|
|
|
|
|
My screen is bigger than yours
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repor...rticle1424713/
http://mobilesyrup.com/2010/01/08/pu...iders-equally/
Public Mobile is asking the Canadian government to overturn (again) it's decision on allowing Globalive to operate.
Today, Public Mobile has stepped up and asked the Federal Court to overturn the decision that allowed Globalive to launch stating “we could all have the benefit of having foreign capital”. Public Mobile CEO Alek KrstajicYour thoughts?Government Urged to Treat All Wireless Providers Equally”, Krstajic said “We believe Cabinet’s decision is unfair to other wireless carriers, especially new entrants like Public Mobile that have played by the rules and secured substantial Canadian investment. Furthermore, while we respect the Government’s authority we believe what it has done amounts to a change in law, and only Parliament can change Canadian law.”
My screen is bigger than yours
Your headline is a bit mis-leading.
PM's Krstajic asked that the arbitrary decision by Minister Clement be over-turned and Parliament bring in formal rules which would allow Globalive to continue as is -- and provide Rogers, Public Mobile, DAVE, Bell, Videotron, Telus and Shaw with access to foreign capital up to 97% of debt as per Globalive.
Sorry about that, chief!
I've climbed a cellphone tower
PM is a little piss ant company that will be of no relevance whatsover in the big scheme of things
My screen is bigger than yours
Krstajic used to head Bell when it was even more pathetic in terms of customer service than it is now (and that's saying something). That kind of speaks volumes on anything he has to say.
He is asking that Wind either come into conformity with his interpretation of the current foreign ownership rules, or be shut down (though he admits that's likely not to happen). Foregoing all that, he then recommends that cabinet re-write foreign ownership rules.
All decisions regarding this matter are "arbitrary", the CRTC's decision was, as was Clements "variance". That's part of what's led to the mess that is today's Canadian wireless industry.
This appeal to the courts is going nowhere. Krstajic is just afraid his plan to sell off to one of the incumbents in five years may not be as lucrative for his shareholders as he planned.
My screen is bigger than yours
What Public Mobile is pissed about is that they need to come up with a new pricing.
"But the new entrant is not trying to shut down Wind. What Public Mobile is trying to do is seek legal clarity on telecom foreign ownership rules muddied in recent months by regulatory confusion, the company said."
No signature
I've climbed a cellphone tower
And more importantly (for him), himselfOriginally Posted by Salinger
Phone Collector
Public Mobile better have something real SERIOUS up their sleeve, because a generic launch will not cut it. They are launching on CDMA, that alone makes me want to smack them
jEEVERZ|bEEFEATER
Mobile Pro
Why doesnt someone write an Article about what People Want! I dont care if Public Mobile is against Wind because Orasswho or whatever, i got ripped off for too long! Public mobile just wants to knock Wind down since they got nothing better to offer besides Quebec
Makes me hate the Company, the retard admitted he would sell the company to the big 3! Bell got rid of there CDMA service, cuz it sucks- who would buy them out? if it was compatible with GSM or AWS then thats a diff story!
I've climbed a cellphone tower
Public Mobile is doomed before they have even launched - and it seems like they know it too! hence they are grasping at straws trying to bring attention to themselves..
I've climbed a cellphone tower
The only thing that can save them is maybe a $25 unlimited local calling area, and maybe $5 for addition of text messaging. It's CDMA... Plus the only phone they have is this ZTE POS which has really bad reviews from our neighbours in the south
PM, game over...
Arr~
The Fastest and Most Reliable. Question-Mark?
My antenna is smaller than yours
Blame it all on the administrative secretary which is from the United States. The company he works for in Virginia owns stakes in other wireless companies. This is probably one of the reasons why Public is having a problem now.
Canada needs to stop protecting the telcom giants from incumbents that found financing outside of the country.
Canada should protect the natural resources from outside countries, but thats just me.
I've climbed a cellphone tower
HAHAHA.....PM is just trying to be nice with the CRTC and say "We believe in U, U we're right all along"...and since they're tied to Telus there is no other way but to play good puppy....LOL...it really is a very lame attempt...
Phone fan
Salinger has it exactly right. This has really made me lose any respect I had for Public Mobile. Seriously, don't they have anything better to do?
And the ridiculous arguments they are recycling from the Big 3 -- "just let us play the same rules"? By all means, Aleks, if you ever get together a business plan that will attract foreign investment on exactly the same terms as Globalive, then go for it. There's nothing stopping you. The rules are the same for everyone.
Between the candid plan to sell out as soon as possible, the unambitious service offering, the cheap-o wonky spectrum, the company head's background at Rogers and Bell, and now this, it's hard not to wonder if Public Mobile is intended as a serious market entrant, or is some kind of contingency plan by th Big 3 or something. Really, it is not making a lot of sense for me.
Phone Collector
They can't compete with WIND then want to sue them ?
It's a shame. PM is going down.
----------------------------------------------------
2 Lines:
1. Unlimited local call any time for $30 flat. No contract
Based on Telus network. PM if you want it.
2. Rogers + iPhone Data, most time only for Email, Web.
Why yes, that is a bag phone
Umm, aren't you jumping the gun of the Federal Court by pre-deciding that the gov't's decision was "arbitrary"?
Legally, all that Public Mobile has asked (and can ask for from the Federal Court) is a "review" of the gov't decision to determine whether it was in accordance with the law. It will be highly, highly, irregular for the court to give any direct guidance to the gov't on how they should or shouldn't change legislation. The court may decide the legislation is so vague as to be unenforceable and all they will do is send it back to Parliament for clarification, but the court will not tell the gov't how to change it only what part needs changing.
All the other stuff from Public Mobile is PR and lobbying for what they want the gov't to do, assuming the court gives them anything to work with.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks