Some things change. Some things stay the same.

Today’s papers are full of information on Quebec City’s four-hundredth birthday. And so I’m going historical on my blog for today.

Nothing like a $80-million party to start a fight amongst Canadians. With Quebec Nationalists not exactly pleased with the Anglo’s involvement.  There’s also the military march occurring that has ruffled some feathers. #1 Irony of the event? Paul McCartney Doing a concert on the plains of Abraham where the British defeated France and thus secured Quebec in 1759.

But, this is not the first time controversy has been stirred up for Quebec’s birthday. H.V. Nelles wrote a history of the Tercentenary of Quebec or the 1908 Celebrations. In it he describes the federal, provincial and municipal attempts to find accommodation on how to celebrate this delicate (to Quebec nationalists) celebration. Lets remember that back then Laurier was not only Prime Minister but also represented the riding of Quebec City, so a big party (and budget, ours is $80 million, theirs about $800,000) was definitley going to happen. Just how do you celebrate the history of a city that had essentially been conquered, and was now loyal subjects of a non-catholic King?  Back in March, Nelles wrote an excellent article in the National Post on Quebec’s last big party and I’ve clipped some of the more interesting tidbits:

Yet even though the Tercentenary celebrations were historical in theme, it was a peculiar kind of history — one that was selectively remembered to serve multiple present needs. In the case of the historical pageants, Quebec history turned out to be more royalist, pious and aristocratic than one would have expected. The representation of the battle of 1759 became a grand mingling of armies under joint British and French command marching together in peace. And if the British victory on the Plains were to be celebrated, so too the French victory at Sainte-Foy the next spring had to be elevated to historical equivalence.

This was history modified to meet present requirements, toned down or changed to assuage sensibilities, or selectively represented to counteract one form of imperial grandeur with another. This was history as people wished it to be.

Funny how some things just don’t change.  It’ll be interesting when someone decides to write the inside story of this years events.

Ottawa’s Plasco in MIT’s Tech Review

I did a tour of the Plasco site site a year and a bit ago.  Rod Bryden did his usual artistic sell on the merits of the technology and handed out a bunch of material on the project. Andreas Tsangaris his chief scientist (CTO?) seems to be an authority on this technology and, though a layman, I came away impressed with the promise.

Recently, Ottawa city’s council approved the building of a new plant to provide power on the local grid. For those interested in Gasification of Garbage there was a a primer by MIT’s Technology review released today. Its worth a look if your not up to speed on what this stuff does. This should hopefully help with our pressing issues on garbage and energy, the recent trial experienced some delays so this isn’t for the faint of heart, and our Local government should keep on an eye on how our tax dollars are being used here. Nevertheless, a cool story coming out of our city.

Watch this….

Bell just released some data to meet the CRTC request for information following their recent bump into network neutrality.  You’ll hear numbers been thrown about by people who have never run a network… truth being Bell’s network is Very congested.

Its not that their network is 95% free of congestion… which is what you’ll hear.

Silly Points for the first person to say that.

BCE is there a deal to be made?

I’ve been trading in and out of BCE over the past few months to make some money, just enough to buy some furniture here and there.

But I’m now out and done. Mostly because I don’t really know where the story is going to go from here, and in the summer i stop mucking about with stocks, because I’m usually at the beach. But for Insight into whether BCE and the LBO/Banks can make a deal here Mark McQueen over at Wellington Financial has been following every painful twist and turn of the OTPP/BCE deal.

Today, Mark wrote a post that if there was an award for best post on a financial subject I’m pretty sure would win him the prize. Its direct and to the point. And by far the best analysis I’ve seen on the subject, I think anyone with an interest in the BCE saga should read it. Well done Mark!

[as a full disclosure: i no longer own BCE directly, but may in some mutual funds. And come on would you take any of my investment advice? ;)]

Newspapers are dying.

A week or so ago Steve Ballmer said that in 10 years newspapers would be dead.

This of course riled up a few people still working for the Newspapers. With Mathew Ingram pointing out that there will be papers for the foreseeable future. I fundamentally agree with Mat. But I have to ask the question of what kind of papers will they be?

The reason I ask is that Sam Zell CEO of the Tribune, a conglomerate of US papers, best known for owning  the LA Times. Also announced his papers will be going to a new ad ratio:

excluding classified advertising and special ad sections — split 50-50 between news content and ads.

He also plans on cutting staff as with smaller space they need less staff (win win). But Zell is no idiot when it comes to the newspaper business, he can read a balance sheet as well as the next guy.  AD percentage in all of today’s papers has been creeping up, while subscribers and revenues decline.

But you’ve got to wonder with the staff cuts and other issues going on at newspapers just what kind of paper my Dad will be reading in 20 years time. So while I agree with Mathew that there will be print media (with papers being a part of them) You got to wonder who the heck is going to buy them with ad ratio’s and content going the way they are?

Maybe E-ink to Print Papers will be what FM is to AM. AM exists but no one goes there for their music anymore.

CBC’s mixed message on who pays for hockey night in Canada.

I haven’t posted in a bit but like most Canadians I’ve been watching the drama associated with the hockey night in Canada Theme song. For those way out of the loop this is where the story starts in The National and in the National Post, and on CTV News, the Globe And Mail, the Ottawa Citizen, and the Toronto Star.

For my American friends. This is the theme played on our national public broadcaster, the CBC (like the BBC), before and during the broadcast of our NHL hockey games. Turns out the CBC doesn’t own the jingle and has been licensing it for the past few (40) years, recently at $500 bucks a pop. They tried to come up with a perpetual agreement that would give them full ownership for a price in the high 6 figures, or just under a million bucks or so. You can watch the coverage on the CBC’s The National on CTV News, Or Read about it in the Globe, in the National Post, the Toronto Star and in the Ottawa Citizen, so as you can see its pretty big news here.

What happened is the CBC decided to break off negotiations and announced a contest to replace the jingle with a new one, sort of a American Idol for jingles. At this point CTV, another major TV station swooped in and bought the rights, for roughly $2.5 million or so. I personally believe that the Contest and the ending of negotiations was a bit of a ploy on the CBC’s negotiators side, because as soon as they saw that CTV was in the running they announced they were negotiating again.

In any event The CBC lost the deal with Scott Moore, executive director, CBC Television Sports saying:

“The owner’s demand of $2.5 to 3 million is well beyond—actually, three or four times as much aswhat we consider to be a reasonable valuation. As a public broadcaster, it would have been irresponsible to have offered that amount.”

Fair enough. (I have bolded the public thing)

Now CBC Sports has been having a rough time as of late. They won’t be broadcasting the Olympics (they were outbid) and lost the CFL (Canadian Football League) again because they were out bid, they also lost curling (no great loss IMHO). Last year they won both the FIFA and NHL Broadcasting rights. The NHL deal cost “roughly 100 million a year” this being bid on again against CTV. The CBC at the time tried to reassure Canadians that this wasn’t Tax Payers money being used but private money.

Stursberg explained that 45 per cent of CBC Television’s financing comes from public money — the other 55 per cent is private money.

“This is financed completely out of private money … There is no public money involved in this deal,” said Stursberg, adding that revenue generated from the deal will help finance other, less-profitable CBC programs.

He was also quoted in other media outlets saying:

“This is financed completely on private money,” said Richard Stursberg, the network’s vice-president of TV. “Advertising revenues from the property cover in their entirety the rights and production costs.”

I remember this argument and kind of laughed at the statement, but I like CBC’s hockey coverage so no biggie.

But as this Private vs. Public Money thing is CBC’s argument for paying huge numbers on the Hockey rights, hockey is over 18% of CBC televisions budget alone, they should be honest about it. Remember their argument for not getting the jingle was of course they are a poverty stricken public broadcaster. I don’t think they can or should have it both ways.

Were they going to use public money to buy a jingle that helps their ‘privately paid for’ broadcast? We were told that this NHL Broadcast deal was profitable, so presumably they can afford to pay for the jingle with those privately financed dollars. In any event, I’d probably be complaining if they had paid $3 million for the jingle but the broadcaster should stop trying to have it both ways on private vs. public dollars and quit trying to spin how their budget works. They are a publicly funded institution that has dipped into competing with CTV and Global, fair enough, but if you’re going to be compete on these things (and make money on deals - which they have) don’t beg off when you loose in public because you’re the public broadcaster.