Share:

Wind Mobile, Mobilicity, Public Mobile Quit Lobby Group Over ‘Big 3’ Carrier Bias

Share:

 

Looks like our newer wireless entrants aren’t happy with the Canadian Wireless Telecommunications Association (CWTA), as Wind Mobile, Mobilicity and Public Mobile have withdrawn from the wireless lobby group, over claims the latter has become the “voice of Big Three telcos at expense of consumers and new entrant mobile service providers.”

In a joint statement released today, all three carriers vented their frustration with the CWTA, citing ongoing frustration with the latter’s consistent bias towards Rogers, TELUS and Bell on a wide range of issues. Essentially, Wind Mobile, Mobilicity and Public Mobile feel the CWTA cannot and does not speak on behalf of the entire mobile wireless sector:

“When we were first approached by the CWTA, we were promised clear and fair representation on issues of true industry alignment,” said Simon Lockie, Chief Regulatory Officer for WIND Mobile. “But despite making our objections and concerns abundantly clear on numerous occasions, the CWTA has repeatedly failed to honour this promise, leaving us no alternative but to withdraw.”

“It has been evident for quite some time that, rather than being a true industry association which represents the views of all players regardless of size, the CWTA has instead largely been an advocate for Rogers, TELUS and Bell, and often directly contrary to the interests of new entrant wireless carriers,” said Bob Boron, General Counsel and Senior Vice-President, Legal & Regulatory Affairs for Public Mobile.

“We have spent the better part of three years repeatedly voicing our opposition to the CWTA on a wide range of matters to the point of issuing a press release in January 2011 that publically expressed our dissent on the CWTA’s position on wireless consumer protection,” said Gary Wong, Director of Legal Affairs for Mobilicity. “There seems to be a blatant disregard of the new entrants in favour of acting in the best interests of the Big Three carriers and it is unacceptable.”

In response, Marc Choma, spokesman for the CWTA said “CWTA has always and will continue to work on behalf of all of its members,” rejecting the allegations it favoured the incumbents:

“While any industry association that represents a large and diverse membership in an intensely competitive sector will have some disagreements amongst it members on certain issues, CWTA is a catalyst for numerous initiatives that bring many benefits to Canadians.”

The CWTA said last month the Canadian wireless industry is more competitive than we believe it to be, in response to claims by critics it is “woefully uncompetitive”.

Do you think the CWTA has fairly represented all carriers in Canada, or is there a bias towards the ‘Big 3’?

Share:

  • K3

    trying to figure why the letters B and S where left off of CWTA- you can safely bet that CWTABS???? does receive a “little on the side” to help “motivate” their own day to day operations.

  • Kostas Kritsilas

    CWTA is a non-entity. They do not do anything of significance, and as to ” bring many benefits to Canadians.”, I would like to see some real evidence of that. The CWTA, if it were even the slightest bit effective (which is questionable in my mind) would be advocating the carrier’s interests, not the general public. The statement “The CWTA said last month the Canadian wireless industry is more competitive than we believe it to be, in response to claims by critics it is “woefully uncompetitive” clearly shows whose interests the CWTA is promoting, and it is definitely not the interests of Canadians. The Canadian cellular industry is clearly a tri-opoly, and firmly intends to eliminate any other potential competitors (see Roger’s buy out of Shaw’s 1700 MHz spectrum). If the CWTA had the slightest regard for Canadians, their position on wireless conumer protection would have been much different.

  • ward09

    The big fish always want to eat the little fish. Play with them first, use them as they see fit… then eat them! Good move by the Little 3.

  • pure4

    I think our only hope is the spectrum auction that hopefully will attract new foreign players to the market. It is disgusting what has been going in in this country regarding the monopoly the big 3 have been holding. Oligopoly/monopoly call it what you want they still have control and are charging customers up the ass.

  • Groagun

    We, I say WE again, as voters need to make this a priority in the next election. I just got off the phone with Fido, a company I left and who are still trying to charge me, and to say the conversation was frustrating and adversarial would be an understatement.

    Adversarial is the key word because that is what the Canadian wireless industry is! The big 3 have no intent to change and or imputes to do so. At all costs they will fight to protect this obscenely profitable little venture they control. I like profit and a free market but don’t fool yourself, this is not what we have here in Canada.

    What is the value in protecting a company that truthfully in the long run has hurt and gouged us? The Federal Gov and CRTC seem so intent on protecting “ROBELUS” that they are hurting us instead. The CRTC is merely a force by which the big 3 shape policy.

    I could not care if any or all of them go out of business after real competitors enter our market. If you are simply not good enough to compete then you shouldn’t be in business.

    I’m so tired of fighting with and paying outrageous fees to the big 3 in this country, we must do something, NOW!

  • 1His_Nibs1

    “The CWTA said last month the Canadian wireless industry is more competitive than we believe it to be, in response to claims by critics it is “woefully uncompetitive”. Outlandish…..I commented on the previous article on the CWTA and I think we all know who owns the leash (ROBELUS) that controls the dog (CWTA)!

Deals