Another ICASA complaint...

reech · May 3, 2004

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Mr. X complained that the ADSL service is very expensive in South Africa. He alleges that the modems are sold at R2300.00.

He would also like the Authority to explain why there is a 3 GBytes limit on the service and how and who monitors it.

He would also like the Authority to explain if data being transferred is also monitored and if privacy agreements are in place.

He would also like the Authority to explain why ADSL is not available throughout the country considering that most lines in South Africa are digital.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Telkom's response:
What!? - no response to the price of modems ? - a decent ethernet modem/nat router should cost about £60 - let's say 800ZAR.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">It is a well-known fact that most operators in the USA and Europe acknowledge that they under priced their ADSL services to enable them to compete with the cable operators. Telkom priced the service based on the costs.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Okay - but BT's wholesale price for ADSL in the uk is £15 -let's double that to £30 to account for 'under pricing'(we're being very generous here)-let's say 400ZAR - and that's for an unrestricted service - and we're still nowhere near the level of service offered.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">The 3G cap has been introduced to ensure heavy BW (bandwidth) users do not adversely affect other ADSL users. The cap is introduced to keep the cost of the service down.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
The cost is already three times international norms - and capping further decreases the value of this service.

BTTB · May 3, 2004

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">The cap is introduced to keep the cost of the service down.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Telkom couldn't of put it better. While keeping their costs down, they are keeping their profits up. They put their foot in it their I would say.

<hr noshade size="1">You can take Telkom out of the Post Office but you can't take the Post Office out of Telkom.

microfast · May 3, 2004

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by BTTB
 <blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">The cap is introduced to keep the cost of the service down.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Telkom couldn't of put it better. While keeping their costs down, they are keeping their profits up. They put their foot in it their I would say.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Only a monopoly could conduct business in this way.

MICROFAST
The source for data recovery
Recovering Fujitsu Hard disk drives for years.

rpm · May 3, 2004

Hi guys

I think it all boils down to the absurdity of a legally protected monopoly being listed on the stock exchange and openly trying to please stockholders. In a different case in our region they are refusing basic telephone services to a suburb simply because they do not see an immediate profitability in doing so. They openly state that their main concern is stockholder expectations and higher profits and can therefore not provide services that do not fit these criteria (published in the local newspaper). Isn’t it ridiculous that this company is still protected by the state?

Regards,

RPM
[email protected]

Join the MyBroadband community

Get started

Another ICASA complaint...

reech

Expert Member

BTTB

Executive Member

microfast

Well-Known Member

rpm

Admin