-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: Have you ever ordered a product online and received a fake knock-off?
Neotel dismisses InfraCo speculation
- Thread starter rpm
- Start date
Lord Anubis
Expert Member
Neo...hellooo..where are yoooo???
talk, talk, talk, blame, blame, blame, excuses, excuses, excuses....just launch your residential services and get on with it already...for pity's sake!
talk, talk, talk, blame, blame, blame, excuses, excuses, excuses....just launch your residential services and get on with it already...for pity's sake!
pkid
Expert Member
I just don't care about Neotel anymore and I probably won't use them. I have a cellphone that I make calls on and an ADSL line that I use for data at home. When I am travelling I use my cellphone as a modem. Done. They can keep their wireless because I want the performance of a physical line. How long until they go the route of iBurst and madly oversubscribe some of their towers leading to slow Internet? They won't have the coverage of the cell phone networks as well. I want one number that anybody can contact me on at any time and the cellphone operators give me that.
My big hopes are Vodacom getting into the ADSL business and SEACOM.
My big hopes are Vodacom getting into the ADSL business and SEACOM.
ads
Senior Member
Surely this is all just history now. Neotel's SITA network went live some time back, and that makes use of Infraco's infrastructure nationally. SITA seems impressed: http://mybroadband.co.za/news/Telecoms/2799.html
ITWeb should be nailed for falsely quoting a "source". There is zero accountability and ethics in journalism in this country it seems
Agreed.
Give Neotel a break. Change is coming - Through Neotel and others.
The beast (telkom) will die.
well. it's taking too long!
There was a time that I would even pay more for the same service from Neotel than Telkom. Just because I hate Telkom so much... but due to the delays and delays and delays and delays and delays and delays from Neotel, I have lost almost all confidence in them and they will have to offer a truly amazing product at significantly less than Telkom for me to even consider the hassle of going through with the transfer. Nice going on shooting yourself in the foot NoTel.
cookiemonster
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 6, 2005
- Messages
- 409
- Reaction score
- 0
Well look at where Neotel is coming from.. I'm saying Tata to them, cause I don't think I will touch them now.
Globetrotter
Expert Member
I agree that Neotel's empty promises (so far) has been disappointing. However, I just watched a MoneyWeb interview with the SEACOM president and he's talking about reduction of up to 90% on wholesale broadband prices once their undersea cable 'lands' next year. Neotel happens to be their partner.
Trust me, with those soft of savings to look forward to, most people will be signing up with Neotel if nobody else can offer those sort of competitive prices at the time.
pkid
Expert Member
Great. But Neotel still need to get the fibre out there so we can actually use the bandwidth. My nightmare situation would be the cable is finished and waiting to be used but all Neotel do is release press releases saying how much they are going to save the public etc and not actually connecting everyone to the new cable!
Globetrotter
Expert Member
Fair enough. I just hope that if that happens (Neotel non-delivery) that SEACOM will be allowed to strike an agreement with someone else (other than Telkom). Would be interesting to know what the nature is of the SEACOM / Neotel agreement regarding Neotel's landing rights for the cable.
Setting the record straight
I would normally not bother getting involved in a debate such as this, however, the attack on ITWeb has been unwarranted and unjust.
Let me point out that it seems to be a habit of some companies to say things to the media and then retract them when they realise that their views may be construed as unpopular, or not toeing the "party line".
Firstly, the article posted on this site says:
"Towards the end of last year Neotel was quoted as saying that Infraco was to blame for the service offering delays from the company. “It was a real show-stopper,” ITWeb quoted Neotel spokesperson Mala Suriah as saying.
Neotel said that they were ‘disappointed with the mis-quotes’ and Suriah even pointed out that she had ‘not had any interview with ITWeb’."
To say that there was no interview with ITWeb is, quite frankly, a lie. The interview was conducted by ITWeb senior journalist Leon Engelbrecht, a man with almost 20 years experience in journalism. I happened to be in the newsroom and overheard part of this telephonic conversation.
It is thus disappointing to note that spokespeople such as Suriah are unwilling to take responsibility for what they say - but this is not uncommon in the industry. On the other hand, we stand by what we write.
Secondly, I personally had an interview with Neotel on February 15 - in case there are any doubts.
Neotel's response to the article was one of disappointment about the angle of the story - that Neotel had been delayed by Infraco. The feedback I received from Neotel's enterprise marketing manager Elise Roscoe was that this is inaccurate. Ms Roscoe when to great lengths to explain that it was not Infraco, but the DPE's indecision regarding the establishment of Infraco, that lead to the delay. Furthermore, she pointed out that it wasn't the launch of Neotel, but its licensing that was delayed.
My argument is that this is splitting hairs - this is purely semantic. Does it matter whether one says that it was Infraco directly, or its establishment, that caused the delay? The end result is the same.
Furthermore, does it make any difference to say that it was Neotel's licensing or launch that was delayed? End result: the launch was delayed. End of story.
This has, unfortunately, become a storm in a tea-cup.
The MyBroadband article quotes Fani Zulu, Neotel’s Executive Head of External Affairs, saying: “The statement published in ITWeb does not represent the views of Neotel.”
Mr Zulu sat in on my interview. Curiously, he does not deny that this was said. He also does not claim that this is a misquote or out-of-context reporting . Just a question, Mr Zulu: If this is not the view of Neotel, who's is it? I see you are having a difficult time distancing the company from something that was actually said.
Certainly, looking at the MyBroadband article, Neotel has a history of blaming Infraco and then retracting its statements. Curious.
Lastly, as a result of the MyBroadband piece, ITWeb has taken a lot of unfair flack. However, while it is nice to point fingers and accuse us of bad journalism - were we ever contacted for comment? Is the MyBroadband piece based on anything more than hear-say?
Martin Czernowalow
News Editor
ITWeb
I would normally not bother getting involved in a debate such as this, however, the attack on ITWeb has been unwarranted and unjust.
Let me point out that it seems to be a habit of some companies to say things to the media and then retract them when they realise that their views may be construed as unpopular, or not toeing the "party line".
Firstly, the article posted on this site says:
"Towards the end of last year Neotel was quoted as saying that Infraco was to blame for the service offering delays from the company. “It was a real show-stopper,” ITWeb quoted Neotel spokesperson Mala Suriah as saying.
Neotel said that they were ‘disappointed with the mis-quotes’ and Suriah even pointed out that she had ‘not had any interview with ITWeb’."
To say that there was no interview with ITWeb is, quite frankly, a lie. The interview was conducted by ITWeb senior journalist Leon Engelbrecht, a man with almost 20 years experience in journalism. I happened to be in the newsroom and overheard part of this telephonic conversation.
It is thus disappointing to note that spokespeople such as Suriah are unwilling to take responsibility for what they say - but this is not uncommon in the industry. On the other hand, we stand by what we write.
Secondly, I personally had an interview with Neotel on February 15 - in case there are any doubts.
Neotel's response to the article was one of disappointment about the angle of the story - that Neotel had been delayed by Infraco. The feedback I received from Neotel's enterprise marketing manager Elise Roscoe was that this is inaccurate. Ms Roscoe when to great lengths to explain that it was not Infraco, but the DPE's indecision regarding the establishment of Infraco, that lead to the delay. Furthermore, she pointed out that it wasn't the launch of Neotel, but its licensing that was delayed.
My argument is that this is splitting hairs - this is purely semantic. Does it matter whether one says that it was Infraco directly, or its establishment, that caused the delay? The end result is the same.
Furthermore, does it make any difference to say that it was Neotel's licensing or launch that was delayed? End result: the launch was delayed. End of story.
This has, unfortunately, become a storm in a tea-cup.
The MyBroadband article quotes Fani Zulu, Neotel’s Executive Head of External Affairs, saying: “The statement published in ITWeb does not represent the views of Neotel.”
Mr Zulu sat in on my interview. Curiously, he does not deny that this was said. He also does not claim that this is a misquote or out-of-context reporting . Just a question, Mr Zulu: If this is not the view of Neotel, who's is it? I see you are having a difficult time distancing the company from something that was actually said.
Certainly, looking at the MyBroadband article, Neotel has a history of blaming Infraco and then retracting its statements. Curious.
Lastly, as a result of the MyBroadband piece, ITWeb has taken a lot of unfair flack. However, while it is nice to point fingers and accuse us of bad journalism - were we ever contacted for comment? Is the MyBroadband piece based on anything more than hear-say?
Martin Czernowalow
News Editor
ITWeb
@ Martin: thank you for taking the time to put some things straight here, but I would like to point out one thing:
Your job is to split hairs. Factually correct appropriate quotation is your duty, as is ensuring that your facts are unquestionable. If you want to portray yourselves as honest, ethical and above all above petty challenges from, as you put it "Industry", then you should at least ensure that when you quote you quote accurately and to the point. Are you willing to go on record that this person was lying? So why should we believe your version, as after all, it's nothing more than hearsay?
Quoting MyBroadband articles is probably not the best course of action as many MyBroadband articles are faceless regurgitations of pre-existing articles from all over the web - and badly written at that.
I find the writing on all technology news sites very lacking, but that is my personal opinion and not really a debatable issue.
Once again I thank you for your time to comment here.
Your job is to split hairs. Factually correct appropriate quotation is your duty, as is ensuring that your facts are unquestionable. If you want to portray yourselves as honest, ethical and above all above petty challenges from, as you put it "Industry", then you should at least ensure that when you quote you quote accurately and to the point. Are you willing to go on record that this person was lying? So why should we believe your version, as after all, it's nothing more than hearsay?
I don't find anything wrong with that quote, the man is saying that the statement published by your paper does not represent the views of Neotel. In all likelihood it therefor stands to reason that it probably doesn't!
Quoting MyBroadband articles is probably not the best course of action as many MyBroadband articles are faceless regurgitations of pre-existing articles from all over the web - and badly written at that.
I find the writing on all technology news sites very lacking, but that is my personal opinion and not really a debatable issue.
Once again I thank you for your time to comment here.
Last edited:
dominic
Legal Expert: Telecoms
without going into the itweb/mybroadband issue i would like to just point out the obvious: neotel has without any shadow of a doubt been royally messed around and delayed by the infraco debacle
why they are so intent on denying this and being everyone's friend is beyond me
why they are so intent on denying this and being everyone's friend is beyond me
Probably because they need to maintain a very good relationship with government to keep existing contracts and win a few more? Biting the hand that feeds you is not exactly best practice in business.
Edit: and we all know how well this government responds to criticism.