Look at high cost of à la carte channels, PIAC tells CRTC

GATINEAU, Que. — There are still some problems with the implementation of the CRTC’s skinny basic and pick-and-pay rules, consumer groups told the regulator during the second day of a licence hearing Tuesday. Alysia Lau, counsel for the Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC) and the Consumers’ Association of Canada (CAC), said the groups were “disappointed to find that some continue to deny bundling discounts to basic service subscribers.” She also flagged the pricing of some individual channels. “Some appear to be unreasonably expensive — for instance, $7 per month for one channel, whereas a theme package of eight services, which includes that channel, is priced at $10 per month.” Lau added that “we are concerned that the prices of some individual services do effectively deter consumers from subscribing to à la carte services. It would just make no sense. Excessively high prices affect not only consumer choice but also the affordability of television service.” She noted the denial of bundling discounts came up the last time the CRTC looked at this issue, and the CRTC didn’t agree that not including the skinny basic in bundles amounted to an undue disadvantage, as PIAC had argued, though it said in its best practices that they should be eligible for discounts. However, during his questioning of the group, new chairman Ian Scott — presiding over his first hearing since his appointment to the job — said that “when you bundle a number of services, obviously, combining several services, the rate may be different. I’m not sure that’s very different than a lot of other retail situations,” and asked the group to elaborate their concerns around the pricing issues. Lau responded that the group, in its pricing research, found “there were some services which we thought were unreasonably expensive...to the extent that they would effectively deter customers from opting for these options in the first place. So we were concerned because if the price of individual programming services is set too high, then that hinders the achievement of objectives of the consumer choice policy, which the commission had established in the first place.” However, most of Tuesday’s portion of the licence renewal hearing was focused on other issues, including the new set-top box audience measurement system currently under development by an industry working group. Lau also expressed some concerns regarding privacy issues around the system, noting “there has been no statement in our view at all regarding how BDU customer privacy will be protected.” Earlier in the day, BCE Inc.’s vice-president of regulatory affairs, content and distribution Kevin Goldstein was asked to weigh in on the potential business case for such a system, after companies told the panel on Monday that would be a necessary condition to bring such a system to fruition. “I think there is a value in taking the data and making the audience measurement system as good as we can,” he responded. “We’re always hoping to have better data, a better thing to sell to advertisers, especially in today’s challenging advertising market, to show the value of television.” Telus Corp. vice-president of broadcast policy and regulatory affairs Ann Mainville-Neeson, the outgoing chairwoman of the working group, said the group “started off very fast out of the gate,” but then development stalled because the group went back to the drawing board and reconsidered aspects of the system, including partnering with audience measurement organization Numeris, whom it ultimately went back to. She also noted one of the benefits of the new system would be to be able to include data on smaller, niche channels that currently don’t have reliable ratings. During its appearance, Telus also asked for changes in how it is licenced. It asked that it surrender its licences in favour of serving area-specific ones that differentiate between areas with more and less than 20,000 subscribers, which fall under different regulatory rules. It noted that regional rival Shaw Communications Inc. has been able to revoke some of its licences in areas with fewer than 20,000 subscribers and operate on an exempt basis, and Telus asked for its licences to be treated the same way. Mainville-Neeson said the company “sees no public policy rationale for treating terrestrial competitors differently.” She added, in reference to Shaw, whose cable business preceded Telus’ more recent IPTV offering that “surely if there is to be any regulatory asymmetry, shouldn’t it be tilted toward greater regulation of the incumbent service provider? The new entrant that has brought the first real competition to the market should not bear a greater regulatory burden than any other current provider in the areas in question.” — With reporting by Anja Karadeglija at akarad@thewirereport.ca and editing by Ahmad Hathout at ahathout@thewirereport.ca

Look at high cost of à la carte channels, PIAC tells CRTC

Broadcast | October 17, 2017

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us

Look at high cost of à la carte channels, PIAC tells CRTC

Broadcast | October 17, 2017

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Related Stories

Telecoms testing their networks for the future of quantum connectivity

Telus’ arguments for incumbent access to wholesale regime not supported by competitors

Bell won’t participate in subsidized broadband projects if wholesale access for Big Three continues, signs agreement with CNOC

Rogers’ purchase of Bell’s MLSE stake not being challenged by Competition Bureau ‘at this time’

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us