Bell Purchase of MTS

[The Unknown Poster]

The investment is misleading since it implies MTS would not have made infrastructure investments but my understanding is the difference is a lot closer than they make it seem.

Rumor has it, the clerks union requested to negotiate their contract early (presumably to get the same deal the manager's union just got) and the company declined. Take with a grain of salt.

[bomberjet]

Originally Posted by CoryB

Competition Bureau has officially opened public comment on the BCE purchase of MTS.

http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/e...eng/04077.html

If you go to this link you can submit your views. Not sure how effective it will be. But if mass public opinion is shown, maybe that can sway the decision.

[CoryB]

^^ My understanding is the comments will all be reviewed but do not need to be done in formal, professional submission style. The more public concern that is raised the more the Competition Bureau will further look into the issue. So if they had no comments on it they would just do their own internal analysis however external comments could direct or expand their areas of examination.

Industry Canada will be much more difficult to appeal to as it is hip deep in telecom policy specific to wireless industry.

The CRTC, well lets just say good luck getting your concern heard there. The deck is definitely stacked in favour of the telecom industry.

[Cyro]

Business
Fundamental risk for SaskTel after Bell deal to buy MTS: report
By: Jennifer Graham, The Canadian Press

REGINA - A report says the takeover of Manitoba Telecom Services by Bell poses serious risks to Saskatchewan's provincially owned telecommunications company..........


The report says there's also a risk that establishing Winnipeg as a western headquarters for Bell could "lead to an erosion of SaskTel's share of the Saskatchewan business market."

"The big question will be with Bell on our border, what will Bell do in Saskatchewan? How hard would they come after our business customers? How hard will they come after our consumers?" said SaskTel president and CEO Ron Styles.

Styles said the consequence could be "more pressure on the bottom line." A hit to SaskTel's net income could reduce the amount of dividends the corporation returns to provincial coffers.

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/bus...383658571.html

[CoryB]

Bell had an interesting CRTC ruling applied against it -- they were required to provide wholesale access to all wired broadband networks they operate, including their fiber networks. The industry analysts I follow said that the ruling essentially formed a policy precedent meaning Bell could use that same ruling to purchase wholesale broadband access from SaskTel to sell to businesses/customers.

The other interesting piece that is happening in CRTC land is a questionnaire was sent to the three large wireless companies to gather information. Some of the information on that I have seen seems to be looking into mandating wholesale access on the wireless side.

The three reviews on the BCE purchase of MTS will likely form significant precedent going forward for Canada's wireless service industry.

[bomberjet]

Good. Hopefully some of those smaller companies can bring Canada into the new millennium. In terms of competition.

[CoryB]

All signs are pointing to something is going to happen on the wireless side of the BCE/MTS deal before it is approved. What form that takes though is very unclear currently. The rest of the deal though seems likely to proceed without conditions other than clarifying the operational terms that apply to Bell elsewhere also apply to the former MTS when the deal closes.

[h0twired]

It would be nice if Shaw stepped on the gas pedal to expand the Wind Network and have a new 4th wireless provider.

[Chrisforpm]

Does anyone know when the MTS/Rogers agreement ends? I'm wondering if a scenario develops wherein Rogers loses a large part of its service when the agreement ends. Service would be useable in the cities but outside of that, they'd have to fall back on extended coverage.

If that happens, I could see Rogers offering many incentives to stop the bleeding of its customers to Telus and Bell. This might actually keep prices around where they are.

[bomberjet]

Originally Posted by Chrisforpm

Does anyone know when the MTS/Rogers agreement ends? I'm wondering if a scenario develops wherein Rogers loses a large part of its service when the agreement ends. Service would be useable in the cities but outside of that, they'd have to fall back on extended coverage.

If that happens, I could see Rogers offering many incentives to stop the bleeding of its customers to Telus and Bell. This might actually keep prices around where they are.

This is what I'm wondering. If Rogers goes in the tank, I'll have to jump over to whatever MTS wireless becomes.

[CoryB]

Originally Posted by h0twired

It would be nice if Shaw stepped on the gas pedal to expand the Wind Network and have a new 4th wireless provider.

The challenge is the day before Wind Mobile was sold to Shaw they divested all their wireless spectrum in Manitoba to MTS. Even if Shaw fully built out their Wind Mobile service tomorrow they would still not offer service in Manitoba!

In terms of the Rogers and MTS deal the outlook is very unclear currently. The current deal would live past every two year contract that is currently in market and any that are signed before the deal closes. The challenge is partnership agreements between two businesses usually have a prenuptial clause that covers how either side can unwind the partnership early. Due to the confidential nature of these type of business agreements none of the terms are public.

[Chrisforpm]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

This is what I'm wondering. If Rogers goes in the tank, I'll have to jump over to whatever MTS wireless becomes.

I'm debating jumping from Rogers to Telus so I can get in early on the cheaper plans we have here. I'll be good for at least 2 years, maybe more if I don't do a hardware upgrade and keep a grandfathered plan. I'd just have to put up with a lacklustre network until Bell and Telus have access to the MTS network.

[CoryB]

^^ I would strongly suggest waiting on moving to Telus. It is unclear if Telus will gain access to the MTS network under the Bell deal. If you want Bell offers nearly identical plans in Manitoba currently...

[jmt18325]

Didn't MTS and Rogers each pay for a portion of the new tower network?

[Nathan]

Originally Posted by CoryB

^^ I would strongly suggest waiting on moving to Telus. It is unclear if Telus will gain access to the MTS network under the Bell deal. If you want Bell offers nearly identical plans in Manitoba currently...

Telus and Bell co-operatively built out their network across the country, so it would be interesting if Bell blocks Telus out in Manitoba... there could even be covenants in their agreement to prevent such a situation?

IIRC, the only place Bell and Telus didn't partner to build a network is Saskatchewan, where it just didn't make sense from a business perspective... here they decided to ink an agreement to allow Sasktel customers to roam on the Bell/Telus network as long as Bell and Telus could themselves use the Sasktel network.

Front the sounds of the above comments, in Manitoba MTS and Rogers partnered for one network and Bell/Telus partnered for another, which isn't as good as the MTS/Rogers network?


It's interesting how convoluted the wireless market is in Canada considering there are so few players.

[CoryB]

I do not have any inside knowledge but my impression was that MTS essentially handed their network over to Rogers with Rogers looking after two rounds of major upgrades.

As for the Telus/Bell network it is almost exclusive the Telus network. It wasn't until about 2012 that Bell even started offering service in Manitoba other than a limited earlier presence for national business accounts.

The challenge with Telus gaining access to the MTS wireless network is the Rogers agreement could have an exclusivity clause that roughly says MTS has rights to the network for its customers. In the sale those rights move to the new company but without permission from Rogers, MTS or a new company, cannot otherwise rights on the network for a third party. It is likely a mutual clause so Rogers can't go and add anyone either without consent. The wind down of the partnership would also be written out in fine detail in the contract.

Granted I could be wrong but I think in the next three years you are much more likely to see Wind Mobile offering service in Manitoba than you are to see Telus having the same access as Rogers to the MTS wireless network.

[The Unknown Poster]

If I recall, MTS gave Rogers' access to their network (so Rogers could offer service all over the province) in exchange for Rogers' LTE towers or something to that effect. If they unwind the deal (which I believe the MTS CEO said was the plan), it would also degrade MTS' wireless service, no? Unless Bell immediately swoops in and builds towers to replace whatever Rogers' had given MTS.

Is there any chance the government approved with the condition that rather than Telus getting a percentage, that SHAW does? Would SHAW want 1/3 of MTSs business? I would think that would be attractive to them...

[bomberjet]

Don't you remember Pallister's big presser about upgrading service along Hwy 75?! Oh how he trumpeted about better service. Don't be against the deal he said, or you're against better service. lol..

We must rely on our amateur leader's advice, shouldn't we? You better save your pennies too because Pallister doesn't like CPP either. I'm a little dissapointed so far in old Pally. But I'll give him a shot. He needs to realize this isn't private insurance anymore. Back to politics.

Sorry for my political rant.

[Cyro]

Stick with MTS and look for the deals to come with this acquisition coming down the pipes. They don't want to lose customers, with so many questions and possible price increases in the future. Just a thought..

[CoryB]

Originally Posted by The Unknown Poster

Is there any chance the government approved with the condition that rather than Telus getting a percentage, that SHAW does? Would SHAW want 1/3 of MTSs business? I would think that would be attractive to them...

The Competition Bureau, aka the agency which would require divestment, would simply saw that the 1/3 stake of MTS wireless business needs to be divested to a company other than Rogers or Telus. This would leave it open to 1/3 of MTS remaining as a much smaller independent company, Shaw/Wind Mobile picking them up or someone else like SaskTel perhaps grabbing them.

My thinking is something along these lines is the likely outcome of the review.

--

In terms of future wireless deals, it is possible Rogers will get aggressive in advance of the MTS deal closing and offer low rates to get people with MTS wanting to switch and not go to Bell to sign up. Right now everyone is heavily sitting on the sidelines waiting for something to happen out of the three reviews of the deal.