Profits - Telkom, MTN and Vodacom

[MaD]

<b>Telkom......</b> - 4.3 Billion from 0.53 million
<b>Vodacom...</b> - 3.0 Billion from 9.70 million
<b>MTN...........</b> - 3.7 Billion from 6.27 million
<b> TOTAL - 11 Billion Profit</b>

One would thinky they would each be happy with a few hundred million profit... it is *profit* after all. What u guys think??? <u>Are we benefitting from these profits?</u>



<font color="navy"><font size="1"><b>Where others have progress, we have Telkom.</b>
Hellkom website - http://telkomsucks.0catch.com</font id="size1"></font id="navy">

 

[Jerrek]

Who are you to demand benefits from another man's profit? You must be a Marxist.

 

[MaD]

It's profit I have provided for them.

BTW why don't you check out:
http://www.myadsl.co.za/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=3103&SearchTerms=troll
heheheheheheh

<font color="navy"><font size="1"><b>Where others have progress, we have Telkom.</b>
Hellkom website - http://telkomsucks.0catch.com</font id="size1"></font id="navy">

 

[Karnaugh]

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> Who are you to demand benefits from another man's profit? You must be a Marxist.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Government owns 49% of Telkom or something. 50% of Vodacom's profit goes to Telkom as well.

so Telkom got 4.3+1.5= R5.9 bil.

Government takes 49% of that, call it 2.9 bil, then taxation on the other half, making it R4.3 bil. Plus taxation on MTN's profit (~1.8).

So this month on telecomunications alone they made about 6 billion rand. Plus other taxes (they earn money from what we spend as well as take half what we earnt)

Now ask me again, "Who are *WE* to demand benefits from that"?

- Colin Alston
colin at alston dot za dot org

"Getting traffic shaping right is easy and can be summed up in one word: Dont." -- George Barnett

 

[mbs]

AND... what's wrong with being a Marxist? Whilst you may disagree with Karl Marx's economic philosophies and principles, that does not mean others must subscribe to your view: furthermore, he did not publish the dogmatic viewpoint that others must "demand benefit from another's profit", but instead subscribed to the view that common ownership of the means of production implies benefit for the common good, in the form of whatever profit or value-add is realised. Methinks you're confusing Leninism/Stalinism with Marxism...

 

[Karnaugh]

Oh dear... BCom students *runs*

- Colin Alston
colin at alston dot za dot org

"Getting traffic shaping right is easy and can be summed up in one word: Dont." -- George Barnett

 

[neobyte]

mbs, no one was really commmenting on a particular viewpoint. It was just stated that it does seem to be unfair that the hinderence of economic development lies in the fact that the only power that can chage current trends is the major receiver of the wealth.

The government is using the money to develop what they want and not what should in theory be developed naturally. Our GDP growth rate is poor and out country is spending on expenses instead of prolonged capital growth. Obviously AIDs has a lot to do with this.

Even in life, your early years should focus on maintaining a positive income statement, then focus on capital growth. I just fear the economic policies of this country have focused on the first for too long.

It would be interesting to see exactly where the governments share of the profits goes?

 

[MaD]

The thing is, we pay and pay and pay and pay and pay... and prices never ever go down, even though profits are through the freakin' roof.

If any of these 3 companies halved their prices they would have exponentially more customers and make more profit, way more.

<font color="navy"><font size="1"><b>Where others have progress, we have Telkom.</b>
Hellkom website - http://telkomsucks.0catch.com</font id="size1"></font id="navy">

 

[mbs]

NEO:
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> mbs, no one was really commmenting on a particular viewpoint.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Nah - JERREK made the blatant and bold statement to MAD: "You must be a Marxist." - my response was for him, as I really have no appreciation for snide comments posted by a foreigner...

But, to get back to the subject - I concur with the statement that it seems we're in a 'forever-pay' culture, whilst profits soar. It's a natural consequence to now query the continued necessity of this. By the same token, however, we've charged Government to ensure equable benefit for society as a whole. This implies that we have to focus on the mechanisms deployed by Government for this purpose - like it or not, we're all activists to ensure delivery, even as lowly members of this forum. All 3 companies concerned have a responsibility to their client base, as well as the environment within which they operate. This means they must be brought to task in the event of non-delivery, or evidence of misalignment with societal goals - a prime example of which would be blatant profiteering, as evidenced by their posted profits, IMHO.

My fervent hope is that there are individual or group shareholders in these organisations, who will question the operational basis of whatever dividends come their way, and demand insight into the basis for future revenue projections and ultimate profitability. With Government as a shareholder (albeit directly or indirectly) in all three, methinks they have a duty to pursue precisely this aspect, for public dissemination...

 

[onionpeel]

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by mbs</i>
I concur with the statement that it seems we're in a 'forever-pay' culture, whilst profits soar.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I refer to this as the 'Robin Hood approach'.[8]

 

[James]

If i start a company, i stock 1 item it cost me R1, I sell it for R2. That means i make R1 and R1 goes into my pocket. That is what telkom is doing instead of thinking, why don't i use this other rand and buy 2 items, that way i can provide a beter service, i will make more money in the long run and will be able to keep growing and expanding instead of increasing prices, offering the same thing and watching my profit grow.

There is no peace without war!!!

 

[dikbek]

http://www.mg.co.za/zapiro/imagePage.aspx?YearId=2004|MonthId=6|DayId=14