Rogers doesn't extend bid - must have gone through?

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.fido (More info?)

Rogers' bid expired Nov. 5 at 5pm. Since Rogers didn't extend its bid,
I guess we can assume that it went through.

They say they will keep the Fido brand. But never said that they would
keep Microcell.... so bye bye Microcell employees and hello "Fido is a
registered trademark of Rogers Wireless".

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.fido (More info?)

> Rogers' bid expired Nov. 5 at 5pm. Since Rogers didn't extend its bid,
> I guess we can assume that it went through.
>
> They say they will keep the Fido brand. But never said that they would
> keep Microcell.... so bye bye Microcell employees and hello "Fido is a
> registered trademark of Rogers Wireless".

One might be suprised with what comes about. Given comments and commitments
made to the Competition Board, to obtain approval for purchase, things may
not change all that much. Now.. I could say more, but..

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.fido (More info?)

malingerer@gmail.com wrote:
> One might be suprised with what comes about. Given comments and commitments
> made to the Competition Board, to obtain approval for purchase, things may
> not change all that much. Now.. I could say more, but..

Look at all the promises Air Canada had made when it convinced the government
to allow AC to buy CP. At first opportunity, AC broke each and every promise.
There is very very very little left of the original CP and certaintly nothing visible.

When Rogers officially gets it hands on Microcell, it will need to rationalise
all duplication. It will probably be forced to let go of some spectrum in some
cities.

It makes no sense for Rogers to keep Microcell operating. Fido's brand will
likely be used for "pay as you go" branding.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.fido (More info?)

JF Mezei wrote:
> It makes no sense for Rogers to keep Microcell operating. Fido's brand will
> likely be used for "pay as you go" branding.

I don't care what happens to the "brand". It would be nice
if Rogers left the current Microcell operations and
technical staff in place and not cannobolize Microcell
towers, etc.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.fido (More info?)

Michael Moore wrote:
> I don't care what happens to the "brand". It would be nice
> if Rogers left the current Microcell operations and
> technical staff in place and not cannobolize Microcell
> towers, etc.


Yeah, it would be nice. But it won't happen. One company rarely buys another
to keep it alive, especially when the company it is acquiring is a direct
competitor that brings no new services/products/technologies to the buyer.

 

[Joseph]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.fido (More info?)

On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 23:51:43 -0500, JF Mezei
<jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote:

>It makes no sense for Rogers to keep Microcell operating. Fido's brand will
>likely be used for "pay as you go" branding.

So you say that you have inside information. Otherwise how do you
know all that Rogers intends to do or are you in direct communication
with Ted Rogers?

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

 

[Joseph]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.fido (More info?)

On Sun, 07 Nov 2004 03:57:55 -0500, JF Mezei
<jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote:

>Yeah, it would be nice. But it won't happen. One company rarely buys another
>to keep it alive, especially when the company it is acquiring is a direct
>competitor that brings no new services/products/technologies to the buyer.

Now isn't this silly. Of course companies look for ways to be
innovative in their market. Just because Fido had the innovative
ideas doesn't mean that Rogers will automatically axe them.
Industries must be innovative or their competition will run right over
them.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.fido (More info?)

> When Rogers officially gets it hands on Microcell, it will need to
rationalise
> all duplication. It will probably be forced to let go of some spectrum in
some
> cities.

So, did you happen to know about the announcement a while ago regarding
spectrum caps? There are no longer any..

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.fido (More info?)

malingerer@gmail.com wrote:
> So, did you happen to know about the announcement a while ago regarding
> spectrum caps? There are no longer any..

Spectrum caps may be gone, but competition bureau isn't. And the later may
decide that Rogers needs to give up some spectrum to both Telus and Bell in
certain areas..

And in terms of what I know or don't know, there is nothing magical about
this. In every merger between peers, one of the two has disapeared much much
faster than had been promised.

The only time you see some parts survive is when the target company offers
products that the buying company doesn't have. And that is not the case with Microcell.

Rogers will probably decide that some of Microcell's assets are better than
its own and decide to ditch Rogers assets and keep the Microcell ones, but
they will become Rogers assets.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.fido (More info?)

> Rogers will probably decide that some of Microcell's assets are better
than
> its own and decide to ditch Rogers assets and keep the Microcell ones, but
> they will become Rogers assets.

And.. I guess along with it.. you?