Back to the archive

The encyclopedia · Advertising & PR · Marketing decision · 2024

SiriusXM advertised the price minus a fee worth 10-20% — Canada fined $3.3M

June 2024: SiriusXM Canada paid $3.3M — plans advertised everywhere except the Music Royalty and Administrative Fee that added 10-20% to every bill.

SiriusXM Canada · 2024-06

What happened

SiriusXM Canada advertised its satellite radio and streaming subscription plans on its website, in promotional emails and in direct mail — outside Quebec, at prices no subscriber could ever pay. Every advertised plan excluded a mandatory charge, the Music Royalty and Administrative Fee, which added 10% to 20% to the monthly cost. The Competition Bureau called the advertised numbers unattainable: misleading price representations under the Competition Act.

On 5 June 2024 SiriusXM signed a consent agreement: a $3.3 million penalty plus $30,000 toward the Bureau's investigation costs, a commitment to stop drip pricing and promoting unattainable subscription prices, and an enhanced compliance program. Commissioner Matthew Boswell set the standard in one line: Canadians should be able to trust that the price they see is the one they pay.

SiriusXM extended the Bureau's drip-pricing ledger from one-time purchases to subscriptions — from Bell's $10 million in 2011 through Ticketmaster, StubHub and TicketNetwork to a recurring bill that compounds the drip every month. Since 2022 drip pricing has been written into the Competition Act itself; SiriusXM settled under the new wording.

Why it happened

  • The Music Royalty and Administrative Fee was mandatory — and excluded from every advertised price, adding 10% to 20% to the bill.
  • The claim ran across three channels — website, email, direct mail — and a price repeated everywhere is still one price.
  • A subscription renews the deception monthly: every bill repeats what the ad hid.
What it cost$3.3M penalty + $30K costs; pricing correctedcostly

The lesson

A price advertised without the mandatory fee is not a price: the Bureau treats the omitted surcharge as drip pricing, and the penalty lands on the ad, not on the fee.

Aftermath

The consent agreement was registered with the Competition Tribunal with the force of a court order. Ticketing and telecom preceded it; subscriptions became the Bureau's next front in drip-pricing enforcement.

Sources

spotted an error? The club wants to know.

Comments · 0

    Sign in to join the comments.

    More like this

    Somewhere, someone solved the problem this company failed at. 2nd Opinion →