Follow Us:
Rogers on Mobilicity going after Chatr: “I’m a little puzzled by it”
It’s known that Mobilicity is fully against Chatr launching, threatening Rogers and stating that “they’re trying to destroy our success”. Today during Rogers Quarterly Investment Community Conference Call Rob Bruce, President of Rogers Wireless was asked about the new discount brand “Chatr” strategy and his thoughts on Mobilicity’s concern about the impending launch.
In response Bruce stated that “As penetration increases typically brands expand to address different market segments. That’s exactly what’s going with Chatr… Chatr is a segment brand designed to serve the Zone based Unlimited Voice and Text market. Neither Rogers or Fido really fully address this segment. We believe that it will be a very effective competitor and it’ll offer customers out in the market much more choice.”
Specifically regarding Mobilicity Bruce stated that “I’m a little puzzled by it, to be honest with you. I don’t think about our efforts on Chatr as being anti-competitive. In fact I think they are competitive. Wireless has always been a competitive marketplace and we expect it to continue that way.”
Audio is after the break (you’ll have to turn your volume up really high to hear it)
Discussion
34 comments for “Rogers on Mobilicity going after Chatr: “I’m a little puzzled by it””
Post a comment
- CES 2012
- Mobile News
- Airtel Wireless
- Bell Mobility News
- Chatr
- Clearnet
- Eastlink
- Fido News
- Globalive News
- Koodo Mobile News
- Mobilicity
- MTS Allstream News
- NortherTel
- PC Mobile News
- Petro-Canada Mobility
- Primus Wireless News
- Public Mobile
- Rogers Wireless News
- SaskTel News
- Shaw
- Solo Mobile News
- Speak Out Wireless News
- TBayTel
- Telus Mobility News
- Vidéotron News
- Virgin Mobile News
- WIND Mobile
- Reviews – Carrier
- Reviews – Manufacturer
- Various News
Rogers has a mole!!
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
“I’m a little puzzled by it, to be honest with you. I don’t think about our efforts on Chatr as being anti-competitive.”
Well he must be totally dense.
So why aren’t they launching in Montreal and Quebec City too? And why only in the exact same cities Mobilicity are operating in?
I think it is a bit too obvious to EVERYONE that this Chatr brand is specifically trying to keep users from moving away from the Rogers’ corporate umbrella. As well as catering to the clientele Mobilicity is catering to.
Like or Dislike:
23 
3
The reason why they cannot launch services in Montreal and Quebec City is because the AWS spectrum was snapped up by Videotron. Therefore they are unable to launch their AWS network within Quebec. The only Quebec service they can offer is Hull because the wireless service area is considered to be part of Ottawa.
Like or Dislike:
0 
1
This is the best part. “Wireless has always been a competitive marketplace and we expect it to continue that way.”
Wireless in Canada has not been competitive in the near past. The big three oligopoly has kept rates in Canada the highest in the developed world, ya, really competitive.
Like or Dislike:
21 
3
“Wireless has always been a competitive marketplace and we expect it to continue that way.”
LOL. That is all.
Like or Dislike:
11 
3
The amount of poop coming out of this guys mouth is astonishing!
Like or Dislike:
11 
5
Competitive means the prices will be efficient – not necessarily low! I’ll grant you that Robellus have been very effective in convincing us to pay the high prices they charge. But if any one of them though they could make more money by lowering their prices they would!
And am I the only one who doesn’t understand people who consider Chatr to be “anti-competitive” because they’re only launching in cities where they’ll have competition?!
Like or Dislike:
3 
4
Well, this whole thing with Rogers and Mobilicity, I’m going to have to agree with Mobilicity because brands like Mobilicity and Wind were supposed to be wake up calls to the Big 3 brands, they are supposed to foster competition. It’s tough for them to compete when they just form a new brand that directly addresses what ever anyone else is throwing at them. As Canadians we get pretty much the worst cell phone rates possible, from experience living in the states and having Verizon for 2 years I can say that what we pay 50 dollars a month for goes a lot longer in the states, for $50 with Telus I’m lucky to get 100 minutes, a choice of unlimited texting, OR double minutes, OR nationwide calling to 5 people and 500mb of data and no caller ID or added services that should be essential on a phone. With Verizon for example, on a family plan, you can get unlimited texting, 1400 minutes to share, and calls to 10 people, and free calling to anyone on the Verizon network for 119.99 divided between however many people are on your family share. Then data is 29.99 a month added on for unlimited data, not a tiny little 500mb of data.
Anyways, the Big 3 shouldn’t be making brands like Koodoo, Virgin, and Chatr, they should be making changes to the core dynamics that they operate, in order to stay competitive in the marketplace. Wind and Mobilicity were supposed to bring about a big change in the wireless market in Canada, but with companies launching fighting brands like these those of us currently stuck in contracts with the Big 3 are not seeing the effects.
Like or Dislike:
15 
4
If you’re stuck in a contract you won’t see the effects of any changes to the core dynamics until your contract expires anyways! And when your contract does expire you can change to Wind, Chatr, Moblicity, Petro Canada Mobile, Presidents Choice Mobile, Videotron (yes, they already have mobile), etc.
Like or Dislike:
2 
4
Well, being stuck in a contract isn’t all bad for me, all it really means is that I can’t move away from Telus at the moment. I’m free to switch my plan around at my leasure to anything that Telus has avalible, so if they came out with lower priced plans that offered what it was that I was looking for I could switch, I change around my rate plans all the time. The only thing keeping me from switching to a brand like Mobilicity or Wind are the fact that they have crappy phones and I don’t really feel the need to buy one off contract and pay 600 dollars when I don’t really mind being locked into that provider and getting the phone for 50 bucks. The other thing keeping me from switching is the fact that I move around a lot and am out of the coverage areas for the smaller companies a significant amount of the time so they don’t really work all that well for me.
Like or Dislike:
1 
2
That’s part of the problem though – If Rogers was truly trying to give us choice and be competitive they would add these cheaper options to the Rogers brand rather than only offering them on a new brand. Doing the latter prevents those on contract from getting the better rates, even though the money is going to the same place.
I’ll be leaving Rogers when my contract is up due to this despicable behaviour.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
Interesting comment about pulling the “zone-based big-bucket segment” out of Fido. Is this a hint that the City Fido plans will eventually go? Or just that a portion of customers who would have been attracted to City Fido will opt for chatr (those who can live without data).
Also noted, as I have stated elsewhere, chatr puts the “under-utilized” (2G) network capacity to use.
The only grounds for complaint I see is that chatr won’t be offered everywhere Rogers Wireless has coverage. If that is illegal, then why weren’t the same complaints raised about City Fido? Why were people in London or Kitchener denied an option that Torontonians had?
Like or Dislike:
1 
2
The fishy thing is not that it is not being launched everywhere. The fishy thing is that it is being launched only where new entrants operate, ignoring significant markets such as Montreal.
Like or Dislike:
7 
0
competitive my @ss, they never cared about catering to the customer until the CRTC sort of opened up the flood gates. I hope customers go to the new companies and send robbers a message.
Like or Dislike:
8 
1
I for 1 and looking fwd to them. It will raise awareness and force the little guys to raise the bar. Failed calls, busy circuits billing nightmares.. all for the new players.. Why not take a page out of the big 3′s book and get the network working, staggered billing.. and fix the network.. spread thinly all over the place.
Like or Dislike:
1 
7
It is a bit funny. If your building a brand you would expect a company to choose a market place that isn’t currently being serviced. It’s simply a safe way to build a brand. To choose to set up shop in a market that is serviced is to choose to directly compete with another brand. There are many large communities in Ontario and Quebec that Chatr could bring their services to and expanded from. So many other places to set up zones. However you choose to look at it, this is a deliberate choice to confront another brand when others could be waiting for a company to provide a similar service. Rogers is not there just to provide a service, it’s there to destroy another service before it can estabish a firm footing and expand.
Like or Dislike:
9 
0
They’re probably not in Qc because they already have a 3rd brand here: Videotron! Until that agreement expires and Videotron sets up their own network there’s no need for Chatr in Quebec!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The Canadian wireless industry has been a oligopoly marketplace with the Big 3 since Rogers bought up Fido and Telus bought up Clearnet. It is notoriously uncompetitive internationally from the OECD’s research and other researches. It is even worse than many developing countries. That is the reason the government auctioned out spectrums and reserved some specifically for the new entrants.
I’m also a little puzzled why the President of Rogers Wireless said the wireless has always been a competitive marketplace.
Like or Dislike:
4 
1
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Like or Dislike:
1 
11
I control all of the oil in the world, you now pay $20 a litre for gas, you don’t want to pay that? To bad, no where else to turn.
This is why monopolies are bad…
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
such a stupid comeback
sometimes monopolies are necessary because the monopoly itself can provide the service at an optimal cost structure
it may be more efficient to have a sole provider of a service or a product, rather than have many companies providing the service and also fighting each other for customers, increasing costs and subsequently passing these costs along to consumers.
^ that is just “one” example of how industry structures other than a monopoly can lead to inefficiencies.
Like or Dislike:
0 
3
Monopoly Benefits
1. Economies of Scale.
If the firms produces in an industry with very high fixed costs, consumers can benefit from a large firm which can exploit economies of scale. Economies of scale lead to lower average costs and therefore the potential of lower prices. Example:
Would you want several firms providing tap water? Would it make sense to have 2-3 companies laying a network of water pipes and sewage systems across the country? No. It is better to have 1 firm. This is an example of an industry which is a natural monopoly.
Industries like car production and airline production also have significant economies of scale so it makes sense for firms to have some degree of market power.
However, just because a firm has monopoly power doesn’t mean that the industry necessarily has economies of scale or that lower average costs lead to lower prices.
2. Research and Development
Firms with monopoly profit can use their profit to invest in new products and techonologies that benefit consumers in the long run. e.g. oil companies who find new sources of oil
3. Monopoly Firms are Efficient
An argument popular with economists of the Austrian School of Economics is that firms who gain monopoly power are invariably successful, innovative and efficient. e.g. Google have monopoly power but who can do it any better?
Like or Dislike:
0 
3
The foundation of capitalist (the framework on which our economy is supposed to be based) is that monopolies are bad by definition and that better products and services are grown through having many competing products and brands. Maintaining affordability in capitalism is accompished by no one having the power to set the price themselves by use of monopolies.
I know a great deal about economics little dude. It may not be the end of the world, but monopoly and oligopoly are contrary to the system on which the Canadian economy is built. Further, that is why they are illegal. Within a socialist economic system such as the wheat board which is a state controled monopoly prices are held in check by regulation in order to prevent abuse. They have their place, and by law that place is not the private market. Mobilicity is well within it’s rights to question and in fact sue Rogers. They may choose not to due to the expense, but their claim is based in law.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
oligopolies are not illegal
stop spreading lies and making false statements
Like or Dislike:
1 
4
I agree with jarr,many of the posts on here are simply moronic and totally out of whack compared to reality…your assumptions about Rogers is absurd and without basis.You have no knowledge of business or economics and make up your own beliefs as you go along.
It’s funny how some of you protect Wind with one of the most corrupt backers in the world and claim Chat-R is out to destroy the world even before launching.
Absolutely hilarious…HAVING SAID THAT CHAT-R WILL EVENTUALLY launch and the Newbies better be prepared.
Like or Dislike:
1 
7
Oooo exageration. No one said end of the world except you two, who evidently are not very well educated in either law or economics. If you are, congrats, you hide it very well.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Hey Bruce,
“Zone based Unlimited Voice and Text” isn’t a market segment, it’s a better service offering that you weren’t willing to provide until you were forced into it by competition. This is why competition is good.
Capitalism at it’s worst.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
Mobilicity can’t even afford to build their own network and you expect them to succeed with a useless law-suit,Chat-R will be fairly competing regardless what anyone of you say and if they allow this to go through it only opens up the door further for Rogers to have a case against Wind in the way they entered the market and explains why Wind is remaining so perfectly quiet in this issue promoting competition instead of screaming “You’re Unfair”.Personally,I would LOVE to see all those hidden files the government is afraid to disclose and I assure Rogers won’t be the baddest WOLF when it comes to corruption…maybe some of you should start thinking with logic rather than your own bias feelings and not be so plain gullible.
Mobilicity is well within their right to sue and all that will do is waste their money in the end and under the Fair Competition Act show they have no integrity and prove they can’t handle competing.
Like or Dislike:
1 
4
@Ivan
Well,at least your stupidity is extremely visible!
HaHaHaHaHa!!!
Like or Dislike:
0 
4
This is what is hilarious!
The monopoly the Big Three had was not caused by them,if anything blame the government although this produced jobs/pensions/etc as already stated and you’re only argument is that the rates are too high because in general all the established networks work well…then claiming you want COMPETITION after new entrants were allowed into the market you want to prevent Chat-R from launching stating they will kill Mobilicity/Wind/PM even though these companies are performing awful which will be the reason for their failure and not really worth being loyal.
I have no interest to prevent a better company from launching to insanely support three bad ones to remain,the Newbies have a choice to either compete or not and if not they should get out of the market…it’s absurd to push for legal actions when it actually stops competition and allows the situation to get worse.
Like or Dislike:
1 
3
I don’t get how Rogers is allowed to do this, I agree, if they are really targeting a specific market, why not launch in Montreal?! Simply because there is not much choice for unlimited calling there…. Even though there is public mobile in Montreal, but I highly doubt anyone sees Public as a threat. =p
Like or Dislike:
4 
1
Mike this may shock you but they can launch wherever they like. So would you be happier if they launched in a few different cities as well? This is just a first phase, they will launch in other cities.. Barrie Newmarket Aurora Markham. for them its easy.. they already have the network..
I have no doubt had the launched somewheres else you would object. as far as are they allowed to do this? Yes they are. Are they doing it? yes they are. Will it hurt the new players yes it has.
Like or Dislike:
2 
1
Wind has only themselves to blame. Chatr would not be competition if the new entrants built a good network. The poor network of wind has kept me from switching. If in the future they survive and improve the quality I would dump Telus in a heart beat, until then I can’t afford to switch because I have a business and need reliability.
People who don’t need the phone for work don’t have much to lose from a dropped call here and there and I hope they switch to the new entrants pr stay away from Chatr.
Like or Dislike:
0 
2
Hmm, dropped calls. I have been using a rogers branded (heavily branded) phone on the rogers 2G network for just over a year and I suffer dropped calls every day. Doesn’t matter where I am – happens downtown Toronto, outdoors, indoors, standing on the roof of a tall building. Their advertisements for both Rogers and Chat-r highlighting their low rate of dropped calls are a joke- read the fine print too – it will probably say something about those stats being applicable only when moving zone to zone.
My contract with Rogers ended yesterday and I bought a Mobilicity sim and $35 account – total cost to try Mobilicity obligation free – $45 – less than I pay Rogers in any given month for limited minutes and no free texts. if Mobilicity doesn’t work for me I’m free to try another company next month.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0