• AutoTL;DRB
    link
    English
    131 year ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    Aug 29 (Reuters) - Canada’s merger court asked the competition bureau to pay about C$13 million ($9.58 million) to Rogers Communications (RCIb.TO) and Shaw Communications for the lengthy court battle after its failed attempt to block the telecom firms’ C$20-billion merger.

    The Competition Tribunal, Canada’s merger court, in a ruling dated Aug. 28 said the Commissioner of Competition Matthew Boswell’s approach to block the deal was “unreasonable”.

    The companies maintained that Boswell “adopted an unnecessarily contentious approach throughout the litigation, which significantly increased the costs that they were required to incur,” the tribunal said.

    The Rogers-Shaw merger had faced intense opposition from Canada’s antitrust regulator whose efforts to block it were rejected by the Competition Tribunal and a Canadian court.

    The bureau’s biggest concern was the deal would lessen competition in a country where wireless bills are already among the highest in the world.

    In March, Canada approved Rogers’ buyout of Shaw Communications after securing binding commitments to pay financial penalties if it failed to create new jobs and invest to expand its network.


    The original article contains 179 words, the summary contains 174 words. Saved 3%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

    • Peanut
      link
      fedilink
      17
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Please go look for the financial penalties. They are a joke compared to the money being thrown around. Antitrust is a joke. Everybody and their dog knew this shouldn’t be allowed, and knew that it would be regardless.

      • @Auli@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Why shouldn’t it have been allowed? I don’t personally care. But Shaw sucked and if it brings the offers the east gets out west all the better for the users. The one less competertior is bull shit because they already had an agreement to not compete with each other. Besides cell service I being in the west could never get Rogers service so I had one choice of cable provider Shaw now I have Rogers what have Iost as a consumer? The choice of one cable provider all that has happened is the name changed.

        • Peanut
          link
          fedilink
          2
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Things should be moving in the other direction. The entire point of antitrust is to prevent things from getting to where they already are. None of the telecoms should be growing in power or consolidating at this point, and there was no good reason to allow it. There is already a disgusting overreach of power, and antitrust should be actively making changes to increase competition and set guardrails. Rogers should also not be gaining after they downed important services over the entire country for a whole day.

          Notably, the restrictions and promises made to allow the deal were an absolute joke, and the citizens come out last here. There was no reason to allow the insulting deal that was allowed.

          This 26 billion dollar deal is supposed to come with billions of dollars in required efforts. The punishment for failure is a fine that is… A fraction of what those efforts cost. 1/26 of what was spent on the deal paid over ten years.

          The amount of money given to these companies is already absurd.

          And now we are paying Rogers ten million for necessary due diligence? The power dynamic is beyond broken.

        • @phx@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          11 year ago

          I’ve had service from both Rogers and Shaw. By and have Rogers was muuuuuuuch worse, so I can’t really see things getting better for those in the west with this deal