Telkom: Please Read.

[RetroPedro]

I saw several people mention that SA is a third world country. Look at what VAT you pay in first world countries here in comparison to SA. Obviously you will pay less percentage wise if the price of whatever (ADSL?) is lower

 

[vespax]

South Africa is a first world country according to the CIA world factbook. There is some dispute about this however (From the UN notably). SA is a first world country with aspects of a third world country. But we are getting off topic

According to the CIA...... Lets not go that route here. Wars have been started because of them.

 

[Sneeky]

1st world country 3rd world telecoms and telecoms laws, no argument.

 

[RetroPedro]

If we are (supposedly) third world, then Zim must be nth world! Check this link for a good laugh and feel better about living in SA!

 

[kilo39]

critics can easily point to 1) its proximity to Europe (a very big internet hub), 2) its density 3) its high population etc.

The UK has a population of 45 million - the same as us!

 

[sunsoffun]

The UK has a population of 45 million - the same as us!

the differance is that 30 million of them dont walk to fetch their water and most of them actually know what the internet is.

 

[mancombseepgood]

Ok...

For starters ... Londen is a major internet peering point to NY ... JHB is not.

Let's be more specific... WHY NOT!?

 

[youradsl]

The UK has a population of 45 million - the same as us!

It's not so much about population than it is about population density. There are more people in London using the internet than there are PC owners in SA.

 

[Freshy-ZN]

there are more people in one street in london on broadband than PC owners in SA!

I fully agree that we need to stop comparing ourselves to UK, USA etc and start doing it with countries like Aus & NZ. It doesnt make Telkoms case any stronger as AUS and NZ both are way ahead of us.

The UK & Most of Europe is incredibly densly populated. It well worth a companies while to run fibre down any street and they will have enough subscribers on that cable to make a profit. Most of the houses in London are not even one house. You stand on the street and look at what you think is a house but in reality its been converted into 6 flats or something silly.

I have always maintained that wireless is the way to go here. Wireless to cover the distances between centres then onto smaller fibre rings in centres.

 

[kilo39]

It well worth a companies while to run fibre down any street and they will have enough subscribers on that cable to make a profit. Most of the houses in London are not even one house. You stand on the street and look at what you think is a house but in reality its been converted into 6 flats or something silly.

...and there was a time (not so long ago) - where only BT could run a cable down a street - imagine if they kept the market closed - BT would never have kept up... exactly the problem telkom face in this country.
And - densely populated as it is - there are very remote areas - some of these areas were the first to get broadband through community projects, etc. None of this will happen here - telkom have it wrapped too tight