SNO is here

The nameless one is here.

About bladdy time ..... now only another 9-12 months before they're operational.
 
the unbundling of the local loop has been delayed until further notice, said Icasa counsellor Tracy Cohen.
Click to expand...
Are you freaking kidding me????
How the hell can the arrival of another operator contribute to delaying LLU?

Oh hang on...now it becomes clear.
Clearly the SNO has been promised a period of "duopoly exclusivity" by ICASA/government. If LLU happened before the SNO got operating, the new operator would lose significant profits through the increased competition...we cant possibly have that happen now can we??
 
lewstherin said:
Its only really "here" when I can place an order for an ADSL line from them.
Until then the SNO remains about as real as snow on Durban beachfront.
Click to expand...

You are correct, but now the ball is in thier court. Now we shall see if they are any good.
 
lewstherin said:
Are you freaking kidding me????
How the hell can the arrival of another operator contribute to delaying LLU?

Oh hang on...now it becomes clear.
Clearly the SNO has been promised a period of "duopoly exclusivity" by ICASA/government. If LLU happened before the SNO got operating, the new operator would lose significant profits through the increased competition...we cant possibly have that happen now can we??
Click to expand...
bingo
 
mccrack said:
The nameless one is here.
Click to expand...
FIN24 said:
the Independent Communications Authority (Icasa) entitled the new player - SNO Telecommunication - to compete with Telkom on the public
Click to expand...
Sounds like thats what they're calling themselves
 
Farking finally!
Off to get a bottle of good champagne
 
the unbundling of the local loop has been delayed until further notice, said Icasa counsellor Tracy Cohen.
Click to expand...

Of course it has. We couldn't have Telkom's entire monopoly falling to pieces and becoming totally unprofitable over night now could we?

What with 80% of the population cancelling their lines with Telkom to take up the option of the SNO's offering, they have to get a revenue stream from somewhere.:rolleyes:
 
Yes, about time to..

Mentioned on E this morning/last night but not a peep on 702 or SABC AFAIK...

Good luck to them, in lieu of a name I christen them SNOT (Second National Operator Telecommunications)
 
South African consumers have long been waiting for a duopoly of fixed line operators
Click to expand...

WHAT?!!?

We have not been waiting for a "duopoly" of operators. We have been waiting for proper competition!

I fear all we have now is another real life example of how the "Nash Equilibrium" works...

Yes I am referring to the guy from "A Beautiful mind"

:(

Why do you think Telkom is almost delirious with joy at the prospect of more "competition"?
 
Last edited:
Well... I have not received the press-release very well.

Pull out the Strawberry flavoured KY ... SNO is just going to make it more pleasureable to be screwed over.
 
Telkom on the public switched telecommunications service (PSTS), the unbundling of the local loop has been delayed until further notice, said Icasa counsellor Tracy Cohen.
Click to expand...

Delayed as TELKOM and the GVT got to PADA, Icasa, SNO? and to the new TELKOM CEO. Wonder what packages and deals were discussed for silence and ignorance to enable TELKOM to carry on defrauding this market as long as they can. Well no consequence on me as I can remain on dialup another two years. Even then I wonder if the SNO would have had any impact as up to now they said and seemed to do little to inform the public and gain interest. Another TELKOM Doc ploy? I would not even wonder twice of it.

All a bunch of wankers not here for the people but for their own pockets
 
"Clearly the SNO has been promised a period of "duopoly exclusivity" by ICASA/government. If LLU happened before the SNO got operating, the new operator would lose significant profits through the increased competition...we cant possibly have that happen now can we??"

The SNO has had to payvery large licencing fees. It is only fair that they get some sort of period of exclusivity. As long as LLU is on the horizon, I dont mind.
There is nothing wrong with a duoploy. Hell, there is nothing wrong with a monopoloy. Some great companies are monopolies e.g Eskom.
It is only when monopoly position is abused that there is something wrong. So, repeat after me "there is nothing wrong with monopolies/duopolies"
 
Last edited:
JStrike said:
"Clearly the SNO has been promised a period of "duopoly exclusivity" by ICASA/government. If LLU happened before the SNO got operating, the new operator would lose significant profits through the increased competition...we cant possibly have that happen now can we??"

The SNO has had to payvery large licencing fees. It is only fair that they get some sort of period of exclusivity. As long as LLU is on the horizon, I dont mind.
There is nothing wrong with a duoploy. Hell, there is nothing wrong with a monopoloy. Some great companies are monopolies e.g Eskom.
It is only when monopoly position is abused that there is something wrong. So, repeat after me "there is nothing wrong with monopolies/duopolies"
Click to expand...

Again, I agree to a certain extent with JStrike. Unfortunately, in my opinion, duopoly is necessary and really the only path out of the mess we are currently in. The SNO needs to succeed, we don't want them to come into a fully liberalised and competitive market with a deeply entrenched incumbent: this will almost ensure their failure.

The main issue we need to pressurise govt on now is SNO access to local loop. Just to give a quick summary for those who don't know, this is the current situation:

The Telecoms Act of 1996 provided for Telkom to have a monopoly for 5 years (this could be extended to 6 provided licence conditions were met, but thats another story). Telkom's monopoly, according to the Telecoms Act, officially ended in 2001. The Act also provided for local loop access for additional operators AFTER TWO YEARS of them being licenced. Thus there are two arguments that have arisen on this issue.

The first argument asserts that the letter of the law must be followed, i.e. that now the SNO has been licenced, the law says that they can only have local loop access after two years. This is Telkom's argument.

The second argument asserts that the spirit of the law must be followed, i.e. that Telkom's monopoly has been artificially extended (a de facto extension), and the Telecoms Act had envisioned local loop access for SNO by 2003/2004 already.
 
My thought is that the ADSL regulations should carry the Local loop unbundling policy, as technically that 'local loop' is an integral part of the ADSL service.

So we need to propose taht as an amendment ot the Draft regs.
 
Hark3n said:
You are correct, but now the ball is in thier court. Now we shall see if they are any good.
Click to expand...

That should be "Our balls have always been in their court"... :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X