-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: Which is the most hair-raising South African mountain pass you've driven?
Altech hits back, saying it protected consumers
- Thread starter rpm
- Start date
I personally think Altech did a good thing by challenging the merger. While it was not successful – and I don’t think it should have been blocked – it served the purpose of assessing whether the merger will have an impact on competition. And the fact that MTN committed not to charge higher fees for VoIP is a big bonus!
Pitbull
Verboten
Does any one know for a fact that this was aimed at the Normal Data subscription base or the Verizon base of the business which would fall under MTNNS ?
I think there might be a little missunderstanding here. I might be wrong though
I think there might be a little missunderstanding here. I might be wrong though
Rouxenator
Dank meme lord
I hate MTN.
This is a good thing. And Altech definitely had an reason to go before the commission. Vodacom stated that they are not keen on buying an existing ISP because of competition commission issues. If Vodacom publicly admitted that is why they are avoiding such a purchase, then there definitively is an argument against cellular operators buying ISPs.
What interest me is the precedent this will set. Seeing that MTN got the all clear what prevents Vodacom from making a big purchase in the same space? In fact MTN had a higher bar to meet because they have a long running established ISP with MTN Network Solututions, while Vodacom has not.
Watch this space.
What interest me is the precedent this will set. Seeing that MTN got the all clear what prevents Vodacom from making a big purchase in the same space? In fact MTN had a higher bar to meet because they have a long running established ISP with MTN Network Solututions, while Vodacom has not.
Watch this space.
The competition commission only gave the go-ahead for the merger - it does not insulate MTN from future action from the commission regarding their behavior.
Frankly - after the Tiger Brands thing, any company will think twice about doing it in people's faces. It is not worth it for MTN - because if they act anti-competitively on this, it might open a can of worms regarding their other business practices which deals with established revenue of magnitude an order or two greater than their ISP business.
Pitbull
Verboten
I think you guys are not understanding the question I raised
1. MTNNS = ISP
2. MTNSA/SP = Mobile service provider
Now my question is this:
Does the VOIP charge Altech and MTN mentioned cover the MTNNS side or does it also cater for the MTNSA side.
Remember this is 2 completely different things. MTN could have said yes there will be no increased rate for VOIP in relation to the ISP side. However the VOIP rates still apply for the MTNSA/SP which is the "cellphone/Data" side.
This is 2 different things and there is no clarity if this applies to both.
I think you guys are not understanding the question I raised
1. MTNNS = ISP
2. MTNSA/SP = Mobile service provider
Now my question is this:
Does the VOIP charge Altech and MTN mentioned cover the MTNNS side or does it also cater for the MTNSA side.
Remember this is 2 completely different things. MTN could have said yes there will be no increased rate for VOIP in relation to the ISP side. However the VOIP rates still apply for the MTNSA/SP which is the "cellphone/Data" side.
This is 2 different things and there is no clarity if this applies to both.
Oh - I get what you are saying - but I think the issue was exactly this - that MTN will utilize its position as a cell phone network operator to get a anti-competitive advantage in the ISP business. This was only half of the issue before the competition commission, but that was the issue that Altech had.
Also - as far as I know MTN NS is wholly owned by MTN SP and they can't really play "this is a separate entity card".
Pitbull
Verboten
True,
However they cater for a different client base.
Lets say you subscribe to MTNNS for ADSL which is a data package (No different rate on VOIP) as stated by MTN.
Now you also subscribe to MTNSP which deals with lower data requirements and is mainly a Voice provider. They can still impose a VOIP rate different to the Data rate in this regard if they so wish. Being a "Voice" provider at that.
The article above has to do with the Verizon take over. In this case it's relevant to MTNNS AFAIK and then Altech claim to have made MTNNS stay away from different rate for VOIP. AFAIK there never was any such terms in relation to MTNNS only MTNSA/SP.
Again, I'm only guessing and trying to get to the actual cause of this statement by Altech and if it as the article assumes cover the Whole MTN group and not just one section of it.
I'm completely neutral about this, it just leaves a question. Does it cover MTN as a whole regarding VOIP being charged differently or not.
Ref:
BY CANDICE JONES , ITWEB TELECOMS EDITOR
Source: www.itweb.co.za
Date: 9 January 2009
With the Competition Commission's inability to affect lower bread prices even after successful fines, and it's recent bungling of the Banking saga... I fail to see how they can claim to "act in the consumers' interest" or "on the consumers behalf."
So that begs the question: Who is competent to do this policing in the interests of, and on behalf of the consumer???