The “relief” proposed by Rogers-Shaw is not sufficient to overcome competitive harm: Competition Bureau submission

Article content

In a filing published editorial on Tuesday, the Competition Bureau has proposed a “bailout” proposed by Rogers Communications Inc. to alleviate concerns about reduced wireless competition due to its $ 26 billion acquisition plan for communications rival Shaw Communications Inc. “Is not effective.

Article content

“Rogers and Shaw have (edited) with parties interested in the acquisition of Shaw’s Freedom Mobile wireless business and argued that such a sale would eliminate the significant reduction or prevention of competition resulting from the proposed transaction. “I did,” said the submission to the competition court. “But the proposed sale is not an effective remedy for the competitive harm caused by the proposed transaction and may continue to occur.”

The Competition Bureau said on Monday that it is calling for a “perfect block” of the show and Rogers combination, especially due to concerns about intensifying consumer competition and rising prices in wireless communications. Both sides must now discuss their proceedings in front of the court unless they can reach an appropriate arrangement to satisfy the Competition Bureau. This process can take several months.

Article content

Rogers has pledged to sell Show’s entire wireless business and assets after the Competition Commission has informed Rogers and Shaw last Friday that they will file an application against the merger.

Details of the remedy personally proposed in March to alleviate concerns about wireless competition, and the names of the parties that were part of the remedy, were blacked out in publicly available documents. .. However, National Bank communications analyst Adam Shine said in a report on Sunday that Freedom Mobile’s assets had 12 bidders. Communications Inc., and Aquilini Investment Group.

Article content

Xplornet is owned by the private equity firm Stonepeak Infrastructure Partners, and the Aquilini family owns Vancouver Canucks among their various holdings.

Rogers has not commented on the bidder’s report and has not published the terms of such an arrangement.

Analysts suggest that the issue may not be the buyer, but the terms of the arrangement. The Competition Bureau continues to provide Rogers, a network or other backbone service to new owners of Freedom Mobile assets, Rogers, BCE Inc.’s BellCanada, and Telus Corp. — About Canadian subscribers. We serve 87%.

In the discussions submitted to the court, the Competition Bureau said that eliminating Shaw, which entered the wireless market in 2016, as a competitor was made by introducing more competition into the centralized wireless services market. He claims to be threatening to cancel “progress.”

Article content

In a memo to customers over the weekend, National Bank Shine said that the structure or terms of the bailout Rogers proposed to alleviate competitive concerns could be a problem for authorities, “more complete. The more open auction process has captured more stakeholders and proved to be more plausible to regulators. “

Federal and regulatory agencies have been pushing for years to establish a fourth national wireless communication player to stimulate competition. In a filing released Tuesday, the Competition Commission said that incumbent Rogers, Bell and Tellus “dominated” Canada’s wireless services market and, until recently, owned more than 90% of the revenue of such services in the country. Said he was.

Article content

“Continuous regulatory intervention since 2008 to stimulate competition through measures such as licensing new spectrum acquisitions … will ultimately benefit Canadians as a result of entry and expansion by Shaw Communications Inc. Filing said, the road to the mobile business for cable and wired operators was brought through the 2016 acquisition.

“Since leveraging wired infrastructure to reduce costs and accelerate service deployment, Shaw has made significant network investments, achieved significant growth for wireless subscribers and played a role in competitive turmoil. “I’m here,” the commissioner said in the filing, adding that Shaw pushed it down. We have set prices to make wireless data more accessible to consumers in key markets operating Ontario, British Columbia and Alberta.

The filing states that Rogers and Shaw are the closest competitors to each other, and that they are in fierce competition with each other, each gaining or losing more customers than any other wireless operator.

“Shaw has entered a market that counters intensifying competition, which benefits Canadian consumers with the highest prices for wireless services and the lowest consumption of wireless data in developed countries.” Filing said.