevés, plus grande est la probabilité que le
nouveau venu tiendra bon dans le marché face à d'éventuelles pratiques de prix
abusives de la part des titulaires.
6880
Les tenants de ce point de vue ne suggèrent pas nécessairement de la
déréglementation immédiate, mais plutôt une attitude modérée à l'égard d'une
déréglementation hâtive, dans la mesure où, selon eux, une fois lancé, le nouvel
exploitant ne voudra pas retirer ses billes.
6881
À notre avis, le premier de ces deux arguments, celui des coûts
irrécupérables négligeables, est carrément inexact. Les coûts irrécupérables de Vidéotron en
téléphonie locale sont considérables, aussi bien au départ que par la
suite. Des services de téléphonie
locale résidentielle efficaces et fiables, pleinement équipés pour livrer une
concurrence à un titulaire omniprésent, ça ne se lance pas à partir d'un garage
ou d'un sous-sol.
6882
Quant au second argument, celui selon lequel les nouveaux venus seraient
dans un sens piéger par des coûts irrécupérables, il nous apparaît peu
judicieux.
6883
Nous suggérons respectueusement au Conseil de se demander si l'intérêt du
public serait bien servi par un environnement concurrentiel local dans lequel
les concurrents non-titulaires resteraient dans le marché uniquement parce
qu'ils n'ont nulle part où aller.
6884
Est-ce bien là la vision que nous avons de la concurrence entre
exploitants de services de télécommunications au Canada?
6885
Une économie productive a un besoin vital de services de
télécommunications efficaces et modernes.
Les télécommunications représentent également une industrie
particulièrement dynamique et à très forte intensité de
capital.
6886
À cet égard, de nouvelles vagues d'investissement dans les réseaux seront
nécessaires dans les années et dans les décennies à venir. L'intérêt public exige, donc, des
concurrents efficaces, financièrement solides, et non des concurrents
fragilisés, afin de garder le Canada à l'avant-garde de l'évolution
technologique.
6887
Une concurrent durable dans les télécommunications locales ne sera pas
possible si on permet au titulaire d'utiliser son incomparable poids financier
pour mener des stratégies ciblées et anticoncurrentielles afin de maintenir ses
compétiteurs régionaux dans une situation de faiblesse
prolongée.
6888
Voilà pourquoi nous avons conclu que la seule définition viable et
pertinente d'un marché géographique soumis à la déréglementation locale est la
totalité du territoire d'exploitation des entreprises titulaires de services
téléphoniques locaux.
6889
Quant aux critères de déréglementation applicables sur un territoire
donné, nous avons proposé qu'une part de 80 pour cent du marché sur l'ensemble
du territoire du titulaire, calculée en fonction du nombre de foyers et non du
nombre de lignes, soit le seuil en-dessous duquel le Conseil devrait envisager
une déréglementation des services locaux.
6890
En mettant de l'avant cette proposition, nous affirmons candidement une
évidence, à savoir que les titulaires devront perdre des clients avant que l'on
puisse parler d'une concurrence durable.
6891
Ce qui nous permet une évidence n'est est pas une pour les
titulaires. À leurs yeux, la seule
menace de la concurrence devrait suffire au Conseil pour qu'il renonce à
réglementer.
6892
Dans le cadre du marché d'affaires locales, par exemple, Bell a soutenu
le plus sérieusement du monde qu'une concurrence solide continuerait
d'exister.
6893
Même si Bell devait rafler la totalité des contrats auprès des grandes
entreprises, tout ce qui compte, c'est qu'il y ait eu des soumissions
concurrentes pour chacun de ces contrats que Bell aurait gagnés, et j'imagine
que quelqu'un qui croit sérieusement à cette proposition a suivi avec passion
les dernières élections cubaines.
Cette personne peut trouver la compétition partout.
6894
Cette vision des titulaires d'une concurrence sans perte de clients
trouve également son expression dans une part de marché extrêmement
faible : le 5 pour cent qu'ils proposent comme seuil pour leur
déréglementation du marché téléphonique local.
6895
Compte tenu de leur taux de pénétration de près de 100 pour cent dans ce
marché, les titulaires voudraient bien nous faire croire que les conditions
d'une concurrence durable se trouve établies lorsque 95 pour cent des foyers
continuent de verser consciencieusement leurs paiements mensuels dans les
coffres de l'ancien monopole.
6896
Accepter cette proposition reviendrait à permettre aux titulaires de
maintenir un avantage financier déjà écrasant sur l'ensemble de leurs
concurrents.
6897
Aucun câblodistributeur n'a jamais profité d'une domination aussi absolue
dans son taux de pénétration.
6898
Par exemple, dans le cas de Vidéotron, seulement 60 pour cent environ des
foyers sont abonnés à nos services de câblodistribution. En ce qui concerne nos services d'accès
internet haute vitesse, cette proportion tombe à environ 24 pour
cent.
6899
Nous réitérons notre conviction à l'effet que si nous voulons une
émergence d'un marché de concurrence durable, il faut qu'une portion
significative des clients de la téléphonie locale cesse de gonfler à chaque mois
les coffres des titulaires.
6900
Comme nous l'avons dit plus tôt, Québecor Média est d'avis qu'une
proportion significative de clients pourrait équivaloir à 20 pour cent des
foyers.
6901
D'autres participants à ces audiences, en particulier, l'Association
canadienne des télécommunications par câble, ont même soumis des témoignages
convaincants provenant de d'autres secteurs de l'activité économique et d'autres
juridictions qui donnent à penser qu'une perte de marché de l'ordre de 30 pour
cent serait, en fait, plus appropriée avant de procéder à l'analyse qualitative
de l'opportunité d'une déréglementation.
6902
J'aimerais souligner que notre proposition d'un seuil de 20 pour cent est
fondée sur deux conditions-clés.
6903
Tout d'abord, une définition des parts de marché basée sur le nombre de
foyers, c'est‑à‑dire une définition de la part du marché du titulaire qui soit
égale au nombre de foyers abonnés à ses services de téléphonie locale, divisé
par le nombre total de foyers abonnés à des services de téléphonie locale dans
un territoire donné.
6904
Puis deuxième condition, un marché géographique pertinent qui comprend la
totalité du territoire desservi par le titulaire.
6905
Il va de soi que si la décision du Conseil ne retenait pas ses
conditions, soit en adoptant une définition des parts de marché fondée sur le
nombre de lignes d'accès plutôt que le nombre de foyers ou en établissant un
marché géographique réduit par rapport à l'ensemble du territoire desservi par
le titulaire, nous soumettrions alors que le seuil de marché approprié pour
procéder à une analyse de l'opportunité d'une déréglementation devrait se situer
plus près de 30 pour cent.
6906
En conclusion, Monsieur le Président, mesdames et messieurs les
commissaires, nous sommes venus ici pour vous dire que nous avons obtenu jusqu'à
maintenant des solides résultats en téléphonie locale. Plus de 75 000 foyers québécois
profitent déjà des avantages d'une véritable concurrence entre exploiteurs de
réseaux, mais ce succès ne doit pas être tenu pour acquis. Notre présence dans le marché local
résidentiel représente toujours moins de 1 pour cent de celle de
Bell.
6907
Comme je l'ai souligné plus tôt, il suffirait d'une seule campagne de
reconquête bien financée et bien ciblée de la part de Bell dans un environnement
déréglementé et notre base de clients pourrait fondre comme neige au
soleil. C'est la réalité à laquelle
nous faisons face.
6908
Nous sommes toujours au stade des balbutiements dans notre présence en
téléphonie locale. Notre part de
marché est, somme toute, encore marginale et sans comparaison avec
l'omniprésence de Bell.
6909
Nous sommes fort encouragés par les succès que remporte notre
produit. Toutefois, ce succès n'est
pas étranger au fait qu'une portion de la clientèle de Bell est insatisfaite et
réceptive à toute offre de la concurrence, quelle qu'elle
soit.
6910
À notre avis, il est bien trop tôt pour conclure que nous avons atteint
une dynamique de marché où la dominance n'est plus présente et où le titulaire
n'a plus les moyens de poursuivre des stratégies anticoncurrentielles
désastreuses pour l'émergence d'une compétition viable.
6911
Seul un exercice judicieux de vos pouvoirs réglementaires vous
permettraient de faire en sorte qu'une véritable concurrence en téléphonie
locale ne soit pas tuée dans l'oeuf.
6912
Merci de votre écoute. Nous
sommes disposés à répondre à vos questions.
6913
LE PRÉSIDENT : Merci beaucoup, Monsieur Gingras.
6914
Madame Noël.
6915
COMMISSAIRE NOËL : Bonjour, madame et messieurs.
6916
Monsieur Gingras, j'aurais peut-être quelques petites questions avant
d'aborder les questions plus fondamentales, des questions par rapport à votre
présentation d'aujourd'hui.
6917
Vous nous dites, à la page 2, que certains ou plusieurs d'entre eux ont
choisi de couper leurs liens historiques avec le titulaire, en parlant de vos
nouveaux clients à la téléphonie locale.
6918
Est-ce que vous pouvez nous donner, sans dévoiler des données
ultra-secrètes, une proportion des gens qui ont décidé de couper tout lien avec
Bell -- appelons le chat, le chat -- ?
6919
M. GINGRAS : Comme on a un service de première ligne, on n'a pas de
données précises à cet égard, mais on pense que la presque totalité de nos
clients ont coupé tous les liens avec Bell, en termes de lignes
téléphonique.
6920
COMMISSAIRE NOËL : Et ça, c'est le service que vous avez lancé en janvier
ou février, je crois, sur la Rive sud?
6921
M. GINGRAS : Le 24 janvier sur la Rive sud de
Montréal.
6922
COMMISSAIRE NOËL : Le 24 janvier sur la Rive sud, que vous avez étendu à
Laval ensuite un peu plus tard, et qui est maintenant disponible sur la partie
ouest de l'Île de Montréal?
6923
M. GINGRAS : Il est disponible depuis la fin juillet sur la totalité de
l'Île de Montréal et depuis le début juillet dans la région de
Québec.
6924
COMMISSAIRE NOËL : D'accord.
Et à quel rythme... Là, vous
nous parlez de 75 000 abonnés à la fin d'août. À quel rythme hebdomadaire ou mensuel
est-ce que vous... parce que plus vous augmentez le territoire dans lequel vous
offrez le service, je suis sûre que votre take-rate, pour parler un bon anglais,
augmente, il y a de plus en plus de clients à chaque semaine
qui...
6925
M. GINGRAS : Oui, on a maintenant environ 62 pour cent du territoire de
Vidéotron qui est...
6926
COMMISSAIRE NOËL : Qui est ouvert?
6927
M. GINGRAS : ...qui est ouvert, sur lequel on accepte... on déploie la
téléphonie, et le rythme de croisière actuel est alentour de 5 000 clients
par semaine.
6928
COMMISSAIRE NOËL : Cinq mille... cinq ou sept?
6929
M. GINGRAS : Cinq.
6930
COMMISSAIRE NOËL : Cinq, d'accord.
6931
Maintenant, à la page 3, vous parlez... alors, les 75 000 seraient
devenus à peu près 95 000 à l'heure où on se parle? On est le 29
septembre.
6932
M. GINGRAS : À peu près.
6933
COMMISSAIRE NOËL : D'accord.
6934
Maintenant, vous nous dites que ça... à la page 3, vous nous dites que ça
représente 1 pour cent du nombre de lignes résidentielles en service chez
Bell.
6935
Ce chiffre de 1 pour cent, vous le calculez sur l'ensemble des lignes
résidentielles de Bell dans l'ensemble du Québec et de l'Ontario ou dans les
régions que vous desservez?
6936
M. GINGRAS : C'est sur l'ensemble des lignes de
Bell.
6937
COMMISSAIRE NOËL : Au Québec et en Ontario?
6938
M. GINGRAS : Au Québec et en Ontario.
6939
COMMISSAIRE NOËL : Vous ne trouvez pas que, étant donné que vous offrez
le service juste au Québec que de mettre la partie ontarienne, qui est encore
plus importante que la partie Québec des lignes de Bell, dans l'équation, vous
arrangez les chiffres pour qu'ils vous servent un petit
peu?
6940
M. GINGRAS : C'est des chiffres qui étaient disponibles. On n'a pas de segmentation, mais on
pense que quand même dans la réalité, quand même le chiffre doublerait ou
triplerait. Ça serait quand même un
chiffre qui est encore très faible en relation avec une part de
marché.
6941
COMMISSAIRE NOËL : Oui.
6942
Maintenant, si on prenait le territoire desservi par Vidéotron, puis on
essayait de voir... Les territoires
desservis par Vidéotron, si on les surimposait sur les territoires desservis par
Bell, est-ce que le nombre de lignes résidentielles de Bell diminuerait encore
un petit peu?
6943
M. GINGRAS : On serait peut-être alentour de 3 pour
cent.
6944
COMMISSAIRE NOËL : O.K.
Alors, on vient de tripler.
C'est parce que je trouvais que 1 pour cent, c'était un chiffre qui
était un petit peu bas.
6945
Maintenant, quand vous allez à la page 4, vous nous dites qu'en 2004, le
poids financier de Bell dans le marché des communications représentait 18 fois
celui de Vidéotron.
6946
Ça, c'était avant le lancement de votre service de téléphonie... de voix
sur IP?
6947
M. GINGRAS : Effectivement, c'est des résultats de
2004.
6948
COMMISSAIRE NOËL : Merci.
6949
Et si on va à la page 5, vous parlez de votre expérience personnelle au
Salon de l'habitation.
6950
Est-ce que cette offre de Bell, est‑ce que vous n'avez pas porté plainte
au Bureau de la concurrence là-dessus?
6951
M. GINGRAS : Oui, en effet, on a porté plainte au Bureau de la
concurrence.
6952
COMMISSAIRE NOËL : Et est-ce que le Bureau de la concurrence a statué sur
votre plainte?
6953
M. GINGRAS : Je ne pense pas qu'ils ont statué
actuellement.
6954
COMMISSAIRE NOËL : Ils n'ont pas statué encore?
6955
M. GINGRAS : Non.
6956
COMMISSAIRE NOËL : C'est ce que je voulais savoir.
6957
Maintenant, c'est une offre superintéressante, sauf que ce n'est pas une
offre qui était mise dans les journaux là, ça été offert au Salon de
l'habitation pendant neuf jours, c'est ça?
6958
M. GINGRAS : Effectivement.
6959
COMMISSAIRE NOËL : Merci.
6960
M. BÉLAND : Effectivement, c'est une offre ciblée.
6961
COMMISSAIRE NOËL : C'est une offre ciblée?
6962
M. BÉLAND : Oui.
6963
COMMISSAIRE NOËL : Je pense que... ah! non, une petite question de
détails.
6964
Monsieur Gingras, dans votre présentation... moi, je suivais avec le
texte, et vous... À la page 11, au
premier paragraphe, à la fin, vous parler de... vous dites, pour procéder à une
analyse qualitative de l'opportunité d'une déréglementation, on devrait se
situer plus près de 30 pour cent, et vous avez dit
40.
6965
Est-ce que c'était un lapsus ou...
6966
M. GINGRAS : C'était sans doute un lapsus. Excusez-moi.
6967
COMMISSAIRE NOËL : C'était un lapsus significatif.
---
Rires / Laughter
6968
M. GINGRAS : Je m'en excuse.
6969
COMMISSAIRE NOËL : D'accord.
Non, c'est juste que je me posais la question.
6970
Alors, voilà pour les questions que j'ai par rapport à votre présentation
d'aujourd'hui.
6971
Maintenant, si on allait explorer peut-être un peu plus la définition de
territoire que vous avez élaborée, et qui est, je pense, abrégée par rapport à
ce que j'ai vu -- à moins que vous l'ayez changée -- qui est abrégée dans votre
présentation d'aujourd'hui, par rapport à ce qu'il y avait dans vos mémoires
écrits, et je vous réfère au paragraphe 51 de vos commentaires du 15
septembre.
6972
Vous mentionnez comme seuil déclencheur dans ces commentaires-là... au
paragraphe 51, vous mentionnez comme seuil déclencheur d'une demande
d'abstention pour demander la déréglementation une perte de marché d'au moins 20
pour cent, et cette perte doit être couplée à deux conditions additionnelles,
c'est-à-dire que la perte en question soit basée sur la notion de foyers plutôt
que sur la notion de lignes d'accès et qu'elle soit calculée sur l'ensemble du
territoire du SLT.
6973
Alors, dans le cas qui nous occupe, c'est-à‑dire votre cas, on parle du
territoire de Bell Canada, donc, Québec et Ontario, y compris -- vous me
corrigez si je me trompe là -- mais Québec et Ontario, y compris les zones de
dessertes à coûts élevés?
6974
M. GINGRAS : Oui, effectivement.
6975
COMMISSAIRE NOËL : Merci.
6976
Vous ajoutez, cependant... puis ça, vous l'avez refait dans la
présentation d'aujourd'hui. Vous
ajoutez, cependant, que si les critères devaient être différents, par exemple,
un territoire plus restreint ou fondé sur des lignes d'accès, il faudrait
augmenter la part de perte de marché à 30 pour cent pour pouvoir enclencher un
processus d'abstention de réglementation et une analyse
qualitative.
6977
Maintenant, dans vos commentaires du mois de juin -- et je vous réfère au
paragraphe 8, qui est repris au paragraphe 58 de vos commentaires de septembre
-- vous proposez un triple test, et aujourd'hui, je vois un test double, mais je
ne vois pas la troisième patte de votre test.
6978
Alors, il y avait, d'abord, la perte de 20 pour cent des parts de marché
dans l'ensemble du territoire, une preuve à l'effet que l'offre de service et
les conditions de la demande dans l'ensemble du territoire de Bell Canada, dans
le cas qui nous occupe, soient telles que l'abstention soit devenue nécessaire,
et une mise en oeuvre graduelle de l'abstention par région d'interconnexion --
je réfère au LIR -- par région d'interconnexion locale, en autant que la part du
marché dans chacune de ces régions d'interconnexion locale, soit la part du
marché du SLT, soit en bas de 70 pour cent.
6979
Maintenant, je vous réfère aux arguments finaux...
6980
M. GINGRAS : Oui.
6981
COMMISSAIRE NOËL : ...du 15 septembre, paragraphe 51, et je vais le citer
parce que j'ai de la misère à juxtaposer ces deux
options-là :
"To the extent the Commission's determinations might deviate from these
conditions, either by adopting a definition of market share based on access
signs rather than households or by setting the relevant geographic market at
something smaller than the entire ILEC territory, then we would submit that the
market share loss thresholds for proceeding with a qualitative forbearance
analysis should tend closer to 30 percent." (As read)
6982
Est-ce à dire que si on décidait de limiter le territoire de façon plus
petite, on n'aurait pas à rencontrer le premier test, qui est de perdre
20 pour cent des parts de marché sur l'ensemble du territoire de Bell,
zones de desserte à coûts élevés comprises?
6983
M. BÉLAND : Vous avez bien vu que notre position a évolué avec le
temps. Donc, je vais reculer, puis
je vais expliquer pourquoi.
6984
Au mois de juin, quand on a proposé, effectivement, le processus à trois
étapes, la troisième étape, qui était le test de 30 pour cent par RIL, c'était
une étape qui essayait de répondre à la problématique des clients
orphelins. Donc, la problématique
que si on adopte, comme on propose un territoire très élargi qui est le
territoire de desserte de la compagnie titulaire, qu'il y a un risque de
clientèle orpheline dans des régions éloignées.
6985
On a essayé de palier à ce problème-là en proposant un genre d'étape, une
troisième étape à la fin du processus.
6986
Depuis ce temps-là, on a vu des propositions des autres intervenants qui
parlent notamment de ce que l'on considère maintenant comme étant un mécanisme
beaucoup plus direct et facile qui est le mécanisme d'un prix
plafond.
6987
Donc, notre troisième étape pourrait bien être remplacée par un simple
prix plafond sur le prix de service de base de la compagnie titulaire et donc,
n'est plus nécessaire. Ça, c'est le
premier point.
6988
Donc, on revient à un processus à deux étapes : un trigger, un plancher
de part de marché perdu, suivi par une évaluation qualitative de la
situation.
6989
Tout ce qu'on disait avec l'autre paragraphe que vous avez cité
concernant le paragraphe 51 de notre argument final où on parle des deux
conditions derrière notre estimé de 20 pour cent comme trigger de perte de part
de marché, ce qu'on est en train de dire dans ce paragraphe-là, c'est si vous
n'acceptez pas nos conditions pour cet estimé de 20 pour cent, ces conditions
étant un territoire élargi, l'ensemble du territoire du titulaire, et une
définition de part de marché basée sur des foyers et non les lignes, si jamais
vous n'acceptez pas ces deux conditions-là, si vous allez plus vers des
territoires plus restreints ou vers une autre définition de part de marché qui
est basée sur les lignes, à notre avis, le trigger de perte de part de marché
doit monter.
6990
C'est ça le fond de notre position.
6991
COMMISSAIRE NOËL:
D'accord. Mais, à ce
moment-là, vous abandonnez le troisième test qui était l'entrée graduelle, mais
qui était à 30 pour cent aussi.
C'est ça que j'ai de la misère à...
6992
M. BÉLAND: Oui. Nous croyons qu'il existe un autre
mécanisme qui a été proposé par d'autres intervenants qui, à notre avis, est
beaucoup plus directe et simple.
6993
Si vous avez une crainte par rapport à la protection des clients
orphelins, vous mettez...
6994
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: À la
manière d'une réglementation par plafonnement des prix, un
plafond.
6995
M. BÉLAND: Mais une très
simple réglementation de part de marché.
6996
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: Oui, oui,
oui. C'est ce que je dis :
*à
la manière de+
et non pas un régime de plafonnement des prix avec tous les attributs qu'on lui
connaît à l'heure actuelle.
6997
Maintenant, avez-vous fait des calculs pour savoir quel serait le
résultat de votre test *A+
par rapport à un test *B+
sur le nombre de clients que la compagnie titulaire devrait perdre avant de
rencontrer soit un des tests, soit l'autre?
6998
Est-ce qu'il y aurait un différentiel dans le nombre de clients
perdus?
6999
Et je vais vous dire pourquoi je regarde ça. Parce que si vous prenez l'ensemble du
territoire de Bell Canada qui comprend l'Ontario et le Québec, alors, à ce
moment-là, il faudrait tenir compte de tous les intervenants ou de tous les
nouveaux concurrents dans tous ces territoires-là. Ça fait des données assez
difficiles.
7000
Je trouve que c'est grand le Québec puis l'Ontario. Juste le Québec c'est 18 fois la France
et ajouter l'Ontario là-dedans, on est rendu à 40 fois la France à peu
près.
7001
M. BÉLAND: Mais pour bien
cerner la question, disons qu'on a deux options.
7002
Une option, c'est un test de 20 pour cent de perte de part de marché sur
le territoire dans son ensemble et l'autre test, c'est un test de 30 pour cent
de perte de part de marché dans un C.R.I.L. à la fois.
7003
Disons que ce sont nos deux choix.
7004
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: Et ce qui
est le test qui est proposé par l'A.C.T.C.
7005
M. BÉLAND: Oui. C'est...
7006
COMMISSAIRE NOËL:
D'accord. Et vous pouvez
vivre avec un ou l'autre de ces tests-là?
7007
M. BÉLAND: Oui. Et pour répondre à votre question
qu'est-ce qui va déclencher quelque chose en premier, disons, entre les deux
tests, on ne sait pas.
7008
Parce qu'on pourrait imaginer une situation où des concurrents percent
vite dans certains C.R.I.L. et, donc, le test de 30 pour cent déclenche une
déréglementation plus rapide que le test 20, mais on pourrait imaginer le
contraire aussi.
7009
COMMISSAIRE NOËL:
Intuitivement, je vous dirais que peut-être, parce que dans des régions
plus densément peuplées, ça va... où les gens ont plus, où le câble est rendu
parce qu'il faut quand même se rendre compte que le câble ne rejoint pas tout le
monde.
7010
M. BÉLAND: Oui, mais les
endroits densément peuplés ont la majorité de la population aussi qui va
contribuer au 20 pour cent. Donc,
ça pourrait aller plus vite ou moins vite, selon...
7011
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: Exact,
exact. Ça peut jouer dans les
deux sens. C'est pour ça que je
vous demandais si vous aviez évalué les deux, si vous aviez fait des calculs
dans le temps pour voir si...
7012
M. BÉLAND: Notre calcul
n'est pas basé sur la...
7013
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: ... si
l'un ou l'autre avait le même impact au niveau de la
clientèle?
7014
M. BÉLAND: Notre calcul
n'est pas basé sur la vitesse avec laquelle la déréglementation va arriver. C'est plus basé sur notre croyance
profonde qu'il faut que le titulaire perde une portion significative de sa
clientèle avant de permettre l'abstention.
7015
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: Et si je
comprends bien, le critère alternatif que vous nous proposez, c'est le C.R.I.L.,
la région d'interconnexion locale, au point de vue
géographique?
7016
M. BÉLAND: On vous propose
le territoire dans son ensemble.
7017
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: Mais vous
pourriez vivre avec.
7018
M. BÉLAND: On vous indique
que si vous choisissez l'autre, le pourcentage doit être plus
élevé.
7019
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: Le
pourcentage doit être plus élevé, mais c'est en se fondant pour la zone
géographique sur le C.R.I.L. et non pas sur les circonscriptions individuelles
ou des zones d'appel local.
7020
M. BÉLAND: Si vous voulez
notre opinion sur ces deux possibilités-là...
7021
COMMISSAIRE NOËL:
Oui.
7022
M. BÉLAND: ... je pourrais
peut-être demander à mon collègue Philippe de parler un peu des
circonscriptions.
7023
Moi, je dirais, prenons l'option des circonscriptions comme territoire de
référence, moi, à mon avis, les circonscriptions téléphoniques, c'est un peu
comme ZaZa Gabor.
7024
COMMISSAIRE NOËL:
Comme?
7025
MR. BÉLAND: ZaZa Gabor. Do you remember ZaZa Gabor? ZaZa Gabor was someone who was famous
for being famous.
7026
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: Ah!
bon!
7027
MR. BÉLAND: And telephone
exchanges, they...
7028
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: Ça ne
s'est pas rendu jusqu'à Montréal.
7029
MR. BÉLAND: Telephone
exchanges, they're relevant because they're relevant. What I mean by that is like ZaZa, you
would be less and less interested in what is happening with her life, but she
would keep popping up on Entertainment Tonight every once in a while because she
was famous for being famous.
7030
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: C'est
parce que vous regardez la télévision en anglais, vous, monsieur
Béland.
7031
M. BÉLAND: C'est
ça. And telephone exchanges are like that,
they were created at a point in time, they had relevance at that point in time,
they keep popping up for different regulatory reasons, but they really have no
relevance any more to anything meaningful.
7032
Je pourrai demander à Philippe d'expliquer un peu la pertinence des
circonscriptions pour notre réseau.
7033
M. WAUTHY: Les
circonscriptions téléphoniques sont un héritage du passé qui reflète le
déploiement des réseaux téléphoniques dont ils se faisaient au milieu du siècle
dernier et c'est encore ce qui dicte finalement nos interconnections
principalement, basé sur ce découpage historique.
7034
Force est de constater que c'est devenu un paradigme puisque pour la
population en général, ça a bien peu de signification d'appartenir à la
circonscription téléphonique de Montréal si j'habite dans Notre-Dame-de-Grâce ou
de Dorval si j'habite à trois kilomètres de là.
7035
Et les contraintes associées à la portabilité des numéros, si on avait,
par exemple, à déployer un réseau téléphonique aujourd'hui, probablement que ce
ne serait qu'une seule grande circonscription sur l'ensemble du
territoire.
7036
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: Vous êtes
trop jeune pour vous rappeler de Hunter puis Crescent.
---
(Rires / laughter)
7037
M. BÉLAND: Puis en terme de
marketing, de services, en terme de comportement de clients dans un
environnement, de mobilité, de nomadicité, et caetera, et caetera, les
circonscriptions téléphoniques, au fond, n'ont aucune pertinence pour un réseau
moderne, à part le fait qu'elles existent.
7038
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: Et la zone
d'appel local, qu'est-ce que vous en pensez?
7039
M. BÉLAND: Comme il y a
d'autres intervenants qui l'ont expliqué, ça a peut-être plus d'attrait comme
ensemble géographique naturel, sauf qu'il y a des problèmes administratifs
reliés au fait qu'il y a des chevauchements, et caetera.
7040
Donc, ça semble être moins facile à adopter comme entité
d'absentium.
7041
COMMISSAIRE NOËL:
Maintenant, si on essaie de définir le marché par rapport aux produits
plutôt que le marché géographique comme on a fait depuis tout à l'heure, au
paragraphe 14 de votre argument final du 15 septembre 2005, vous dites que le
marché d'affaires que vous considérez comme un marché distinct... que vous
considérez que le marché d'affaires est... -- je vais remettre mes lunettes, je
vais peut-être capable de me lire -- que vous considérez comme un marché
distinct du marché résidentiel, le marché d'affaires.
7042
Est-ce que vous êtes d'avis qu'il devrait être segmenté?
7043
Alors, vous voyez deux marchés, vous, quant aux produits : le marché
d'affaires et le marché résidentiel.
Est-ce que vous pensez que le marché d'affaires devrait être segmenté de
façon plus pointue, un peu à la manière dont Aliant le caractérise; c'est-à-dire
service d'affaires de base, monolignes, services multilignes Centrex pour partie
d'entreprise dans la première catégorie.
Deuxième; le Centrex pour entreprises moyenne, soit de 31 à 1 500
accès. Centrex pour les grandes
entreprises à plus 1 500 accès et les circuits numériques.
7044
Est-ce que vous voyez un avantage ou un désavantage quelconque à
segmenter plus avant le marché d'affaires, en terme de segment de
marché?
7045
M. BÉLAND: C'est une idée
qui semble avoir un certain attrait.
Nous, on aurait deux inquiétudes quand même par rapport à cette
idée.
7046
Premièrement, aussitôt qu'on commence à segmenter trop les marchés, on
augmente les possibilités de ciblage, de stratégie, d'attaque ciblée de la part
des titulaires.
7047
Deuxièmement, je ne suis pas sûr que les lignes qu'on pourrait tracer
entre ces segments-là du marché des affaires sont si claires que ça.
7048
Donc, il y a probablement énormément de chevauchement entre ces trois ou
quatre catégories et disons qu'il y en a une qui est déréglementée avant une
autre, ça ouvre des possibilités, je ne dirais pas... je n'appellerai pas ça
du
gaming
nécessairement, mais disons des incitatitifs.
7049
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: Du
"twickage".
7050
M. BÉLAND: Des incitatifs à
déplacer des clients d'un marché à l'autre, selon est-ce que c'est réglementé ou
déréglementé.
7051
COMMISSAIRE NOËL:
D'accord. Maintenant, juste
question de produits aussi.
Qu'es-ce que vous pensez de la proposition de la Commissaire à la
concurrence de marché des premières lignes, des deuxièmes lignes?
7052
On a tous entendu les propos de Rogers à cet effet-là et d'autres
intervenantes, mais qu'est-ce que vous pensez, vous, de diviser le marché entre
un marché... on parle du marché résidentiel là, entre un marché de la première
ligne puis la deuxième ligne?
7053
M. BÉLAND: Encore une
fois...
7054
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: Je pense
qu'en quelque part dans votre texte vous nous répondez de façon assez claire
là-dessus, mais je voulais juste que vous nous le
précisiez.
7055
MME BROUILLETTE: En fait, si
vous me permettez, c'est clair que d'un point de vue commercialisation d'un
produit, on branche des maisons.
Donc, c'est clair que cette notion-là pour nous, de la manière que... en
fait, les sondages, ce qu'ils nous ont démontré, c'est que la deuxième ligne,
souvent c'est perçu comme une option.
7056
Donc, nous, on attaque vraiment des foyers. Alors, je pense que le marché c'est dans
cet ensemble-là qu'on devrait le voir.
7057
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: Et ce que
vous nous avez dit, que monsieur Gingras nous a dit au début, c'est que la
majorité de vos clients ont substitué totalement le service de Bell au service
de Vidéotron. C'est
ça?
7058
MME BROUILLETTE: Tout à
fait, oui.
7059
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: Madame
Brouillette, j'avais une question que je voulais vous poser et ça vient de
m'échapper, mais ça va revenir. Ah!
oui, c'est ça.
7060
Par opposition à COGECO et Rogers, vous avez décidé d'offrir votre
produit sur une base de... passez-moi l'expression, "stand-alone" et d'offrir
des options qu'on peut greffer à son choix.
7061
Est-ce qu'il y avait... quel avantage voyez-vous à cette façon de
procéder par rapport à une offre de service où on offre un produit tout
enrobé?
7062
MME BROUILLETTE: En fait, il
y a différents éléments à l'intérieur de ça. Si on regarde la stratégie de fond de
Vidéotron, l'ensemble de nos produits, de la façon dont on bâtit nos offres,
c'est vraiment à la carte.
7063
Si on pense, entre autres, à la télé-distribution, nous sommes le seul
câblo-distributeur à offrir des packages donc de chaînes à la carte. Le consommateur peut choisir via la
Grille de canaux et se monter sa propre offre de service.
7064
Si on parle, entre autres...
7065
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: En
numérique.
7066
MME BROUILLETTE:
Pardon?
7067
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: En
numérique?
7068
MME BROUILLETTE: En
numérique, tout à fait. Mais
lorsqu'on regarde Internet, encore là, on offre des packages, par exemple, de
vitesse sur demande, donc encore là, dépendant du besoin du consommateur, c'est
le besoin d'accéder à un débit plus rapide pour une certaine période -- on
parle, entre autres, 48 heures -- il peut acheter à la carte justement le niveau
de débit dont il a besoin.
7069
Alors, lorsqu'on a planifié la tarification dans notre service de
téléphonie, c'est clair qu'il est important pour nous d'être en lien avec cette
stratégie de fond et l'ensemble des sondages qu'on a effectués avant de déployer
le produit ont démontré que le consommateur, il voulait avoir le
choix.
7070
Donc, effectivement, on est allé vers une approche d'une ligne
résidentielle de base et à ça peuvent s'ajouter des
services.
7071
On croit que le consommateur est plus libre dans ce cas-là et, à prime
abord, c'est ce qui semble faire le succès dans notre
offre.
7072
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: Oui, parce
que vous avez quand même un rythme de croissance assez
impressionnant.
7073
MME BROUILLETTE: Assez
intéressant.
7074
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: Monsieur
Gingras, vous nous avez parlé des coûts irrécupérables dans votre présentation
de cet après-midi.
7075
J'aimerais ça entendre vos commentaires sur la proposition de la
Commissaire à la concurrence à l'effet qu'une des conditions du test qu'elle
applique, elle, dans ses propositions serait que les coûts variables de la
fourniture sur les deux réseaux sont semblables ou que le coût du nouveau venu
est inférieur et la capacité d'aucun des deux réseaux n'est
limité.
7076
Qu'est-ce que vous pensez de ce test qui est proposé par la Commissaire à
la concurrence?
7077
M. GINGRAS: Je trouve que
c'est quand même un exercice assez fastidieux à démontrer et s'assurer qu'on
compare les mêmes choses, surtout que je pense dans les deux cas les réseaux --
en tout cas, dans le cas de Vidéotron on transporte un ensemble de produits et
services dans le même réseau avec des services à la clientèle groupés -- ça fait que déterminer ou d'identifier
des coûts variables propres à un produit est un exercice qui demanderait
énormément d'allocation, somme toute, arbitraire.
7078
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: En
ressources.
7079
M. GINGRAS: C'est-à-dire
c'est assez difficile de prédire un résultat et d'en faire un élément
pertinent. Je pense qu'au bout de
la ligne, c'est la part de marché et la pénétration réelle sur le marché qui va
dire si on est un concurrent crédible ou non.
7080
COMMISSAIRE NOËL:
D'accord. Maintenant, dans
un tout autre ordre d'idée, les compagnies -- appelons-les *les
compagnies+,
c'est-à-dire Bell et Télébec, ont soumis que dans certains pays européens et de
l'hémisphère sud, notamment la Nouvelle-Zélande et l'Australie, on avait... on
était passé d'une réglementation des tarifs de détail à une réglementation des
tarifs de gros.
7081
Est-ce que vous pensez que c'est une solution qui est
envisageable?
7082
M. BÉLAND: Pour répondre
tout simplement, la revente, parce que c'est ça la réglementation des tarifs de
gros, c'est quelque chose qui facilite la revente puis la revente, ça ne nous
intéresse pas ni Vidéotron Télécom ni Vidéotron fait de la revente. Ce sont des compagnies dédiées à
"facilities-based" 100 pour cent.
7083
Donc, j'ai entendu lors de cette audience, par exemple, je crois que
c'était la première journée, le commentaire retourné à la problématique des
poches de clients orphelins, j'ai entendu un intervenant qui a dit, mais le
câblo qui a ces poches-là, il va juste louer quelques books locaux de la
compagnie titulaire puis il va remplir ses poches-là.
7084
Le business de location de book local, Sprint Call-Net, Rogers Telecom,
son nom actuel, il...
7085
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: Il va
peut-être changer de nom encore.
7086
M. BÉLAND: ... il pourrait
vous en parler. Ce n'est pas un
business qu'on décide de lancer parce qu'on a une poche à remplir dans son
réseau.
7087
Nous, si on nous disait demain qu'on doit embarquer dans la location de
book local, moi, la première chose que je ferais, ce serait d'aller demander à
Ken Engelhart si je peux engager l'équipe réglementaire de Rogers Telecom, c'est
la première chose.
7088
Ensuite, on engagerait l'équipe d'ingénieurs de co-localisation de Rogers
Telecom. C'est une grosse démarche
de se lancer dans la revente de télécommunications de book local et ça ne nous
intéresse pas.
7089
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: Est-ce
que... vous avez fait allusion, monsieur Gingras, à la présence il y a à peu
près un an de monsieur Gouin à cette tribune dans le cadre du dossier de la voix
sur IP. Je me rappelle de ses
remarques préliminaires qui étaient assez cinglantes sur ce qu'il pensait de la
revente, si je me rappelle bien, on parle de pique-assiette et preneur de
marché, est-ce que ça se peut que ma mémoire soit fidèle?
7090
Je n'ai pas le transcript devant moi, c'est de
mémoire.
7091
M. GINGRAS: Je pense que
l'idée générale est assez fidèle.
---
(Rires / laughter)
7092
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: C'était
justement à cet effet-là que je lui avais demandé s'il avait mangé du lion pour
son petit déjeuner parce que...
7093
Alors, si je comprends bien, vous ne croyez pas que la revente, même si
c'est pas vous qui deviendrait le locateur d'un book local pour compléter le
trou dans votre réseau, mais que ça soit un revendeur qui fonctionne comme
revendeur sur une base générale, vous ne croyez pas à la revente dans l'équation
pour la concurrence.
7094
Ou si vous voyez une possibilité que, par exemple, de la voix sur IP
indépendante de l'accès soit une façon de faire baisser les parts de marché de
la titulaire?
7095
M. GINGRAS: Bien, la
technologie de la voix sur IP va être sans doute une avenue beaucoup plus
simple. Pour notre part, à l'heure
actuelle, on doit dire qu'on est fortement orienté sur le déploiement actuel
d'une stratégie facility base.
7096
COMMISSAIRE NOËL:
Maintenant, il y a plusieurs intervenantes qui nous ont parlé d'au moins
trois entreprises dotées d'installations pour être un des éléments déclencheurs
d'un test d'abstention de réglementation.
7097
Est-ce que vous pensez que le marché est capable d'absorber trois
concurrents dotés d'installations dans le même marché ou si vous croyez que deux
concurrents dotés d'installations c'est suffisant?
7098
M. GINGRAS: Je pense que
deux concurrents dotés de facilités, c'est une question de fait aujourd'hui
qu'il n'y a pas beaucoup d'autre alternative, c'est-à-dire en terme de facility
base.
7099
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: On ne sait
jamais.
7100
M. GINGRAS: Maintenant, on
parle beaucoup d'émergence de nouvelles technologies, du WiMAX, de voix sur
IP, fait que tous ces produits-là,
toutes ces offres-là vont être aussi des choses accessibles sur le marché qui va
laisser quand même un choix.
7101
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: Est-ce que
vous croyez que, éventuellement... on a entendu hier les entreprises
Utilities... UTC, Utilities Telecommunications of Canada Competitors, qui est
venu nous parler.
7102
Est-ce que, à votre connaissance, Hydro-Québec, au Québec entre autres,
s'enligne vers une participation dans le marché de la
téléphonie?
7103
M. GINGRAS: Hydro-Québec
regarde actuellement ses options pour l'accès Internet. Une fois cette chose-là fait sur l'accès
Internet, est-ce qu'ils vont prendre la décision d'y ajouter une voix sur IP
par-dessus?
7104
Je pense qu'on est... je sais qu'Hydro-Québec examine leurs options face
aux technologies nouvelles sur les lignes d'alimentation
électrique.
7105
COMMISSAIRE NOËL:
Émergentes. Je vous
remercie.
7106
Maintenant, peut-être que j'aimerais juste avoir vos commentaires très
rapidement sur les mesures de protection en matière de concurrence, soit les
promotions et les reconquêtes.
7107
Est-ce que vous pensez qu'une fois l'abstention de réglementation
enclenchée, qu'on doive maintenir ces mesures de protection ou si vous voyez une
fenêtre de temps sur laquelle devrait être *phase
out+?
7108
M. BÉLAND: Vous parlez
précisément de l'idée d'une période de transition où ces mesures sont
affaiblies...
7109
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: Oui,
oui.
7110
M. BÉLAND: ...
progressivement avant l'abstention?
7111
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: C'est
ça.
7112
M. BÉLAND: Manon pourrait
peut-être répondre à ça.
7113
MME BROUILLETTE: Bien,
écoutez, pour être bien franche avec vous, j'ai vraiment, moi, le sentiment
qu'on est déjà en période de transition.
7114
On regarde, tout à l'heure, on vous a présenté une offre qui a été fait
récemment. Cette même offre-là a
été déployée quelques semaines après notre déploiement de notre service de
téléphonie dans la région de Québec.
7115
Donc, on voit que Bell est déjà actuellement bien équipée pour faire face
à notre entrée en téléphonie via des offres très agressives dans les autres
secteurs produits qu'ils ont.
7116
En parallèle à ça, on a constaté lors de nos différents déploiements
régionaux que Bell avait... très rapidement pouvait se retourner et faire des
investissements publicitaires massifs pour nous contrer.
7117
Si on prend l'exemple de la rive sud, lorsqu'on a déployé le 24 janvier,
deux semaines après Bell avait nolisé l'ensemble des panneaux d'affichage collés
à nos panneaux de Vidéotron et l'ensemble des journaux locaux, avec une campagne
qui discréditait directement notre produit.
7118
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: Ça devait
être les journaux de Transcontinental.
7119
MME BROUILLETTE: Je ne
répondrai pas à ça.
7120
Par ailleurs, ils ont récemment lancé des produits de Voice over IP. Donc, j'y crois, pour être une fille de
marketing, je ne vous cacherai pas que, actuellement, Bell est un compétiteur
direct en téléphone et ce ne sont pas seulement une entreprise monopolistique de
laquelle on doit aller chercher des clients. On doit garder nos clients parce que,
actuellement, ils sont très agressif sur le marché.
7121
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: Est-ce que
vous avez expérimenté, parce que ça fait déjà quand même neuf mois que vous
êtes...
7122
MME BROUILLETTE: Bien, huit
mois, oui.
7123
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: ... huit
mois, oui, le 24 janvier, huit mois que votre produit est sur le marché. Est-ce que vous avez ressenti ce qu'on
appelle ici dans notre jargon le *turn+?
7124
MME BROUILLETTE: Bien, en
fait, c'est clair que j'ai eu certains indicateurs dans mes autres
produits. Ceci étant dit, pour la
téléphonie, il est un peu tôt pour être en mesure de tirer des conclusions de
substance parce que, effectivement,
fait seulement huit mois.
7125
Ce qu'il ne faut pas oublier, c'est que sur le territoire de la province
de Québec, on a une situation particulière dans le temps juillet-août, en fait,
juin, juillet, août...
7126
COMMISSAIRE NOËL:
Oui.
7127
MME BROUILLETTE: ... qui
vient influencer vraiment les données.
7128
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: On connaît
ça.
7129
MME BROUILLETTE: Donc, c'est
clair que, nous, on attend vraiment d'avoir une année complète pour être en
mesure de tirer des conclusions importantes face à ça. Donc, je ne saurais vous répondre à
l'heure actuelle.
7130
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: Juillet,
le 1er juillet, la grande transhumance.
7131
Maintenant, questions qui ont été soulevées par ARCH, c'est-à-dire la
disponibilité de services pour les personnes qui souffrent de handicaps. Est-ce que votre offre de service répond
à ces exigences-là ou à ces demandes?
7132
M. BÉLAND: Notre offre de
services pour le moment est pas mal alignée sur le service de Bell. Il ne faut pas s'en
cacher.
7133
Ceci étant dit, c'est sûr que les technologies IP en général offrent
beaucoup de potentiel en ce qui concerne les nouveaux terminaux, les nouveaux
modes de transmission, et caetera pour les personnes avec
difficulté.
7134
Nous, on n'est pas sûr, honnêtement, que c'est la matière à cette
audience de regarder ces questions d'accès-là. L'important pour vous, présentement,
c'est probablement de garder vos pouvoirs selon la Loi, pour pouvoir imposer des
conditions sociales aux joueurs.
D'ailleurs, on n'a pas...
7135
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: Et,
d'après vous, ça devrait être à tous les joueurs?
7136
MME BROUILLETTE: D'ailleurs,
on n'a pas de problème à ce que ce genre d'obligation sociale soit imposé de
façon non discriminatoire, si je peux dire, entre compagnies, entre LEC, mais de
là à parler spécifiquement des besoins puis quelle technologie pourrait répondre
à ces besoins-là, on n'est pas sûr que c'est vraiment le forum ici pour répondre
à ça.
7137
COMMISSAIRE NOËL:
D'accord. Mais peut-être
juste une question de savoir, vous me dites que les terminaux ont des capacités
plus raffinées pour adresser les problèmes de certaines personnes qui souffrent
de handicaps.
7138
Est-ce que vous avez l'intention, puis je pense que je m'adresse à madame
Brouillette, éventuellement, de faire savoir aux diverses associations, par
exemple, que ce soit les mal-entendants, les mal-voyants, et caetera, quelles
sont les caractéristiques propres à votre offre de service qui puissent combler
certains besoins qui sont mal servis par le bon vieux téléphone
noir?
7139
MME BROUILLETTE: C'est clair
que notre objectif, c'est vraiment de répondre à 100 pour cent des attentes de
notre clientèle. Si c'est une
grosse démarche d'entrer en téléphonie, donc, on procède actuellement
progressivement.
7140
Notre produit à l'heure où on se parle est sensiblement comparable au
produit de Bell. Donc, il répond à
certaines obligations.
7141
Ceci étant dit, on va évoluer avec le temps et se conformer davantage à
l'ensemble de ce que nos clients demandent.
7142
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: Moi, ce
sont mes questions, monsieur le président.
Merci beaucoup, madame, messieurs.
7143
LE PRÉSIDENT: Merci. Monsieur le vice-président Arpin.
7144
COMMISSAIRE ARPIN:
Aujourd'hui, on a entendu les comparutions de COGECO, de Shaw, de Rogers,
qui nous ont fait part de leurs difficultés avec les entreprises titulaires dans
leurs secteurs.
7145
Vous, si vous nous dites, monsieur Gingras, que vous êtes capable
d'accommoder 5 000 clients par semaine, est-ce que vous avez des difficultés
avec... parce que vous avez un lien d'interconnexion quand même avec les
entreprises titulaires.
7146
Incidemment, qui est votre fournisseur
d'interconnexion?
7147
M. GINGRAS: Nous, on est
parti d'une compagnie soeur qui est Vidéotron Télécom qui est un CLEC, lequel a
grandement facilité notre classement de téléphonie qui avait déjà en place une
infrastructure, une multitude de points d'interconnexion.
7148
Ça fait que les ajouts pour couvrir l'ensemble du réseau qui n'était pas
nécessairement par Vidéotron Télécom, naturellement on fait face aussi à des
échéanciers et des délais dans l'obtention de ces
choses-là.
7149
Alors, en ce qui a trait à la portabilité des numéros, on a eu des issues
de temps à autres, on les a réglées, ça fait que, généralement, les choses... on
a réglé nos problèmes en cours de route.
7150
On demeure, cependant, toujours fortement dépendants du titulaire. On doit négocier, argumenter et
s'assurer qu'on procède, mais à date on a réussi à le faire sans entrave
majeure.
7151
On a des inconvénients, comme le 1er juillet qui est la plus grosse
période de déménagement au Québec, bien on ne peut pas faire de portabilité
parce que les switches de Bell sont fortement sollicitées aussi, fait qu'ils se servent en premier.
Ça fait que, nous, ça pose un problème de déménagement pour nous, ça fait
que partout on est... on vit tout de même la même situation de dépendance, mais,
somme toute, on n'est pas dans une situation où on a des problématiques
majeures.
7152
COMMISSAIRE ARPIN:
Merci. C'est
tout.
7153
LE PRÉSIDENT: Merci. Madame la conseillère
Cram.
7154
COMMISSAIRE CRAM:
Bonjour. Je vais parler en
anglais, s'il vous plaît, parce que je suis gênée de parler en
français.
7155
I wanted to ask, you were very articulate in your first brief about
winbacks and if I gave you three choices, I want you to tell me which is your
first choice.
7156
We would do as PIAC suggested, we would allow winbacks at 80 percent and
then, deregulate later at 70 percent, as choice number 1, so winbacks
first.
7157
Choice number 2 is allow the ILECs to have winbacks at the same time
their prices are deregulated or Choice number 3, allow deregulation first and
winbacks later.
7158
So, which of the three would you choose and why?
7159
MR. BÉLAND: It's interesting
that we just described our menu self-serve approach to services and the
Commission is giving us a self-serve approach to the regulatory framework, it's
interesting.
---
(Rires / laughter)
7160
MR. BÉLAND: Tough
question. Manon will probably want
to expand, but I think the principal point I would make in response to what
you're saying is that we would rank, in terms of the tools that the ILEC can use
to target us, and if I can use the word "abuse us", winbacks ranks very high for
them as an effective tool because you look at the offer we show attached to our
presentation...
7161
COMMISSIONER CRAM: And I
want it, but I noticed it expired.
7162
MR. BÉLAND: ... $100.00 in
gas; maybe $200 in gas next week.
If you can take that sort of offer and target it down to calling the
people who have left you and offering them their free terminals and their gas
and they're throwing a cell phone, that becomes -- and with the financial power
of Bell behind that, it's almost impossible to fight that.
#
So, you know, I would say that I would rank your options the most
favourable to us is keep that winbacks in place for a good long
time.
7163
MME BROUILLETTE: Je
suis entièrement d'accord avec toi, Dennis, et ça m'amène à revenir sur un point
du début, lorsqu'on parlait du territoire de Bell versus notre
territoire.
7164
Je pense que ce qu'il faut prendre en considération, c'est que si nous
sommes un petit joueur lorsqu'on parle de territoire, comparativement au
titulaire, lorsqu'on parle de winbacks eh! bien, ils peuvent prendre le pouvoir
financier qu'ils ont à l'extérieur de notre territoire pour financer des
offensives très agressives et pour venir nous attaquer.
7165
Donc, c'est clair que le winback actuellement pour nous c'est... bon,
premièrement, on vit avec, c'est une réalité. Je pense que tous les représentants vous
ont amené quelques exemples de ce qu'ils ont vécu. On a déjà de la difficulté à faire face
à ça.
7166
Alors, imaginez s'il n'y a pas de réglementation en place, on va être
encore plus mis en problème. Donc,
je pense que le winback, effectivement, c'est la chose à préserver.
7167
M. BÉLAND: I would also
point out that $200.00 in gas is worth more today than it was four months
ago. That's a
deal.
---
(Rires / laughter)
7168
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Less,
yes. Can a person get your Voice
over IP without getting your high speed internet?
7169
MME BROUILLETTE: Oui,
définitivement.
7170
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Oui. Okay. So then you would be able to sell it to
all the 50 percent penetration?
7171
MME BROUILLETTE: Oui, tout à
fait.
7172
MR. BÉLAND: To all the 100
percent of people who got the cable access.
7173
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Yes. O.K. Merci bien, monsieur le
président.
7174
LE PRÉSIDENT: Merci. Madame
Pennefather?
7175
COMMISSIONER PENNEFATHER:
Merci, monsieur le président.
Juste pour clarifier.
7176
Madame, vous venez de parler d'une période tantôt, d'une période de
transition comme si on est là-dedans dans le moment. Dans ce sens-là, madame Cram vous a
demandé que pendant cette période-là de transition, est-ce que vous prévoyez des
changements, si on retient winback, promotions, et ces aspects-là, est-ce qu'il
y a d'autres éléments auxquels on peut toucher?
7177
Parce que je prends pour acquis que votre seuil c'est 20 pour cent et
après ce 20 pour cent, c'est possible d'aller de l'avant et il n'y aura plus de
safeguards, comme on dit en bon anglais.
7178
Est-ce que j'ai bien saisi votre position?
7179
MME BROUILLETTE: Si on
ramène ça à ce pourcentage-là, on s'entend que la 20 pour cent, c'est en
fonction du territoire global. Il
faut revenir sur un 30 pour cent si on vient sur un territoire plus
restreint.
7180
Ceci dit, tout à l'heure, ce que je faisais référence, j'ai le sentiment
qu'on est en période de transition, mais c'est clair que ce n'est pas vers là
qu'on veut aller.
7181
Ceci dit, si on y va par une démarche de dire winbacks versus
déréglementation, j'opterais pour dire le minimum requis serait 20 pour cent,
par la suite on commence à déréglementer le winback et ensuite la
tarification.
7182
COMMISSAIRE PENNEFATHER:
Mais tantôt aussi, je pense que vous avez dit, je ne sais pas qui, que
vous ne voulez pas parler d'une période de temps. Vous parlez plutôt d'un 20 pour cent
part de marché comme trigger pour vraiment cette décision.
7183
Mais est-ce que vous pouvez nous donner une certaine idée de quant ce
moment sera devant nous, le 20 pour cent, ou est-ce qu'on continue dans une...
en effet, une réglementation?
7184
M. GINGRAS: C'est un petit
peu difficile même pour nous de prédire ce comportement-là. On pense ou on sait qu'il y a un certain
nombre de clients du titulaire qui attendaient une alternative. Il y en a une
aujourd'hui.
7185
C'était la question qu'on se posait aussi initialement lors du lancement
du produit, à quelle vitesse, les gens qui ont un intérêt à quitter le
titulaire, à quelle vitesse qu'ils vont se manifester et comment va se répartir
cette clientèle-l<.
7186
Ça fait qu'on a... on ouvre un territoire, un boom, ça redescend après,
l'historique est relativement courte, donc quelle est la preuve, quel va être la
vitesse qu'on va réellement croire une fois qu'on va avoir ramassé ce qu'on peut
appeler *la
clientèle facile à obtenir+
qui n'attend qu'une alternative?
7187
Il y en a un certain nombre, une fois passé ça, à quelle vitesse va être
la croissance, je pense qu'il est trop tôt, on ne le sait pas
encore.
7188
COMMISSAIRE PENNEFATHER: Merci. Merci beaucoup, monsieur le
président.
7189
LE PRÉSIDENT: Merci. Monsieur Arpin.
7190
M. ARPIN: Vous revenez
toujours sur le territoire de la titulaire. Si je me limite au territoire du Québec,
est-ce que vous avez des... parce que vous êtes exclusivement au Québec, est-ce
que vous avez des cartes superposées qui démontreraient votre territoire par
rapport au territoire de la titulaire et si vous en avez, pouvez-vous les
déposer sous pli confidentiel?
7191
M. BÉLAND: Nous avons
fourni, en réponse à un interrogatoire, je n'ai pas le numéro devant moi, une
carte de notre réseau, mais ce n'était pas superposé sur les C.R.I.L. ou les
circonscriptions des compagnies de téléphone.
7192
On pourrait essayer de le faire dans un sens pratique. Je ne sais pas si on a les moyens
cartographiques pour le faire, mais, oui.
7193
MME BROUILLETTE: Oui, on
pourrait faire ça, oui.
7194
M. BÉLAND: On pourrait vous
produire une telle carte et vous allez voir d'ailleurs que notre couverture de
réseau de câble touche aussi les territoires de Télébec et de Telus
Québec.
7195
LE PRÉSIDENT: Messieurs,
madame, est-ce que vous étiez
présent pendant la présentation de Rogers ce matin? Oui?
7196
M. BÉLAND:
Oui.
7197
LE PRÉSIDENT: Est-ce que
vous avez obtenu une copie de leur présentation orale? Il y a un attachement là à cette
présentation de Bell. Est-ce que
vous l'avez devant vous?
7198
MME BROUILLETTE: Vous parlez
de la carte?
7199
LE PRÉSIDENT: Pas la carte;
un attachement d'un message qui... oui, c'est ça.
7200
MME BROUILLETTE: C'est une
promotion, oui.
7201
M. WAUTHY: Mais ce n'est pas
une promotion, c'est un...
7202
MME BROUILLETTE: Bien, une
note, un contact.
7203
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: C'est une
petite carte de monsieur Blouin.
7204
LE PRÉSIDENT: Un
attachement.
7205
COMMISSAIRE NOËL: C'est une
carte de monsieur Blouin.
7206
LE PRÉSIDENT: L'attachement
1, oui. Est-ce que vous avez vu la
même sorte de carte chez vous à Québec?
7207
M. BÉLAND: Oui. Nous avons même déposé une application
Partie 7, concernant ce qu'on considère comme étant une tentative de
reconquête. Donc, je ne suis pas
sûr que c'est le moment approprié pour en parler. C'est devant le...
7208
LE PRÉSIDENT: Je ne pense
pas.
7209
M. BÉLAND: ... c'est devant
le Conseil.
7210
LE PRÉSIDENT: Merci. Monsieur le conseiller
juridique.
7211
MR. WILSON: Sorry. Just one quick question, Mr. Chairman,
with respect to the information that Vice Chairman Arpin asked.
7212
Can you just give us some sense of when you will be able to file that
with the Commission?
7213
MR. BÉLAND: And perhaps we
should clarify as well.
7214
Votre désir, monsieur Arpin, ça serait de superposer notre couverture sur
les circonscriptions ou les C.R.I.L. des compagnies
titulaires?
7215
COMMISSAIRE ARPIN: Mais,
vous, vous avez parlé du territoire de la titulaire, donc c'est l'ensemble de
C.R.I.L., c'est comme ça que vous l'avez défini?
7216
M. BÉLAND: Oui. O.K. Donc, notre territoire versus le
territoire des titulaires.
7217
COMMISSAIRE ARPIN: C'est
ça.
7218
M. BÉLAND: Une semaine, si
possible?
7219
COMMISSAIRE ARPIN: Merci,
monsieur le président.
7220
LE PRÉSIDENT: Merci
beaucoup. Ce sont nos
questions.
7221
Madame la secrétaire.
7222
LA SECRÉTAIRE: Merci
beaucoup, monsieur le président.
7223
We will now proceed with panel No. 18, EastLink
Telephone.
7224
THE CHAIRPERSON: Did you
call this item? I think you
did.
7225
THE SECRETARY:
Yes.
7226
THE CHAIRPERSON: Please
proceed.
‑‑‑ Pause
PRESENTATION
/ PRÉSENTATION
7227
MS MacDONALD: Good
afternoon, Mr. Chair, Commissioners.
My name is Natalie MacDonald and I am the Director of Regulatory Matters
at EastLink.
7228
With me is Lee Bragg, Co‑CEO of EastLink.
7229
We are here today to provide our comments on a proceeding that has the
potential to significantly impact the future of competition in local exchange
markets.
7230
EastLink is one of the first CLECs to provide a competitive residential
local telephone service and it is the first to do so over its cable
network. We have made significant
investments in order to provide this service and have forced challenges at
various steps along the way.
EastLink has played a significant role in contributing to the development
of competitive local telephone options for consumers early on and through that
early contribution has provided others with insight into the challenges of the
business.
7231
EastLink was also the first company to offer bundled services to
consumers and not long afterward the term "bundle" became a regular household
name, with all ILECs now offering bundles to consumers.
7232
The importance of sustainable competition cannot be overstated. Mere entry means nothing unless it is
sustainable. In EastLink's view,
the Commission must always keep this objective in mind when analyzing the
argument and evidence before it.
7233
EastLink proposes the following regime for determining future forbearance
applications:
7234
1. That the geographic
market be no smaller than the province, at least in the Atlantic
region.
7235
2. That the forbearance
determination be based on a two‑part test.
The first stage is a determination that the ILEC no longer serves at
least 30 percent of the market. The
second stage requires an assessment of the ILEC's market power, which involves
consideration of various factors.
Even with a loss of 30 percent of the market, an ILEC may still be in a
position to unduly impair competition.
7236
If this stage 2 assessment indicates ongoing market power, then it will
still be too early to forbear.
EastLink also proposes that the Commission consider the investment made
by the entrant. If the entrant has
not had a decent opportunity to recover some of that investment, competition may
not be sustainable.
7237
Sustainable facilities‑based competition can occur where efficient
competitors are able to enter the market on a business case that makes sense;
where competitors are able to respond to, and discipline, incumbent
behaviour.
7238
This can only happen where the incumbent is faced with competitors who
exist across a broader area.
7239
Some parties suggest that if the market is larger, then there will be
some pockets of that area where no competition exists. In EastLink's case, EastLink is offering
service throughout Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island, so we reach many rural
areas. If the test is properly
defined, forbearance will occur only when the competition is pervasive enough
throughout the market so that ILECs will be less likely to differentiate even in
these smaller pockets.
7240
There is a greater risk in selecting a smaller geographic market because
it gives Aliant (in our case) free reign to target smaller areas, while allowing
it to justify its higher prices or its current prices in regulated
areas.
7241
In EastLink's view, decisions should not be made solely on theories. Instead, the Commission must look at the
facts as they exist. Various
parties have presented theories about market dynamics, ILEC responses to
competition and opinion on the potential or lack thereof of ILECs acting
anti‑competitively. While these
theories may be useful to guide the Commission, the more important evidence in
assessing how the ILECs will respond in a forborne environment is through past
experience and an understanding of the current
environment.
7242
For example, some ILECs say they need to be forborne soon or consumers
will lose out. They say there is
evidence of competition and it is not fair to deny them the ability to compete
without regulation.
7243
The facts are:
7244
Canadians experience some of the lowest telephone rates in the
world.
7245
There has been very little growth in local telephone competition since
the Commission set the landscape in Decision 97‑8.
7246
Earlier CLECs have gone out of business.
7247
The Commission created more rules because of the slow growth of
competition and ILEC behaviour that impeded that growth.
7248
Companies need a viable business case to enter these markets, with an
expectation that they will not be facing giant forborne ILECs very soon after
entry.
7249
There are significant barriers to entry ‑‑ even after the initial
investments are made.
7250
Consumers now have far more options today than they have had
before.
7251
ILECs have significant flexibility in offering multiple services and
packages today.
7252
The ILEC's business is not at risk if forbearance is not granted
soon.
7253
These facts illustrate there is no real urgency at this time to grant
forbearance.
7254
Second, the incumbents and their experts also argue that if a
facilities‑based competitor has already entered the market, then it is unlikely
to exit. The Commission must not be
convinced by this argument.
7255
The fact is that while EastLink may have spent the money to enter the
market, there are ongoing costs and barriers to maintain this business and these
costs continue when EastLink loses customers due to ILEC
winbacks.
7256
If customers keep switching, an entrant may be less able to continue
responding to the ILEC's pricing strategies, since it will continue losing money
with little likelihood of keeping that customer in the long
term.
7257
Even if the entrant does not exit the market, it may choose not to grow
the business but instead to focus on other services. Or it may choose to stop responding to
ILEC targeting so the ILEC gains back most of the market. If that happens, true competition would
not really exist.
7258
Theorists suggest this will not happen, but it does happen in the real
world.
7259
EastLink has, for example, turned off cable systems in some areas when a
business was no longer economical.
To suggest that if an entrant goes out of business there will be another
party to come and use that facility is also wrong. Since cable companies would still
operate the cable and internet business.
New entrants would have little incentive to enter and consumers will be
less likely to switch after experiencing exit by others.
7260
There are dangers in presuming that an entrant who has built the
facilities is secure when that entrant is facing a regional incumbent with size,
scope and synergies across four provinces.
Aliant can use its resources across its entire region to target the
subsets of its territory where a competitor exists. The existence of a facilities‑based
competitor does not negate the damage large incumbents, such as Aliant and Bell,
can cause to them.
7261
Will Aliant engage in predatory behaviour? We have every reason to believe it
will. The economic theory presented
seems to suggest that predatory pricing would not be profitable since the ILEC
would still need to recover these costs later. We say this is not the
case.
7262
If Aliant is able to target a very small area with deep discounts, it has
already benefited by winning back those customers, maintaining prices for its
services in other areas, limiting the likelihood of further customer losses by
sending a message to EastLink that if there is a price war it will win every
time and sending a message to potential entrants that entry will not be
profitable.
7263
When Aliant wins back a customer from EastLink we have lost the costs
incurred in initially gaining that customer. In order to win that customer back or
any new customer EastLink must be prepared to offer those customers a better
deal and incur the administration, marketing and advertising costs to do
so. In many cases, the customers
who leave the incumbent are price sensitive. It is this price sensitivity that also
makes these exact customers more inclined to switch back to the ILEC if faced
with sweet deals and incentives.
There is little benefit of incurring such costs when those hard won
customers will merely switch again when Aliant offers another deal, making
ongoing responses to winback unaffordable.
7264
It is far easier for ILECs to engage in this behaviour if they are
freed‑up to target smaller areas through deep discounts and winback
activity. Aliant's desire to engage
in winback activity is obvious considering the various applications it filed for
removal of winback restrictions and it has applied for promotions seeking to
waive service charges of installs.
7265
The fact that Aliant wants to have forbearance on an exchange basis also
illustrates a desire to target smaller areas. Aliant is capable of offering reduced
prices to its customers today and its choice not to file tariffs for lower
prices is indicative that it would prefer to target this activity to smaller
areas. Again, facts and not theory
are more telling in determining how ILECs will respond in a forborne
environment.
7266
I now turn to Lee Bragg to speak generally about EastLink's business and
the ongoing barriers to offering local phone service.
7267
MR. BRAGG: Thanks,
Natalie. Good afternoon,
Mr. Chairman and commissioners.
Thank you for the opportunity to be here today. I somewhat feel like all this is a
little bit of my fault, but I hope we can get over that.
7268
We looked at entering the local telephone market about six years ago and
I myself built the business plan and there were some huge huge hurdles at that
point in time. Capital was the
biggest issue, trying to get availability of funds to be able to invest in a new
business opportunity like this and it took a ton of capital. The majority of our banks who we were
involved with and our other family members who were making the decisions thought
we were a little crazy to attempt this.
The simple things of even trying to buy equipment from some of the
vendors like Nortel, who were not used to dealing with private organizations
they were, as Ken Stein talked at one time about the ILECs controlling the
system, it even went as far down into controlling the equipment vendors, you
know, who to the best of their ability had Chinese walls at the time to separate
what different competitors are selling gear to, but it was very evident that
that was a challenge.
7269
Even hiring the people, I mean we were cable guys, we didn't really know
much about the telephone business.
We knew it was a potential opportunity, but we needed to be able to
attract the right people to be able to run a telephone system let alone over a
cable plant and in parts of those individuals that we had credibility, that we
were going to be successful enough that, you know, to make a move and be
employed by us was going to be a fruitful career.
7270
We had interconnect issues like everybody else early on with the ILEC, LD
carriers, 9-1-1 service, others, I mean we were very early into this, so we were
forging a lot of paths and there were a lot of challenges. Again, it was tough but one of the
biggest hurdles to overcome was the issue how will the ILEC react. We understood at the time, you know,
certainly there were much much larger than we were and had huge market dominance
in this area and we felt, you know, there was a huge issue if they targeted
against us, at our size, a simple thing of just making not only offers to the
customers but offers to our key employees, we had identified that as a huge
risk. If they pulled a half a dozen
key people out, I mean, we could not continue in the
business.
7271
We knew they were bigger, deeper pockets controlled the market, but we
got our heads around all those issues and we got our heads around the financial
issues as well as the staffing, but it was still how are we going to get a
foothold against this larger, well‑entrenched incumbent? But, for this, we relied on the
Commission's desire to develop a framework for the sustainable competition and
local telephone market. I mean, we
knew that that was, you know, that was a desire for the country and for the
Commission that, you know ‑‑ so there is an opportunity, there is some
protection for us, there is how we can get into this
business.
7272
We understood it was not a guarantee for success and we still have to run
a quality system, provide good customer service, trucks have to show‑up on time,
we have to give the customers a value proposition in order to come over to us
and that part was certainly our job.
But we felt it was the Commission's job to create that environment and
hold the incumbent at bay long enough for a competitor to gain that sustainable
foothold. I think sustainability is
the key for this whole thing. And I
really don't think that that job is done, that really we have an environment to
allow somebody to have sustainable competition. We have heard from a lot of the other
people about the targeted winbacks which are very dangerous in a small market,
that the incumbents target against us.
7273
When I talk about sustainability, we have had great success ‑‑ I
mean, a lot of people out there will talk about our numbers, we have great
penetration in certain markets and certain issues but, I mean, really we have
had success at entering the business and that is the key for us. All we have done is we have entered the
competitive telephone market and we have been at it for five years, but we still
have relatively small market share compared to the people we are fighting
against. But successful entry is
not really sustainability. I mean,
we need some time and we need a sizeable market share in order to have the
incumbent respect, from a pricing and a targeting policy, that they can't just
push us out.
7274
But again, all that being said, we are in the business now and we are
continuing to deal with the high incremental capital costs to acquire and
install each individual customer, the continued cost to operate the
network ‑‑ it is not cheap to run, the people we had to hire are
expensive ‑‑ and provide that reliable telephone service. It is because of some of those high
incremental costs and some of the targeting activity that we have seen that it
is, you know, EastLink and myself are investors ‑‑ and a small number as
they are ‑‑ we are very concerned about the possibility of the existing
safeguards being removed, again we are not ready yet.
7275
The concept of forbearance based on the local exchange would be an
absolute disaster for us. It is far
too small an area to measure when determining sustainable competition. The size of the ILEC versus the
competitor has to be considered. I
mean, there are unique situations around the country, but Aliant is a much much
larger organization than we are and their ability to cross‑subsidize out of
other markets to target on an exchange basis, to me, it is
obvious.
7276
A 30 percent loss in any given exchange is not that material for them,
given the size of some of the exchanges we are talking about. They can easily target those customers
with the promotions and winbacks, slowly win the customers back on an exchange
by exchange basis. We have talked a
lot about predatory pricing. I
mean, are they going to go in and offer free service for year, which would be
very obvious to win the customers back?
They don't need to do that.
They only need to offer something in the $10.00 or $15.00 a month ‑‑
if they get all their customers back in 10 years it is the same issue for me, I
am out of business, maybe I am out of the telephone business. It is the issue on that exchange that
they can use those outside customers, outside to help balance off and target
that area.
7277
It has been suggested that we can withstand more intensive marketing by
the ILECs due to our sunk capital costs and that would mean we would not abandon
the customers or shut systems off in a particular area if this is dropped, but
that is absolutely not the case. It
is still a very fragile business opportunity for us and we will exit the
telephone business if we don't think it has financial viability. I mean, we went in it because we said
well how are we going to grow our business, how are we going to provide more
products and services to our residential customers? Local telephony was obvious, but we are
in business to make some money and if we are not making money there, we will
focus our resources elsewhere.
7278
We are a cable company and we are not like a long distance carrier that
sort of had a purpose ‑‑ one product network that if they went broke or
went out of business somebody else could gather‑up that network and use the
facilities to offer service again.
It is just bandwidth to me, I have lots of reasons to use that
bandwidth. If I can't operate the
system and make a dollar or if I think, and that is the key issue, if it looks
like the environment has changed such that I can't continue, we will stop, we
will repatriate those channels, we will sell the switch, we will move on, we
will sell more high speed internet and we will put more video channels on, that
is a relatively easy decision.
7279
We had a loose discussion with our families, said well, you know, all the
capital sinking into the telephone business, maybe we should go buy Bell shares
or Bytel shares, I mean that is a way to be in the telephone business, but I
would like to prefer ‑‑ we would be a better
alternative.
7280
Telephone is a product and, you know, it is not the end of the world for
us if we get out of it, it has to be a viable business. We need a base of customers, to be able
to hang onto that base of customers, to support our ongoing operational costs
and that is sort of the foundation that we built the business on when we talk
about, you know, why a 30 percent penetration in an individual exchange ‑‑
that is not a foundation to build a business on, that is just not
enough.
7281
If we end‑up in a churn battle, moving customers back and forth, again,
we will soon do the math and be out of the business because churn is a huge cost
for us, again, due to the incremental capital costs and the ongoing operational
costs of the customers. We are in a
very incremental business about how we acquire our customers. It will be a business decision and no
different than what Natalie talked about earlier. I mean, we have shut cable systems off,
we have handed in licenses, I mean we have done that and not at the point where
we see we are losing money, we have done a couple of them when we see, you know,
here is the trend, let us get out now while we can. So we have ‑‑ I am not sure ‑‑
three licenses so far and hopefully no more.
7282
But that is the point, sustainability is the issue. I want it, I mean, I think the
Commission wants it, I know our customers want it, I am not so sure the ILECs
want it, but in the long run I think it makes them better competitors as well to
have sustainable competition.
7283
We exist in an environment now with very aggressive pricing. We have a $9.00 local telephone offer on
the table for some of our bundled customers. We know Aliant has a $10.00 offer for
wireless for bundle. I mean, we use
those individual prices to help attract customers within bundles and they are
usually for a period of time, sometimes three months, sometimes six months, but
that is pricing. I mean, the
pricing, the aggressive pricing doesn't bother me, it doesn't concern
me.
7284
I mean ‑‑ I will get in trouble here ‑‑ but theoretically, they
have some boundaries around their local telephone pricing, but when the put it
in a bundle and they have a technical requirement to tie it to DSL and all their
other products are tied to DSL, I mean, I have my head around that, it doesn't
really matter. I mean, that is just
the price that is in the market, but it is across the entire market, I can deal
with that. It is the target
marketing in a particular exchange, in an area of Truro or in Amherst or in
Oxford where they can just go in and bang bang bang, hit individual customers
and offer them and take them away and then, hey, it is a disincentive for me to
go into other exchanges, but it is a disincentive for me to continue with the
entire business.
7285
One of my comparisons was ‑‑ you know, early on I think they didn't
take us seriously nor did others, and we got a certain amount of market share
from whether it was, you know, we have talked about sort of the ILEC haters,
there is 5 or 6 percent there, there is some very price sensitive people, there
is students. I mean, we climbed up
and got through some hurdles I think before people really took us seriously
about being in this business and that was the first few years. But now, we are absolutely under the
spotlight.
7286
What happens when you take it down to defining the market by the exchange
is not only ‑‑ suddenly we go from being under a spotlight to a magnifying
glass. They can just take that
magnifying glass underneath the spotlight and begin to focus on us. It is just, I mean, it is like burning
ants when you are a kid, that is what happens. The spotlight we can deal with, because
it across a wide enough market that we can handle that. It gives them some market discipline
about the promotions they have in the pricing.
7287
As I said earlier, the successful entry is not the same as successful
sustainability. I mean, we do not
have the economic foothold right now to counter Aliant's market dominance and
their economic power, their sheer size.
So, I mean, I am not an accountant or an economist or a lawyer, I am a
businessman, we have heard lots of numbers and economic theory and comparisons
to other markets and products, but at the end of the day it is ‑‑ you know,
it has been eight years since the regulations have allowed somebody to enter
into the business, there is only a minute portion across the entire market of
competition and it is really ‑‑ it is just very
early.
7288
So I am going to hand it back to Natalie to make a few more
comments.
7289
MS MacDONALD: The Commission
should not debate on whether the ILECs ‑‑
7290
THE SECRETARY: I am sorry,
you are exceeding your allocated time.
7291
THE CHAIRPERSON: Do you want
to conclude in a few sentences please?
7292
MS MacDONALD: Sure. I guess the main point we have been
making is after hearing all of this, you know, our position is that the
Commission should not really be debating on whether the ILECs are going to
engage in certain behaviour. The
real question is when they do it will competition be able to respond and that is
really the point to be made. There
has been a lot of debate on will they do this and will they do that? We know they are going to act to winback
their customers and the question is will competition be able to respond to
that?
7293
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Commissioner Cram.
7294
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Thank
you. I wanted to talk ‑‑ we
heard a little bit from Telus the other day about how you launched and some of
the choices you made in launching.
I mean, it was circuit switched and I will get to that later. But you chose, I gather, to have all of
the options in?
7295
MR. BRAGG: That is
right. All the features bundled
together.
7296
COMMISSIONER CRAM: And one
price?
7297
MR. BRAGG: One
price.
7298
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Including
long distance?
7299
MR. BRAGG: No, we had a
separate long distance deal, separate bill for long
distance.
7300
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Through a
reseller?
7301
MR. BRAGG: Through a
reseller, that is right.
7302
COMMISSIONER CRAM: And when
did you first launch and then how did you expand?
7303
MR. BRAGG: Our first
launch area was Halifax in oh I would say half the city and then, you know,
based on some success ‑‑ and when I say success, it wasn't so much success
of gaining customers, it was success of just making it work ‑‑ then we sort
of rolled out to the rest of the area of Halifax. In the first year ‑‑ we had a
unique market strategy ‑‑ the first year we sold it as a standalone
service, we did not bundle it in and we targeted students. I had a couple of reasons why I liked to
do that. Students tend to be very
sensitive to price, I mean, they would rather buy a case of beer than buy
voicemail, and they all go home at the end of the year, so if we really screwed
it up we could start over again in the next year.
7304
So we felt it was a very flexible sort of customer base to use as a bit
of a living trial to determine whether we could do this. And again, there were all the issues of
number portability, interconnect with the 9-1-1 guys, all that stuff that we had
to solve, could we run it, could we keep the network up, I mean, network
reliability was a big issue, but we did do that, launched in Halifax. Didn't really gain ‑‑ I am not sure
how many customers we had, 1,500 in the first year or something like
that ‑‑ and then figured, you know, alright we know what we are doing now,
it is time to roll this in. We
heard always from customers, why can't I get everything for $100.00, why can't
we get everything for $100.00? And
so that is when we formulated or came up with well let us have bundled services
for $99.95 I think at the time for $100.00. And to answer your question, we threw
the features in because, you know ‑‑ I get in trouble ‑‑ we had half
the marketing guys, the features are all margined, I mean there is no cost to
providing the features, so half the team said, you know, that is where the gravy
is.
7305
But there are also ‑‑ there is operational issues with sorting
through all the features for the customers, what is on, what is not, so I am a
very operationally focused guy and like things simple, so I said let us just
give them away, it doesn't cost anything, it is a value proposition, easy, easy
to maintain, one number on the bill, you know, we are pretty simple guys, so it
was easy that way.
7306
COMMISSIONER CRAM: And you
say that I guess Aliant sort of thought you would go away or
something?
7307
MR. BRAGG: Nobody thought we
were going to be successful.
7308
COMMISSIONER CRAM: The first
couple of years you were just in Halifax.
So if Aliant had reduced their band A rates to be competitive, if their
costs allowed that, what would have happened to you?
7309
MR. BRAGG: That is a good
question. We were under the
impression that they had a provincial rate. We didn't think that they were going to,
across the entire city of Halifax, lower their rate. That was when we were just in
Halifax.
7310
They had spent so much time in the past trying to get away from these
different rate bands and balance out their rates across the province that we
thought just because we happened to show up on the scene, are they going to undo
all that? Not likely on day
one. So we felt we had some time in
order to justify putting a value proposition in front of the customers that
would allow us to get a little bit of market share.
7311
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Does the
circuit switch have, in terms of costs vis‑à‑vis VoIP ‑‑ I don't know if
you know VoIP costs very well or not.
7312
MR. BRAGG: Too
well.
7313
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Too
well. Is it a one‑to‑one ratio,
your switched costs, your circuit switch costs, or is it higher than
VoIP?
7314
MR. BRAGG: It is higher than
VoIP. That is part of the challenge
of VoIP. There are so many ways you
can do it, whether you want to do back‑up power in the customer premise or not,
or try to do network back‑up power ‑‑ that is a little more costly ‑‑ whether
you use a separate customer premise equipment for the voice service or the
internet, or combine them; whether it is an indoor unit or an outdoor
unit.
7315
There is a tonne of ways you can take capital costs
out.
7316
Vonage V over IP, they don't have any capital costs hardly. They send you a cheap deal in the
mail. You plug it in and you
utilize somebody else's infrastructure versus ‑‑ I will use Rogers for an
example because I know what they are doing reasonably well. They are putting capital in place and
dedicated equipment, and they are building a proper network that is going to be
reliable and is going to work.
7317
Part of the challenge is that from the equipment provider's standpoint,
VoIP has taken off so the price of the equipment is going down, where the
circuit switch guys who we were in with early are somewhat stagnant with Cox or
big buyers. We are not as big as
Cox in the U.S. or Japanese companies, some guys in Chile and I think in
Spain.
7318
Still the capital cost of our equipment is a little higher. It is robust. It is very reliable. It works well. Switches aren't cheap. So that is why the capital for us is a
little higher.
7319
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Can you
give us a number? If VoIP is one,
what would the cost ‑‑
7320
MR. BRAGG: I know our
costs ‑‑ and I think we have submitted some of the
costs.
7321
We are somewhere between $700 and $1,000 a customer for our capital. The VoIP guys are all over the map. They are likely half as much as that,
but some could be up a little more; some are down a
little.
7322
COMMISSIONER CRAM: There
would be a different recovery of capital or recovery issue for you than with the
VoIP people.
7323
MR. BRAGG: That's right, but
VoIP wasn't an option when we started either.
7324
COMMISSIONER CRAM: I
know.
7325
When you launched and now, how do you market?
7326
MR. BRAGG: We market it from
a telephone product. We market it
as a standalone telephone product.
We also market it within our bundles.
7327
Really, bundling is likely the most prevalent way we
market.
7328
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Maybe I
should have said where do you market it?
Do you market it in newspapers?
7329
MR. BRAGG: Oh, where. We market it on our own, some of our own
facilities. We do some billboard,
telephone. We will buy commercial
space on Global and ATV.
7330
The reality is word of mouth is one of our biggest sellers. I have never done an analysis so
much. Some of our marketing guys
would say Aliant outspends us 15 to 20‑to‑1.
7331
COMMISSIONER CRAM: In Nova
Scotia, is there one newspaper?
7332
MR. BRAGG: Not really. There are a lot of regional
newspapers.
7333
I guess The Chronicle Herald would be considered more or less the
provincial paper, for want of a better word. It is a Halifax‑based paper, but it goes
out across the province.
7334
There is the Halifax Daily News that is quite prevalent in the Halifax
metro area and a lot of other small, when I say regional, sort of county‑sized
papers.
7335
I would say The Halifax Herald, which is the provincial paper, would be
where we would spend the majority of our ‑‑ I don't want to call it global
marketing as opposed to if we were just to launch in an area of New Glasgow, we
would also advertise in the local New Glasgow paper.
7336
We do a fair bit on radio stations as well.
7337
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Your
marketing in the paper is addressed at the provincial
level.
7338
MR. BRAGG: Yes. It is the same when we do mail drops by
postal code. We know that they are
going to land on the doorsteps of people who are slightly outside of the cable
serviced area, no different than the newspaper is going to show up. You get used to this in the cable
business. You always have the rider
"in cable serviced areas only" or "call your cable company to find out if you
are under the footprint".
7339
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Then you
say you use radio spots. Are the
contours of the radio equivalent to the province or do they get all around the
province, up to Cape Breton?
7340
MR. BRAGG: Not one radio
station. You would have to
advertise in multiple. There are
typically more market radio stations.
7341
Like in Sydney in Cape Breton there is a radio station that would ‑‑
I don't know what the contours are.
I feel like I should have one of our marketing guys here who buys the
advertising.
7342
COMMISSIONER CRAM: I wanted
to talk about sustainable and that issue.
7343
I don't think we are in the business in telecom of making people whole,
as we seem to do with programmers.
On the other hand, I don't think we want to see phoenixes coming out,
because that would virtually kill investment in telecom.
7344
So where do we go?
7345
Somewhere in between there we have sustainable competition. I don't know where and market share
doesn't answer for me because you are really concentrating on how strong you are
and that you have to retain that strength to be able to
fight.
7346
MR. BRAGG: How strong I am
certainly is relevant, but a bigger issue ‑‑ really, when I talk about the
market share issue, it is how weak they are.
7347
If I have 5 percent and somebody else has 5 percent, certainly I am a lot
weaker with 5 percent than I am with 30 percent. But if there are six of us with 5
percent, that is still sort of the equivalent level of weakness for the
incumbent that gives them the same effect of having some discipline in the
market. There is competitive
foothold enough.
7348
When we talk about 30 percent, I want to make clear that that is not me
getting 30 percent; that is them losing 30 percent. It doesn't really matter where they lose
it to.
7349
I think I am pretty good at what I do, and I will get the majority of
that 30 percent, I hope. Maybe Bill
Linton is going to come in and sell local loop over my system, but I will have
to deal with him next.
7350
That is the key. It is my
responsibility, if I buy high‑cost capital. We may transition to VoIP. We have that option at some point in
time as well, and I am not suggesting that you should write me a cheque for $150
million and give me my money back, but just give me the opportunity to operate
in a manner that I can try to get my money back.
7351
COMMISSIONER CRAM: So we
shouldn't concern ourselves with whether or not you are cash flow positive,
anything like that.
7352
MR. BRAGG: That question
leads down eventually to what is the number and what is the timeframe and what
is the cash flow?
7353
I don't know because the economics are going to be different for every
competitor. My economics are
different than Shaw's and Rogers' and Bell's and Telus'. They are all different
situations.
7354
The best I could reasonably conceive of is across a reasonable ‑‑ if
I have a reasonable base of customers across the market that I am servicing,
which is ‑‑ I know we have positioned the province, but personally I lean
toward the Videotron style.
7355
I am competing against Aliant, all of Aliant regardless of where they
are. So I need enough market share
that I can sustain myself.
7356
Is 30 percent in a given exchange enough? No, that is not enough. Again, it is the magnifying glass. They can just stomp me out at each
step.
7357
If I had 20‑30 percent across the market, I think I am big enough that I
can survive. If I am crappy at
running the system and I am wasteful and I am not very efficient, I don't
deserve to get my money back.
7358
I think it is a consideration.
We were in early so I think that has a bit of an effect. It is too difficult to try to say here
is your return; it should be five years after you invested X number of
dollars. That is too hard to
do.
7359
COMMISSIONER CRAM: You talk
about time to build and develop customer loyalty in your final brief, at page
4. Also in your test you have a
wait time; that after a certain amount of share is lost, there is a wait time
and you say that should be decided on a case‑by‑case
basis.
7360
Should we on this wait time recognize the fact that you are a cable
company, that you have a brand, that you have loyalty and so shorten it compared
to others?
7361
MS MacDONALD: If I may, the
suggestion on the wait time, it really gets into an analysis of what is the
market power of the incumbent we are dealing with in a given
scenario.
7362
In our particular situation we would say that you need to look at the
party and you need to look at the competitor. It may be that when you look at the
circumstances in that stage two, which is what is the market power of the party
that you are competing against ‑‑ and in our case we are dealing with
Aliant, which spans across four provinces.
We would say that, notwithstanding the fact that we had built cable
facilities, that should not be a deciding factor that would warrant a reduced
period of time.
7363
We are not necessarily saying what that period of time is so much as when
you hit that threshold there is another analysis, and you have to say: What are the real circumstances
here? How big is Aliant? Is there really potential for them to
act in a way that the competitor who has entered the market can sustain
that? That is really the
key.
7364
So when we talk about looking at what part of the investment has been
recovered, or if any has, and when we look at what the situation of EastLink is,
we say you just need to look at all of the circumstances.
7365
We have provided some information in the submissions, particularly in the
June 22nd submission, about some of the other examples of why Aliant's scope and
scale across the four provinces does have an impact; examples in terms of
responding to major emergency event issues that can also impact churn, the speed
with which Aliant can respond to those situations as compared to a smaller
competitor.
7366
We merely say that when you are looking at the forbearance analysis, it
does have to happen on a case‑by‑case basis because you could have a competitor
the size of, to exaggerate, a convenience store and then you could look at
EastLink and you could look at other competitors.
7367
When you are EastLink dealing with an incumbent that spans four provinces
and is owned by Bell, we have a lot more worries when we are talking about once
you hit that threshold. We just
think it is really warranted to look at those other
issues.
7368
MR. BRAGG: I dreamt up a
scenario which would concern me about hitting the threshold and why you would
have to look at it. The other day I
was thinking ‑‑ we had some little discussions and we talked about some of
the issues on our wireless real competitors or Voice over IP, third party and
should that count if the competitor is losing market share or
not?
7369
There has been a variety of opinions, whether it is second line or not,
about what is losing market share and what is not.
7370
One of the things that popped into my head that concerned me is if Bell
owns or controls Aliant, if Bell offers a Voice over IP service over Aliant's
DSL and Aliant loses 30 percent of their local lines to its parent, does that
trigger something? Is that
reasonable?
7371
Once the trigger is there, you have to look at the situation and
say: How did it happen? Is it reasonable what has gone on
here?
7372
COMMISSIONER CRAM: When we
are at the trigger and you are at that test, does the test include the same
thing as MTS was proposing: that the Q of S standards have been adhered to for a
certain period of time and that the ILEC didn't have any sustained complaints
against it?
7373
MS MacDONALD: I will start
with that and if Lee wants to add anything, he can.
7374
I would suggest that we look at the first stage and that gets you into
the analysis. Then the second stage
has to do with market power.
7375
In that part of the analysis the questions are: Can this competitor sustain this
incumbent? When you do that, you
can't help but say: What is the
incumbent likely to do in this situation?
7376
When you are asking that question, you look at quality of service and you
say: What have they done in the
last year? We don't necessarily
think that quality of service indicators should be a point where you say: Oh, they have met the quality of service
indicators. Well, things are
okay. They are not going to do
anything.
7377
That might be a factor, and that might be an argument that a competitor
makes and says: Look what they have
been doing in the last year or so.
I don't think that should be the determining criteria, but certainly it
can be something that is raised as an indicator of the potential for the
incumbent to act in a way that will unduly impair
competition.
7378
COMMISSIONER CRAM: You are
using the province. Would you agree
that that may not necessarily be the same geographic area across the
country?
7379
I know you want Aliant territory.
7380
MR. BRAGG: There has to be a
manageable way to do this, that's right.
Is province right across the country? To be honest, I haven't given it a whole
lot of thought. I really don't
know.
7381
I typically am more concerned with what Aliant can do to me as opposed to
what Telus could do to Shaw ‑‑ no offence to my friends at
Shaw.
7382
MS MacDONALD: Perhaps I
could comment as well on the issue of the province.
7383
We note the CCTA's position, which is based on an LIR, and I think there
is a lot of value in looking at the position in the sense that we are dealing
with a framework proceeding here.
7384
If you are looking at let's start with the framework and work with that
framework, it makes sense to look at a geographic market definition that has
some practical realities like: Who
are we dealing with? What are the
consumers' patterns? Municipal
boundaries and that sort of thing are all incorporated into
that.
7385
It makes sense that it provides for a practical avenue for competitors to
provision service throughout that area.
So the CCTA has made that case.
7386
Our position on the province is not really inconsistent with that. In fact, it is quite consistent with
it. If you look at the position as
a framework proceeding, then you can look at the individual circumstances of
competition in various areas across the country.
7387
I might add that a lot of the different companies have put forward
various positions on this should be the geographic market or that should be the
geographic market, but when you really take an arbitrary definition ‑‑ for
example, an exchange. Well, an
exchange in Nova Scotia may be quite different from an exchange in Alberta in
larger centres. Even if you think
you are taking the same criteria and applying it across the board, you really
are not because the components in each area across the country might have a
completely different picture. They
might tell a different story.
7388
I would say, as a framework proceeding, there are a lot of advantages in
terms of ease of administration, et cetera, with the LIR. Then you can work up from that or down
from that, if necessary, depending on the circumstances of the
market.
7389
We would say in our particular area, Nova Scotia is an area that warrants
combining those LIRs and we think that the province is a really important
consideration that the CRTC should be looking at.
7390
We look at the pricing of Aliant across the province. In fact, I think in many cases their
bundles have been consistent across their territory, but I know their local
pricing is the same across the province.
7391
We price the same across the province. The services have been provided
throughout. EastLink is building
its network, and we offer service throughout most of the province of Nova Scotia
and in Prince Edward Island. In
fact, we are in, as of now, all LIRs in Nova Scotia.
7392
So we would suggest that there is a lot of reasons why the province makes
sense, and we are able to supply a service across the
province.
7393
For those reasons, we feel that it is warranted in our particular
case.
7394
COMMISSIONER CRAM: You said
the same price throughout. I am
fascinated by the fact that you are actually in what is called a band F and a
band E in the high‑cost service areas and you charge the same
rate.
7395
It just doesn't sound feasible to me. Is it an actual money‑making proposition
for you?
7396
MR. BRAGG: Once the network
is in place, again because so much of our capital is incremental based on the
customer, it doesn't really matter where the customer is. If I can reach them with the wire, that
is a smaller element of the capital cost as opposed to the box they have to put
inside the house and then facilities back in the headend to pass the signal link
back to the switch. That is all
incremental based on each customer.
7397
We have fibred together all the systems. The relative network is there, so it
really doesn't matter where they are.
It is a different story if somebody said: why wouldn't you consider
building a new network in some of those less dense areas? That is where we have some
challenges.
7398
COMMISSIONER CRAM: A
different issue.
Yes.
7399
You said when you were first talking, Mr. Bragg, that you have cleaned
out ‑‑ you have the ILEC haters.
That is, you said 5 per cent to 6 per cent. Then you have the price conscious. How many per cent is that? What do you think?
7400
MR. BRAGG: Maybe another 5
per cent to 10 per cent. It can be
a variety in different markets. It
might be a little higher in our market.
We are so university dense.
We have a lot of students who I would categorize as price
sensitive.
7401
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Yes. I was listening to Mr. Engelhart and it
sounded like then you are into what he called the inert. Are you anticipating a plateau now? I know you are rolling out
so ‑‑
7402
MR. BRAGG: That is a good
question because that was one of the issues that I didn't like about an exchange
basis and why we continue to grow outside of our original footprint. I simplify it and say a little bit. Each incremental customer was harder to
get than the last.
7403
As you get up through the ‑‑ whether it is the early adopters or the ILEC
haters or the price sensitive ones.
And you get into the, as I say, my Aunt and Uncle who hardly know how to
run the VCR, it is hard to convince them about what does a cable company know
about delivering telephone service.
We try to simplify it and say it is exactly the same telephone service as
the other guy, but it becomes harder and harder to get each incremental
customer.
7404
That being said, it is often easier for me to gain my next thousand
customers in a brand new territory than it is on top of the previous 5,000 or
10,000 customers I might have in Halifax.
It is our incentive on why often we continue to grow out. There is a new batch of ILEC haters out
there. You know. You kind of get used to
that.
7405
COMMISSIONER CRAM: That is
why you are moving out.
7406
What was the impact on you of the Aliant strike? That was last year. Was it last year
or ‑‑
7407
MR. BRAGG: Good and
bad. I say it was good in the short
term because certainly they had a struggle to do their own work so during that
period of time I think it did push some more customers to us because they ended
up feeling some stretched out timeframes.
Although, we did some sampling.
It was amazing how fast they hook people up in Halifax compared to
Moncton where we weren't were. I
think they were rejockeying some folks around.
7408
That being said, in all fairness, they did a good job working with us on
trying to balance from a number portability standpoint how we were moving
customers back and forth. The
reality is we have built a pretty good operational relationship with
Aliant. We may fight like cats and
dogs from a regulatory or a marketing standpoint, but when it comes down to
getting through a lot of this stuff, I mean we have had five years, we have
learned. We have had to learn, they
have had to learn about how to get this stuff done, and we have done
that.
7409
During the strike we were pretty upfront. I mean we were pushing them to stay you
need to move more numbers over to us.
You need to be able to move more numbers over to us. They would push back and say, you know,
we have everybody we can doing this.
We worked through it, so I think we did end up with a bit of a blip, a
benefit of getting more high-speed Internet and more telephone customers than we
would in the short term.
7410
It had the opposite effect in the long term where we continue to update
and grow our markets or rebuild our systems in order to launch high‑speed
Internet or telephony, we are a little bit at their whim again, because whether
we are on Aliant poles or Nova Scotia power poles, Aliant controls the
communications space so we have to apply to them for make‑readys to get on to
get our systems updated and I think all their system engineers were doing
installs and service calls.
7411
So our projects in order for us to grow our footprint really slowed down,
so at the end of the day it was about a balance roughly: the customers we were getting in the
short term was affected our longer term ability to grow and grow into more
markets.
7412
COMMISSIONER CRAM: After was
there an increase in churn or did you notice it?
7413
MR. BRAGG: On a percentage
basis I don't recall there being a greater ‑‑ that they switched back. We dealt with some of this during a
hurricane. I don't know whether it
is Maritimers, but there weren't that many customers that we found went for
spite and just say, oh, you know, I'm mad at Aliant, they couldn't hook me up;
I'm going to go to Eastlink then go back to Aliant. I mean the customers in that area, they
don't seem to want to take advantage of somebody when they are down a little
bit.
7414
We found that during the hurricane.
We had some issues. Well,
you know, Aliant I think targeted a few of our customers, but it didn't work, so
we weren't going to target their customers unduly. I mean we inherited ‑‑ I mean they just
came to us because we were able to hook them up.
7415
COMMISSIONER CRAM: You then
talk about you don't want any transitional regime, which I am going to call sort
of like a half pregnant argument.
You either have competition or you haven't I guess. That is sort of your argument, isn't
it?
7416
MR. BRAGG:
Yes.
7417
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Then you
seem to say that you are already half pregnant because of ‑- not you, Mr.
Bragg ‑‑
7418
MR. BRAGG: I hope
not.
7419
COMMISSIONER CRAM: --
because of that one particular tariff that we approved, CRTC 2005‑25. Maybe you can explain that tariff to me
and provide us with I guess percentage increases in churn as a
consequence.
7420
MS MacDONALD: The specific
reference to that has actually been filed in a portion of our submission on
September 15, and particularly referred to at paragraphs 48 and 49. That particular information has been
filed on a confidential basis, but it does have an illustration of some of the
impact of that particular tariff.
Basically, it was a tariff that was approved for waiving service charges
I believe for reconnects or enhanced consumer access
service.
7421
In July, Aliant started a promotion whereby customers who switch back are
not charged installation fees and receive a $50 credit toward their long
distance bill. This was I
understand something that they had been offering in the market. That was particularly, that was in the
context of the value package.
7422
Around the same time Aliant had been offered ‑‑ had been approved for an
interim tariff for a promotion that would, in effect, weigh the service charges
for consumers switching into an enhanced consumer access bundle. It shows that there is a blip, a peak of
customer loss, shortly after that point in time. According to our marketing department
and the analysis that they had performed, which had been filed, it was indicated
that it seemed to be in and around the same time that this was approved, so
there was an expectation that there was a connection with that. That was what we had
referenced.
7423
The intention of showing that wasn't so much to say that we are in a
transitional regime, but it does certainly illustrate that Aliant does have the
flexibility to make applications to the CRTC and get approval on some of those
applications in order to provide competitive services and compete with Eastlink
even in a regulated environment.
7424
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Has the
steepness of the trend from July to August continued from August to
September?
7425
MS MacDONALD: I don't have the details of that information here
today. It is certainly
something ‑‑
7426
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Maybe if
you could provide it in confidence.
7427
MS MacDONALD:
Certainly.
7428
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Give us
the real number, the loss, if you give it confidence.
7429
Your point is that they have already got enough leverage right
now.
7430
MS MacDONALD: Yes. I think the main point being that our
real concern is about the kind of behaviour that Aliant could engage in on a
very very specific basis in smaller areas if forborne, that they aren't really
hurting ‑‑ and consumers aren't really hurting today as has been stated in their
presentation.
7431
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Cable
basic penetration in Nova Scotia and PEI, if you can give me that. You don't need high speed for your
service.
7432
MR. BRAGG: No. That's right.
7433
COMMISSIONER CRAM:
Okay. Would you have
any ‑‑
7434
MR. BRAGG: Sorry. You said "cable penetration". Cable penetration of total homes or
cable penetration of our homes past?
7435
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Of homes
past.
7436
MR. BRAGG:
Okay.
7437
MS MacDONALD: I believe we
have provided, in one of the interrogatory responses, information with regard to
homes past cable penetration.
Certainly, I can review that and I can provide anything that hasn't been
already provided to the Commission on that.
7438
COMMISSIONER CRAM: This
churn that you had, do you normally have an exit interview with people on
that?
7439
MR. BRAGG:
Usually.
7440
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Do you
find out why?
7441
MR. BRAGG: We
try.
7442
COMMISSIONER CRAM: So the
marketing department or somebody I guess in July and August would have been
asking people why they were moving on?
7443
MR. BRAGG: Yes. We do. I mean not so much the marketing
department, but that is a part of when somebody calls to disconnect. We try to capture why, whether it is a
pricing, is it an offer by somebody else, are you moving, what is the
issue. Because of the way our
footprint is, you know, in the Maritimes people move all over the place and
because we have so many students that move we really need to capture that to be
able to measure what is incumbent behaviour versus just sort of the natural
churn or student whim. I don't
know. We really do try to ask those
questions.
7444
It is easy to find out, well, I'm moving or what those issues are. Then the other issues, customers don't
often -- they don't often want to admit they were bought away by somebody
else. They will just say, oh, I
didn't like the service or whatever.
We try to sort through some of that to figure out ‑‑ I mean some are very
upfront because they want us to re‑offer something. There are quite a segment of customers
who ‑‑ they are the switchers. They
will go from one hundred dollar offer or one free this one free that and come
looking for something from us. They
are quite upfront.
7445
COMMISSIONER CRAM: When you
lose a customer, presumably you had them, a good lot of them, before as a TV and
an Internet customer.
7446
MR. BRAGG: The majority of
our telephone customers are cable customers although we don't ‑‑ I mean we will
hook anybody up if they want it and I am not sure ‑‑ I don't know if we have the
numbers. There is a percentage of 6
or 8 or something like that, a per cent of our telephone customers who are just
standalone telephone customers.
7447
COMMISSIONER CRAM: When you
lose them as a telephone customer, do you normally lose them as a TV or an
Internet ‑‑
7448
MR. BRAGG: More and
more. It has become a bundle versus
bundle marketplace. One of the
issues we have, it is a big issue now, is the fact that we don't have access to
a wireless product. I mean we have
an arrangement with Rogers where we resell a wireless I say to try to solve the
economic issue with the customer, but it is not the same as having sort of the
product branded the same, on one bill.
7449
We see real targeted activity on wireless, on the product that we don't
have, within the bundle of the ILEC to try to pull our customers away. But that is the effect because now we
all have, well, with the exception of I don't have a wireless product and maybe
the Rogers one is, but we all offer all the products now. So it is easy to lift the whole ‑‑
whether it is a $150 a month customer and move them based on an offer on one
product.
7450
MS MacDONALD: If I
may?
7451
Just going back to the question with regard to the bundles, we did file
that information confidentially in an Eastlink interrogatory to the Competition
Bureau, No. 28. So that
information, in terms of the breakout, has been provided.
7452
COMMISSIONER CRAM:
Yes.
7453
When they leave, what is your rough percentage of ILEC incentives going
back beyond ‑‑ knowing it is an unreliable number. I just wanted to get an
idea.
7454
MR. BRAGG: So I could tell
you anything then.
7455
I just want to get the question clear. Of the customers that we lose, how many
of them are due to an aggressive Aliant offer?
7456
COMMISSIONER CRAM:
Yes.
7457
MR. BRAGG: I am going to say
all the customers that are controllable churn, meaning that we could have done
something about versus somebody just moving, I mean usually it's an offer that
gets them, but the issue is we are always going to trade customers back and
forth for whatever reason, a different offer at a different point in
time.
7458
An offer across the market, again, I can deal with and we will have some
of that churn, and I will have a big offer or a special or telephone for six
months for $9, and they will have get wireless for $10 for a year in a
bundle. Those things, that is
normal business practice. We will
whittle each other down. Again, as
long as we are reasonably sustainable and they can't target at us we whittle
each other down to where there is a comfortable level where we are dealing with
closer to what our costs of operation are.
7459
It is the ones we don't really know about. It's just when customers just disappear,
we don't really know what sort of targeted activities ‑‑ suddenly we will see
little spikes. The ability to waive
an install fee, to me that is a targeted winback activity in a sense because it
is only those customers that would have gone to us that need the free install to
come back.
7460
I don't know. We can work on
trying to sort out and give you a better number of what we think are a result
of, I don't know what to call it, anti‑competitive behaviour or targeted
winbacks or whatever. I am not
really here complaining saying they are doing it a lot. That is the issue. I don't want them to do it. I don't want them to be allowed to do
it.
7461
COMMISSIONER CRAM:
Okay.
7462
Then I wanted to talk about the social obligations. Do you agree that you would have similar
social obligations that both the ILECs and CLECs should have the same
obligations?
7463
MR. BRAGG: In general, when
it comes to I guess most of the standard things that we have defined as social
obligations. We want to be a true
telecom service provider and offer everything. There is an issue around the publication
of the phone book itself where we would submit that that is still, given the
dominance that the incumbent has and the costs associated with being able to do
something like that at our size, something they should still undertake to
do.
7464
COMMISSIONER CRAM: Thank
you. I have no more
questions.
7465
It ran in my mind that you are Professor Bauer's empirical data in
Canada. Thank you very
much.
7466
MR. BRAGG: My numbers aren't
so secret after all then.
7467
THE CHAIRPERSON:
Counsel.
7468
MR. WILSON: Thank you, Mr.
Chairman. I just had two
questions.
7469
In talking with Commissioner Cram and in your presentation you have
highlighted a couple of points, the significance of churn and the cost of churn
to you. I am wondering if you could
file with the Commission in confidence, if you wish, your churn rates let's say
for the last five years in terms of the telephone business and also with respect
to the cable business.
7470
MR. BRAGG: We can do
that.
7471
MR. WILSON: Then just
picking up on what you talked about in terms of initially sort of targeting the
student market because of the nature of that customer base, do you have a sense
at sort of this point in time what percentage of your customer base is sort of
still composed of that sort of student type population?
7472
MR. BRAGG: I couldn't tell
you off the top of my head. We
could undertake to provide that because the majority of them do leave in the
spring. They all pop up. We get a big spike in September when
they all arrive and a decrease that ‑‑
---
Short pause / Courte pause
7473
MR. BRAGG: I'm not likely
going to tell you the exact number but I certainly can give you an indication of
what that fluctuating body is.
7474
MR. WILSON: Maybe your best
estimate I guess would be fair.
7475
MR. BRAGG: I can do
that.
7476
MR. WILSON: With respect to
that and to the other information that you had undertaken to provide to
Commissioner Cram, can you give us a sort of sense of what timeframe you would
be able to provide that to us in?
7477
MS MacDONALD: We can work
toward a one week timeframe, but certainly if we run into some difficulties we
can let you know.
7478
MR. WILSON: Just let us
know.
7479
Thank you very much.
7480
THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank
you. Those are our
questions.
7481
I think this brings the initial presentation phase of this consultation
to a close. We will resume at 9:30
a.m. tomorrow morning with the reply comments, shall we say, five-minute
comments in reverse order, at 9:30 tomorrow morning, 9 h 30 le
matin.
7482
MS MacDONALD: Thank
you.
7483
MR. BRAGG:
Thanks.
---
Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1800, to resume
on Friday, September 30,
2005 at 0930 / L'audience
est ajournée à 1800, pour
reprendre le vendredi
30 septembre 2005 à
0930
REPORTERS
____________________
____________________
Richard
Johansson
Kristin Johansson
____________________
____________________
Jean
Desaulniers
Fiona Potvin
____________________
____________________
Susan
Villeneuve
Sandy Kelloway