Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: How does the Canadian industry compare?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    3,400
    Carrier(s)
    Value
    Feedback Score
    0

    How does the Canadian industry compare?

    [originally posted elsewhere, the data should be made available to this forum]

    Excerpted from Debunking the wireless myth busters - Peter Nowak, March 18

    I’ve since acquired more recent data, as of the third quarter of 2012, which paint a much more accurate and up-to-date picture. BofA’s Global Wireless Matrix is something of a bible for the wireless industry, packed with thorough statistics on virtually every carrier in 50 developed and developing countries. The regular report is the most accurate measure and comparison of wireless carriers around the world, which is probably why the Canadian industry and its allies don’t want the public to see it. The report details just how well they’re doing and does much to prove that Canadians are indeed paying high prices.
    ...
    It’s no secret Canada has always been behind in overall cellphone penetration [see original article for chart]. The Matrix confirms that Canada is dead last among 21 developed countries, at 78 per cent. Only four countries in the entire Matrix have worse penetration: Bangladesh, India, Pakistan and Nigeria.
    ...
    Why is Canada lagging in both overall and smartphone penetration? High prices have been identified and accepted by the government as the main problem. Here’s how carriers stack up in terms of revenue numbers:

    Attachment 91463

    The story here is clear. Canadian carriers lead the world in terms of monthly average revenue per user, at $60.79. That’s 16 per cent higher than the United States ($51.61), 32 per cent higher than the developed world average ($43.79) and 76 per cent higher than Europe ($27.02). Moreover, as the graph on the right shows, Canada is one of only four countries seeing ARPU growing. Cellphone bills almost everywhere else are going down, which is probably what they should be doing given that wireless service is a technological product, and technology is subject to Moore’s Law.
    ...
    The above chart [see article] also shows that Canada is on the low side of churn, or how many customers defect to other carriers, which is indubitably the result of three-year contracts. The countries with the highest churn rates are typically those with the strictest contract and phone locking regulations (Belgium used to ban bundling phone sales with monthly service). They’re also the ones that typically come in low on ARPU comparisons, which indicates a strong correlation between high monthly prices and low churn. In other words, when customers are able to switch providers easily, prices and ARPU tend to be lower.

    Lastly, we come to profit:

    Attachment 91465

    With a margin of 45.9 per cent, Canadian carriers come in at the high end of the most profitable list. They’re seven per cent more profitable than their American and European counterparts and five per cent more than the developed world.

    Even more interesting is the fact that Canadian carriers had the third highest year-over-year growth in margins (Spain is comparatively crushing it). Combined with ARPU growth, it’s clear that business is good in Canada. Incumbent carriers may have experienced a temporary hiccup thanks to new entrants such as Wind and Mobilicity, but things are obviously getting back to normal.

    One of the myths the Scotia Capital report tried to quash (#4) was that the new entrants have had no effect on the market. While they definitely did have an effect, the numbers suggest they’ve done all they’re going to do. The report’s conclusion that regulators should “declare victory on the policies they adopted five years ago” when the new entrants were spurred into the market through special rules is therefore not correct.

    It’s hard if not impossible to look at these key metrics and come to any conclusion other than Canadian wireless carriers are some of the most profitable around based on unmatched monthly revenues, which are coming directly out of consumers’ pockets.
    Last edited by pjw918; 04-17-2013 at 10:26 PM.
    A Canadian tale of wireless competition, and Another
    From unjust discrimination to undue preference - a CRTC timeline

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    3,400
    Carrier(s)
    Value
    Feedback Score
    0
    This is the market comparison chart from the Global Wireless Matrix showing the numbers for all the measures, for reference. I should have attached this file to the original post. 2012 Q3 data.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    GTA
    Posts
    6,398
    Device(s)
    Blackberry Z30, Blackberry Q10, Galaxy Nexus
    Carrier(s)
    Fido
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    The revenue figures are (as always) absurd in these reports with "average Canadian ARPU" levels that are higher than any of the big3 report
    Please explain how the "average Canadian pays $60.79" when Rogers is $57.65 for 2012, TELUS had $60.95 for 2012, and Bell had $56.72 (unless you think wind or 7-11 somehow raises the overall average which I doubt... Mobi & Public are not even in the radar but with ARPU in the $27 range it would make a small impact)

    It also is absurd to complain about low smartphone use & arpu increases as it stands to reason as people trade in old phones and upgrade to smartphones of course the added data causes cost increases. Since we have most room for growth it makes sense to happen.

    As I always point out in these silly world comparisons, most other countries do not have free calling after 6PM or FAB10 calls, most calls are billed in reverse to North America (calling party pays here, receiving party pays there)

    http://www.rogers.com/web/Rogers.por...bel=IR_LANDING

    http://about.telus.com/community/eng...rgets-for-2013

    http://www.bce.ca/news-and-media/rel...nth=2&keyword=
    It is sad I need to state the obvious but some people just don't get it. Any posts I make are my own OPINIONS and in no way represent the views of my employer

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    GTA
    Posts
    6,398
    Device(s)
    Blackberry Z30, Blackberry Q10, Galaxy Nexus
    Carrier(s)
    Fido
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    I also love this absurd claim that the "average European" pays only $27.02
    As someone who has travelled extensively there I would love for you to show me a carrier that charges so little (I still have my SIMs from France & Finland from last year and paid alot more than that to get a decent package)

Similar Threads

  1. fed up with ic902, how does the moto V950 compare
    By Geo2199 in forum General Nextel Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-11-2009, 01:08 AM
  2. Fed up with ic902, how does the moto V950 compare
    By Geo2199 in forum Regular Phone Discussion
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 03-10-2009, 02:44 PM
  3. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-03-2005, 02:26 PM
  4. How does the TMO V600 compare to OEM?
    By acm25 in forum Motorola
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 09-06-2004, 02:53 AM
  5. How does the MOT v600 compare to the SE z1010?
    By orijinal in forum Motorola
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-08-2003, 04:02 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks