So I'm thinking...

We’ve been relatively quiet so far about the CRTC’s decision on our ownership structure at the end of October. Today we are ready to speak up, announcing the launch of an advertising campaign geared at letting Canadians know that when it comes to wireless service, they deserve more.

Canadians were supposed to have choice this holiday season – and now it looks like they might not.

Over these past few weeks, the Canadian wireless situation and our role in it has been widely covered in the media and sparked much conversation on this site and elsewhere. There have been a lot of questions about how Globalive Wireless and the WIND Mobile brand got here, and we think you deserve to know the facts. I’d like to address a number of questions we’re frequently asked.

Q. Is Globalive Wireless controlled by non-Canadians?

A. You only have to walk through our main office at Queen's Quay in Toronto or our other offices in North Vancouver, Kanata, Calgary or Edmonton to see a Canadian team building a new Canadian wireless company. In March 2009, both Industry Canada and the Justice Department carefully reviewed our structure and granted us licences to compete against the incumbent carriers (TELUS, Rogers and Bell). They ruled that we were fully compliant with Canadian ownership and control rules, applying the same test as the CRTC did a few months later.

Q. Why did the CRTC decide to hold a public hearing?

A. In April 2009 TELUS asked the CRTC to hold a public hearing to effectively review the Industry Canada and Justice Department decision. To everyone’s surprise the CRTC agreed, and for the first time in its history, it held such a public review. It is nice to be first but we weren't so happy about this one.

Q. What did the CRTC decide?

A. The CRTC agreed with the government of Canada that Globalive met the objective legal requirements of Canadian ownership and control. However, it differed from the Government in its subjective interpretation of “control in fact” of our business and raised four questions about our structure all of which go well beyond the legal requirements of Canadian ownership and control requirements. We respect the CRTC’s right to form a subjective opinion on the facts. But we respectfully disagree with that opinion.

Q. What about the other new entrants, DAVE and Public Mobile? Are they approved for launch?

A. Not as far as we know. Globalive was the first to be ready to launch and the first to undergo the new public review process established by the CRTC. To our knowledge, the CRTC has made no rulings yet on DAVE and Public Mobile. In fact the CRTC has not even decided what type of review process it will apply to these companies. The CRTC could well make a decision also prohibiting these companies from launching their service. Unlike Globalive, these companies have not revealed their control structure publicly.

Q. I’ve heard that we’ll still get more competition in the Canadian wireless market if Globalive can’t launch, because DAVE and Public Mobile will be there?

A. Despite what the big three are telling people, Globalive will be the only real national alternative with a cross-country network. We are also ready to compete now. Coverage and network aside, Rogers filed an application with the CRTC in early September, asking the CRTC to launch the same type of public review of DAVE and Public Mobile’s foreign ownership and control as it did for Globalive.

Q. What’s next for Globalive?

A. We remain focused on our goal of bringing change to the wireless market. Right now, we’re working to achieve that goal by informing the public about the current state of wireless in Canada. Though many Canadians are frustrated in their own experiences with mobile service providers, they don't understand the scope of the the issues at hand.

• Higher prices: Due to lack of competition and real alternatives, Canadians pay an average of 60% more for mobile wireless services than Americans according to the Telecommunications Policy Review Panel.
• Staggering complaints: The Better Business Bureau released its list of top ten consumer complaint calls. Cell phone companies tops that list – soaring above car dealers, movers and even utilities. Clearly Canadian consumers aren’t being treated as they should be and they’re not happy about it.
• Among the weakest in the world: Canada’s wireless industry is one of the weakest in the developing world. Merrill Lynch puts Canadian wireless penetration at 65 per cent, last among 22 developed countries (below Tunisia and Iraq). The International telecommunications Union (ITU) has tracked Canada’s decline from 35th in 1998 to 128th in 2008 – far behind many underdeveloped nations.
• Oligopoly: The Canadian wireless market is dominated by three very large, very profitable players – Telus, Rogers and Bell. This is not a 'hypercompetitive market' as they would have you believe. WIND Mobile, is the only new entrant that offers a truly national wireless alternative.

You can see our new print advertisement here.

And if you haven't already, I inivite you to join the conversation by telling us how you feel: Join the conversation here.