I believe that I speak for many of us students when I say that we hate dealing with cell phone carriers. Yes, we come, sometimes in flocks, when a certain company unveils its “ultimate” smartphone, lining up a day before because it really is worth getting.
Yet, we all dread coming to the till and negotiating our “contract” and “terms.” Oh, I have to sign up for three years just to get the subsidized phone price? And there is a minimum price I have to pay for those 36 months? And even if your phone and patience survive those three years you can’t even change carriers, as the phone will be locked to your carrier. These are some of the pitfalls of Canadian wireless companies that the CRTC (Canadian Radio-television Telecommunications Commission) has allowed for so long.
However, all of that might change; Canadians have a chance in an open forum to address what changes they would like to see their phone carriers adopt. In this article I will explain two major changes I think should happen with our current wireless code.
The first thing is changing the standard three-year “$50 minimum” term agreement in order to get, for instance, an iPhone 5 for $180 – erroneously believing that you will “save” $580. However, they’ve got you for three years, and within about a year you have already paid Rogers, Telus, Bell, or whomever, the difference in cost owed to the manufacturer. It is interesting to note that these three mega companies have 94 per cent of the mobile phone market in Canada. I understand that not everyone can pay a lot more than $180 up front for purchases like these, but the lack of options really gives the carriers a huge advantage. Indeed, Canada’s Competition Bureau reports that “the large proportion of wireless contracts are three years in duration.”
I propose that they introduce both one-year and two-year contracts instead, because a lot can change even after just one year, and termination fees should not have to be such a nightmare. You should be able to opt out anytime and just pay the difference from the MSRP (manufacturer’s suggested retail price) if it’s early enough in the contract agreement, or not at all if you’ve reached that certain point where they’ve paid off that difference. Nevertheless, offering choices tailored to individuals’ needs are commonly established in many industries and I hope to see that happen in the wireless industry as well.
Another issue is data charges, especially concerning roaming charges on trips. No way do I want to be charged an extra $100 or $200 for sending a couple of text messages or accidentally downloading an app. Is it possible for a carrier to warn us or set up a cap on additional fees? Perhaps going over or $50 or $100 would help remind people of this crucial step to make sure they aren’t roaming.
To be fair, they are technically providing a cap, but the average person’s monthly fee on their plan does not stray too far from $50 before taxes. So when your “new” bill from roaming and other charges is about 400 per cent over your average bill, only then do they start capping or actually caring about you. Lowering these cap levels to 100 per cent would make much more sense. I suggest they change that right away. As you can see, there is currently only one clear winner in this situation, and it is not the consumer.
It’s important for Canadians to speak out on these issues. You can do so by going to the CRTC website and becoming a part of the process.
