Telkom technical brief for Nov 1

[Debbie]

Debbie Please check the second document on

http://www.icasa.org.za/Documents.aspx?Page=43

Is that the document you are looking for ?

I think what you are (NOT) looking for is on page 15 ??

Thanks so much qDot, that was exactly what I was looking for.

Ok, for anyone seriously wanting to put ICASA into a bind on this Nov 1 thing, this is what you need to do:

You need to draft a complaint to Icasa charging that, should Telkom go ahead with the price changes of 1 Nov, then it will potentially violate Icasa and ministerial-approved regulations. The regulations I am referring to are those which the minister signed in June of this year and gazetted on 6 July - I am unsure of the date or name of the regulations, but it is the document which approved the new price-cap fomula of <CPI - 3,5%>.

According to these new regulations, Telkom's ADSL service is placed within the basket (more specifically, the "residential sub-basket"), and thus ADSL is subject to the further price-control regulations. In other words, Telkom may not increase the price of the basketed services by more than CPI - 3,5 %. Telkom filed it's new tariffs in August this year, and in this filing they did not include a price change to ADSL. Telkom now, after the deadline for filing new tariffs has passed, want to change the price stricture of a component of ADSL.

There are thus a few things that you need to argue:
1) You must make it clear that bandwidth would be included in the basket definition provided for in the regulations - it talks of "the provision and maintenance" of ADSL services. Bandwith is thus an essential part of ADSL, and would be part of the "provision" of ADSL (i.e. you cannot have the ADSL service without bandwidth). Furthermore, despite the fact that other service are explicitly said to be excluded from the basket, bandwidth is NOT explicitly said to fall outside the basket.

Right, so now you have argued that bandwidth is subject to the price cap. Next step:

2) You need to argue that Telkom missed the deadline for filing new tariff increases. Telkom did not file for the new increases in July/August 2005, when they filed their new tariff structure. Telkom has missed the deadline to increase the price of an item with is a component of the basket. Therefore Telkom's new bandwith tariffs are illegal.

Next:

3) In changing the price of bandwidth, is Telkom within the price-cap regime regulations? In other words, when one looks at how much Telkom has changed their prices (year-on-year) - how much they increased their prices this year - does it satisfy the formula CPI - 3,5% (where CPI is the CPI used in filing the September increases)? Perhaps you yourself could do the maths behind this, although I don't think it is to much to ask Icasa for proof that the new bandwidth prices indeed satisfy the price-cap regime.

4) A forth point you can make is to bring up the additional price-cap imposed on individual services. I *think* that there is a limit imposed on the percentage that Telkom is allowed to increase the price of any individual item on the basket, and I *think* this limit is 5%. In other words, the law says that Telkom may not increase the price of an individual basketed item by more than 5%. You need to do the maths and show that, in certain instances, Telkom's new prices are to be increased by more than 5%.

Thats what you need to do. Remember that when lodging a complaint with Icasa, you need to hound them about it (follow-up calls, pressure etc).

 

[R4tt3xx]

Most interesting Debbie, but it seems ICASA cannot regulate ADSL bandwidth because SAIX is not regulated.

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Molawa Moeletsi" <[email protected]>
> To: <*****>; <*****>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2005 10:35 AM
> Subject: SAIX services
>
>
>
> Dear Sir
>
> I have looked at the information furnished and I have realised that the
> wholesale services mentioned are offered by SAIX . Please be informed that
> SAIX is not regulated and consequently they do not file their services
> price
>
> adjustments with the Authority.
>
>
>
>
> Yours Truly
>
>
> Molawa Moeletsi
>

http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/showthread.php?t=28633

What a shame, yet again Telkom gets away with increasing prices.

 

[asmith]

Thats crazy. So now if Telkom does not want their telephone call prices regulated all they have to do is form a new subsidiary called SATEL, sell some assets to it and be done with ICASA for good.

 

[Rastabob]

Hi all

This is totally ridiculous. Reading throught the posts here and the information on Hellkom, one has to ask, what the hell is going on? Telkom, the part-government owned communications provider should be offering a public service. After doing three years of economics at university (including economics of the internet), these policies do not make any sense at all. Especially if the government keeps trying to promote economic growth.

What confuses me the most is all the mystery surrounding telskum. They sound like the freakin gestapo. If they are using less than 50% of their capacity of the Sat3 (that right?) line then why are they doing this? Why wouldnt they answer ICASA about that issue... unless they are far below capacity?

I think it is time to stop complaining to a powerless governing body and start taking action ourselves, it is up to us to show Telkom that they are not going to get away with this. Hoping that some bureaucratic regulator is going to save the day is as useful as hoping Telkom will wake up, smell the bull****, and help their "customers". I have only two ideas for action we could take, firstly, how about we dedicate November a, "No phonecalls" month. If we spread enough word throughout the country (I believe this site has the capacity to do so...), we could make a big enough dent in their earnings to pay us some attention. The only other option is civil disobedience, destroy phone lines, routers, telkom vehicles and hell, ill even sell my Telkom shares. However I think thats probably a bad idea, I dont wanna go to jail...

 

[Debbie]

Most interesting Debbie, but it seems ICASA cannot regulate ADSL bandwidth because SAIX is not regulated.

http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/showthread.php?t=28633

What a shame, yet again Telkom gets away with increasing prices.

Hey,

I don't know if I am correct in this, but I would venture that it does not really matter where SAIX comes into the picture. The point is that such charges originate from Telkom. And such charges are being applied to a service which is subject to a ministerial-approved price cap. Telkom is violating these regulations either way you look at it.

 

[Sneeky]

Declare the cables an essential service, that'll F@#$ 'em (Saix, Telkom, Robbers of the Nation, whatever they want to call themselves depending on the day of the week)
In the same breath the 'Saix is not Telkom' argument can be used against them. Mandate ICASA to regulate SAIX and the cost of the bandwidth, which is fundamental to the issue we are dealing with, then Icasa can do Telkom a favour and ensure that they (Telkom) have cheap bandwidth How Icasa so nonchalantly separate the 2 is really worrying.
Considering Telkom/Saix/Whatever, only paid 13% of the cost of SAT3 the mind boggles at how they dictate and hold everyone in this country to ransom. It is even more astonishing that they have been allowed to do this for so long, and still do, virtually unchallenged by the DoC.
Macbeth / Rotten / Denmark

 

[Peter7]

I suggest we start phoning ICASA and talk to someone else and not the guy that's differentiating between SAIX and Telkom. I'd would like to hear from someone else. In the consumers view it makes no difference, we're still getting crippled if Nov 1 happens with per GB billing and ICASA can do something about it.

Edit: hmmm...Phone number was: 011 321 8200 - ask for the telecoms regulations dept

 

[Peter7]

Phoned ICASA. After a bit of a run-around from the switchboard, eventually got through to the Consumer Protection department. Basically, what he said was that complaints are flooding in (from ISPs and consumers) on the Nov 1 per GB billing changes like a tsnuami. The guys nick/name is "OB" (just ask for "OB" at the switchboard - should save you some time). Nice chap, sounds like he's for the people

Anyways, he said he couldn't put forth an authoratative response to the matter yet, but that they are getting a response from the tariffs department on these changes and if they have been approved that his Consumer Protection department will demand to know how Telkom can still charge these high prices in the per GB billing model. They seem to be very aware of the matter over there.

He said to send email with regards to complaints about the pricing changes (similar to w1zard's request: What the new prices will be and what you were paying before). The email address he gave me was: [email protected]

Once they have formulated an authoratative response he said he would reply to the growing database of Nov 1 complaints.

Continue sending in the complaints!!!

P.S: Forgot to mention to OB the TELKOM SAIX technicality and query about it, since they are the "Consumer Protection" department. Maybe the next person phoning in can mention this.

 

[slowgo]

If I have to pay R2k+ for 30GBs of international traffic I have no option but to pack up my family and move to the U.S. and continue working for a firm over there. It's a little web development firm, so nothing major, but with these high bandwidth costs it's going to make it extremely difficult to stay afloat over here in SA.

MaD, what can we do?

Ministers ponder SA's high telecoms costs


BY PAUL VECCHIATTOhttp://www.itweb.co.za/sections/telecoms/2005/0510061043.asp?A=CEL&S=Cellular&O=E&CiRestriction= - contacts, ITWEB CAPE TOWN CORRESPONDENT

READ IN THIS STORY:

Investor-friendly telecoms

[Cape Town | ITWeb, 6 October 2005] - Deputy communications minister Roy Padayachie met his Brazilian counterpart Helio Costa yesterday for talks that covered why South African telecommunications costs are twice that of the South American country.

The ministers met to discuss and compare the different telecoms regimes of their respective countries.

“Brazil is considered to be a key comparative country with SA and occupies a similar status in the same development band, yet telecoms costs in SA are twice that of Brazil. DSL 512 service is seven times more expensive than Brazil's equivalent,” says an official South African statement.

The ministers met during bilateral meetings of the International Telecommunication Union's Telecoms Americas 2005 Regional Conference.

Delegates from various Latin American countries and other developing countries, such as India and China, are attending the conference.

The official statement says: “Confirming the need for vigorous and effective competition within the telecommunications sector, Brazil has three fixed-line operators and four mobile cellular companies. Telephony penetration rates over the last seven years have multiplied many-fold in Brazil. Fixed-line penetration increased from 11% to over 21.5%, or from 18 million to 42 million, and mobile penetration increased from 3%, or less than 5 million users, to 43%, or over 80 million users.”

The meeting comes ahead of the second round of the telecoms pricing colloquium on 12 October, where industry and government are expected to formulate plans to reduce SA's telecoms costs. Padayachie will chair the colloquium.

Investor-friendly telecoms

Commenting on the meeting, Padayachie conveyed the commitment of South African President Thabo Mbeki and the South African government to the India, Brazil, SA partnership.

He highlighted this country's commitment to building an investor-friendly, competitive and thriving telecoms sector based on universal service, increasing access to basic telephony for all and productive returns for investors in the telecoms sector.

Padayachie outlined government's approach to digital migration and the development of an appropriate policy framework that would accelerate provisions of high-speed broadband Internet uptake in SA.

He also highlighted of particular importance to both countries, the need for support for wireless technologies for rural and underserviced areas, as well as the need for appropriate regulation to support these new technology innovations to achieve the goal of universal service.

“Exposure to the innovative strategies and trends in telecoms development in Latin America will greatly assist our efforts to achieve a higher GDP growth rate from 3.8% to 6% in the coming years. An interesting feature of the trends is the introduction of low-cost technologies and low-cost end-user hardware solutions that are making digital inclusion a reality with the ‘massification' of ICT services,” Padayachie said.

 

[ernstn]

Wow, I thought the answer is simple: TELKOM is the reason why South African costs are twice that in Brazil. Maybe they should sign a telecomms provider swop agreement.

 

[Peter7]

DSL 512 service is seven times more expensive than Brazil's equivalent,” says an official South African statement.

What's going to happen come Nov 1?

 

[MaD]

We need to organise a meeting with the DoC. Ivy doesnt need to be there, but rather the people there who are actually putting in *effort*.

 

[daysleeper]

Too Technical!!!

Don't you guys think that things are too technical. I mean really. Members of this forum are clued up and all, but the problem is still that lots of people, just use the home 512 dsl for simple email and a bit of web not and then and their kids do a little homework.

These people should be targeted by myAdsl even though they are not happy with the price, they pay and use the service, they are not techies just normal people.

The point I'm trying to make is that I'm all for lots of package choices, but it is getting way to techical with, hard capping, soft capping, 30gig international including, shaped, unshaped ect.

I think telkom are getting in a tangle in there own CAT5!

KISS
Keep it stupid simple

 

[Peter7]

We need to organise a meeting with the DoC. Ivy doesnt need to be there, but rather the people there who are actually putting in *effort*.

MyADSL, Hellkom ;-), Antitrust - you guys up to represent the broadband users? Will have to be some form of representative body.

 

[sunsoffun]

Most interesting Debbie, but it seems ICASA cannot regulate ADSL bandwidth because SAIX is not regulated.


http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/showthread.php?t=28633

What a shame, yet again Telkom gets away with increasing prices.

All I can say is, when i pay my bill at the end of the month... I dont pay SAIX, I pay Telkom. So if the two are different companies, should I wait for my SAIX bill at the end of the month rather --- makes as much sense as there pir gig billing on ADSL

 

[R4tt3xx]

Yes, you should wait for your ISPs account weather it be TelkomInternet, IS or anyone else. The line rental (Hardware) is different from the access (Data). How can Telkom charge you for bandwidth ? Are they a VANS ?

 

[R4tt3xx]

Hey,

I don't know if I am correct in this, but I would venture that it does not really matter where SAIX comes into the picture. The point is that such charges originate from Telkom. And such charges are being applied to a service which is subject to a ministerial-approved price cap. Telkom is violating these regulations either way you look at it.

Telkom is not renting anything expect the line. Content is different from infrastructure. ICASA can regulate Telkom with reference to their physical lines, but when it comes to a third party content provider, ie the data piece of the equation, SAIX data, they can't regulate it. That would me major government censorship.

 

[Debbie]

Telkom is not renting anything expect the line. Content is different from infrastructure. ICASA can regulate Telkom with reference to their physical lines, but when it comes to a third party content provider, ie the data piece of the equation, SAIX data, they can't regulate it. That would me major government censorship.

I understand your point, but nevertheless I stick to my view that bandwidth is subject to the price cap.

 

[dominic]

sorry i cannot become involved in this properly....debbie2 is correct i think - bandwidth and the provision of bandwidth is an infrastructure issue - the provision of a telecommunications facility

i cannot imagine how it would fall outside of the basket or how SAIX falls outside the scope of regulation of ICASA...that is imho pure bs

 

[Debbie]

The point here is that ADSL as a service is in the basket, and bandwidth is a necessary component of the ADSL service. Whether Telkom is selling it direct to consumers (through a Telkom-owned VANS, i.e. TelkomInternet) or to a middle-man (SAIX ISPs), it does not matter.