ExpressVu clears major regulatory hurdle in battle for big building subscribers

Bell ExpressVu has scored a pivotal victory in the competitive battle for customers living in apartment buildings and condominiums. In a ruling that wasn’t unexpected, on September 26 the CRTC approved a licence amendment that now allows the DTH company to serve multiple unit dwellings (MUDs) using terrestrial facilities (i.e. fibre) that cross property lines or public streets. Earlier this year, the commission turned down Bell’s request to serve MUDs, saying the company’s current licence only allowed it to serve entire buildings and clusters of apartments on the same property, but that it could not act as a terrestrial broadcast distributor by crossing property lines, streets or highways – PN 2000-51. It’s an old regulation that was established for licence-exempt master antenna television (MATV) services. And it was a rule a majority of CRTC commissioners decided it was time to change. Bell ExpressVu is now able to compete more effectively with incumbent cablecos in the lucrative big building markets. Prior to the decision, ExpressVu argued that many people living in apartment buildings couldn’t receive its satellite signal because their apartments face the wrong way. The only group to oppose ExpressVu’s application was the Canadian Cable Tele-vision Association (CCTA). It argued ExpressVu would, in effect, be carrying on a cable distribution undertaking and should, therefore, be subject to the same regulatory requirements as cable, including local content regulations. In response, ExpressVu told the CRTC it would work with MUD owners to set up master antennas to pick up and distribute local stations The CCTA said Bell ExpressVu should have to apply for a cable licence whenever it wants to interconnect MUDs using terrestrial facilities to cross property lines, public streets and highways. Alternatively, it suggested that the commission authorize cable undertakings to offer the same range of signals as DTH operators. However, ExpressVu and the CRTC said such a system would be not be feasible, as cable has exhausted its analog capabilities. The CCTA also argued that the licence amendment would effectively allow ExpressVu to offer a second set of U.S. "4+1" signals, along with additional distant Canadian signals. It contended that Bell ExpressVu’s ability to configure its system in this way, while distributing signals currently unavailable to its cable competitors, constituted unfair competition. The commission pointed out, however, that it is holding a separate proceeding (PN 2000-73) to consider allowing similar carriage arrangements for Class 1 and Class 2 cable systems. Langford files dissenting opinion The cable association managed to sway one commissioner to its point of view. In a dissent, Stuart Langford said the CCTA was right to challenge the application on the basis of competitive equity, saying the commission should have delayed its ruling until a decision from PN 2000-73 had been released. That decision is expected soon. "Such a short delay could in no way seriously jeopardize Bell ExpressVu’s marketing plans regarding subscribers living in apartment buildings," Langford writes. He goes on to say that the CRTC’s majority decision "could very well result in an inequitable competitive situation by creating, in terms of content offered, two classes of cable companies, haves and have-nots. "Simply by deferring final consideration of this application until it could be dealt with at the same time as PN CRTC 2000-73, any inequities real or perceived could have been avoided. That is the route I would have chosen," Langford writes.

ExpressVu clears major regulatory hurdle in battle for big building subscribers

News | 09/28/2000 4:00 am EDT

To keep reading, get a free trial.

Already a Subscriber?

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us