Telkom may face Competition Commision investigation over uncapped ADSL

km2

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2007
Messages
1,168
Fact or opinion? So far they have met all the conditions of the CompCom settlement without any prompting from (especially) a competitor.
Where did the 10% drop come from? If you look at Telkom's statement on the previous October cut they explicitly reference that it's part of the CC settlement. This drop has no reference to the CC, and reading the article they didn't offer anything when the ISPs initially talked to them, and after the ISPs talked to the CC, Telkom came back with an offer.
 

eyc

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2011
Messages
118
Ummm... 'cos it forms part of the original settlement?
It was ? Don't recall any percentages on specific dates other than an overall amount. Can you point me to those commitments ?
 

eyc

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2011
Messages
118
Where did the 10% drop come from? If you look at Telkom's statement on the previous October cut they explicitly reference that it's part of the CC settlement. This drop has no reference to the CC, and reading the article they didn't offer anything when the ISPs initially talked to them, and after the ISPs talked to the CC, Telkom came back with an offer.
Spot on.
 

km2

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2007
Messages
1,168
if anything Telkom has said up yours to Hershaw, who has been crying about this since October last year.
That would be a fairly spiteful and petty reaction from a multi-billion rand corporation, but that's not entirely out of character for Telkom, and one of the reasons they need to be complained about to the CC if they show a hint of getting up to their old tricks.
 

MickeyD

RIP
Joined
Oct 4, 2010
Messages
139,117
Where did the 10% drop come from? If you look at Telkom's statement on the previous October cut they explicitly reference that it's part of the CC settlement. This drop has no reference to the CC, and reading the article they didn't offer anything when the ISPs initially talked to them, and after the ISPs talked to the CC, Telkom came back with an offer.
It was ? Don't recall any percentages on specific dates other than an overall amount. Can you point me to those commitments ?
It's in Annexure D
http://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZACT/2013/62.pdf
 

MickeyD

RIP
Joined
Oct 4, 2010
Messages
139,117
No , not convinced yet. Don`t see anything in there about a drop on 1 Feb. In anyway why would they drop the price late 2013 ( was it October ? I cant remember ) and now drop it again ?
It's in Annexure D.
Ask your ISP for a copy of it.
 

MickeyD

RIP
Joined
Oct 4, 2010
Messages
139,117
And Annex D is confidential to Telkom. All we have publicly is that when Telkom makes a cut for the benefit of the CC, they mention it in the press release.
Not only Telkom. The original applicants also have it. And ICASA. And the CompCom...
 

Paul Hjul

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 31, 2006
Messages
14,902
Not only Telkom. The original applicants also have it. And ICASA. And the CompCom...
Also the applicants, ICASA and CompComm have it but TI are precluded by virtue of the other annexures

the moral of the story is that regardless of the contents the ISPs that were applicants in that complaint have an advantage over other ISPs and TI and rather than trying to build a positive broadband environment are showing up as greedy little bastards
 

eyc

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2011
Messages
118
Also the applicants, ICASA and CompComm have it but TI are precluded by virtue of the other annexures

the moral of the story is that regardless of the contents the ISPs that were applicants in that complaint have an advantage over other ISPs and TI and rather than trying to build a positive broadband environment are showing up as greedy little bastards
as apposed to the greedy bastards that were already found guilty by the cc for margin squeeze and putting SA broadband back 10 years ?
 

km2

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2007
Messages
1,168
Not only Telkom. The original applicants also have it. And ICASA. And the CompCom...
http://www.humanipo.com/news/32649/consumer-wont-benefit-from-full-telkom-wholesale-cuts-ispa/

"ISPA is not privy to the settlement negotiations and considerations attendant on the settlement of the complaint as between the Competition Commission and Telkom and therefore does not want to comment on whether the cuts are substantial enough other than to note that this is the first of three sets of reductions which are to take place under the settlement." - Dominic Cull

If dominic struggles to get his hands on it, there's no way I'm going to be able to see the official numbers just by asking my ISP nicely.

http://www.techcentral.co.za/telkom-to-cut-wholesale-broadband-fees/43346/

Telkom will reduce the wholesale fees it levies on fixed-line broadband service providers by 8% next month, the first of three cuts to come in the next three years.
Seems rather odd that if you're going to reduce prices three times in three years, you blow two of those reductions in the first year.
 

Paul Hjul

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 31, 2006
Messages
14,902
as apposed to the greedy bastards that were already found guilty by the cc for margin squeeze and putting SA broadband back 10 years ?
no contention there - in fact the number of times I have stated that Telkom must be held accountable for their actions and that they must be compelled to follow the law etc ... should stand as sufficient testimony to the fact that there is a serious problem
I have probably criticized Telkom's shortsightedness on all manner of things - gutting their human capital, failing to implement LLU, being a stooge for government - ad nauseum. The point is that there are legitimate claims and cases to be made under prevailing law against Telkom and they need to be made (as I said in this thread, a case may be made that if Telkom fails to move in LLU the settlement is violated - I am looking at this as soon as I've cleared a few things off my desk and have made some meat on the ICT Policy Review Green Paper). However IS and MWEB blatantly and repeatedly lie to the public when they claim that Telkom is using a taxpayer funded network, they lie to the public when they allege Telkom has a monopoly on the last mile, they lie to the public when they omit to point out the IPConnect includes national backhaul.

All that this complaint does is make the prospects of getting a competitive TI and TM in the space with TW functioning as a wholesale utility provider that much more difficult.
 

eyc

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2011
Messages
118
no contention there - in fact the number of times I have stated that Telkom must be held accountable for their actions and that they must be compelled to follow the law etc ... should stand as sufficient testimony to the fact that there is a serious problem
I have probably criticized Telkom's shortsightedness on all manner of things - gutting their human capital, failing to implement LLU, being a stooge for government - ad nauseum. The point is that there are legitimate claims and cases to be made under prevailing law against Telkom and they need to be made (as I said in this thread, a case may be made that if Telkom fails to move in LLU the settlement is violated - I am looking at this as soon as I've cleared a few things off my desk and have made some meat on the ICT Policy Review Green Paper). However IS and MWEB blatantly and repeatedly lie to the public when they claim that Telkom is using a taxpayer funded network, they lie to the public when they allege Telkom has a monopoly on the last mile, they lie to the public when they omit to point out the IPConnect includes national backhaul.

All that this complaint does is make the prospects of getting a competitive TI and TM in the space with TW functioning as a wholesale utility provider that much more difficult.
Paul , can you help with this ?

Originally Posted by MickeyD View Post

It's in Annexure D.
Ask your ISP for a copy of it.

I can either mail Afrihost and ask or you can perhaps post the relevant bit on here for my benefit ?
 

eyc

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2011
Messages
118
no contention there - in fact the number of times I have stated that Telkom must be held accountable for their actions and that they must be compelled to follow the law etc ... should stand as sufficient testimony to the fact that there is a serious problem
I have probably criticized Telkom's shortsightedness on all manner of things - gutting their human capital, failing to implement LLU, being a stooge for government - ad nauseum. The point is that there are legitimate claims and cases to be made under prevailing law against Telkom and they need to be made (as I said in this thread, a case may be made that if Telkom fails to move in LLU the settlement is violated - I am looking at this as soon as I've cleared a few things off my desk and have made some meat on the ICT Policy Review Green Paper). However IS and MWEB blatantly and repeatedly lie to the public when they claim that Telkom is using a taxpayer funded network, they lie to the public when they allege Telkom has a monopoly on the last mile, they lie to the public when they omit to point out the IPConnect includes national backhaul.

All that this complaint does is make the prospects of getting a competitive TI and TM in the space with TW functioning as a wholesale utility provider that much more difficult.
" However IS and MWEB blatantly and repeatedly lie to the public when they claim that Telkom is using a taxpayer funded network"

Never seen this argument before myself , but why would that not be at least partially correct ? Note , I`m asking ...not disagreeing.
 

MickeyD

RIP
Joined
Oct 4, 2010
Messages
139,117
" However IS and MWEB blatantly and repeatedly lie to the public when they claim that Telkom is using a taxpayer funded network"

Never seen this argument before myself , but why would that not be at least partially correct ? Note , I`m asking ...not disagreeing.
Peace.
In 1991 the Dept of P&T split into Telkom and SAPOS and their assets were valued at R12,8billion. In exchange for these assets Telkom had to accept all the liabilities, eg. gross interest bearing debt of R14,3 billion and had to fund some of the SAPOS losses for a fixed period.

http://mybroadband.co.za/news/telecoms/35920-did-you-pay-for-telkom’s-infrastructure.html
 

Paul Hjul

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 31, 2006
Messages
14,902
IS made the argument to ICASA with the previous LLU hearings - I can check in their submissions to see if it is there in the written submissions as well.

What we can categorically state is that during the "managed liberalization" era that the monopoly was a "tax" on the public in the same way we speak of seigniorage and regulations requiring companies to spend money or regulatory compliance is a tax. Rudi Jansen made remarks in this vain - the public suffered so the public should benefit is fine.
However under the two current boys at MWEB the line very much has been that Telkom was paid for by the taxpayer - might even appear in this article.
 
Top