Here it is – the Act which will determine Vodacom and MTN’s future in South Africa

Newsfeed

MyBroadband Newsfeed
Joined
Jun 28, 2017
Messages
6,329
#1

Ivanr

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2008
Messages
1,338
#6
What's the fuss about a Parliamentary Bill it is NOT LAW YET. Still has follow parliamentary processes that may or may not change the contents of the Bill- Newsfeed.
 

Jan

Drifting in the black
Joined
May 24, 2010
Messages
4,606
#7
What's the fuss about a Parliamentary Bill it is NOT LAW YET. Still has follow parliamentary processes that may or may not change the contents of the Bill- Newsfeed.
Don't bring your optimism here.

(Seriously though, the fuss is because the point of the process is to discuss the bill. Now is the time to make a fuss.)
 

wizardofid

Executive Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2007
Messages
5,085
#8
What's the fuss about a Parliamentary Bill it is NOT LAW YET. Still has follow parliamentary processes that may or may not change the contents of the Bill- Newsfeed.
I don't think you understand essentially all 4 countries that tried this failed, service providers underspent on tech advancements to improve profits, prices didn't come down at all.Kenyans still use the SP's own 3g network as the 4g network doesnt work most of the times.

Network roll out slowed down immensely, Of the 4 countries that this are 4 or 3 years behind other countries on technology deployment nothing good came out of it, if this becomes law consider it the end of times so yeah it requires a massive fuss......for once I am with the mobile providers
 
Last edited:

system32

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2009
Messages
2,613
#9
Minister takes control of the band plan
The amendment bill contains a change which places control of the national radio frequency band plan with the minister, rather than ICASA.

It has amended the legislation to state that in preparing the national radio frequency plan, the minister must consult ICASA.
What does this mean?
What is the "national radio frequency band plan"?
 

DXL

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2006
Messages
1,156
#11
It cannot benefit the consumer in its current form. The bigger operators may not have coverage in rural areas.

I suggested to Doc and Icasa why not licence 3 Woans with very tough licence obligations starting with rural rollout first.

Cost based regulated wholesale offerings.
 

konfab

Honorary Master
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
19,980
#12
The amendment bill contains a change which places control of the national radio frequency band plan with the minister, rather than ICASA.

It has amended the legislation to state that in preparing the national radio frequency plan, the minister must consult ICASA.
Just remember this is the same minister who is charge of a postal service that does not work. Nothing bad can happen here.
 

sajunky

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 1, 2010
Messages
13,125
#15
I hope this benefits the consumer?
Not sure, it will benefit consumers immediately. It depends. In long term it has great potential to increase spectrum utilization. It is critically important in South Africa in most areas where wired broadband is not a primary Internet.

There are many ways to address limited spectrum. Network operators will push for implementing unlicenced spectrum offloading technologies, as spectrum is free and cheap to implement. If you allow them to monopolize unlicenced spectrum, they will block WOAN effectively. Period.

For now these technologies are in unfinished state, i.e. on Vodacom VoWiFi is only active on selected devices, but situation will be changing quick. Spectrum invasion must be controlled by the state. I don't think new legislation address this issue, but it should.

Also all depends how WOAN will be implemented. Incentives is a key. You can't be successful without support from network operators.
 

krycor

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
14,595
#16
I don't think you understand essentially all 4 countries that tried this failed, service providers underspent on tech advancements to improve profits, prices didn't come down at all.Kenyans still use the SP's own 3g network as the 4g network doesnt work most of the times.

Network roll out slowed down immensely, Of the 4 countries that this are 4 or 3 years behind other countries on technology deployment nothing good came out of it, if this becomes law consider it the end of times so yeah it requires a massive fuss......for once I am with the mobile providers
Not sure, it will benefit consumers immediately. It depends. In long term it has great potential to increase spectrum utilization. It is critically important in South Africa in most areas where wired broadband is not a primary Internet.

There are many ways to address limited spectrum. Network operators will push for implementing unlicenced spectrum offloading technologies, as spectrum is free and cheap to implement. If you allow them to monopolize unlicenced spectrum, they will block WOAN effectively. Period.

For now these technologies are in unfinished state, i.e. on Vodacom VoWiFi is only active on selected devices, but situation will be changing quick. Spectrum invasion must be controlled by the state. I don't think new legislation address this issue, but it should.

Also all depends how WOAN will be implemented. Incentives is a key. You can't be successful without support from network operators.
It cannot benefit the consumer in its current form. The bigger operators may not have coverage in rural areas.

I suggested to Doc and Icasa why not licence 3 Woans with very tough licence obligations starting with rural rollout first.

Cost based regulated wholesale offerings.
Keep in mind SA has tried the other model of forcing coverage as part of licensing and the costs have basically inhibited ICT growth.

While I agree that network operators will reduce direct capital investment and letting others work on the infrastructure side of things, means they ok with others deciding priority of rollout of services. Fine and dandy but also means there will be mobility of consumer base so good luck.

In the end this a dumb argument and i suspect we will eventually have a fibre like consortium(multi-company owned) or independent group wherein coverage is driven based on sales potential. How ICASA/DoC get coverage in non-profitable areas is questionable.
 

wizardofid

Executive Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2007
Messages
5,085
#17
Keep in mind SA has tried the other model of forcing coverage as part of licensing and the costs have basically inhibited ICT growth.

While I agree that network operators will reduce direct capital investment and letting others work on the infrastructure side of things, means they ok with others deciding priority of rollout of services. Fine and dandy but also means there will be mobility of consumer base so good luck.

In the end this a dumb argument and i suspect we will eventually have a fibre like consortium(multi-company owned) or independent group wherein coverage is driven based on sales potential. How ICASA/DoC get coverage in non-profitable areas is questionable.
4 different countries tried it the biggest being Russia and it still failed....How will it be any different ?
 

Swa

Honorary Master
Joined
May 4, 2012
Messages
20,191
#18
I don't agree with the spectrum refarming requirement. Spectrum should be technology agnostic. All this will achieve is to prolong the phasing out of older technologies like 2G.

As for WOAN, it will be a failure in any case so anything assigned to it is immaterial. Only question is will the current operators get its spectrum or a few new ones?
 

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
10,218
#19
This absolutely the time to read the proposed amendments and comment on the changes proposed. The more comments the better, otherwise the usual suspects will dominate the process.
So get to it guys, dig in stop all the speculation and concentrate on the task at hand.
Deal with the big picture first before getting lost in the detail.
 

sajunky

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 1, 2010
Messages
13,125
#20
I don't agree with the spectrum refarming requirement. Spectrum should be technology agnostic. All this will achieve is to prolong the phasing out of older technologies like 2G.

As for WOAN, it will be a failure in any case so anything assigned to it is immaterial. Only question is will the current operators get its spectrum or a few new ones?
It seems to me it will be a complex process. Operators will continue using current frequency assignments, but will be encouraged to hand over some spectrum voluntary in specific areas. Their towers would still carry traffic on these frequencies, but it would be WOAN traffic. All new frequency assignments will go to WOAN, as it doesn't make sense otherwise. It is a good time to do that when 5G start to appear commercially.
 
Top