The results of the Rogers/Shaw merger continue to pour in after a lawsuit was filed by the Competition Bureau against the corporate giant.
When the $26 billion Rogers/Shaw merger deal was approved, the promises were made that it would lead to a better customer experience, lower prices, more market competition, and even more jobs.
Obviously, if you believed any of those hilarious promises, I have a bridge to sell you. Yet the Canadian government went ahead with approving the deal, saying, no really, all of those things will happen and the ISP/carrier industry will practically be a magical wonderland filled with pixie dust and unicorns. Well, right on cue, Rogers quickly got to work cutting funding for news operations, slashing jobs, shutting down radio operations, jacking up rates for customers, slashing even more jobs, and, of course, ripping off consumers using price gouging tactics. On top of it all, Rogers also went running back to government demanding bailout money for good measure. It’s a series of events that really could end with the line, “the Aristocrats!”
Of course, the market abuse is by no means ending there. There are other ways Rogers is using their monopolistic market powers to further there abuses like the two other monopolistic players in the sector. This has to do with the most notorious word in the industry: unlimited.
This is a term in the industry I am all too familiar with. In fact, many years ago while attending university, I remember Rogers setting up a table in a high traffic student area selling “unlimited” plans. Naturally, there was a very large crowd that was growing because it was at the beginning of the school year and some students were still trying to set up their cell phone and internet. The sign they used in massive letters included “unlimited plans”. When I saw this, I knew the scoop, but also knew that many consumers might not. So, I got a devious idea and got in line fully knowing I had no interest in signing up.
When I made it to the front of the line, I asked the companies representative what they mean by “unlimited”. I said, “does this mean I can download anything I like and not have to worry about extra charges for the bandwidth I use?” The representative briefly flashed a deer in headlights look before admitting, “Uh, no. When we say ‘unlimited’, we mean you can connect to the internet at any time. It’s an unlimited amount of time you can connect to the internet is all. You can’t just download a whole bunch of movies and expect to not get additional charges.”
What was remarkable was how quickly everyone at the table dispersed. It went from a huge crowd surrounding the table to just me and the two representatives. I remember saying, “Oh, OK. Well, I guess I’ll think about it then” before leaving. As I walked away, I knew I very likely saved a number of students a bunch of money in the process. No doubt word spread from that one because I don’t believe I saw a crowd that large around that table since.
Generally speaking, the word “unlimited” has to be one of the most abused words used in marketing for large carriers and ISPs here in Canada. Saying you can simply connect to the internet for an unlimited period of time as long a you don’t use data isn’t the only way the marketing departments in those corporations can mislead consumers. Another fun one is calling a plan “unlimited(asterisk)” and then saying in the fine print something along the lines of “(asterisk)up to [insert data cap here]. Additional charges may apply after exceeding the plans allotment.”
Part of the problem is that these companies seemingly can get away with these dirty tactics because in Canada, there’s only three national carriers left: Rogers, Bell, and Telus. It’s rare, if ever, that consumers can “vote with their wallet” and take their business elsewhere. This is partly because in some cases, there’s no other carrier to take their business to in the first place. What’s more, there’s not a whole lot of consumer protection laws that are actually enforced that protect consumers from some of the misleading advertising campaigns by the larger corporations. This thanks to the consumers themselves having to foot any litigation costs and since most consumers are barely scraping by (thanks to the rising cost of everything and continuous wage suppression tactics), affording lawyers is one of the last things consumers can do.
That’s why many Canadian’s might smile at the news that a lawsuit was filed against Rogers recently by the Competition Bureau over false or misleading claims on various advertising efforts by Rogers. From the Canadian Press:
The Competition Bureau says it’s suing Rogers Communications Inc. over the company’s allegedly false claim that it offers unlimited data in its “Infinite” wireless phone plans.
The bureau alleges that Rogers’ ads create the false or misleading impression that the plans provide consumers with limitless data, when in reality data service is severely throttled once a data cap is reached.
It says data speeds are reduced, or throttled, by over 99 per cent once a customer hits the cap.
The bureau says it has filed an application with the Competition Tribunal to have Rogers stop the misleading advertising, pay a penalty, and issue restitution to Infinite wireless phone plan customers.
Rogers says the advertising of its Infinite plans is clear and truthful, and it will fight the litigation.
The Competition Bureau has published a short press release on the issue which says this:
The Competition Bureau is taking legal action against Rogers Communications Inc., alleging they are falsely advertising their Infinite wireless phone plans as offering unlimited data.
The Bureau claims that Rogers’ advertisements create the false or misleading impression that the plans provide consumers with limitless data, allowing them to use as much data as they want. In reality, the plans have data caps and once reached, the data speed is reduced, or throttled, by over 99%.
As a result, the Bureau has filed an application with the Competition Tribunal seeking, among other things, for Rogers to stop the misleading advertising, pay a penalty, and issue restitution to Infinite wireless phone plan customers.
“Canadians need accurate and truthful information when purchasing goods and services especially essential services like wireless data plans. This case demonstrates that the Bureau remains committed to ensuring that Canadian consumers are not misled. And that we take all appropriate measures to address false or misleading claims in the marketplace.”
Matthew Boswell,
Commissioner of Competition
While I’m not personally convinced the committee hearings into Rogers over similar allegations is really going to lead to anything, this lawsuit seems to be the first sign that anything at all is being done about these kinds of market abuses that Canadians have grown to just accept as a fact of life because there’s not really anything they can do about it. Hopefully, something good can come out of this lawsuit because I don’t see much else going on right now that will really improve the consumer experience with these monopolistic corporations.
