Cellular QoS: ICASA FIFA 2010 report results

Considering these stats, was the number of subscribers to each network considered, Cell C will look good because their network is not as busy as VC and MTN.
 
ICASA said that the “operators should be mandated to improve coverage in and around the stadiums so that the consumers can enjoy Voice and Data services in future events.”
Click to expand...

I don't live in a stadium, I need quality service everywhere I am in the country.
 
Oracle666 said:
Considering these stats, was the number of subscribers to each network considered, Cell C will look good because their network is not as busy as VC and MTN.
Click to expand...

Regardless of that Cell C have a lower subscriber base, does not mean is not a busy network, VC and MTN performed below standard period.
 
Oracle666 said:
Considering these stats, was the number of subscribers to each network considered, Cell C will look good because their network is not as busy as VC and MTN.
Click to expand...
Was thinking the same.

Chances are that the majority of visitors who attended the games would've been roaming from one of the Vodafone networks, so Vodacom (and then MTN) probably saw the biggest spike in subscriber numbers.

Would be interesting to see the total number of subscriber per network for the period.
 
Oracle666 said:
Considering these stats, was the number of subscribers to each network considered, Cell C will look good because their network is not as busy as VC and MTN.
Click to expand...

I absolutely agree. They were probably not overloaded or stretched like the others.
 
What's concerning is that this was their service levels for a special event of magnitude like the world cup. Ordinary citizens in ordinary times just have no hope.
 
ajax said:
I absolutely agree. They were probably not overloaded or stretched like the others.
Click to expand...

Why does that matter, all the cell companies knew that quite a few people are coming for the world cup and will probably be using cell phones around the stadia. What worries me is the drop call rates for MTN and Vodacom. People paid for the call to connect and then it is dropped, nice revenue boost getting people to call and call again.
 
VC and MTN are bigger telcoms then CellC so they were supose to delivering better service then CellC. Regardless of subscribers,it goes for planning,infrastructure,forecast etc. Anycase im still getting subscriber not available or number doesnt exist,redail and you get the person.
 
I'm not sure why you guy's are all revering to network congestion to try and cover for VodaScum & EmptyN. The facts are: There where targets set. All the operators agreed on those targets, saying they where ready to meet those targets, if not better them. Then after the world cup Lied about they're success rate (according to this article).

Another fact CellC have been working on upgrading their network for the last 14 months now, so if their network can support more users than the other two operators don't blame low numbers, saying VodaScum & EmptyN where congested. Then they should have upgraded they're towers & perhaps set-up more, instead of buying that new Merc or BMW.

I also believe that part of CellC's success was because they where busy setting up new Towers & with the World Cup in mind they Placed their towers more strategically to provide better coverage around the stadiums.

Lastly during the World Cup we had 3 Swiss, 3 German & 2 Dutch people staying with us & friends & all of them bought cheap handsets when they landed here with CellC sim cards saying, they left their expensive phones at home because of crime in South Africa.

Doesn't matter which way you look at it, it's another win for Cell C :D
 
Oh come on, it's not like the networks had only 2 weeks notice! They had more than enough time to be ready. They wanted to make as much money off the world cup by spending as little as possible. Then they still had the audacity to lie about their success rate! F@cking greedy pigs.
 
Last edited:
Oracle666 said:
Considering these stats, was the number of subscribers to each network considered, Cell C will look good because their network is not as busy as VC and MTN.
Click to expand...

Either way, Cell C service was better. Better planning or whatever.
 
Sgt.Romeo9 said:
I'm not sure why you guy's are all revering to network congestion to try and cover for VodaScum & EmptyN. The facts are: There where targets set. All the operators agreed on those targets, saying they where ready to meet those targets, if not better them. Then after the world cup Lied about they're success rate (according to this article).

Another fact CellC have been working on upgrading their network for the last 14 months now, so if their network can support more users than the other two operators don't blame low numbers, saying VodaScum & EmptyN where congested. Then they should have upgraded they're towers & perhaps set-up more, instead of buying that new Merc or BMW.

I also believe that part of CellC's success was because they where busy setting up new Towers & with the World Cup in mind they Placed their towers more strategically to provide better coverage around the stadiums.

Lastly during the World Cup we had 3 Swiss, 3 German & 2 Dutch people staying with us & friends & all of them bought cheap handsets when they landed here with CellC sim cards saying, they left their expensive phones at home because of crime in South Africa.

Doesn't matter which way you look at it, it's another win for Cell C :D
Click to expand...
There's NO WIN here.

They all failed.
 
Since 1994

boerseun said:
Oh come on, it's not like the networks had only 2 weeks notice! They had more than enough time to be ready. They wanted to make as much money off the world cup by spending as little as possible. Then they still had the audacity to lie about their success rate! F@cking greedy pigs.
Click to expand...

Since 1994 this has been the case. Spend minimum charge maximum. What govt should seriously look at is :

How operators in India use 5mhz of 900mhz spectrum and have enough capacity for tens of millions of subscribers yet charge the lowest rates in the world.
How operators in South Africa use 15mhz of 900mhz spectrum and dont have enough capacity for 10 million subscribers yet charge the highest rates in the world.

DxL - Team
 
if the two networks can justify poor service due to large number of subscribers icasa should cap the number of subscribers according to network capacity,if a network needs more subscribers it should proof it can service them accordingly...i think nigeria applies this practice
 
now that funny.

Cellc better stats, while piggy backing of VC network durning that time . ROFL
 
Last edited:
DXL said:
Since 1994 this has been the case. Spend minimum charge maximum. What govt should seriously look at is :

How operators in India use 5mhz of 900mhz spectrum and have enough capacity for tens of millions of subscribers yet charge the lowest rates in the world.
How operators in South Africa use 15mhz of 900mhz spectrum and dont have enough capacity for 10 million subscribers yet charge the highest rates in the world.

DxL - Team
Click to expand...

I agree! This is a big problem, and also the reason why I suggested that they rather give smaller allocations for wimax and we have more operators than the big chunks with less operators. We do not have a chance in hell of low prices with the way things are going.
 
Kgabogk said:
if the two networks can justify poor service due to large number of subscribers icasa should cap the number of subscribers according to network capacity,if a network needs more subscribers it should proof it can service them accordingly...i think nigeria applies this practice
Click to expand...

If tat is the case Nigeria is doing one thing right at least! :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X