SAT3 hopes dashed

[DJTazzz]

http://www.itweb.co.za/sections/telecoms/2007/0705241100.asp?S=All Africa News&A=AFN&O=FPIN

[ Johannesburg, 24 May 2007 ] - Declaring the SAT3 undersea cable an essential facility will not solve SA's problem of high telecommunications costs, says Verizon Business.

Industry is again eyeing the SAT3 cable, as Telkom's exclusivity contract with government for access to the landing station expires within the next few weeks. Under current legislation, no future monopolistic contracts may be entered into between government and a telecoms provider.

It is expected that government and industry will negotiate new terms for access to the landing station.

Edwin Thompson, Verizon's regulatory and operations executive, says access to the landing station to SAT3 is not the highest cost base for local telecoms operators when they facilitate international access. Verizon holds a share in the SAT3 cable.

The cost to facilitate a national backhaul connection from the landing station to Johannesburg, where about 90% of telecoms companies are based, is the largest cost.

 

[Franna]

Well - the chap from Verizon should have read this article first:

"InfraCo plans to break Telkom stranglehold on backhaul bandwidth"
http://mybroadband.co.za/nephp/?m=show&id=6520

 

[Gatecrasher]

The thick plottens....

Clarity, anyone?

 

[Sneeky]

Let's declare it an essential facility anyway Edwin, it might not solve the problem but the action would no doubt contribute to the solution

 

[curiouswanderer]

At least give it a try right? Why all of a sudden, this negativity regarding opening up access pops up? It's fact that Telkom monopolises SAT 3. What Verizon is proposing is that "it's ok, let Telkom keep the monopoly and look for other ways to reduce costs". Not a very logical solution is it?

When I first saw the article I thought government has decided against nationalising SAT3...thank heavens that isn't the case. At least not yet.

 

[DJTazzz]

Well, the article says Verison is a shareholder of the cable currently so they stand to loose should it be declared an essential asset. Hence I guess they trying to save their monopoly on the cable... Bottom line, it needs to be nationalised and declared essential and if costs don't come down, then so be it but have it in private hands after being paid for by the tax payer makes no sense.

 

[curiouswanderer]

Again, greed at the expense of the country's growth and right to access information at an affordable price.

 

[JStrike]

DJTazzz : They dont stand to loose anything. Their ownership wont be taken away, or their profits on it. When people refer to declaring it a national asset, they are refering to the landing rights, which Telkom currently owns (i.e Verizon cant access the Sat-3 cable, part of which they own, without going through Telkom)

 

[reech]

FUD from a company with vested interests.

 

[Sneeky]

Yup Edwin worried about his bonus.

 

[Skip]

I'm sure he'd prefer it if just Verizon and Telkom were given landing rights. That way Neotel will have to go through Verizon to get access (I don't see them going through Telkom if they can avoid it). If they open it up for anyone to land then Neotel will go straight to VSNL and Verizon will have to compete with other SAT-3 cable investors like BT.

 

[StefK]

FUD from a company with vested interests.

Yup Edwin worried about his bonus.

I agree, I think this is MTN/Voda -esque shaite propoganda.

After all:
10% of R100 is R10
10% of R12.50 is R1.25

Businessmen will be businessmen (read : thieves).

 

[bwana]

I'm sure he'd prefer it if just Verizon and Telkom were given landing rights. That way Neotel will have to go through Verizon to get access (I don't see them going through Telkom if they can avoid it). If they open it up for anyone to land then Neotel will go straight to VSNL and Verizon will have to compete with other SAT-3 cable investors like BT.

Neotel's (VSNL) share in SAT3 is probably the largest of all the shareholders.

 

[eremos]

Telkom's exclusivity contract with government for access to the landing station expires within the next few weeks.

say what?

 

[bwana]

Seems Edwin was talking out of the wrong orifice? http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/showthread.php?t=76107

 

[Oupoot]

Is there thus a business case for laying a cable from the landing station (say Mtunzini coz its closest to GP) to Gauteng? How about a 60-80Gbs cable? It will supply broadband access to whoever wants to purchase it in GP or along the way, with them then simply providing the metropolitan distribution network. Just need to negotiate with govt to have access to the cable and purchase some space from one of the SAT3 partners (BT?). Oh yeah, I think I will need a infrastructure licence from ICASA, but they should be much easier to get than international access licence.

 

[Tanarri]

Is there thus a business case for laying a cable from the landing station (say Mtunzini coz its closest to GP) to Gauteng? How about a 60-80Gbs cable? It will supply broadband access to whoever wants to purchase it in GP or along the way, with them then simply providing the metropolitan distribution network. Just need to negotiate with govt to have access to the cable and purchase some space from one of the SAT3 partners (BT?). Oh yeah, I think I will need a infrastructure licence from ICASA, but they should be much easier to get than international access licence.

I think legally that would fall under a (EXTREMELY RARE RESOURCE IN SA) telecoms license. Hence that would mean Telkom and Neotel through Infraco.