Does it strike anyone as strange that the C.D. Howe Institute has suddenly decided to explore Canada's wireless market just before two important industry events -  the federal telecom review and the CRTC's examination of local telephone rules - are unveiled in March? It's not like C.D. Howe has been an engaged telecom thought-leader in recent years. In a new report, C.D. Howe concludes the major reason why only 50% of Canadians have wireless phones are regulations that keep local phone prices artificially low. If local phones were higher, it reasons, there would be more demand for wireless service and higher penetration. Unfortunately, there are several flaws in the report. Among them is the failure to properly examine other markets to determine why penetration rates are higher in the U.S. (65%), Australia (75%) and Europe (>90%). But perhaps the study's biggest shortcoming is the failure to look at a crucial issue within the wireless industry itself: pricing. Over the past few years, Canadian wireless carriers have prided themselves on being disciplined and a focus on ARPU and "profitable growth". It's a solid, pragmatic approach if you're focused on the bottom line and satisfying investors and analysts. And it has worked to perfection if you look at how well Telus Mobility and Rogers Wireless have performed in the past two or three years. But it is not the most exciting approach if you want to convince recalitrant potential customers to come on board - that is, if you really want to pick the highest hanging fruit, which may be the most lucrative. There's nothing wrong with this way of doing business but it is what it is. In a study earlier this year, telecom consultancy, Seaboard Group, contended Canadian wireless users pay 60% more than U.S. plans and 19% more than what Europeans pay. For C.D. Howe not to make wireless pricing a focus draws into question the validity of the report.