http://www.markevanstech.com/2005/06/01/telus-ceo-slams-crtc-over-voip/ Insight and Analysis from North of the Border Mon, 01 Dec 2008 17:32:44 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1 http://www.markevanstech.com/2005/06/01/telus-ceo-slams-crtc-over-voip/#comment-304 Anonymous Fri, 05 Aug 2005 10:16:11 +0000 http://markevanstech.com/?p=614#comment-304 Very useful comments - good to read <a href="" title="" rel="nofollow"></a> Very useful comments - good to read

]]> http://www.markevanstech.com/2005/06/01/telus-ceo-slams-crtc-over-voip/#comment-303 Anonymous Thu, 02 Jun 2005 00:26:50 +0000 http://markevanstech.com/?p=614#comment-303 This is a bit unclear. He's saying that the cablecos don't need to be protected from the ILECs. Now, that could mean one of two things -- regulate the prices charged by neither, or by both. If neither, then he's being disingenuous. If the cablecos don't need to be protect by the ILECs, that's hardly an argument to regulate noone's price at all. Rather, it's just another shot at what the Large ILECs have been arguing (and going over the CRTC's and even Minister's head all the way to the PMO to aruge, and paying large lobby dollars to back: what's the story behind the Coalition for Competitive Telecommunications, and why are their regulatory positions identical to Bell's?). The ILEC line being -- as monopolists are wont to argue -- that nobody should have their prices regulated. Presumably because everyone knows how to play nice. The more logical conclusion one would draw from his argument is that both should be price-regulated. Assuming we want other players in the market, that is; maybe we don't. This is a bit unclear. He's saying that the cablecos don't need to be protected from the ILECs.
Now, that could mean one of two things — regulate the prices charged by neither, or by both.
If neither, then he's being disingenuous. If the cablecos don't need to be protect by the ILECs, that's hardly an argument to regulate noone's price at all. Rather, it's just another shot at what the Large ILECs have been arguing (and going over the CRTC's and even Minister's head all the way to the PMO to aruge, and paying large lobby dollars to back: what's the story behind the Coalition for Competitive Telecommunications, and why are their regulatory positions identical to Bell's?). The ILEC line being — as monopolists are wont to argue — that nobody should have their prices regulated. Presumably because everyone knows how to play nice.
The more logical conclusion one would draw from his argument is that both should be price-regulated. Assuming we want other players in the market, that is; maybe we don't.

]]>