+100000 ginggs, I also don't understand why they just don't make it simple? why BBAdvanced?!
make it as fast as possible - the faster Vodacom makes it for us the more money they make? i don't get what the problem is?
-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: Are you keeping your Prime subscription?
- Status
+100000 ginggs, I also don't understand why they just don't make it simple? why BBAdvanced?!
make it as fast as possible - the faster Vodacom makes it for us the more money they make? i don't get what the problem is?
K
kingrob
Guest
Where is Vodacom??
ADSL pricing lowest it has ever been in this country, while 3G/HSDPA pricing still exactly the same.
Was hoping that the broadband leader of South Africa would come to the party, but it was only a fool's hope.
ADSL pricing lowest it has ever been in this country, while 3G/HSDPA pricing still exactly the same.
Was hoping that the broadband leader of South Africa would come to the party, but it was only a fool's hope.
vatso
Well-Known Member
Agreed--but you will find many consumers (some on this forum) that actually vouch in defense for the high prices: because V3G has such high infrastructure costs, and because they provide such good underlying service(s) and because it is a privilege and not a right to have access to broadband internet.
I can not disagree with those points--however as a business owner currently forced to use 3G--it will be cheaper to move to a site that has full ADSL access in the end. We can't wait forever for 3G to fall into a competitive price class.
I can not disagree with those points--however as a business owner currently forced to use 3G--it will be cheaper to move to a site that has full ADSL access in the end. We can't wait forever for 3G to fall into a competitive price class.
Yes, the costs of a technology that does not suffer cable theft or the maintenance cost of millions of KM's of copper MUST be extremely high cost...
BS.
More BS.
And even more BS.
Vodafone UK, which is effectively the same company... charges less per MB than we pay.
How much less?
Even with currency conversion and ADDED CURRENCY CONVERSION FEES from bank as well as ADDED TRANSACTION FEES from the bank...
Even with all that added on top of the Vodafone UK prices,
We pay 2.5x more. 250% more.
I have actually made a thread about it, if you want to have a look at it.
We're just being ripped off, end of story.
Here's that quoted post:
BS.
More BS.
And even more BS.
Vodafone UK, which is effectively the same company... charges less per MB than we pay.
How much less?
Even with currency conversion and ADDED CURRENCY CONVERSION FEES from bank as well as ADDED TRANSACTION FEES from the bank...
Even with all that added on top of the Vodafone UK prices,
We pay 2.5x more. 250% more.
I have actually made a thread about it, if you want to have a look at it.
We're just being ripped off, end of story.
Here's that quoted post:
deweyzeph
Honorary Master
It's time we reject the fallacy that a wireless radio network is more expensive to run and maintain than a fixed-line network. That is just pure and utter bullcrap. Even a layman can see that a cellphone tower must be cheaper to run and maintain than a telephone exchange with DSLAMS, copper cabling, and all the associated labour and maintenance costs that go with laying down fixed-line infrastructure.
So how exactly does the data get from the Tower to Vodacom? Carrier Pigeon?
deweyzeph
Honorary Master
I really don't understand the relevancy of your sarcastic comment. DSLAMS sitting in Telkom's exchanges suffer from the same backhaul constraints as cellphone towers. In many cases however cellphone towers have their backhaul provided to them by microwave especially those in rural areas, meaning even less maintenance and labour costs.
Whatever the backhaul constraints of a cellphone tower, I don't see why they would be any more expensive than that of a telephone exchange. By their very wireless nature they should be much less.
Your post suggests that backhaul to cellphone towers is all provided wireless which is the exception rather than the norm. The bulk of cellphone towers backhaul is supplied by Telkom Diginet. Only In areas where fibre rings have been lit up and areas where no Telkom infrastructure is available will Telkom not be used. So in addition to having to provide backhaul you then still have to put up a tower. The more populated the area the more towers you need to install. If you want to ensure that a tower can provide 7.2 speeds you need 4 x 2m Diginet lines plus another 1 for voice. That's not cheap to rent.
Telkom is not paying anything for their backhaul because the tax payers already paid for that copper years ago. So all they have is upgrades and maintenance.
That being said in addition to the local backhaul costs there is also an international bandwidth cost. Seacom has made an impact in that regard to ADSL pricing so there should at least be some relief to that component for 3G as well.
Oh you mean... they use Telkom backhaul...
Oh ok... that makes it so much better huh?
Seeing that the same ISP's that offer R20/gig are also using Telkom...
So Vodacom doesnt even pay ANY maintenance towards 90% of their backhaul...
Youre not exactly helping your pro-high-price argument here.
Oh I almost forgot... who do you think provides the Backhaul for Vodafone UK's cellular towers?
You don't know?
92% supplied by BT.
Good job on proving how much different Vodacom is from Vodafone.
Except, I already know theyre one and the same company, as should everyone else.
Is there any other baseless arguments you want to make in favor of Vodacom's insane pricing models?
And how that model isn't the result of price-fixing alongside MTN?
You don't know?
92% supplied by BT.
Good job on proving how much different Vodacom is from Vodafone.
Except, I already know theyre one and the same company, as should everyone else.
Is there any other baseless arguments you want to make in favor of Vodacom's insane pricing models?
And how that model isn't the result of price-fixing alongside MTN?
Yes, which they rent at great expense
No not really, but when that's the only choice you have then you take it.
You clearly don't understand the difference between reselling SAIX ADSL accounts and Diginet.
Correct. They just pay a fat monthly rental for premium Diginet lines.
No arguing for the price, just stating the realities, which it seems not many are privy too.
Seeing as local loop unbundling has taken place in the UK and that there is more than one fixed line operator to pick from, I am sure they could negotiate a decent deal.
Who's trying to prove that other than you? Vodafone currently own 65% of Vodacom it was all the news last year.
I am not arguing for the price. I am just pointing out incorrect assumptions being made on what the costs are made out of. I also find it disturbing that MTN and Vodacom have exactly the same pricing on 3G data and I sure hope the competition commission gives them a fat walloping for it.
Last edited:
Is now a good time to mention that BT has been in South Africa for 16 years already?
Is now a good time to ask then, if Telkom is so extremely expensive, why not fall-back to their preferred supplier (BT) which obviously charges better on their own country as well?
Oh wait... BT is also here just to exploit as much as they can.
No, I think I get the brunt of the matter without any feedback.
Lets see if anything comes off this then...
http://forum.vodafone.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=54236
Is now a good time to ask then, if Telkom is so extremely expensive, why not fall-back to their preferred supplier (BT) which obviously charges better on their own country as well?
Oh wait... BT is also here just to exploit as much as they can.
No, I think I get the brunt of the matter without any feedback.
Lets see if anything comes off this then...
http://forum.vodafone.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=54236
So while BT have been in South Africa for 16 years, they have only until recently owned nothing more than a VANS license, which means only in the last year have they been able to self provide. Something which all the large ISPs are now doing so they can rid themselves of Telkom.
http://www.southafrica.info/business/economy/infrastructure/bt-040209.htm
Ockie
Resident Lead Bender
Who is BT? British Telecom? Are they in South Africa? heh?
Apparently so: You can read more here: http://globalservices.bt.com/globalLocation.do?method=VIEW&country=za&fromPage=Furl
Ockie
Resident Lead Bender
Access to http://globalservices.bt.com/globalLocation.do?method=VIEW&country=za&fromPage=Furl has been blocked by Vodacom IT Group *sigh* hehehehe
Yes ocleroux,
BT = British Teleco.
Have been in SA for 16 years.
http://www.btplc.com/Thegroup/BTUKa...rld/MiddleEastandAfrica/SouthAfrica/index.htm
Next-Gen global IP network?
That doesnt sound like something you do in a matter of 1 year.
Four global points of presence in South Africa already connected?
...
BT = British Teleco.
Have been in SA for 16 years.
http://www.btplc.com/Thegroup/BTUKa...rld/MiddleEastandAfrica/SouthAfrica/index.htm
So... where the savings?
Next-Gen global IP network?
That doesnt sound like something you do in a matter of 1 year.
Four global points of presence in South Africa already connected?
...
So without knowing:
a) If Vodacom use BT
b) What the size and capacity of BT's network in South Africa is
This point cannot be argued.
All the information I have seen about the mobile network operators in SA is that they use Telkom Diginet, self provisioned fibre and radio links for backhaul.
The point I am arguing is not whether Vodacom is using BT here or not.
My point is that this British-owned company is here to exploit as much monetary value out of it and then bugger off.
And we sit back and shut up?
Or worse yet, DEFEND THEM?!?!
My point is that this British-owned company is here to exploit as much monetary value out of it and then bugger off.
And we sit back and shut up?
Or worse yet, DEFEND THEM?!?!
Last edited:
- Status