How can Telkom Lie like this!!!

**Chubs** · 28-11-2003 07:57 AM

Check out this articel I just read.

http://www.news24.com/News24/South_Africa/News/0,,2-7-1442_1451901,00.html

Cant believe Telkom says they dont have the funds to install normal phone lines for the poor farmers.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Telkom said it would cost R50 000 to replace each of the lines and there were no funds available for this. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

**gabor** · 07-12-2003 11:00 AM

Everyone has to pay for the line one way or another. If you are unfortunate enough to 50+ km away from an exchange, and the exchange needs an upgrade then you must pay big $.

Telkom can't pay for "poor" farmers lines, it's just business.

**rpm** · 07-12-2003 12:12 PM

Hi Gabor

Here I disagree. They are a government protected monopoly. In most major businesses there are sectors that will show high profits where others will show a loss. As long as the business as a whole makes a profit. I think in Telkom’s case they want every single part to show a profit. With billions in profits they can surely afford to ‘sponsor’ the lines to less profitable regions. After all, these farmers have no choice but to use Telkom. They have the benefit of being a protected monopoly, and that is not a one way street. They should provide services to everybody who needs them.

Regards,

RPM
rpm@myadsl.co.za

**ASF** · 07-12-2003 04:51 PM

I have to agree with RPM. If we were in a totally deregulated market and a provider chose not to offer services as referred to above due to the cost of provision - so be it. BUT you can rest assured that there would be A provider who would choose to create a niche for themselves by offering the service.

Whilst Telkom is in the position of being a legally protected monopoly I don't see how they can refuse to offer the services. Further charging an additional surchase is discrminatory.

**mithrandi** · 07-12-2003 07:08 PM

As I've stated elsewhere, the simple answer is to deregulate the market, and allow simple economics to sort these sort of imbalances out. As long as people rely on the government / other monopolies to do the "right thing" out of the goodness of their heart, disappointment after disappointment will continue.

mithrandi

**Karnaugh** · 07-12-2003 08:02 PM

Well honestly, how can telkom afford to maintain a 100Km line into the middle of no where that provides 1 line? Imagine the cable theft etc.

<hr noshade size="1">
"Since light travels faster than sound, people appear bright until you hear them speak."

NetLink Research

**ChezAnwyne** · 07-12-2003 10:13 PM

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Karnaugh
 Well honestly, how can telkom afford to maintain a 100Km line into the middle of no where that provides 1 line?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Quite frankly, that's their problem. As others have said, as long as Telkom's monopoly is legally protected, they have an obligation to provide these services to all South Africans.
Yes, as a public listed company they also have an obligation to their shareholders to show a profit, and finding a balancing these 2 obligations can't be easy. Regrettably, Telkom has obviously decided it's more important to keep their (overseas) investors happy than it is to empower their own people.

The following comes straight from Telkom's web site, in the "Corporate Responsiblity" section:
http://www.telkom.co.za/IR/corpgov/csi_ecnemp.jsp

Telkom views economic empowerment as a strategic business imperative. This approach is based on the Company's belief that the economically marginalised segments of society must be brought into the mainstream of the economy. Telkom furthermore believes that if South Africa is to reap the benefits that come with integration into the global economy, a number of essential requirements must be met.

First, a broad base of South Africans must be able to access and become skilled users of electronic communication systems, paving the way for a genuine knowledge-driven economy. Second, entry must be facilitated for as many organisations and people as possible to participate in the industry, which underpins the new economy. 

So what Telkom is basically saying:
a) We think its important that people have access to electronic communications systems.
b) Oh look, we just declared billions of Rands of profit.
c) Sorry mate, we just can't afford to give you a phone line.

Something stinks.

We must also remember that although Sentech and the SNO will provide some welcome competition, both of them are at least partially state-owned and also legally protected from open competition. As such, both of them should eventually share the same obligation to provide affordable access and services to ALL South Africans, even if they are in the middle of nowhere. We should judge them by the same standards we judge Telkom.

Chez

PS: Out of interest, does anyone know how Eskom and the postal service manages this dilemma? Surely they also have to provide "non-profitable" services in rural or remote areas.

**mbs** · 07-12-2003 11:17 PM

All of this has to do with the public service obligations that state-run monopolies have, and which the management of such organisations are tasked to fulfil on behalf of government for broader society. For example, the national broadcaster must flight public service announcements, the postal service must undertake postal delivery, and so on. The crunch comes when management cannot fulfil their accountabilities in this regard (the usual reason being lack of funding), so they're posted off to greener pastures... Clearly, if Telkom cannot provide a rural service due to cost, but they post obscene profits at the same time, Nkenke Kekana is not doing his job, and methinks he will be posted off somewhere very soon...

**mithrandi** · 08-12-2003 01:03 AM

The problem is, this obligation is purely notionary. No-one is pointing a gun (legal or economic) forcing them to fulfil this obligation. The few legal actions brought against Telkom in this regard have had about as much effect as the anti-trust lawsuits aimed at Microsoft: very little. Corporations are not in the business of "doing the right thing", they are in the business of making money, and they will do whatever increases profit for them.

mithrandi

**mbs** · 08-12-2003 10:51 AM

Very true - I made a similar comment elsewhere... It's debatable, however, whether unconstrained supply/demand (free markets) would foster an improved scenario, whether for technological access, service efficiencies, or all those other good things. Economic self-interest, whether individual or group, will eventually take over completely and lead to the disadvantage of others, unless regulated appropriately...

Public service obligations are additionally incorporated in the policy publications of bodies like the ITU, PAPU (Pan-African Postal Union), and so on, of which (hopefully) most countries are a signatory to. The tragedy is the hypocrisy in the actions of such signatories, as evidenced by our very own Telkom. So now we have things like 'peer group review' and assessments by 'eminent persons', and not leastly, walk-outs by supposed leaders (our very own HF Verwoerd beng guilty of one of the first, in 1961). Ah well - let's put it all down to the frailty of the human animal...*sigh*

**mithrandi** · 08-12-2003 04:33 PM

"The tragedy of the commons"... private ownership is the only solution for this one that I can see. Under no other circumstances is the motivation sufficient for the results to be beneficial. I cannot think of a single example of a "public service" anywhere that is not a brilliant example of why "public services" are a very bad idea. cf. postal services in various countries, television in various countries, etc. etc.

mithrandi

**mbs** · 09-12-2003 01:22 AM

I'm probably sticking my neck out here, [:p], but I can think of 2 instances off the top of my head, both of which are globally regarded with respect and with their outputs being the standard adopted by others in their own endeavours towards the provision of a successful public service. Before I mention them, let me say that there will always be detractors (after all, the human race is not homogenous in terms of belief and value systems, or mindsets - let alone the members of the MyADSL forum!).

It is also useful to consider that sterling public service work is being done internationally by civil society organisations (NGO's), which don't have a profit motive as their raison d'etre, albeit the private/commercial source of their funding (probably with a tax write-off benefit in mind) - the likes of Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors Without Borders) and FARM-Africa come to mind...

The first instance is the BBC, generally regarded globally as the most successful public service broadcaster (despite American contentions to the contrary - in any case, they're private with sectorial interests, not public). The second instance is the Cuban Public Health Service - as beneficiaries of their output for our own rural health services, not much more needs to be said.

So... where do we go to from here? I believe the trick is to recognise that radical and iconoclastic change merely results in chaos, and the answer lies in the establishment of partnerships (both private and public) with a common purpose (read - *not* 'self' interest or 'group' interest, but the *same* interest). This potentially obviates the need for drastic change to the underlying social and economic order, yet at the same time promotes the pursuing of beneficial goals and the definition of appropriate mechanisms to achieve those goals.

To bring all of this back to the MyADSL context, this means that we must empower rpm with the necessary leverage to ensure that Telkom makes the required changes for the provision of an acceptable service. If they don't subscribe to the partnership arrangement (which they apparently haven't, to date), then we go the Regulator, and heads will roll...

**mithrandi** · 09-12-2003 03:45 PM

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">organisations (NGO's), which don't have a profit motive as their raison d'etre<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Sorry, there's no such thing as a non-profit organisation. Really, there isn't; there would be no reason for such organisations to exist.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">The first instance is the BBC, generally regarded globally as the most successful public service broadcaster<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
There are a whole host of people in BBC-land who would disagree with you quite vehemently about the "success" of the BBC. They're almost as unpopular as Telkom, from what I hear.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Cuban Public Health Service<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Ok, I'll admit I don't know anything about this one.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">then we go the Regulator, and heads will roll...<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
I don't see this happening any time soon under current conditions; it seems about as likely as Microsoft taking serious damage from legal action.

mithrandi

**MaD** · 09-12-2003 08:20 PM

There's no way it can be 50 grand, and if it is they must find cheaper ways of doing things.

With their profit last year they can install 32,000 new lines... @ 50,000 beans each... supposedly.

But then again, looking at all Telkom's other prices it probly IS R50,000!

_______________________________________________ _
Just imagine where SA would be now if it weren't for Telkom

**mbs** · 10-12-2003 01:05 AM

quote:organisations (NGO's), which don't have a profit motive as their raison d'etre

Sorry, there's no such thing as a non-profit organisation. Really, there isn't; there would be no reason for such organisations to exist.

This argument is totally specious, and belies the existence of the organisations already mentioned, as well as academic institutions (whose primary motive is not profit, but education and research), hospitals (health - except the private ones), and so on... I suppose it depends on your definition of 'profit' - the basis of this debate was the interpretation of this as 'money', in which case your view would hold water. However, I take the broader view of this meaning 'worth', and not just money. After all, an organisation can return negative results (i.e. monetary losses), but still continue its activities due to the value or worth ascribed to it by its shareholders (Amazon comes to mind, who recently returned their first positive results after many years of bleeding red ink)...

quote:The first instance is the BBC, generally regarded globally as the most successful public service broadcaster

There are a whole host of people in BBC-land who would disagree with you quite vehemently about the "success" of the BBC. They're almost as unpopular as Telkom, from what I hear.

Like I mentioned previously, there will be detractors. This does not belie the fact that many see the BBC as a 'centre of excellence' (my words - poetic license!), as evidenced by the multi-lateral exchanges with other broadcasters (both public and private), governments, foundations and so on...

quote:then we go the Regulator, and heads will roll...

I don't see this happening any time soon under current conditions; it seems about as likely as Microsoft taking serious damage from legal action.

True - but that's the basis for this forum. Let's keep up the pressure until it becomes unbearable and the Regulator has to do something...

Anyway, coming back to the R50K/line problem for the farmers in the southern Free State, I believe that Telkom have abrogated their responsibilities in this regard, which is possibly grounds for further (legal) action. They should approach AgriSA to initiate a group action, the way I see it. Perhaps Chubs could post a comment to the news24 article, if he agrees...

Thread: How can Telkom Lie like this!!!

Thread Tools

Display

How can Telkom Lie like this!!!

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions