Should Bell Be Sold?

[jdobbin]

http://ctv2.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/st...BN/ctv-business

Industry Minister Maxime Bernier is laying out a welcome mat for foreign companies to acquire Canadian telecommunications companies, but even the aggressive, market-friendly minister appears unprepared for the prospect of a U.S.-led takeover of Canada's largest phone company.

Mr. Bernier recently proposed that MPs review the country's foreign ownership laws for telecommunications and cable companies, and indicated his own preference for a further easing of those rules. But a senior official said Thursday that a foreign takeover bid would be “premature” because the government is still in the process of unshackling the country's telecom and cable firms from overly restrictive regulation.

I don't see how it being foreign owned changes anything. Why not let it happen?

[geoffrey]

Agreed. Sell it off.

[Charles Anthony]

Why not let it happen?

The government may have not yet found a middleman to broker the deal -- for which a commission would be paid.

Seriously, they may be holding out in the hopes of getting a better offer.

[Borg]

Why not? We are prepared to sell off everything else.

Borg

[geoffrey]

Who wouldn't want to buy into a near monopoly market with brutally high rates? I'd buy Bell in a heartbeat. We need more foreign competition though, not just foreigner ownership.

Then we'll see our rates become more reasonable.

[White Doors]

Why not let it happen?

The government may have not yet found a middleman to broker the deal -- for which a commission would be paid.

Seriously, they may be holding out in the hopes of getting a better offer.

Currently foreign companies are only allowed 46% ownership of companies in this group including Bell. However the Ontario Teacher's pension fund is being courted to be the CDN 'silent partner' in this deal.

The government CANNOT stop this deal if it is how it is being presented thus far.

Why don't we let telecoms and others be 100% forign owned? I mean what differnce does it make?

I can tell you in Bell's case it would be a good thing.

[White Doors]

Who wouldn't want to buy into a near monopoly market with brutally high rates? I'd buy Bell in a heartbeat. We need more foreign competition though, not just foreigner ownership.

Then we'll see our rates become more reasonable.

Bell is no where NEAR a monopoly. I forgive you though because obviously you are not keeping up with what is going on in ICT.

[blueblood]

Who wouldn't want to buy into a near monopoly market with brutally high rates? I'd buy Bell in a heartbeat. We need more foreign competition though, not just foreigner ownership.

Then we'll see our rates become more reasonable.

Bell is no where NEAR a monopoly. I forgive you though because obviously you are not keeping up with what is going on in ICT.

What's the big players in the Canadian Media?

CBC

BellMedia

Canwest

Sounds like a near monopoly to me, an oligarchy more like it which is the kind of crap I have to put up with in the Ag sector. I hope that investor buys Bell and sells it off so it ends up scattering it the 4 winds. Where's Charles Anthony and his cronyism, the Canadian MSM is an example of that.

[Who's Doing What?]

Yes I just love the thought of potential extremists and enemies to our way of life having a chance to control our communications network.

I know they think it will be a US led bid to take over Bell, for now. Who knows 10 maybe 20 or 30 years from now who will be in a position to buy it. Wouldn't Al Qaeda just love it if one of their ally states used a foreign company to buy and control all of our communications. That sure would help them bankrupt the West wouldn't it? Shutting down phone, fax, and internet services to cause havok to business and the overall economy.

What a comforting thought.

[PolyNewbie]

WhiteDoors:Why don't we let telecoms and others be 100% forign owned? I mean what differnce does it make?

Because that combined with free trade puts up as the mercy of foreign corporations and gives us a government that is powerless to intervene.

What happens when the foriegn owned corporation gets a monopoly and the government is so powerless it can do nothing ?

Just because you can't think of a disadvantage to something doesn't mean it does not exist. If you cannot think of a reason not to do something, you need to read and research to find the disadvantages then make a decision based on being informed. this is known as having an "informed opinion" as opposed to "muck between your ears".

[PolyNewbie]

Generally you should only speak about things for which you are informed unless you are organizing your words in the form of a question. If you take this approach to political discussion no one will have reason to call you a moron.

[White Doors]

Who wouldn't want to buy into a near monopoly market with brutally high rates? I'd buy Bell in a heartbeat. We need more foreign competition though, not just foreigner ownership.

Then we'll see our rates become more reasonable.

Bell is no where NEAR a monopoly. I forgive you though because obviously you are not keeping up with what is going on in ICT.

What's the big players in the Canadian Media?

CBC

BellMedia

Canwest

Sounds like a near monopoly to me, an oligarchy more like it which is the kind of crap I have to put up with in the Ag sector. I hope that investor buys Bell and sells it off so it ends up scattering it the 4 winds. Where's Charles Anthony and his cronyism, the Canadian MSM is an example of that.

What? You are talking abotu CTV? BCE recently spun that off and only owns something like 10% of it now.

And what you are describing isn't a monopoly but an Oligopoly. Regardless, Bell has next to nothing to do with either.

[White Doors]

Yes I just love the thought of potential extremists and enemies to our way of life having a chance to control our communications network.

I know they think it will be a US led bid to take over Bell, for now. Who knows 10 maybe 20 or 30 years from now who will be in a position to buy it. Wouldn't Al Qaeda just love it if one of their ally states used a foreign company to buy and control all of our communications. That sure would help them bankrupt the West wouldn't it? Shutting down phone, fax, and internet services to cause havok to business and the overall economy.

What a comforting thought.

Well your fears are unfounded. The Telecommunications act is very tight and telecommunications companies have to have secure, redundant networks to ensure basic communications for the military and government. It's the #1 priority. Bell is not th eonly company that has to do this, they all do.

Your fears are completely unfounded and are based on ignorance.

[White Doors]

WhiteDoors:Why don't we let telecoms and others be 100% forign owned? I mean what differnce does it make?

Because that combined with free trade puts up as the mercy of foreign corporations and gives us a government that is powerless to intervene.

What happens when the foriegn owned corporation gets a monopoly and the government is so powerless it can do nothing ?

Just because you can't think of a disadvantage to something doesn't mean it does not exist. If you cannot think of a reason not to do something, you need to read and research to find the disadvantages then make a decision based on being informed. this is known as having an "informed opinion" as opposed to "muck between your ears".

Oh jeeze. I usuallyu have you on ignore but I just HAD to see what you had to say about this.

You are completely, 100% WRONG. The telecommunications act clearly lays it all out. The government can sieze and telephone companies assets in a time of emergency if they do not comply with the escalation triage.

You are clearly out of your element here. With the history of your posts one would think you would be worried about the goverments ability to do this with the telecommunications act than whioch shareholders are making money off of your 1-900 calls.

At least be consistent in your paranoia Poly.

[White Doors]

Generally you should only speak about things for which you are informed unless you are organizing your words in the form of a question. If you take this approach to political discussion no one will have reason to call you a moron.

Totally agree. Take your own advice.

[M.Dancer]

I don't see how it being foreign owned changes anything. Why not let it happen?

You are right. What differene would it make if the Globe and Mail or CTV were owned by a Chinese Organ.....

[M.Dancer]

Who wouldn't want to buy into a near monopoly market with brutally high rates? I'd buy Bell in a heartbeat. We need more foreign competition though, not just foreigner ownership.

Then we'll see our rates become more reasonable.

From what I have been told, phone rates are higher south than here. Even so, Bell has ceased to be a monopoly years ago.

[White Doors]

I don't see how it being foreign owned changes anything. Why not let it happen?

You are right. What differene would it make if the Globe and Mail or CTV were owned by a Chinese Organ.....

BCE doesn't own those anymore. At least not much of them.

[M.Dancer]

I don't see how it being foreign owned changes anything. Why not let it happen?

You are right. What differene would it make if the Globe and Mail or CTV were owned by a Chinese Organ.....

BCE doesn't own those anymore. At least not much of them.

But you get the point. Communications should not be foreign controlled. Whether it is the internet (sympatico) or satelitte services.......unless of course we are comfortable with The Chinese (Hell! How about a Iranian Oil Conglomerate....) owning Sympatico.

[jdobbin]

You are right. What differene would it make if the Globe and Mail or CTV were owned by a Chinese Organ.....

I think it has been pointed out that Bell only own 20% of CTV. The rest is owned by Ontario Teachers, Torstar and the Thomsons.

I suspect if a Chinese government company did buy CTV, it would lose viewers if they attempted to do anything that could be construed as political slant. It would be like the Unification Church's ownership of the Washington Times. It has cost the the church more than a billion to own it and it still has only 1/7 of the readership of the Washington Post.

[jdobbin]

But you get the point. Communications should not be foreign controlled. Whether it is the internet (sympatico) or satelitte services.......unless of course we are comfortable with The Chinese (Hell! How about a Iranian Oil Conglomerate....) owning Sympatico.

How would they be controlled? Just by owning them? And what do you think they would do with them that can't be done by Bell now?

[M.Dancer]

But you get the point. Communications should not be foreign controlled. Whether it is the internet (sympatico) or satelitte services.......unless of course we are comfortable with The Chinese (Hell! How about a Iranian Oil Conglomerate....) owning Sympatico.

How would they be controlled? Just by owning them? And what do you think they would do with them that can't be done by Bell now?

Like being responsive and responsible to shareholders? Think about it. Lets say Chinese State owned company buys sympatico. They could control the access to news sites. They could filtre news. As a Canadian, your only recourse would be to switch IPs.

I realize that is a long shot but that is one reason why foreign ownership is an issue. Could you imaging Britain in 1938 if German interests owned a few major dailies?

[White Doors]

I don't see how it being foreign owned changes anything. Why not let it happen?

You are right. What differene would it make if the Globe and Mail or CTV were owned by a Chinese Organ.....

BCE doesn't own those anymore. At least not much of them.

But you get the point. Communications should not be foreign controlled. Whether it is the internet (sympatico) or satelitte services.......unless of course we are comfortable with The Chinese (Hell! How about a Iranian Oil Conglomerate....) owning Sympatico.

Wouldn't bother me in the slightest.

[White Doors]

Like being responsive and responsible to shareholders? Think about it. Lets say Chinese State owned company buys sympatico. They could control the access to news sites. They could filtre news. As a Canadian, your only recourse would be to switch IPs.

I realize that is a long shot but that is one reason why foreign ownership is an issue. Could you imaging Britain in 1938 if German interests owned a few major dailies?

Ahh.. foreign owned by a company and foreign owned by a government are two different things.

I agree, I would nto want a foreign GOVERNMENT to own a large CDN corporation like Bell.

Not a very likely thing to happen though.

[Topaz]

Yes, sure sell BCE off to the US and THEY will be listening to YOU on your phone. We must keep the 40% ownership only to foreign business, especially the US!