IMG_0050 by Rory (CC BY 2.0)

IMG_0050 by Rory (CC BY 2.0)


Higher Prices, Less Competition: Some Reflections on the Proposed Rogers – Shaw Merger

Having spent a good chunk of Monday talking to reporters about the proposed Rogers merger with Shaw, I thought it might be worth highlighting my initial three takeaways. First – and this is stating the obvious – the deal will result in higher prices and less competition. There is no need to overthink any of this. Removing a company that some have touted as the best chance at a viable national fourth carrier would leave some of Canada’s biggest markets (notably Ontario, Alberta, and B.C.) without a much needed competitor. Canadians already pay some of the highest prices for wireless services in the world and if this merger is approved, the situation will only get worse. Indeed, when Rogers promises that it will not raise prices for Shaw/Freedom Mobile customers for three years, it is effectively committing to raising them as soon as the clock runs out on that timeline.

Second, the fact that the companies think that this merger stands a chance of being approved should stand as Exhibit #1 for the failures of the government and the CRTC on the wireless file. Successive governments have pledged to address high wireless costs, but have instead taken half measures or even backtracked at the slightest opposition from the incumbent providers. The CRTC is little better with the current leadership quickly dispensing with the prioritization of consumers under Jean-Pierre Blais and leaving little doubt that Bell, Rogers, and Telus have a friend at the Commission.

Simply put, this deal would not have happened under a government and CRTC that signalled its commitment to more robust competition and better consumer pricing above all else. Instead, the CRTC stands ready to increase consumer costs for Internet services (it even proposed new levies on ISPs in its Harnessing Change report) and the government seems to think that meeting its illusory 25 percent wireless reduction cost target is good enough, even if prices in other countries are declining at a faster rate.

Third, get ready for talking points that will make your head spin. As Rogers and Shaw seek to convince the government and regulators that their deal should be approved, months of criticizing competition from MVNOs may suddenly be promoted as an effective competitive alternative. Further, the companies will re-up old promises to invest in rural connectivity, 5G or anything else that might garner political support. Of course, there is always a price to be paid for those promises and in this case, it will be wireless customers that foot the bill in the form of even higher costs in what is already one of the most expensive wireless markets in the world.

Tags: / / / /


  1. All of this, agreed with. This is going to aggravate the situation for us regular street-level customers. No two ways around it.

  2. Pingback: Rogers Seeks to Buy Shaw for $26 Billion, Reducing Competition Further

  3. Pingback: ● NEWS ● #MichaelGeist #Internet ☞ Higher Prices, Less Competition:… | Dr. Roy Schestowitz (罗伊)

  4. Pingback: Links 17/3/2021: Tor and Sway 1.6 RC1 | Techrights

  5. Pingback: BREAKING NEWS | The Eye Opener

  6. Jack Denton says:

    We’re frequently compared to European cell phone providers on price. ALL the countries in Europe added together have roughly the same land mass as Canada, BUT their population is over 746 Million! Meaning Europe has about 20 times as many people to help pay for the same number of cell phone towers, so one would expect their prices to be 20 times less! Canada, by delaying the decision on Huawei for 5G, has made the carriers choose more expensive 5G equipment from competitors because they can’t risk choosing cheaper Huawei gear only to be told to pull it out later.

    • Your comment appears to presume that the infrastructure costs are the same: that the geographical spread and density of Canada’s towers is equal to Europe’s.

      In 2018, Canada had 13 000 towers; Europe had 350 000.

  7. Pingback: Shaw-Rogers Merger Good For Rogers, Risky For Consumers • JoshWho News

  8. You wanna trust a telecom to be fair…

  9. It may be applicable to some products and services.