Competition Bureau doubles down on wireless carrier info requests

The Competition Bureau is mostly standing firm on its request to the CRTC to compel wireless carriers to turn over detailed, confidential information about their wireless operations, though the bureau said Friday it is willing to compromise on some aspects of the original request. The letter from competition commissioner Matthew Boswell said the bureau would be willing to agree to shorten the timeline of the data sought, to a potential exemption for smaller providers, and to commission a different company to carry out its economic analysis. The initial request, made as part of the CRTC’s mobile wireless framework review, drew swift opposition from telecoms, with Rogers Communications Inc. accusing the bureau of attempting to “hijack” that proceeding and BCE Inc. saying it would be an unreasonable burden on carriers. In turn, the CRTC wrote back to the bureau asking it to either narrow down the information it’s seeking or justify its original request. That original list of questions includes information on revenues, average revenue per user, “new subscriber incentives and customer acquisition costs; average usage of data, minutes, and text; number of subscribers; gross subscriber additions; and net subscriber additions,” broken down into specific categories, such as by various brands, pre- and post-paid, by various plans and by province and territory. The bureau also asked for details on customers who switch services to and from the company, wholesale roaming agreements, data on roaming and wholesale fees paid and roaming and wholesale revenue earned, market share of various companies, and network capacity, usage and quality of service on the network, among other information. The bureau said in its reply the decade-long time period in its original request was chosen so that it could analyze the impact of Quebecor Inc.’s entry into Canada’s wireless market in 2008. But it said it was willing to reduce that time period to 2016 to the present time “should the CRTC find that the probative value of this study is outweighed by the burden” to wireless carriers. The competition commissioner said in the letter that he acknowledges that carriers will incur costs in responding. “However, the importance of this Proceeding, its potential impact on the industry and Canadians, and the probative value of the information sought, outweigh the costs. For this reason, the Commissioner is of the view that the Information Request should be granted as originally sought,” the letter said. Boswell also said that the original request was tailored to take into account what information and databases carriers already maintain. “For clarity, the Commissioner is not seeking information that would need to create but that which is already kept or produced in the ordinary course of business,” the letter said. Still, that burden may be too big for small carriers, the bureau acknowledged, saying that an exception may be appropriate for some smaller carriers, who would only be required to provide some of the information requested. The letter also took issue with Rogers’ calling the info request a “fishing expedition,” saying that the competition commissioner “has been open and transparent regarding the reasons for his request and his intended use of the requested data.” Boswell also took on Bell’s arguments that the consulting group the bureau hired to do the economic analysis, the Brattle Group, has a conflict of interest because it was previously retained by Bell during its acquisition of Manitoba Telecom Services Inc. Bell indicated it would take the matter to court if needed. But the bureau argued that Bell’s interpretation of the company’s agreement with the Brattle Group was wrong. “The agreement between Bell and the Brattle Group only prevented the Brattle Group from working for another client who was adverse in interest for the specific matter of the Bell/MTS transaction,” Boswell said. “That matter resulted in a consent agreement and the transaction closed on 17 March 2017. Therefore, the Brattle Group can be retained in the Proceeding by a party that is potentially adverse to Bell or otherwise.” However, the bureau said in order to “avoid any potential procedural delays or complications that might arise from claims in the Bell Letter, the Commissioner is prepared to move forward with a different economic expert, even though it would pose a significant disruption to the Commissioner in the Proceeding.” — With reporting by Anja Karadeglija at akarad@thewirereport.ca and editing by Ahmad Hathout at ahathout@thewirereport.ca

Competition Bureau doubles down on wireless carrier info requests

News | April 5, 2019

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

Competition Bureau doubles down on wireless carrier info requests

News | April 5, 2019

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

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Related Stories

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

CRTC finalizes terms of Uvagut TV distribution

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

CRTC announces changes to Broadband Fund

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us