20

Bell Q2 2013 results: Subscriber base now at 7,715,641, ARPU $56.85 and LTE network reaches 73% of the Canadian population

belliphone5lte
Bell reported strong Q2 2013 results this morning. “Backed by continued wireless postpaid strength,” wireless revenues increased by 5.4% to $1,442 million, blended ARPU (average revenue per user) increased 2.7% to $56.85, and the total subscriber base has reached 7,715,641, up 43,566 subscribers from Q1 (Postpaid increased by 96,390, but Prepaid sank 52,824). Bell attributed Q2 results by the continued growth of smartphone adoption and data usage, specifically noting its Bell Mobile TV offering. Smartphones now represent 70% of total postpaid subscribers, up from 55% during the same period last year.

As for other inclusions, Bell noted the successful acquisition of Astral, plus that they ‘want a level playing field‘ and urge “the federal government to close the loopholes in new wireless regulations that favour major US wireless carriers like Verizon.” Finally, Bell’s LTE network now reaches approximately 73% of the Canadian population, and that the relationship with RBC will allow Bell customers who have an NFC-enabled smartphones to make mobile payments, via RBC debit or credit cards, “by the end of the year and are now testing the solution with consumers and merchant customers.”

Source: Bell

  • David

    “Bell’s LTE network now reaches approximately 73% of the Canadian population”

    To put that into perspective, Verizon’s LTE coverage reaches approximately 90% of the U.S. population despite Canada’s population being more urbanized and less Rural based. Please Bell, no more excuses about your high prices because Canada is so large and the population so small and you are providing great coverage.

    • skullan

      They can’t hear you due to all the money counting machines drowning out the cries of the average Canadian.

    • Jason

      I can’t wait for Verizon. $30 unlimted plans… Free iPhones on two year contracts and 90% LTE coverage. They can’t come soon enough.

    • skullan

      I don’t think they will afford us that luxury Jason. They will likely apply a Canadian tax, you know, the additional cost of stuff because we’re Canadian.

    • David

      Once they get their network rolled out I suspect they won’t end up being much cheaper but they may not conspire with the other big 3 to get near identical plans. They will offer something different. They also won’t try to force feed you television, internet, phone and home security on you every time you have to talk to them.

    • skullan

      I still get the:

      “Them: Sir, I see you no longer are an Internet or Home Phone customer, is there anything we can do to get you back as a customer?

      Me: Give me comparable packages to X and Y.

      Them: Sir, we couldn’t possibly do that.

      Me: Well then, looks like we’re done for the day”

    • nickbergantini

      Are you expecting $30 unlimited plans based on Wind pricing? When I check VZW’s website I see Datashare for $80 for 500mb one device, or prepaid $60 for 2GB.

    • casey

      Free iPhones on two year contracts? yeah no……. Prices are set by apple there, and even in there primary market (US) they don’t have free flagship phones… And 90% coverage would probably be 5-10 years away.

    • Jason

      That sucks. I guess i’ve been drinking too much of the conservatives party koolaid lol. Well they will still have unlimited everything $30 plans i’m sure. C’mon Verizon!

    • FiveOD

      The reason Wind can afford to offer $30 unlimited plans is because they have low device subsidies, limited network coverage, on inferior spectrum and no LTE. If you seriously expect Verizon to come, invest billions on spectrum and network enhancements, and charge Wind rates while barely even breaking even on the devices they hand out to customers you’re insane.

    • ScooterinAB

      Although the US may a higher rural populated than in Canadian, Canadian rurals are more geographically segregated. It’s also harder and more costly to build a tower in the middle of nowhere for 5 people. Compare all you want, but Canada and the US are very different countries.

  • skullan

    “the federal government to close the loopholes in new wireless regulations that favour major US wireless carriers like Verizon.”

    Perhaps we need to re-evaluate truly used spectrum, versus possible spectrum hoarding. If we find that some of our carriers are just hoarding spectrum, we should strip it from them and offer it up for an auction in order to ‘level’ the playing field.

    • Josh Brown

      Wait for Henry and the other Bell employees to jump all over this one and how Bell is your best friend and when they are stealing your money right out of your pockets, that it is in your best interest as all that excess weight in your back pocket is hard on your back. Plus if you shower your money on Bell, it is like giving it back to your self because they are a Canadian company, and they are like reverse Robin Hood, stealing from the poor to give to the needy Rich people on Bell’s Board of Directors.

  • nickbergantini

    I think there’s a typo in the headline?

    “Bell Q2 2013 results: Subscriber base now at 7,715,641, ARPU $56.85 and LTE network reaches 73% of the Canadian population”

    I fixed it:

    “Bell Q2 2013 results: Subscriber base now at 7,715,641, ARPU $56.85 and LTE network gouges 73% of the Canadian population”

    • JTon

      Disagree. Prices gouge not LTE. LTE is awesome.

  • Miles Harbord

    The idea that Bell needs protecting from Verizon when Verizon at most may only own 10% of the Canadian market that they enter seems just silly to me. Having said that I think 73% of Canadians being reached is a remarkable achievement considering how thoroughly spaced out we are as a people, with so much smaller a population. The return on investment is simply not there to be a fully national carrier. The sooner Bell steps away from that notion the better off they’ll be. Bell is not as flush with cash as I find some people seem to think. If you want to see a company rolling in money have a look at TELUS. They have the third highest profit margin of any cell company in the world.

    • David

      “Having said that I think 73% of Canadians being reached is a remarkable
      achievement considering how thoroughly spaced out we are as a people,
      with so much smaller a population.”

      This is a bogus argument the big three like to spew to make them look better than they really are. You can’t compare percent of people being reached, you need to look at population density or the number of users for the area covered. Take a look at the Bell LTE coverage map and compare it to the Verizon LTE coverage map. Bell isn’t anywhere close. Canada is at least as urbanized as the U.S. and if you cover the top 10 cities in Canada you’ll cover close to 55% of the population. The majority of the land mass of Canada will never get any cell coverage where as Verizon has LTE coverage over the majority of the U.S. land mass (Alaska excluded).

  • skullan

    The $150 is likely due to the fact that every additional device on one of this data share plans is an additional $40 dollars I believe.

    So, a family of 2 with 2 devices would be probably 150 depending on your plan.
    A family of 4 is probably 260ish, so, just about $90 a person.

    High, yes, but I do not expect to see the same ARPU per person in Canada due to the limited spectrum and the disadvantages that come along with that.

  • Techie01

    Rogers is 59.30 to be exact Telus has the highest APRU didn’t see that one coming.

  • Sweet

    Bell’s service margin for the quarter was 45.9%. Clearly, they have lots of room to lower service prices.

Trending News

Other Articles