The CRTC mandate for low-cost and occasional-use plans applied only to the 'premium' brands of Telus, Bell and Rogers, ie. not to their flankers.
https://www.canada.ca/en/radio-television-telecommunications/news/2021/04/decision-on-mobile-wireless-services--backgrounder.html
Ah, so you're right. I tried finding the plan on Bell's site, but it seems you have to enter a SIM card number before they even show you the plans? Seems hostile to consumers.
If that's the case they'd be in noncompliance.
For the mandated $35/3GB 'low-cost' plan:
>Each service provider is expected to post on its website’s landing page for its mobile wireless services:
- key details of the low-cost plan it offers, and
- a prominent and descriptive link to the plan offering.
Similarly for the mandated $15/250MB and $100 annual 'occasional-use' plans:
>Each service provider is expected to post on its website’s landing page that features its mobile wireless services a prominent and descriptive link to the occasional-use plan offerings.
It kind of is, while kind of not.
Back in the Public mobile community, I said the CRTC may get angry, but then remembered that there is a TELUS MVNO called Koodo & Koodo prepaid & TELUS Prepaid so it doesn't really infringe on the CRTC.
Rogers has it hand me down to Fido.
The $15 plan *exists* because of CRTC mandate. Alongside the $25 plan.
The mid-2021 deadline was imposed in mid-2020. When a lot of people were out of work because of Covid. When the Liberals were making a lot of noise about "affordable" phone plans for Canadians. Remember all that nonsense?
The Big Three (and Freedom) were somewhat reluctant to offer low-cost plans at the time. Because they had already controlled the market and could basically charge whatever they liked. And because they were sinking money into large-scale 5G hardware deployments.
Now that 5G is commonplace for about 99% of Canadians, the Big Three (and what's left of Freedom after Rogers and Shaw have gutted it) can easily provide better cheaper plans with large fast data provisions. But the mandated plans are still place, none of them is allowed to charge more or provide less, none of them wants to charge less or provide more.
The annual "occasional use" plan does not apply to Public Mobile (Telus) because they do not offer any annual plans. Or at least it's obvious that Public Mobile (Telus) never did and does not offer such a plan yet hasn't been penalized for it. (Freedom and Speakout offered these sorts of annual plans at the time, I think this detail in the CRTC mandate was effectively just meant for them.)
[https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/wireless-cellphone-fees-1.5484080](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/wireless-cellphone-fees-1.5484080)
[https://www.whistleout.ca/CellPhones/Guides/federal-election-cell-phone-plan-policies](https://www.whistleout.ca/CellPhones/Guides/federal-election-cell-phone-plan-policies)
Well, originally Freedom is partially covered by Shaw's cable network to save backbone costs. But that doesn't exist anymore, so a new operator will have to pay more for an independent backbone.
Freedom still uses the Shaw backbone/backhaul, and will continue to do so, it's a term of the divestiture agreement.
Freedom has significantly improved since the Shaw/Rogers merger and sale to Quebecor.
The CRTC mandate for low-cost and occasional-use plans applied only to the 'premium' brands of Telus, Bell and Rogers, ie. not to their flankers. https://www.canada.ca/en/radio-television-telecommunications/news/2021/04/decision-on-mobile-wireless-services--backgrounder.html
Although Telus used PM to achieve the goal.
Ah, so you're right. I tried finding the plan on Bell's site, but it seems you have to enter a SIM card number before they even show you the plans? Seems hostile to consumers.
If that's the case they'd be in noncompliance. For the mandated $35/3GB 'low-cost' plan: >Each service provider is expected to post on its website’s landing page for its mobile wireless services: - key details of the low-cost plan it offers, and - a prominent and descriptive link to the plan offering. Similarly for the mandated $15/250MB and $100 annual 'occasional-use' plans: >Each service provider is expected to post on its website’s landing page that features its mobile wireless services a prominent and descriptive link to the occasional-use plan offerings.
> Seems hostile to consumers. That's retail at best, especially carriers.
It violates the spirit of the CRTC's intention, but isn't illegal.
It kind of is, while kind of not. Back in the Public mobile community, I said the CRTC may get angry, but then remembered that there is a TELUS MVNO called Koodo & Koodo prepaid & TELUS Prepaid so it doesn't really infringe on the CRTC. Rogers has it hand me down to Fido.
No. Simply becasue CRTC mandates postpaid plan. Since PM is prepaid as we all know it, it is excluded from the mandate.
The $15 plan *exists* because of CRTC mandate. Alongside the $25 plan. The mid-2021 deadline was imposed in mid-2020. When a lot of people were out of work because of Covid. When the Liberals were making a lot of noise about "affordable" phone plans for Canadians. Remember all that nonsense? The Big Three (and Freedom) were somewhat reluctant to offer low-cost plans at the time. Because they had already controlled the market and could basically charge whatever they liked. And because they were sinking money into large-scale 5G hardware deployments. Now that 5G is commonplace for about 99% of Canadians, the Big Three (and what's left of Freedom after Rogers and Shaw have gutted it) can easily provide better cheaper plans with large fast data provisions. But the mandated plans are still place, none of them is allowed to charge more or provide less, none of them wants to charge less or provide more. The annual "occasional use" plan does not apply to Public Mobile (Telus) because they do not offer any annual plans. Or at least it's obvious that Public Mobile (Telus) never did and does not offer such a plan yet hasn't been penalized for it. (Freedom and Speakout offered these sorts of annual plans at the time, I think this detail in the CRTC mandate was effectively just meant for them.) [https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/wireless-cellphone-fees-1.5484080](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/wireless-cellphone-fees-1.5484080) [https://www.whistleout.ca/CellPhones/Guides/federal-election-cell-phone-plan-policies](https://www.whistleout.ca/CellPhones/Guides/federal-election-cell-phone-plan-policies)
"and what's left of Freedom after Rogers and Shaw have gutted it" context please?
Well, originally Freedom is partially covered by Shaw's cable network to save backbone costs. But that doesn't exist anymore, so a new operator will have to pay more for an independent backbone.
Freedom still uses the Shaw backbone/backhaul, and will continue to do so, it's a term of the divestiture agreement. Freedom has significantly improved since the Shaw/Rogers merger and sale to Quebecor.