Kevin: I mean, I might as well - and then I’ll let you expand - I might as well kindof address the noise around the transaction. And the noise and the magnitude of the outcry of opposition, is coming for one reason only: I’ve been at Bell for 8 years now, and in the last 4 or 5 years, we have been driving a real resurgence of the competitiveness of this company. And our competitors don’t like it. And theoutcry overwhelmingly - almost unanimously, 100%, comes from a handful of competitors, and when you look at the 800 intervenors who wrote in support, it’s just virtually unanimous that independent producers, directors, actors, theadvertising community - both from a standpoint of the organizations that speak for advertisers and the agencies themselves, were - and as a matter of fact, severalindependent broadcasters were in support.Mirko: And telecom, like Shaw.Kevin: There’s almost unanimous support, other than two Quebec BDUs -Quebecor and Cogeco - who obviously just have self-interest to use the regulatory process to try and not have competition. One of them bid on this asset, I think it’s been reported, and so one of them bid on this asset and didn’t win the asset, sothere’s some sour grapes there.Rogers intervention - they, you know, they’d love to get the English channelscheap, so they say - ‘Hey, we like consolidation, we like vertical integration, that’sall good, but they should have to sell us the English channels.’ So the oppositionhas been using - first, false numbers, misleading propaganda, and obvious self-interest to make a lot of noise around a transaction that frankly didn’t deservenear this level of media attention.
Are you surprised by the level of attention and opposition?
I think if you’re a business operator and your business is threatened by competition and by competitors, that you do everything you can to try and defendit. If you can’t defend it in the marketplace, then you run to the regulators. So -am I surprised? I am very surprised by the tactics, there’s a level of misleadinginformation and a tone of the debate that I am surprised by.
You say that if we want Canadian broadcasting to survive - and that’s putting it into rather apocalyptic terms - the Canadian system has to be strong, and youneed this kind of scale. Would it then be good to have just 2 companies inCanada?
Kevin: Well, I don’t know that I can speculate. I think that having strongCanadian broadcasters who can withstand - we’re in a cyclical industry as well,and you need to be able to withstand the cyclicality of our industry. So you needsufficient scale. I don’t know what that means, as far as the number of players.But I do think that sufficient scale, if you gonna be a mainstream mass-typeplayer who’s buying first-run content and in the mainstream genres. I still think though there’s plenty of room, and we see this in many industries when they goglobal, that you get a consolidation of the big players, and then you have apreponderance of niche players that are able to fill gaps left open by the big