As skinny cable rules take effect, consumers wait for better options
CRTC demanded channel selection options by Dec. 1 and threatened to revoke licences if the deal is bad
The CRTC and consumer advocacy group OpenMedia say they're keeping a close eye on the country's TV providers as the final phase of new 'skinny' cable packages rules are implemented on Thursday.
After regulations were first introduced earlier this year, companies faced accusations of finding loopholes to ensure customers either remained on more expensive TV packages or paid more for starter cable packages through added fees or eliminated discounts.
- CRTC opens hearings on $25 basic TV packages. Is it just 'lip service'?
- $25 'skinny' TV packages called a 'ripoff' as industry 'stares down' CRTC
The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission and OpenMedia say they want to see the rules, meant to give viewers more choice and affordable options, embraced instead.
"The big concern is ... that the telcos are going to attempt to skirt the spirit of the law and price Canadians out of these channels in another attempt to keep them trapped in expensive bundles," said OpenMedia spokeswoman Meghan Sali.
In March, the CRTC required all TV service providers to offer basic cable packages for no more than $25 monthly. Consumers also had to be given the choice to either add channels to their subscriptions a-la-carte or through pre-packaged bundles of no more than 10 channels.
Canadians frustrated over $25 basic package
But starting Dec. 1, TV service providers must offer both options.
Some TV providers, for example, would only sell the new, cheaper packages in tandem with Internet services, said Hutton, or deny bundling discounts to skinny cable subscribers.
Canadians also complained about hidden fees, difficulty navigating the new options and lacklustre channel lineup in the basic cable packages.
Sali said she wasn't surprised by these tactics as a lack of competition in the industry allows the major telecommunications firms to charge high prices for their services. The companies only modified their anti-consumer behaviour at the CRTC's aggressive behest, she said.
Hutton said that some companies changed their conduct, "which will hopefully make the deployment of the next phase that much more successful."
CRTC demands better information, simple offers
The CRTC has taken several steps to ensure that's the case.
Last week, the broadcast regulator announced a number of suggestions to help companies act in the best interest of consumers, including giving customers information about the new choices and keeping offers simple.
They came with a thinly veiled threat — the regulator also announced it renewed the licences of most providers for just one year, rather than the usual seven.
"We can have this conversation again next year if they don't live up to the best practices," Hutton said.
For their part, all of the companies contacted by The Canadian Press — VMedia, Cogeco, Shaw, SaskTel, Telus, Bell and Rogers — say they're either already compliant with the new regulations or on track to do so as they expand their offerings to suit or exceed requirements. Videotron and MTS did not respond to request for comment.
VMedia, Rogers and SaskTel also defended their adherence to the CRTC's best practices suggestions.
Cable, satellite firms defend conduct
VMedia spokesman George Burger said in an email the company is focused on transparency, allows customers to easily add or remove additional channels and packages online, and has no contracts or cancellation fees.
Rogers spokesman Andrew Garas said in a statement the company already exceeds best practices in most areas.
SaskTel spokesman Greg Jacobs said in an email the company prioritizes giving customers a rich and customizable experience by offering, for example, low equipment costs.
Sali said the fees for individual channels and small packages set by these companies will determine whether they're attempting to make these options affordable for Canadians.
Hopefully, the firms will realize there's not a lot of wiggle room for interpretation in what the CRTC is demanding, she said.
"But I don't think it's going to be something that they'll ... choose to do without that really strong enforcement by the CRTC."