0

Cable hits back over Internet affordability

By NEIL HARTNELL

Tribune Business Editor

nhartnell@tribunemedia.net

Cable Bahamas has hit back by arguing that this nation has “among the lowest and most affordable” entry-level broadband Internet prices in the Caribbean to help make its case for easing regulation.

The BISX-listed communications provider, in its response to the Utilities Regulation and Competition Authority’s (URCA) review of fixed Internet, pay-TV and voice services, argued that increased competition and reduced barriers to market entry mean it should no longer be designated as having significant market power (SMP) or subjected to more stringent regulation.

Drawing on the International Telecommunications Union’s (ITU) benchmarking of entry-level broadband Internet prices for the Caribbean, which shows The Bahamas as having the fifth cheapest cost in the region for 5 Gbps (gigabytes) speed behind Puerto Rico, St Maarten, Dominican Republic and Puerto Rico, Cable Bahamas argued that consumer protection concerns are better addressed via universal service mandates.

“Entry level fixed broadband prices in The Bahamas are amongst the lowest and most affordable in the Caribbean region. Like the TV market, the broadband market is therefore effectively competitive and there is no SMP,” Cable Bahamas alleged.

“The reality is that prices for broadband services have largely remained flat in The Bahamas and broadband prices are also low when compared to other countries in the region... Fixed broadband prices in The Bahamas are well below those charged in most other Caribbean countries, and Cable Bahamas is disappointed that URCA did not reference any regional benchmarks in its discussion of excessive pricing.

“Indeed, in its discussion of potential remedies, URCA alleges that excessive pricing occurs in fixed broadband markets when the evidence of the regional benchmark above points to the opposite conclusion.”

Hitting back at URCA’s comparison of BTC and Cable Bahamas’ pricing, the latter added: “URCA observes that for the three price points considered, Cable Bahamas is consistently charging a higher retail price than BTC ranging from 38 percent to 52 percent higher.

“URCA makes the point that the observed differences in retail prices could suggest that Cable Bahamas ‘is able to price independently of the market’ and that ‘this may explain Cable Bahamas’ increasing market share over time’. This analysis is fundamentally flawed.

“Cable Bahamas has been subject to the retail pricing rules for its broadband services since 2014, and any broadband prices would therefore have been approved by URCA or by its predecessor, the Public Utilities Commission (PUC). Cable Bahamas is therefore not in a position to price independently of the market,” the BISX-listed communications provider added.

“It is more likely that the table is indicative of BTC’s commercial strategy relative to Cable Bahamas. Where Cable Bahamas, as the market leader, offers significant discounts for its bundles relative to its standalone services, BTC as the challenger in the broadband and TV markets would logically deploy a market penetration strategy with lower prices to entice standalone customers to switch between providers. This is not an indication of independent pricing, but an example of competition at work.”

Calling on URCA to address consumer protection issues via a universal service review, Cable Bahamas added: “Cable Bahamas urges URCA to align itself with international best practice and deregulate these fixed retail markets, as URCA has previously done in the mobile retail markets. This would reduce the regulatory burden on the market, improve innovation, stimulate investments and further enhance competition....

“Cable Bahamas also notes that URCA no longer appears to have concerns about predatory pricing in any market, no concerns about undue bundling in any market, no concerns about undue price discrimination in any market and no margin squeeze concerns that require ex-ante regulation. URCA appears to be primarily concerned with consumer protection issues facing standalone customers.

“Cable Bahamas agrees with URCA that there are likely to be small and declining user groups in the market that rely on standalone TV and fixed telephony services, in particular. With younger segments of the market opting to use streaming and mobile services, these customer groups are likely to be older and they continue to make use of services they trust and value.

“This is not to say that they are all vulnerable customers and that these customers have affordability issues in relation to the services they purchase. These matters should be examined by URCA as part of its universal service review.”

Comments

moncurcool 6 months, 2 weeks ago

Drawing on the International Telecommunications Union’s (ITU) benchmarking of entry-level broadband Internet prices for the Caribbean, which shows The Bahamas as having the fifth cheapest cost in the region for 5 Gbps (gigabytes) speed behind Puerto Rico, St Maarten, Dominican Republic and Puerto Rico, Cable Bahamas argued that consumer protection concerns are better addressed via universal service mandates.

Last time i checked, isn't The Bahamas closer to the US? So why is the pricing being compared to Caribbean countries that have no relevance to proximity and relationships?

And rather that just print what they have been given in a report, where is the journalistic input to show that what is being stated is facts. We need journalists to please start challenging these statements from people and not just reporting what they say.

bahamarich 6 months, 2 weeks ago

Whatever the charges are they are HIGH considering the uneven level of service. I can rarely get the bandwidth I pay for

ExposedU2C 6 months, 1 week ago

The rates being charged by Cable Bahamas for video and internet services are outrageously high compared to the rates being charged in nearby South Florida for even better channel programming and much higher internet speeds. That's a simple fact!

DWW 6 months, 1 week ago

no mention of daily limits on volume, throttling certain sites, oh wait maybe that is the mobile side of things which i think has cheaper infrastructure cost compared to running wires. whole areas of Abaco and GB were intentionally omitted and people are forced to rely on wireless services which have crappy terms compared fixed/wired. tell me again why wireless and wired are treated differently? There is no point in offering 5gbs speed but then limiting the daily allowance to 500MB or 1Gb. Like hey we got blazing fast for the first 2 hours of the day but the remaining 6 hours work or 3/4 hours or playtime will be dismally frustrating. The days to selling 'speed' are over, get with the times cable/BTC/uRCA. daily volume is the issue not speed. they all trying a game hiding the prize. There should be a 'minimum service level standard" not some silly "Up To" system which allows to mediocrity or downright frustration. Dont get me started on the 3 day outage that resulted in barely an apology and the wires by the pole still sitting the ground to get damaged again when the road side clean up crew come by again in a few weeks.

Sign in to comment