Canada: three oligopolies in a trenchcoat.
Bank service charges and overdraft fees can infuriate consumers, and more choices could lower their temperature.
From the perspective of investors, though, Canada’s cozy network of oligopolies – in which a few players dominate one sector – can look very different. Slim competition can keep upstarts out and profits in, driving strong shareholder returns and attractive dividends over the long term.
“We have a handful of oligopolies that are able to fend off new entrants (whether regional or foreign) without needing to destroy profits for an extended period of time, or where we need a government financed solution,” Ian de Verteuil, head of portfolio strategy at CIBC Capital Markets, said in an e-mail.
“It’s a structure that has proven to be necessary because of our low population and geographic dispersion,” said Martin Pelletier, senior portfolio manager at Wellington-Altus Private Counsel, referring to oligopolies in general.
No it’s fucking not, that’s absolute fucking horse shit.
That means consumers will continue to grumble about their limited options, and investors can feast on attractive stocks.
That means that the rich will continue enriching themselves at the expense of consumers’ wallets, the quality of products and services they receive, and literally their lives and livelihoods.
This author is a huge fucking piece of shit. Most of what they’re writing is true, but their gleeful characterization of their gluttonous depravity absolutely boils the blood. In a just society they would be thrown in prison for profiting off an oligopoly, not given a fat dividend for doing nothing. Fucking investor pieces of shit.
Honestly, if we needed ologopolies because of our population/geography, why are they so profitable? They should just be getting by.
Break up the ologopolies.
Remove unnecessary/ineffective regulation that has been hijacked to promote protectionism.
Make all infrastructure a publically owned utility. If services can be offered on that utility efficiently via the private sector (roads, rail, ICT “digital highways”) then let any company use them at a rate that supports sufficient maintenance, repair, and I provements.
In general, ban rent seeking.
This isn’t that hard. It’s not happening because the political and bureaucractic classes have been captured by big corporations and we have no real choices.
Supporting oligopolies was an overt decision by the Canadian government in the 1970s or 1980s, since we expected them to build up here and then spread into markets abroad. That has kind of worked out for banks, but not for our other oligopolies.
I agree with the sentiment wholeheartedly.
If you are a subscriber to the Globe I’d honestly report the article. It’s based on skewed evidence and the author had questionable integrity to write it. Investors would almost certainly be better off with more competitive options.
Corrected title:
Consumers[>95% of Canadians] maygrumble[be increasingly unable to afford food and housing due to unchecked corporate greed], but these oligopolies are great for [making the already wealthiest <5% of Canadians and foreign] investors [even wealthier]In the end, isn’t that what life is truly about? Won’t people think of those poor billionaires?
Considering who owns the Globe, this shouldn’t be a surprise.
Agreed. This headline is a textbook example of plutocratic propaganda
What we need in response is an “oligopoly” of labour organization, by which I mean a class solidarity that will be able to hold the corporate oligopolies accountable. Why are workers expected to compete with each other but businesses aren’t once they drive or buy their rivals out?
hold the corporate oligopolies accountable
That’s what elected officials are for, unfortunately every party in Canada is the Capitalist Party.
No they’re not. Elected officials will represent whoever puts money in their pockets along with whoever votes for them. And I don’t mean illegal corruption. I mean direct political donations needed for those officials’ campaigns to get them elected. Electoral democracy is not enough. The only way around it is to take the excess money from the oligopolies via labor organizing so that labor can put more money in the elected officials’ pockets instead of the corporations’ major shareholders. Then perhaps the elected politicians would truly lean towards labor’s interests.
It’s the only way. The more I think about it, the more obvious it is. The only reliable way to take more of the excess profits out of the hands of major shareholders and stop them from funneling it into the politicians pockets is labor organization.
If it needs an oligopoly in order to exist, it needs to be fucking nationalized.
Ah yes, if it is good for investors it’s good for everyone. Fuck you G&M and your bullshit
The image reminds me the RBC just bought HSBC, reducing our options and tightening the oligopoly. I was a customer of HSBC, but I’m not grumbling about RBC because I switched to another smaller bank. I’m not willing to fund their executive bonuses.
They are extracting value from the peasant classes and the state enables it while providing muscle. Most political systems work like this but these “owners” are getting rather braisen. Rapid advances in technology has enabled them to squeeze extra hard across vast majority of markets.
Christ, with that title I thought I was getting a Beaverton article.
I think the Globe editors know they’ll get hate clicks this way.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Consumers like to complain about Canada’s biggest telecom players, banks, railways and grocers, and how limited choice in this country is keeping prices higher than in much of the rest of the world.
The deal created a single line through Canada, the United States and Mexico, which promises to deliver double-digit profit growth from 2024 through 2028, with help from cost savings and share buybacks.
Canadian telecom stocks have been struggling over the past two years as rising interest rates weigh on the appeal of dividends, the established players plough big bucks into upgrading their fibre networks and Ottawa takes on the country’s high cellphone charges with tough talk.
After the telecom reported its fourth quarter financial results, Cory O’Krainetz, an analyst at Vancouver-based investment manager Odlum Brown, said that costs associated with network upgrades and interest expenses weighed on profits.
Loblaw also delivers efficiencies of scale, generates valuable data on the spending habits of members in its PC Optimum rewards program and has a lock on some of the best locations for its 2,400 stores nationwide.
The solution, according to the Competition Bureau, is to encourage online competitors, support independent grocers, open doors to international companies and ease property controls that can shut out new entrants.
The original article contains 1,774 words, the summary contains 207 words. Saved 88%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
Lol sure they are, so what?
