See hidden discussions | Win great prizes | Get free support
Not sure if that's a good thing.more ISPs need to die. Survival of the first fittest.
Since when did Mweb act in the interest of the consumer?
MWEB and DSTV/Multichoice belong to NASPERS. Do you think it is in NASPER's interest if very low broadband prices (and good network quality!!!) were to lead to more of us streaming our content via Netflix, Hulu, etc. rather than pay R700/m to DSTV?I think the ISP's have a legitimate complaint in that Telkom Internet and Telkom Wholesale are one company.
They can squeeze the industry to the ultimate detriment of consumers.
What's the problem here? These ISPs have expressed their concern to the Competition Commission over a price cut that does not entirely make sense to them how Telkom Internet pulled it off, since all of these other companies which are in the same field and should have similar input costs are finding it nonsensical.
which should be no surprise both because of the nature of Naspers and the fact that if a big squeeze happens MWEB and Telkom are the two to come out alive so a course of action that sees Telkom getting bludgeoned while squeezing out smaller operators is a double win for MWEBAs far as I can see, the one squeezing MWEB's margins is MWEB.
Brilliant insight !! Because in a free market we need a monopoly to fix pricing without any competition !!
The asked for a look to be had on the 17th - that is fine and well - but when you consider that all of the data is available through the regulatory information reporting it is largely redundant. Add to that the fact that there is a dispute resolution procedure in the settlement agreement (busy trying to get my hands on it) and the threat is not so veiled. TG will shaft TI or Hershaw and the boys will make life difficult, if they go that route whichever ISPs go with it will loose my support.
And for what its worth it seems the consumer boycott on MWEB for their throttling nonsense has been far more successful than I thought. So I do believe ISPs will think carefully before adopting a course of action that could lead to voting with a wallet.
Nope the 10% IPC reduction is already a component of the settlement
... they formally engaged Telkom and requested a 50% reduction in IPC costs ... Telkom rejected their request ... Eventually the ISPs decided to meet with the Competition Commission ... Telkom has since offered all wholesale customers a further 10% reduction in IPC charges, Hershaw said, which they have decided to accept conditionally ... That condition being that the Competition Commission will still investigate the matter
If they want to do something for the benefit of everybody they will put in an offer to contract for 5 years at current monthly spend on IPC in exchange for a 5% capacity increase every 6 months and for there to be a program of expanding the number of ESRs where IPC is provided
Fact or opinion? So far they have met all the conditions of the CompCom settlement without any prompting from (especially) a competitor.There was not a hope of the 10% anywhere until they went and ran to the Competition Commission, so you can't say that getting the Competition Commission involved recently didn't do anything useful.
The problem IMHO is:
1)Axxess (Afrihost's sister company) announced lower prices for (most of) their uncapped products than Telkom Internet's, *before* Telkom Internet's pricing was announced. If it is so unfair that Telkom had lower prices than MWEB expected, why are they not investigating Axxess?
2)MWEB seems to want to have the lowest price in the market, and they expect Telkom Wholesale to subsidise it. If they think the input costs are too high, why didn't they just match Axxess, instead of under-cutting them?
As far as I can see, the one squeezing MWEB's margins is MWEB.
Fact or opinion? So far they have met all the conditions of the CompCom settlement without any prompting from (especially) a competitor.
Coming back to ranger's question... why no CC complaint when axxess dropped their prices to become the cheapest service provider?
There was not a hope of the 10% anywhere until they went and ran to the Competition Commission, so you can't say that getting the Competition Commission involved recently didn't do anything useful.
So they should support the same terrible tactic that Telkom did before Seacom came online and when they realised that a non-Telkom run cable was inevitable? Try and lock out any potential new players who'd come in via LLU and would be performing an IPConnect type service, by locking all the ISPs onto IPConnect for an extended period.
Nope the the 10% is a lot older than the Comp Comm chat - the amount being published and probably even determined only later. As I understand the undertaking they have to provide a certain amount of million rand price reduction rather than %sbiased any ?? As far as I can see Telkom offered another 10% after the other ISP`s approached the Com-commission. That smacks of admitting guilt ? Why now all of a sudden offer another 10% ?