TELECOM Digest OnLine - Sorted: Re: Telecom Update #500, October 7, 2005

Re: Telecom Update #500, October 7, 2005

Joseph (
Sat, 08 Oct 2005 14:12:48 -0700

On Fri, 7 Oct 2005 11:34:19 -0700, Angus TeleManagement Group
<> wrote:

> for ways to speed up wireless number portability, the Canadian
> Wireless Telecommunications Association says that preparing alternate
> scenarios would be costly and time-consuming, and that the original
> plan to implement WNP nationally by September 2007 is "both aggressive
> and reasonable." (See Telecom Update #497)

> ** The major cellcos agree, saying that an earlier target
> date would create many technical problems and would be
> unfair to consumers.

To which I say "Ha!" The Cellcos are going to drag this out for as
long as possible. The US Cellcos also dragged their feet for WNP also
and had the deadline for implementing it postponed at least a couple
times. They made the same arguments that the Canadian cellcos did
that it will cost them lots of money and that it will be "unfair" to
consumers. Unfair to consumers is pure bullshit. If they bothered to
pay attention to the model that WNP has had in other countries such as
the UK and the US they'd see that the sky did not fall and that far
fewer people abandoned their present service than they had
anticipated. The only reason cellcos don't want WNP is because it
would force them to clean up their act and make their services better
than they are with decent customer service and decent quality of
service. Cellcos try lots of tricks to make things work for *them*
and not for their subscribers. It's only because subscribers are
locked into contracts for as long as two years that many do not leave
their present carrier since leaving before the end of the contract
will make them pay early termination fees of as much as $200. Also
many do not leave since they are business people and have their
clientele know them by their present mobile number. It'd be a real
PITA for them to have to notify all that they've changed mobile
companies and have a new number. No, WNP will help subscribers force
the cellcos to clean up their act. Of course they would prefer that
it go away.

And from the same issue #500, Angus TeleManagement Group <jriddell@> wrote:

> ROGERS SIGNS 18,000 PHONE SUBSCRIBERS: Rogers Communications says its
> cable-based local phone service, launched on July 1, now has more than
> 18,000 subscribers. (See Telecom Update #488)

And this is one of the reasons Rogers *killed* the CityFido programme
since it would canibalize their VoIP business.

Post Followup Article Use your browser's quoting feature to quote article into reply
Go to Next message: Monty Solomon: "Court Ruling in BlackBerry Case Puts Service to U.S. Users at Risk"
Go to Previous message: BrianEWilliams: "Re: Finally Cutting the POTS Cord"
May be in reply to: Angus TeleManagement Group: "Telecom Update #500, October 7, 2005"
TELECOM Digest: Home Page