ICASA: Fair process was followed

[gljackson]

http://www.itweb.co.za/sections/telecoms/2006/0608211200.asp?S=Broadband&A=BRO&O=FPLEAD

In terms of “the principles of approach”, the proper course was followed, says Mashile. “We had a public consultation process. The public hearing process is there to allow ICASA to find the optimum solution based on the evidence – and I feel this has been done.”

However, the introduction of the second national operator will likely cause pricing issues to be resolved through a fair market mechanism, he notes. "Competition is the best form of regulation."

 

[Sneeky]

Icasa might have followed 'fair process', but that appears to be all they did in real terms.

It might be one thing to protect new entrants in the market place as Mr Hurst explains, but surely the one and only party that is effectively causing this skewed and inflated cost of telecoms and connectivity in this country is TELKOM, and they seem to be a law unto themselves.

The major cost is bandwidth, but that has been sidestepped completely.
The way I see it is ICASA has effectively endorsed the practice of making obscene amounts of money on the back of SAT-3, this will just continue with other operators.

Stalling is what it appears to be.

 

[ic]

While ICASA might have been trying to be fair with public hearings etc, I would hardly describe the process as having been fair to consumers who have had to continue paying Telkodemonopolies' exorbitant pricing for the duration since MyADSL lodged the original ADSL complaint back in February 2004. Telkodemonopolies has continued with its profiteering and anti-competitive practices the whole time.

What is further highly disappointing, is that after all this time, ICASA has produced very badly worded and ambiguous ADSL regulations that don't even address all the issues - especially when it comes to the pricing & monthly rentals, and Telkodemonopolies will use this ambiguity to continue ripping off consumers.

ICASA had a golden opportunity to excel by addressing the ADSL regs in a phased manner, and should have fully addressed the most important issue first - which is pricing - both for:

1. end-consumers in the retail space which Telkodemonopolies also operates in [i.e. ADSL access & line rental charges]. IMO the wording of the ADSL regs is highly confusing & ambiguous here; and
2. ISPs in the wholesale space which Telkodemonopolies has a de facto stranglehold on, and there is no relief in sight - despite SNOT allegedly launching at the end of August 2006.

If ICASA had first sorted out the pricing of both retail and wholesale ADSL provisioning, with properly worded and unambiguous ADSL regs, then there would be considerably more confidence in ICASA's ability to effectively regulate and open up the ADSL market to competition with Telkodemonopolies.

 

[supersunbird]

What isnt fair is the big, broad, open-holed language they used...

 

[ou812ltd]

According to Paris you only have to consult the public, you don't have to realy listen to them. "We don't have to tell you that the Telecoms sector is screwed up. You know that. You failed the unsilent majority of the South African public Paris, you failed your organisation and you failed your office."

 

[Skip]

"Competition is the best form of regulation."

Then why have you been doing your icompetent best to prevent any competition for the past 5 years?

 

[krycor]

cell companies have proved it don't work when you have less than a handful of 'competition'

 

[Debbie]

Oh look, Paris Mashile does pay attention to us and our comments....