Sign up with Google
caroper
Executive Member
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2003
- Messages
- 8,162
Same old story
Telkom, our local telecoms giant (and monopoly), has been involved in some heated debates of late. A recommendation by the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa (Icasa) for drastic pricing changes to its broadband offerings did not go down well with the group.
According to reports, Telkom product development executive Steven White said Icasa's ruling that the group should charge a one-off installation fee and no monthly charge for continuing line rental was one taken by people "who don't understand how these things work."
White added that such services were capital intensive and because of this Telkom had invested R1 billion in its network capacity, an amount on which the group must supposedly recoup its costs by charging what it does for broadband services.
That story is an old and tired excuse, and it has been used similarly before. Just over four years ago, I was speaking to Jaques Schellschop, a spokesperson for cellular services provider MTN, about Telkom's interconnect agreements with cellular services firms and the apparent lack of transparency in pricing and operating methods in these agreements.
Telkom senior manager for media Andrew Weldrick at the time told me that the higher prices in its interconnect agreements would allow it to pass on discounts to its residential and business clients.
But Schellshop argued that Telkom had already made vast savings through the use of new equipment on its network, to which Weldrick replied: "We do have newer technologies in our network, but these are capital intensive to put in," and he suggested that Telkom had yet to enjoy the financial benefit of these upgrades.
Telkom's responses are beginning to sound all too familiar. Perhaps its employees carry sets of pre-printed flash cards to prompt them. If that is so, they should at least update them with a fresh set of comments.
At least Schellshop could say what I can not. When I informed him of Weldrick's comments, he chuckled and said: "It would be churlish of me to comment on the management efficiency of our monopolistic supplier."
Regards
Philip Devine
Business Report Online Editor
Telkom, our local telecoms giant (and monopoly), has been involved in some heated debates of late. A recommendation by the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa (Icasa) for drastic pricing changes to its broadband offerings did not go down well with the group.
According to reports, Telkom product development executive Steven White said Icasa's ruling that the group should charge a one-off installation fee and no monthly charge for continuing line rental was one taken by people "who don't understand how these things work."
White added that such services were capital intensive and because of this Telkom had invested R1 billion in its network capacity, an amount on which the group must supposedly recoup its costs by charging what it does for broadband services.
That story is an old and tired excuse, and it has been used similarly before. Just over four years ago, I was speaking to Jaques Schellschop, a spokesperson for cellular services provider MTN, about Telkom's interconnect agreements with cellular services firms and the apparent lack of transparency in pricing and operating methods in these agreements.
Telkom senior manager for media Andrew Weldrick at the time told me that the higher prices in its interconnect agreements would allow it to pass on discounts to its residential and business clients.
But Schellshop argued that Telkom had already made vast savings through the use of new equipment on its network, to which Weldrick replied: "We do have newer technologies in our network, but these are capital intensive to put in," and he suggested that Telkom had yet to enjoy the financial benefit of these upgrades.
Telkom's responses are beginning to sound all too familiar. Perhaps its employees carry sets of pre-printed flash cards to prompt them. If that is so, they should at least update them with a fresh set of comments.
At least Schellshop could say what I can not. When I informed him of Weldrick's comments, he chuckled and said: "It would be churlish of me to comment on the management efficiency of our monopolistic supplier."
Regards
Philip Devine
Business Report Online Editor