BlackBerrys accounted for only 3% of smartphones used in Canada at end of 2017 - Canadanewsmedia
Connect with us

Business

BlackBerrys accounted for only 3% of smartphones used in Canada at end of 2017

Published

on


TORONTO — Somewhat reluctantly, Athar Afzal finally gave up on BlackBerry earlier this year.

He was a longtime fan of the iconic Canadian phone brand but his company forced employees who weren’t already using iPhones to transition over. He was ready to make the change though, having grown fed up with the slowness of his aging BlackBerry Priv.

According to online measurement firm comScore, there aren’t many holdouts left in Canada still using a BlackBerry.

BlackBerrys accounted for only three per cent of the smartphones used in Canada at the end of last year, says comScore.

A decade ago, the BlackBerry brand was at its peak — but about to experience a precipitous decline with the release of the first iPhone and the subsequent unveiling of the Google Android platform. In 2016, after years of failing to stem market share losses, BlackBerry announced a monumental change in strategy. The company’s new focus would be on software and it would no longer make phones, although partnerships with other hardware makers kept the brand alive.

"They never kept up with the times," Afzal lamented. "They just sold it on the keyboard."

Piotr Makuch also gave up on his BlackBerry Priv recently and switched to an iPhone.

"I wouldn’t say I’m an absolute die-hard but I certainly appreciated a lot of the things that they do and I’ve always enjoyed my BlackBerry devices," he said.

"I’d never had an iPhone before and I appreciate that for all the limitations in terms of its customizability, with anything I run everything just works smoothly and nicely. And that’s a nice change from the Priv which would kind of chug when I tried to launch apps sometimes."

Afzal said a lack of operating system updates for his Priv left him frustrated as his device just got slower and slower. And while he appreciated that the device was marketed around data security, he found the software was unreasonably sluggish.

"Every time you had to restart your BlackBerry it would take (up to) five minutes because it would go through all the security settings again. So from a functionality perspective, it would take forever, and it ended up becoming a nuisance actually," Afzal said.

But there are some BlackBerry loyalists who still remain faithful to the brand and hopeful for the future.

Last year, Chinese company TCL released the well-reviewed KeyOne, which had the trademark BlackBerry keyboard, and it’s set to unveil the Key2 next month. A teaser ad promotes the phone with the tagline "an icon reborn." TCL is one of the companies BlackBerry licensed its brand to.

Makuch said he’s still open to getting another BlackBerry down the road, as long as it’s priced reasonably and not competing with a top-of-the-line iPhone.

"I think about that keyboard all the time," he said. "I really wish the phones were priced better."

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Kinder Morgan could win all the battles and still lose the war

Published

on

By


Of the 16 judicial challenges that the Trans Mountain pipeline project has survived so far, none is as important as one handed down this week by the B.C. Supreme Court.

The court actually ruled in two separate lawsuits, one filed by the City of Vancouver and the other by the Squamish Nation. But, make no mistake − it is the second that is so consequential and portends well for the company in terms of the legal matters still outstanding.

To understand why the Squamish case is so important, one has to go back to a Federal Court of Appeal decision in 2016 regarding Enbridge’s proposed $7.9-million Northern Gateway pipeline. Approved by the National Energy Board and the federal cabinet, the court found that Ottawa failed to properly consult First Nations communities along the planned route. That ruling effectively killed the venture there and then.

Story continues below advertisement

Kinder Morgan was always aware of the concerns expressed by aboriginal groups in northern B.C. that there had been insufficient consultation around the Gateway project. Both Enbridge, and the federal government at the time, had been publicly criticized for the poor job they had done in trying to get First Nations groups educated about both the overall project and the measures being undertaken to mitigate potential risks. Kinder Morgan was determined not to make that mistake, determined that inadequate conferral would not be something that killed its project. It pushed the federal government on this front, too.

That First Nations groups would one day launch court actions to try and stop it was a given. And the Squamish, among other aboriginal groups, complied.

Of all the lawsuits levelled against the project, Kinder Morgan was still most nervous about the ones involving First Nations. Courts at all levels had, in recent years, sided heavily in favour of Indigenous groups, when it came to areas such as land rights and consultation.

There’s always been a feeling that if anything was going to threaten Trans Mountain, it would be a legal ruling that sided with a First Nations group opposed to the project – which is why Justice Christopher Grauer’s decision this week is so consequential.

While going to great pains to make it clear what his two rulings were not about – whether the project should go ahead, whether it is in the national interest or whether it presented unacceptable risks to the environment – he said in the case of the Squamish that he was satisfied that the consultation that took place as part of the NEB’s assessment process was adequate.

“I find that … consultation and accommodation sufficient to satisfy section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982, had occurred, was reasonable and entitled to deference,” Justice Grauer ruled in dismissing the Squamish’s petition.

Of course, this is not the end of it. It never is with this project. There is still the reference question that the B.C. government is sending to the courts on jurisdiction. And the Federal Court of Appeal is soon expected to render a decision in a massive case, involving, among others, several First Nations groups along the coast and the B.C. Interior. It also centres around the question of consultation, and whether there was enough of it prior to the NEB and the federal cabinet approval of the pipeline expansion.

Story continues below advertisement

Story continues below advertisement

It doesn’t necessarily follow that because the B.C. Supreme Court has ruled that consultation was sufficient, the federal appeal court will, too. But most legal observers believe that Justice Grauer’s decision certainly bodes well for Kinder Morgan, which must be anxiously awaiting the federal court’s verdict. Whether the company still has the stomach to go ahead with this endeavour is another matter.

If the company sells the project to Ottawa and walks away, which it could, it would be a seminal moment in the history of resource development in this country. Despite what federal Finance Minister Bill Morneau might say, there does not appear to be a lot of suitors waiting in the wings to take over this project should Kinder Morgan decide to wash its hands of it. (And increasingly, that is a view that many are subscribing to).

In the end, the project could end up surviving every court challenge thrown its way and still not proceed. Why? Because people may not have the appetite for the on-the-ground fight that still lies ahead. First Nations groups may lose their legal challenges, but win in the court of public opinion, especially after images of protesting aboriginal elders being carted away by Mounties or the army start being broadcast around the world.

Kinder Morgan could win all the battles and still lose the war.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Police lay charges in alleged Calgary-based, $20-million Ponzi scheme

Published

on

By


Two Calgarians have been charged with fraud in connection with an alleged Ponzi scheme that netted more than $20 million from investors.

Following a decision by the Alberta Securities Commission (ASC), police claim Arnold Breitkreutz, 70, and Susan Way, 67, defrauded hundreds of Albertan investors by using their funds “contrary to what investors were told.”

Police say the pair took in over $27 million dollars in 2014 and 2015 and used the funds to pay off other investors instead of being used for mortgage lending.

“This has been an extremely complex investigation involving substantial resources, interviews and time,” Sgt. Doug Johnston with the RCMP Federal Serious and Organized Crime unit said in a release. “We are pleased to be able to conclude this investigation with charges and extend our gratitude to the various agencies who provided support to the RCMP.”

The ASC decision back in March found Breitkreutz and Way ran a Ponzi scheme through Breitkreutz’s company, Base Finance. The RCMP began looking into Breitkreutz, Way and Base Finance in 2015 after the ASC brought the Ponzi scheme to law enforcement.

The commission said Breitkreutz, Way used Base Finance to deceive investors into thinking they were putting their money into mortgages held by the company, rather than in a loan to an undisclosed entrepreneur involved in U.S. oil and gas developments, according to the regulator panel’s decision.

Between 2004 and 2015, the operators of Base Finance raised more than $137 million from upwards of 250 investors.

Breitkreutz and Way have both been charged with fraud over $5,000 and theft over $5,000.

“Conditions of their release include not to contact certain investors, to report to the RCMP regularly, to surrender their passports and remain in Canada, and not to deal with land or money or securities of others,” police said in a release.

The pair will appear in court on May 28 in Calgary.

RRumbolt@postmedia.com

On Twitter: @RCRumbolt

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Trump administration seeks WTO panel to resolve wine dispute with Canada

Published

on

By


The Trump administration said Friday it requested that the World Trade Organization set up a dispute settlement panel to rule on its claim of Canada‘s “discriminatory” trade practices involving U.S. wine.

div > div.group > p:first-child”>

The dispute with Canada relates to policies at the provincial level that limit grocery store access to American wines. The marketplace for alcohol in several big Canadian provinces is controlled by government-run enterprises and liquor control boards, and in some cases they own and operate state-run retail networks.

Friday’s action specifically relates to the province of British Columbia, where liquor authorities in 2015 amended rules to allow regular grocery stores to start selling wine and liquor but in doing so separated U.S. and other imported wine from B.C.-only product. Even so, American wine industry executives say the U.S. industry continues to have market access issues in other Canadian provinces, including Ontario and Quebec.

Last year, the U.S. held consultations with Canada on the wine issue, but those talks failed to resolve the matter. The request for establishment of a WTO dispute panel is the next step in the settlement process.

The trade action was jointly announced by U.S. Trade Representative Robert E. Lighthizer and Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue, who requested that the WTO set up a dispute settlement panel to look at “unfair regulations” that govern the sale of wine in grocery stores in B.C.

According to the announcement, B.C.’s policy of excluding imported wine from grocery store shelves gives “substantial competitive advantage” to B.C. wine. “These regulations appear to breach Canada’s WTO commitments and have adversely affected U.S. wine producers.”

Canada is the largest single country market for U.S. wine, according to the Wine Institute, a trade organization representing more than 1,000 wineries and related businesses in California. California-produced wine is the No. 1 table wine category in B.C., and the retail value of U.S. wine sales to all of Canada last year was almost $1.1 billion.

“Wine Institute greatly appreciates the Trade Representative’s continued efforts to end these discriminatory practices and hold Canada accountable for their WTO obligations,” said Robert Koch, president and CEO of the Wine Institute. “Canadian consumers should have the same access to the vast array of the world’s great wines.”

Koch said his organization will continue to push “for equal treatment of imported and domestic wine by all Canadian provinces. Policies supporting B.C., Ontario and Quebec that provide favorable distribution and retail access, discounted excise taxes, and local bottling requirements for the benefit of domestic producers are contrary to Canada’s commitments to the WTO.”

The 2015 regulations adopted in B.C. allowed grocery stores in the province a so-called “wine on shelf” option to sell wine anywhere within the store but only BC-produced wine on grocery store shelves. Also, U.S. and other imported wine was only allowed to be sold in B.C. grocery stores where there was a separate so-called “store within a store” option.

“The B.C. policies would allow for imported wine to be in grocery stores within these completely separate [‘store within a store’] stores,” said Charles Jefferson, vice president of federal and international public policy for the Wine Institute. “But today I’m not aware of any grocery stores that have actually set up those kinds of arrangements.”

Yet, Jefferson said it’s “very hard to speculate” about the financial impact of the B.C. regulations on U.S. wine producers. “It’s really hard to see what the potential impacts are other than we know we’re being excluded from those consumers who are in the grocery store,” he said.

U.S. wine has an estimated 10 percent share of the B.C. marketplace.

“The practice of discriminating against U.S. wine is unfair and cannot be tolerated any longer,” Perdue said in a statement. “Our wine producers rely on export markets and they deserve fair treatment, especially by our northern neighbors in British Columbia.”

Lighthizer stated, “Discriminatory regulations implemented by British Columbia are unfairly keeping U.S. wine off of grocery store shelves, and that is unacceptable. Canada and all Canadian provinces, including B.C., must play by the rules. The Trump administration will continue to hold our trading partners accountable by vigorously enforcing U.S. rights under our trade agreements and by promoting fair and reciprocal trade through all available tools, including the WTO.”

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2018 Canada News Media

%d bloggers like this: