Changes ahead for telecoms sector

[Peter7]

news flash! (pre March elections)

"Huge liberalisation on the way" - Ivy Matsepe-Casaburri

news flash! (after March elections)

"Hahaha! Not really" - Ivy Matsepe-Casaburri

Seriously, the SNO already had access to Telkom's infrastructure for a two year period, before this "announcement". This was one of their license conditions.

We've already seen Ivy make "huge" policy announcements, only to turn around and "clarify" them a day later.

This is election spin.

I reckon you're right on the money here. Funny, how they make these promises just before elections and they don't have a track record for keeping them. They ONLY care about you when it's election time, the rest of their term they don't bother - you're just a peon that empowers them.

It's time for the SA public to wake up and vote for someone else.

 

[pupa]

I have been a optimist become a optimistic-pessimist become a pessimist since the per Gig billing regards to Broadband, TELKOM scum and this GVT. I will remain a pessimist until I see real development, not BS and talk by this GVT, ICASSA, DOC and other Telkom schemers. Its all a click IMHO, I do not think there will be any real progress until after maybe 2010/2012.
So no this news is not yet good. It is bad as there is no reversal of the Per Gig billing neither return of the unit time per call Telkom reduced since 2003/2003 and as such stole from the ZAR people with ICASSA knowing about this. Never approved.

Thus we went 20 steps backward and everybody thinks the steps forward now is progress. How naive!

 

[Turtle]

I will change even if the SNO is the same price.

I will not. If enough people do that the SNO will have no incentive to lower prices. If we force their hand however then they will HAVE to lower prices or die. If they lower prices it will trigger a real price war and that's just what we need.

The only way to achieve this though is to boycott the SNO unless they offer lower prices. The SNO have too much riding on this to not cave in if we manage to do that.

Sucks giving more money to Telkom, sure, but the way I see it is they're all the same kind anyway ... if I give the same amount of money to the SNO or to Telkom, it's the same thing.

 

[bwana]

I have to agree with turtle - give me a real reason (ie one that leaves me with more coin in my pocket) and I'll be switching in a minute. I can see Snot making the same massive impact Cell-C made.

 

[Vice]

I like the fact that Roy has indicated that VANS operatos can apply for self provision. What I don't like though is the fact that there seems to be no clear criteria on how the VANS applications will be accepted/denied. Which indicates that there seems to be a bit of "casualness" on how this issue will be dealt with. What's wrong with stating clear criteria for self provision, putting this criteria out in the public for everyone to analyse, and then allowing the interested VANS operators to apply for the license through ICASA? I don't see why the VANS operators have to deal with the ministry itself. However, I seem to recall a clause in the Electronic Communications Act stating that the ministry will determine who can self provide? So it would seem like the ministry has really covered their bases to still control this sector to a large extent.

I do not see why VANs or anybody for that matter must apply. If the bill allows them to, let them set up their operations. Why must they still go through big brother as if they're asking for favors?