Hypocrite? Not so! Alan Knott-Craig responds to his critics

rpm

rpm

Admin
Staff member
Joined
Jul 22, 2003
Messages
66,806
Reaction score
5,057
Location
Johannesburg
Hypocrite?

It seems the jury is out on Alan Knott-Craig, who has been vocal on the interconnect debacle, why broadband costs so much and even how to fix the regulator

Not so! Alan Knott-Craig responds to his critics

First of all, I am not sure who these industry players or analysts are, or what they know about telecommunications, but if they indeed made these comments, then I am afraid they are either mischievous or do not properly understand telecommunications. Probably both.
 
AKC was just another cog in the wheel and he was there from the very beginning so he was pretty much brainwashed with the rest of the crew.
 
This is stupid. Of course he's a hypocrite, what of it?

Fact of the matter is as the CEO of Vodacom he was duty bound to make decisions and plays in the interests of Vodacom.

Since he no longer is the CEO, he's criticising them. Good. He of all people knows their dirty tricks, and if more people would have taken a stand it wouldn't have taken so long for these issues to be exposed.

+1 Alan. You should have run for Stucke's place at ICASA.
 
Ho hum.

Telling it like it is, or tryin' to sell his book? He seemed to like the stink while he was there... no problem for him makin' money and living with the rot then. Hmmmm. Just like a Nazi guard telling us that the camps were problematic after the war... a tad extreme but it is the way I see it.

Bah.

Sloooow news day with thin scrapings off the barrel bottom hey...
 
Last edited:
Maybe it is worth pointing out this.

In the event that you may have forgotten, when I ran Vodacom my duty was to my shareholders, and part of that duty was to maximise shareholder value in a responsible manner, which they had to approve as shareholders and directors. And I make no apology for that.
Click to expand...

and then later on

I accept responsibility for competing aggressively whenever I could, and I accept responsibility for continuously fighting Telkom's monopoly.
Click to expand...
.

Telkom WAS A MAJOR SHAREHOLDER.

No I won't disagree that Vodacom did change the broadband market with 3G, I very much doubt that they did this because they were "fighting Telkom's monopoly". They did it to make money. Which might not be unethical - but he should be genuine about his motives when speaking about it now.

If they were really fighting the monopoly they would have fought to self-provide earlier. They would have been ready to self provide the moment it became legal. The only reason they did not gear up for self provision was to protect Telkom's interest. It would have been in Vodacom's (the entity) interest to self provide a lot sooner than they did with more than the token projects they have taken on so far. And yes that should have happened under Mr Knott's reign.

Clearly prices will never be as low as people want them to be, but penetration is a very good yardstick to measure the success of a competitive industry.
Click to expand...

What? I would like to see this proven. I can name several examples to the contrary: Microsoft, Intel, Google, AT&T. In fact the very definition of monopoly is "a market in which there are many buyers but only one seller". Without penetration there is not many buyers....

Sorry Mr Knott. I some ways I am a big fan of yours in some ways but clearly you should not have taken the bait on this one. Instead of rambling I suggest you use your influence to actually effect real change.
 
Song added: "From my perspective Alan Knott-Craig has forfeited his right to offer this sort of advice.
Click to expand...
+999

But I'd go one further and say:
"From my perspective he has forfeited his right to offer any communication whatsoever on any matter. Henceforth he shall be known as Alan Knott-Speak."
 
AKC had all the opportunity in the world to make a difference, and a big one at that. Pity.

He say what he likes now, his words are hollow.
 
It would have been great if the shareholders of Telkom could have persuaded AKC to come out of retirement to replace its current CEO!!!

Then he could really do something about competition...
 
Actually, I have not been vocal at all, or at least no more so than before.
Click to expand...
Bullshirt.
So where are all those inane articles he claims he has written about himself trying to whitewash his name and clear his conscience in this time-frame he refers to as "at least no more so than before." ??? Because we have those same inane self-vocal articles from his "now" period.
 
"In the event that you may have forgotten, when I ran Vodacom my duty was to my shareholders, and part of that duty was to maximise shareholder value in a responsible manner, which they had to approve as shareholders and directors. And I make no apology for that."

And your customers? you felt nothing for them because at the end of the day you will rather treat your customers like dirt and mollycoddle the shareholders. Your duty should be towards your customers, after all they paid your large salary!
 
All this was recommended by and approved by the regulator. This was a commercial decision and not one born of pity.
Click to expand...
Government gave MTN and VC an incredibly huge helping-hand at your start up... If you remember just how much percentage shareholding Government had when both you two top thieves started operating !!! And you talk about "pity" in the same breath as Cell-C as if it makes you a hero??? ... you make me sick!

Competition in South Africa was fierce from day one.
Click to expand...
Absolutely correct - for Cell-C that is, and Virgin too. Your colluding with MTN does not equate to "fierce competition" unless your referring to the ferocity with which the two of you pursued the SA consumer's pennies.

In 1994 when mobile communication was launched, South Africa had 10% telephone penetration; today it has some 100% penetration.
Click to expand...
What candy-land dream-scape are you living in? Aaah that's right, it's called retirement in London with OUR money. Of course you're not going to know the reality on the ground - you've never known what it's like to not be able to afford to call your family and notify them of a death in the family.
 
Last edited:
Another comparison would be to say that you paid the bribe because the cop accepted it. So it is the cops fault for the bribe?

It is hypocritical, if he was for lower costs we would of seen changes long ago!
 
This charge is supposed to be based on the cost to carry the call plus a fair profit. When a network starts out, this charge is always much lower than the actual cost.

That's Economics 101.
Click to expand...
A fair profit. You were making "a fair profit" from interconnect before Cell-C started, then you hiked the prices 500% overnight. No idiot - that's not Economics 101 - that's RAPE. That's collusion, that's price-fixing, that's criminal. You should be in jail, not on holiday. That's the truth.
 
A source close to Icasa said that Vodacom's standard response to regulation has been to find every way to "challenge the regulations, stall the regulations or embarrass the regulator".
Click to expand...
True, but it would not have been so easy if ICASA even had one competent staff member.
 
Maybe MTN and Vodacom still operates with patch panels and "nommer asseblief"
 
When I clicked on the link I expected to see a poll...
WHY NOT??
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X