Interesting, but your English teacher will send you back to redo the grammar, Jan!
 
Telkom has big plans for its copper network: more details

More information on Telkom’s plans to spin off its copper network have emerged

If the spin off happens, whose IECNS licence will the new entity use, if they are not already a licensee? If they use the existing Telkom IECNS, perhaps as a subsidiary, will there be any real difference to the status quo? My understanding is that a new IECNS licence can only be issued by ICASA subject to a policy direction, whereafter ICASA will invite applications.
 
you don't need a IECNS licence to own copper - otherwise a lot of bracelet owners would be in trouble.
 
Hmm, i would like to see how this SPV is going to be set up and better understand why they are doing this. I would also like a clearer indication of what "copper infrastructure" entails - the article makes it sound like last mile, but then that excludes a large part of the network. I would also like to know if the SPV controls rights to ducting, telephone poles etc as this could be leveraged.
 
If the spin off happens, whose IECNS licence will the new entity use, if they are not already a licensee? If they use the existing Telkom IECNS, perhaps as a subsidiary, will there be any real difference to the status quo? My understanding is that a new IECNS licence can only be issued by ICASA subject to a policy direction, whereafter ICASA will invite applications.

Why would they need it if they only provide the cable? The network operators using the cable would require licences.
 
Hmm, i would like to see how this SPV is going to be set up and better understand why they are doing this. I would also like a clearer indication of what "copper infrastructure" entails - the article makes it sound like last mile, but then that excludes a large part of the network. I would also like to know if the SPV controls rights to ducting, telephone poles etc as this could be leveraged.
copper only - no infrastructure (poles, ducts, etc.).
 
Hmm, i would like to see how this SPV is going to be set up and better understand why they are doing this. I would also like a clearer indication of what "copper infrastructure" entails - the article makes it sound like last mile, but then that excludes a large part of the network. I would also like to know if the SPV controls rights to ducting, telephone poles etc as this could be leveraged.
unfortunately other than Jan who clearly has contacts in the NSA or whatever the details appear to be well hidden and it is a lot of speculation. Probably only a dozen or so people have any documentation on the planned options. What is speculated quite well is that it is the last mile which is up for grabs. Telkom definitely has no reason to discard its fibre infrastructure.
 
I would also like a clearer indication of what "copper infrastructure" entails - the article makes it sound like last mile, but then that excludes a large part of the network. I would also like to know if the SPV controls rights to ducting, telephone poles etc as this could be leveraged.

These details (as we have them right now) are in the previous article (which is linked to) and mentioned in the 4th paragraph of this article:

Article said:
A source previously told MyBroadband that the plan excludes related infrastructure such as fibre and ducting, and that Telkom could be making an announcement on its plans to spin off its copper network as early as next month (August 2013).

It's only the copper being looked at for this project for now, as I have it.
 
to pose a question that can't be answered yet, what happens when copper is stolen or damaged and access to poles, ducting etc is needed or the supporting infrastructure is damaged? How is that going to work?

Are they going to at least include the insulation on the copper wires to the SPV:p

But seriously this is a very confusing bit of info thus far.
 
Imagine the cable theft nightmare this entity will have to contend with
 
I am happy just as long as the experts that calculate how much they need to charge are not going to cook the books like is done in a tender so the consumer ends up paying more.
 
Imagine the cable theft nightmare this entity will have to contend with

And that's exactly why separating Telkom from the copper infrastructure is good for them. I suspect they will be offloading staff too. Basically this allows Telkom to split the cost of service delivery from legacy & theft costs(mainly copper theft) and if they do it in an efficient way they will likely spin a profit off it as a result and consumers may pay more :(
 
Why would they need it if they only provide the cable? The network operators using the cable would require licences.

In my view, the operators using the copper would definitely require ECS licences as they would most likely be retailing EC services to the public. According to my reading of the relevant definitions in the EC Act, however, any person who makes available an electronic communications network (in this case copper cable) to another person for their provision of EC services is providing an ECNS and would require an ECNS licence. I guess we are all awaiting further details on this interesting topic so that matter can become clearer.
 
Back
Top