Digital debate Bell vs Rogers + insights from CBC & Shaw at 2012 Banff World Media Festival

Monday, 25 June, 2012

#Banff2012 Day 1 - pix 05

An interesting debate between Kevin Crull, President Bell Media vs Keith Pelley, President Rogers Media plus — Kirstine Stewart, CBC and Paul Robertson, Shaw Media at 2012 Banff World Media Festival. Have a watch of the debate. This debate is particularly interesting in light of Gary Carter’s presentation at MPJC 2012.


Teachable Moment in #Rogers1Number bashtag epic #fail – Tipping point? Will @RogersKeith and Rogers actually change or just listen and ignore?

Saturday, 17 March, 2012

TorStar, Globe and Mail, and Techvibes have all reported on the #Rogers1Number (live search) epic #fail promoted hashtag turned bashtag (a term coined in the #McDStories campaign).

I am going to dispense some advices (my brand of poison, borrowing a phrase from a friend) and try to turn this epic #fail into a potentially valuable teachable moment for Rogers and us all. Feel free to share your thoughts in the moderated comments.

1) Twitter promoted hashtag/bashtag

If the epic #fail #Rogers1Number and #McDStories campaigns have taught us anything, it is that these promoted hashtags can get out of control, can be risky, and can lead to destructive unintended consequences. You know what, the companies promoting the hashtag will also be paying for these bashtags!

Yes, the companies are literally paying to get bad press! The companies are paying to let the world know how dissatisfied their customers, ex-customers, potential customers feel about them.

NOTE 1: Not all hashtags are bad. I think the organically “grow” hashtag from some greatly loved companies can be possibly useful. But even then, company encouraged, sponsored, or paid hashtags can still become lightning rods for unhappy customers or people with complains. So use hashtags with extreme caution like holding a lightning rod in a stormy area.

2) Sample #Rogers1Number tweets:

I’ve spent some time to find some sample tweets and I try to check to ensure the tweets are not from troll accounts newly created just to bash Rogers.

– “The saddest part of the #Rogers1Number backlash is nothing will change, #Rogers will learn nothing and customer will still get poor service.” (via Twitter)

– “I’m really loving reading all the nasty backlash at#Rogers it’s making my night, keep it up guys they’re paying per tweet! #rogers1number” (via Twitter)

– “When I call Rogers to resolve an issue two more magically appear #rogers1number They can’t get one thing right” (via Twitter)

– “#Rogers1Number “We’re in social media to listen”. Right. Not to change. Just to listen. Hear this: Shitty PR stunts can kill a company fast” (via Twitter)

– “.@RogersKeith Rogers deems data so valuable u charge $2/GB when I go OVER. Why not get credit when I stay UNDER monthly max? #Rogers1Number” (via Twitter)

– “The #Rogers1Number fiasco. Let’s see if this even change something.” (via Twitter) Read the rest of this entry »


WIND and Rogers on 700 MHz Spectrum Auction

Wednesday, 27 April, 2011

From WIND’s Tony, “The 700 MHZ Spectrum Auction: What it means for you

The upcoming 700 MHZ auction will continue to shape the future of wireless competition in Canada. Every stakeholder wants to influence how the auction will be held and on Monday, all parties were invited to file submissions with Industry Canada outlining how they felt the spectrum should be divided.

In our case, we argued that all of the 700MHZ spectrum should be set aside for only new entrants to bid on (like last time). Why? Because the Big Three don’t need it, and we do, and they will do anything, and pay anything, to keep us from getting it. The Big Three are among the most spectrum-rich operators in the entire world and are already sitting on vast amounts of unused spectrum (we call it warehousing). The Big Three acquiring and sitting on all this spectrum doesn’t do you, the consumers, any good. In fact, it hurts because it is yet another way they seek to limit competition.

The spectrum they are sitting on, by the way, includes all of the spectrum they bought in the 2008 auction. Good thing there was spectrum set aside in that auction and good for the Government for resisting the Big Three’s arguments (they are making the same arguments this time around, of course).

We want to see this spectrum benefit consumers. Spectrum in the hands of new entrants like WIND Mobile will help take Canada (finally!) out of the dark ages of wireless. Competition is the #1 key to better wireless choice and value in Canada, but new entrants like us need spectrum. Oh, and we’ll use it!

Industry Canada is expected to set the auction rules later this year so we will keep you posted.”

According to G&M, Apr. 27, 2011 “Rogers to launch LTE wireless by end of year

“Rogers and other major phone companies are concerned the 700 MHz spectrum will be reserved for new entrants in the market as part of the federal government’s efforts to open the market to greater competition.

“It would be a shame if our nine million wireless customers were denied the benefit of this low-band spectrum,” Mr. Mohamed told shareholders at the company’s annual meeting. “Put simply, we need rules that apply equally to everyone.””

For the record.

G&M, Apr. 27, 2011 “Rogers to launch LTE wireless by end of year

Rogers Communications Inc. (RCI.B-T35.260.521.50%) will launch the next generation of wireless technology in four major Canadian cities by the end of the year, promising high-speed Internet access on mobile devices will be as fast as is currently available on home and office computers. Read the rest of this entry »


WIND Mobile v. Rogers Chatr

Friday, 1 October, 2010

Check out Globe and Mail’s article “Wind Mobile lodges complaint against Rogers over Chatr” and video interview about this story. Here is an excerpt from WIND Mobile Chairman Tony Lacavera’ blog entry “Healthy Competition in Canada” (emphasis added),

There is a policy issue related to Chatr’s claims about dropped calls that I’d like to address. In most countries around the world when a customer moves from one carrier’s network to another, there is a seamless transition for the caller. That means that when a customer moves from one carrier to another while conducting a call, the call continues and doesn’t drop. It’s called a seamless hand-off. In Canada however, the government does not obligate carriers to provide seamless handoff and our roaming partner has refused to give our customers the benefit of seamless handoff. The result is that when one of our customers moves from our Wind home zone to our roaming partner’s network, (we call it an “Away” zone) her call drops. When it decided to introduce competition into the telecom sector, the federal government thought about requiring incumbents to give new entrants seamless hand-off. The incumbents lobbied hard and successfully against this. As a result, our customers do have some dropped calls that they would not otherwise have. This is not because of any issues with the quality of our network but because the incumbents are taking advantage of a government policy which gives them a competitive advantage.


Canada “Take Back the Beep” Campaign ?

Thursday, 13 August, 2009

It’s been two weeks since I started “Take Back the Beep,” a campaign to flood the four big wireless companies with complaints. I want them to eliminate (or make optional) those time-wasting, redundant, airtime-eating, 15-second recorded instructions that you hear every time you leave a message for someone (or call to retrieve your own).

To my delight, the campaign has taken on a life of its own. It’s been written up on 28,032 blogs; I’ve done a number of radio and podcast interviews; and the carriers report that “thousands and thousands” of complaints have poured in.

So this US campaign started by NYT David Pogue seems to be effective. I wonder what is the situation in Canada? Are we as bad and need the same campaign?


%d bloggers like this: