Telkom denies instigation allegations

'strue.. telkom's not involved in Matsepe-Casaburri's appeal....

Matsepe-Cowsaburri's involved in Telkom's appeal though...
 
Where theres Smoke ???

And as the saying goes.

Wheres theres smoke theres fire
 
Curious that Telkodemonopolies has suddenly decided to refute this particular allegation of being in bed with Poison Ivy when it has not previously refuted such allegations, this denial makes me suspect that Telkodemonopolies and Poison Ivy did have a midnight liaison to thrash out an appeal.
 
ic said:
Curious that Telkodemonopolies has suddenly decided to refute this particular allegation of being in bed with Poison Ivy when it has not previously refuted such allegations, this denial makes me suspect that Telkodemonopolies and Poison Ivy did have a midnight liaison to thrash out an appeal.
Click to expand...

I agree. Telkom is defensive "when there's smoke".
 
Last edited:
ic said:
Curious that Telkodemonopolies has suddenly decided to refute this particular allegation of being in bed with Poison Ivy when it has not previously refuted such allegations, this denial makes me suspect that Telkodemonopolies and Poison Ivy did have a midnight liaison to thrash out an appeal.
Click to expand...

A case of "Methinks the lady doth protest too much"
 
“Telkom has indeed scrutinised the judgment, but only for purposes of assessing the possible risk and impact to its own business,” Telkom concluded.
Click to expand...

The only risk for Telkom will be that the appeal fails, and the vans be allowed to self-provision, then (and only then) will their cozy monopoly and easy money be taken away...
 
The_Librarian said:
There'll be a major backlash when this rumour can be proven to be true...
Click to expand...
What can we do? There is no frieking alternative to our monopoly.

Telkom knows that they can do whatever they want, we all just have to take it.
 
Tommygun said:
Doesn't the industry regulator name have the word 'independent' in there somewhere? How can she instruct it to do anything? I guess should get real...
Click to expand...

Read the article and was going to quote that as well!
Appalling!

When o when are we ever going to be free of her and as TB says Stalin-Mofele seems to be playing a more sinister role in all of this!

See the following:

[ Cape Town | ITWeb, 22 September 2008 ] - Department of Communications (DOC) director-general Lyndall Shope-Mafole is the driving force behind the appeal against the court ruling that effectively allows value-added network services (VANS) to build their own networks, sources say.

Furthermore, the state's appeal was done without the initial knowledge of communications minister Ivy Matsepe-Casaburri, or her deputy, Roy Padayachie, both of whom only found out the appeal had been lodged after the fact.
Click to expand...
 
DOC is the whore, Ivy is the pimp, and Telkom is the "client".....................
 
Oh look, denials from Telskum :rolleyes: the same company who claim to have good response times on complaints, hehe, funny bunch these government lackeys.

As long as powerful connected people have a vested interest in this company, as well as the government and last but certainly not the least, the PIC who manages the state pension fund, these scumbags will stifle any real liberalisation of this industry.

You can almost hear the screams of independant telecoms execs in their frustration to move forward.
 
Shake&Bake said:
Read the article and was going to quote that as well!
Appalling!

When o when are we ever going to be free of her and as TB says Stalin-Mofele seems to be playing a more sinister role in all of this!

See the following:
Click to expand...
Copied your post into this thread, very interesting ITWeb article.
 
Thanks for highlighting, excellent reporting from Paul Vecchiatto.

[T]he state's appeal was done without the initial knowledge of communications minister Ivy Matsepe-Casaburri, or her deputy, Roy Padayachie, both of whom only found out the appeal had been lodged after the fact.
Click to expand...

dominic, is there a distinction between the DOC and the minister in terms of being party to the legal action?

Would Ivy not have to sign something authorising that the appeal be lodged?

Last week Monday, the DOC's executive committee, chaired by Matsepe-Casaburri and including all of the department's senior management, discussed the ruling, its implications and whether to appeal. Sources say Shope-Mafole was not physically present, but participated via telephone.

“The prevailing view was that the ruling should be left alone. Because by appealing it, it means the department is set against ICASA, which is the sector regulator, and that is an untenable situation,” a source present at the meeting says.

The issue was not resolved at that meeting, as the minister had to leave and discussions did not resume later in the week as they were supposed to, because the minister was ill.
Click to expand...

Last Monday the minister was in Johannesburg until at least midday at Telkom's agm. It is a bit of a stretch to believe that she left Midrand at midday, went to the airport, flew to Cape Town (+ - 2hr flying time, +30mins waiting in airports both sides, +1 hr travelling to and from airports) and made it back in time to attend a critical meeting. This is an overweight septegenerian we are talking about here (she turned 71 on thursday). My point is that it is unlikely she was at a departmental meeting in Cape Town on Monday last week.

The same sources also allege telecommunications utility Telkom provided Shope-Mafole and the state attorney with a legal brief on how to argue against the judgment.
Click to expand...

It wouldn't be the first time Telkom has coached the state on how to respond in legal matters. Ask the registrar of companies.

Despite what Telkom has said officially/pr bs, some of their directors can't keep their mouths shut- speaking to a handful of big wigs last week they definitely are not happy about the Altech ruling.

“The minister should now let it rest. In fact, I believe the minister does want to rest, and that it is probably director-general Lyndall Shope-Mafole who is threatening to disrupt liberalisation again.”
Click to expand...
- Dene Smuts, DOC slammed for VANS appeal
 
Last edited:
This is hardly surprising... I've long held the view that Lyndall is the real policy-maker and enforcer in the DoC. Ivy's just a figure-head and a convenient target for abuse, while Lyndall pulls the strings behind the scenes. I can't really understand her motivation though. To be honest, I think she just wants it her own way and there's no way some upstart business hicks are going to thwart her carefully laid plans. She's rigid and visionless - the most dangerous kind of bureaucrat.
 
Juice said:
This is hardly surprising... I've long held the view that Lyndall is the real policy-maker and enforcer in the DoC. Ivy's just a figure-head and a convenient target for abuse, while Lyndall pulls the strings behind the scenes. I can't really understand her motivation though. To be honest, I think she just wants it her own way and there's no way some upstart business hicks are going to thwart her carefully laid plans. She's rigid and visionless - the most dangerous kind of bureaucrat.
Click to expand...
Hopefully Stalin-Mafole is also (f)rigid and childless as well - we don't need another generation of Stalin-Mafoles screwing with the country's economy!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X