Yes, and the CRTC ruled this year to not force the carriers to take on MNVO's, instead forcing them to permit roaming from the smaller carriers, in particular in Northern Canada on the major networks - so for example, if you have service with ICE wireless in the North Western Territories, you can roam on the major networks in Canada.
There is currently a ruling being decided with ICE and Rogers in that ICE was providing MNVO services to Sugar Mobile which was providing through ICE roaming with Sugar Mobile. Confused yet - yes it is a bit confusing - Rogers argued that since Sugar Mobile users would probably never access the ICE network, ICE and Sugar Mobile were in violation with the ICE Rogers agreement to permit roaming of small carriers on the bigger carriers, which had already been decided by the CRTC, but the agreement to provide access to Sugar Mobile remains in place as of June, but only until a final decision by CRTC is made, - so it means that this test of the "boundaries" is still open for change.
It is similiar to the attempt by Vmedia to provide over the air services over their media network using Roku and not their Internet, so due to Bell not agreeing to licence access to CTV and CTV2, they don't provide those two on Vmedia's cheapest solution as it includes no Internet requirement. This one is being challenged too and we don't know how that will fall out.
And today, the new CRTC director announced that landline to broadband will now be considered to be vital services, and they are putting money in to expand services to rural areas, but they haven't decided what the role of stakeholders (i.e., companies and users) will be yet.
So, we can see that the CRTC is continuing to change up the playing field for all services, but for now, we have what we have, companies will keep trying to push the boundaries of existing and defining new boundaries under new regulations, and we can pretty sure that the big companies will challenge the CRTC on this new initiative and try to get it reworked as they have with the ICE services, the definition of cancellation periods, and so many other things they have changed for the benefit of users over the last number of years. It is a slow process. It is a balancing act for the CRTC and parliament because although the government is going to invest partially into this initiative, they also recognize that they need providers to also expand and provide reasonable pricing, and that remains undefined for now. They acknowledge that they have to balance the reality that large carriers have invested heavily in infrastucture, while trying to provide a competetive market. There in lies the current issue to be decided with Sugar Mobile and ICE. If Sugar Mobile spends money on infrastrure, they could take advantage of the CRTC ruling with no challenges, but it doesn't look like the government and CRTC is prepared to open the market for MNVO's wider at this point in time.
For me, all I know is that I have already been priced out of the marketed solutions of the major companies, so I hang onto my old plans as long as I can, and downsize my usage patterns or look to cheaper alternatives. From what I read on these forums regularly, there is a large group of people who are interested in the high cost plans and fancy phones and value added features along with bundling with contracts, as is clearly stated in the financial quarterly statements. There does seem to be a not so silent minority, which may bigger than we think, who are not willing to pay high prices and keep bringing up questions about costs and alternatives.
I see this as the core of this current thread - some people want to have limited services at lower costs.
One final note on today's announcement - which basically says they want to allow competition to influence services and pricing and plans, but if it doesn't, they are willing to force it through regulation. This is why we have to constantly make our views of what we want heard, and to be willing to also walk with our wallets if necessary.
"The commission's approach to affordability has always been through market forces — to make sure we have enough competitors, we have informed consumers that are working in a dynamic marketplace," Blais said.
"If that step does not work, then we'll intervene with a regulatory process."
Just a little more to the point that was raised about regulation and its impacts on pricing and services.
If I recall correctly, Petro Canada is Rogers too.
LOL ... and there you go .
Hhmmm ...same carrier ... just piggybackers that are cheaper than the carrier ... maybe a Rogers explanation is warranted after all .
And doesn't Telus do $.15 cents a minute on this side of the pond ?
Grand fathered plans you can keep as long as you don't upgrade and just buy used upgrades Rogers doesn't make more money because you don't give them more revenue per user but meh that's what you want anyways
Or the "computer glitches" get you . LOL ... my case.
We're sorry but no we can't get that plan back .... can we offer you this ...but it will cost a little more.
Yes,re the previous post, I see Bruce made a very informative post as usual but I didn't see it till after I posted and too lazy to go back and revamp .
I still get a few who are surprised that I have the old rate, but they consistently try to convince me why I would want to go to one of the new plans.
My answer has always been, take a look at my usage between my wife and me and try to convince me why I would take on any new plan and yes I know my phone is old and I am eligible for an upgrade - My answer to that one is I buy my phones outrright - used, on sale, refurbished (go to Staples, you will find a large range).
The bottom line for me is I am a low end user of minutes and text, don't use data (if I really need it and can't get to a WIFI location I have done a daily pass - think they are still available - I have only done it once, and my daughter did it twice when she moved to the US before she got her US plan.)
So, as Rogers has slowly crept the price up, I like many others have shopped around, and currently stay only because I have a bundle offer (very old one) that discounts all of my services.
And back to the simple explanation question - no simple answer - it is their business plan to move us to Share Everything plans, Roam Everywhere, higher end plans which don't really save you money on new phones until you move past the first 2 year contract, or add multiple phone devices. And our current legilative and regulatory framework really doesn't support competition, although the CRTC does try.
Happy shopping all and enough said on that one, but it keeps coming up, because there are still some of us who want to keep our costs down.