Sugar Mobile’s days may be numbered

Comments

  • TomsDisqusted

    We (desparately) need real MNVO’s here in Canada.

    The gov’s previous attempt at real competition failed due to lack of capital (and gov’ blocking the Wind’s financier’s access to allstream). And prices for cellular service shot up when Robellus realized they had won.

    Flanker brands are just fake competition and an extra layer of the complexity that the carriers are so in love with.

    Real MNVO’s could be the solution, but the CRTC shouldn’t bother creating rules for MNVO’s unless they are serious – no point doing it and leaving gaping holes for the incumbents to exploit (as with basic cable).

    • disqusmy

      Rogers, Bell are taking advantage of these rules, Bring out the fake competition to destroy the smaller, new company. Just like in Air service in usa, they can set that big company can not open new company to compete directly with new comer. See what happens right now.

    • Canada does have laws against so-called “fighter brands” as you’ve described.

    • disqusmy

      How so, describe more in detail.

  • xanth18

    Time to break up Rogers and Bell… they’re too big.

  • rgl168

    Update July 7 2016 – from CRTC: “In light of the foregoing, the Commission grants Ice Wireless’ request for interim relief. Accordingly, Rogers is not permitted to terminate its roaming agreement with Ice Wireless or disconnect either Ice Wireless or Sugar Mobile from its mobile network pending disposition of the request for final relief.”

    MS staff have not posted an update as of yet.