this post was submitted on 31 Mar 2024
39 points (81.0% liked)

Canada

7203 readers
164 users here now

What's going on Canada?

Communities

🍁 Meta

🗺️ Provinces / Territories

🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer

💻 Universities

💵 Finance / Shopping

🗣️ Politics

🍁 Social and Culture

Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca/

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
otter@lemmy.ca
39
Consumers may grumble, but these oligopolies are great for investors (www.theglobeandmail.com)
submitted 7 months ago by sbv@sh.itjust.works to c/canada@lemmy.ca
20 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

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.

https://archive.is/1BPVW

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 60 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (3 children)

“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.

[–] No_Eponym@lemmy.ca 17 points 7 months ago

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.

[–] sbv@sh.itjust.works 5 points 7 months ago

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.

[–] vasametropolis@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

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.