High tariffs are good for the poor: MTN exec

Well I guess a stupid comment like this does deserve to be posted at 2am.

Great thinking, really ingenious.
 
Oh, no no. lol I'm talking about the article's contents not this post or anything.

I sort of meant it deserves to get posted right away, even if that happens to be at 2am.

Im being sour about his idea of high pricing helping the poor.

Ek voel nou so sleg dat Tera AL die flippen sad smileys vir my moes gebruik.. jammers.

Maar those big wig types in their huge leather chairs that say the poor benefit from high prices (I did read teh article) make me pretty angry.
 
Last edited:
Thats one of the dumdest things I have heard dropping their fees will have more people using the network less profit per call but more volume so the yearly income figure would remain the same or shock horror increase.People spend what they can afford if they could afford to make more calls they will.
 
thought is was a joke. How could somebody so high in a corporate say something like that. Of course, the government believes everything he says: Ripping off the poor is good for them.
 
The cellular companies are operating in a very skewed and misrepresented market. Just on that basis alone MTN and CellC and Vodacom lose all rights to compare themselves with someone in India or other countries. Market penetration is huge here not because of the cost of cellphones, but because of the ease to get one (vs a landline for example). Just because cellphone market penetration is high, does not mean people are actually making as many cals as they can. That really is a very stupid thing to say.

Edit: Someone somewhere along the line will have to explain the concept of "scale of economies" to the execs of this country.
 
When is ICASA finally going to declare them a major operator and regulate them?

Oh wait, it's ICASA - my bad.
 
Wahahahaaa,, what utter rubbish!!!! The only person that will believe you is Paris (not the brightest crayon in the box) Mashile ,and then only maybe.

One of the reasons we have a high cell phone usage is cause TELKOM (the monopoly in fixed line) have not provided affordable telecoms to the masses. They have instead decided that it was much easier just to rip-off a small segment of the population with massive tariff's and very little investment in infrastructure. Diginet :rolleyes:

Clever marketing then on the cell phone companies part gets the poor connected via cell phone with not to much cost involved for the individual as long as they don't make any calls.
The poor get shafted on fixed lines and on cell phone tariffs.

The overall conditions for growth in the mobile sector could never of been better than it was in recent history because of the climate and divide created by TELKOM and the ever increasing necessity for individuals in today's rapidly changing world to be able to communicate, 24/7.

The article also creates the impression of a R1bn net profit over 6 months in interconnect fees.

6 month interconnect costs
R2.6bn gross
R1bn net
:eek:

Lekker business this hey!
 
Are you all missing the point, or am I missing the point?

Arthur Goldstuck says Nyoka is being disingenuous. Urbanites who phone poor people in rural areas tend to be poor themselves, he says. It's the poor who are subsidising the poor.

The fantastic thing is that in SA they are actually ABLE to phone the other poor! (P2P poor2poor). In India there is no financial justification to invest in infrastructure expansion into low LMS areas where there no teledencity of significance. – THAT’s the good high interconnection-charges did.

Much more interesting, but not addressed by Goldstuck, would be to hypothesize about what happens when sufficient connectivity is established in those areas;
ICASA goes berserk with licensing more USALs..
But what about dropping the interconnection-fees (just) after the 30 odd operators have made their investments? And would that not be detrimental to the government’s BEE plans and all telco-customers to have a couple of those operators go insolvent due to ICASA approving the huge telco-landscape change of dropping the interconnection-fees?

Poor Arthur Goldstuck failed and underutilized the opportunity to truly comment on the disingene exec’s opinion...


On the other hand, I wonder where the reported billions came from? – Is that general domain knowledge or the outcome of somebody’s bragging-contest?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
AmaDownload said:
Are you all missing the point, or am I missing the point?

Arthur Goldstuck says Nyoka is being disingenuous. Urbanites who phone poor people in rural areas tend to be poor themselves, he says. It's the poor who are subsidising the poor.

The fantastic thing is that in SA they are actually ABLE to phone the other poor! (P2P poor2poor). In India there is no financial justification to invest in infrastructure expansion into low LMS areas where there no teledencity of significance. – THAT’s the good high interconnection-charges did.

Much more interesting, but not addressed by Goldstuck, would be to hypothesize about what happens when sufficient connectivity is established in those areas;
ICASA goes berserk with licensing more USALs..
But what about dropping the interconnection-fees (just) after the 30 odd operators have made their investments? And would that not be detrimental to the government’s BEE plans and all telco-customers to have a couple of those operators go insolvent due to ICASA approving the huge telco-landscape change of dropping the interconnection-fees?

Poor Arthur Goldstuck failed and underutilized the opportunity to truly comment on the disingene exec’s opinion...


On the other hand, I wonder where the reported billions came from? – Is that general domain knowledge or the outcome of somebody’s bragging-contest?
Click to expand...

I prefer Arthur Goldstucks comment to yours, yours is this rambling that I cant understand clearly (either too highbrow or poorly constructed, i dont know)

Anyway, he isn't poor, what does he know about it?
 
What a crock! Can't believe these okes justifying their high prices with a comment like this. :eek:

Pity the poor can't get access to read articles like this thanks to them operators high pricing (probably deliberate so the poor stay uniformed and don't toi-toi and start burning down their HQs).
 
It's difficult to not sit with a blank stare on one's face reading what the MTN chap said.

Confusion is what all operators use.. and I bet ICASA will be confused.
 
Reese: there is a telecom tax charged to all operators (except USALs) by ICASA :-)

SuperSunBird: It's basically that high interconnect fees incentive operators to establish themselves in otherwise unprofitable geographical areas (low LSM, no teledentity). Without an interconnection-charge USALs would not be feasible either. Since the government decided on licensing USALs, they will most surely not decide on dropping interconnect fees. Or cause some havoc :-)

Eish
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X