A confidential mobile pricing report, authored by Strategy Analytics and Pygma Consulting, has divided the mobile operators on the value of the price benchmark.<\/p>\n
Vodacom<\/a> and MTN<\/a> support the findings, while Cell C<\/a> argued that it is not a good reflection of the state of South Africa\u2019s mobile prices.<\/p>\n One of the criticisms levelled against the report by commentators is the countries selected to benchmark SA\u2019s prices against.<\/p>\n Pygma Consulting, which was tasked with identifying benchmark countries to be used to compare mobile prices in South Africa, has provided the following explanation on how the countries were selected.<\/p>\n Pygma Consulting recognises that there are various methodologies that may be applied in comparing prices. In approaching the portion of the project that Pygma Consulting was responsible for, with the objective of identifying benchmark countries to be used to compare mobile prices in South Africa, Pygma Consulting used the methodology set out below. It should be noted that all mobile operators agreed with this methodology.<\/p>\n A two staged approach was followed to determine the appropriate benchmark countries as comparators to the South African mobile communication market. This 2 stage process resulted in the selection of true \u201cpeer\u201d countries based on both generic economic indicators and mobile specific characteristics of the markets.<\/p>\n The first stage in the process compared 152 countries based on:<\/p>\n After a critical evaluation of the resulting country rankings, particularly taking into account the data availability of countries, 31 countries were considered for more detailed calculations within Stage 2. Please note that Ghana, Kenya and Tanzania had a low overall ranking which means that they are not valid comparators with South Africa in terms of the approach taken. However, notwithstanding this they were included in the analysis as they are generally perceived as default benchmark countries for South Africa in the public discourse.<\/p>\n In Stage 2 different indicators for the selected 31 countries were determined by combining the same general and economic aspects as in Stage 1 with very specific and technical mobile communication indicators. This latter group comprises:<\/p>\n The final batch of the 10 countries most similar to South Africa was then extracted from a variety of scenarios applying different weights. The robustness of the model was tested by conducting 8 different scenarios using various indicators as well as weightings. It was also tested by applying the model in a European context. Regarding the latter, the model was used to determine benchmark countries for Germany and the UK utilising a Stage 1 scenario.<\/p>\n Pygma Consulting has no comment regarding the outcomes of the study or the way it was presented. Pygma Consulting does however wish to set the record straight in terms of its very robust benchmarking approach and methodology in response to the comments made by Cell C. We further reiterate that the methodology was agreed to by all 3 operators prior to the commencement of the study.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Secret mobile pricing report \u2013 the truth unfolds<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n \u201cSecret\u201d report reveals truth about SA\u2019s mobile prices<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n\n
\n
More on the secret mobile report<\/h3>\n