Unbundle Telkom (but leave us alone), says Cellular operators

Can't say that I disagree with them much. They paid for their own networks, whereas Telkom's was paid for by the taxpayer. The fact that they charge as much as they do and have been able to maintain the status quo for so long is ICASA's fault, as is usually the case.
 
Mike Hoxbig said:
Can't say that I disagree with them much. They paid for their own networks, whereas Telkom's was paid for by the taxpayer. The fact that they charge as much as they do and have been able to maintain the status quo for so long is ICASA's fault, as is usually the case.
Click to expand...

By that logic they should only unbundle that which was bought using tax payers money. That infrastructure was either stolen ages ago, or is so old its useless.

Fixed line operators are already under strain due to cell companies and VIOP. It is also never a good idea to pick on one company as the second the company fails (due to over-regularisation), another one (likely a wireless company, or cartel of wireless companies) will just take its place.

LLU should be implemented across the board now, so that we are not suck in this same position ten years from now.
 
Last edited:
that's fine, make telkom unbundle now and give neotel another 40 years before they have to.
 
inferno said:
By that logic they should only unbundle that which was bought using tax payers money. That infrastructure was either stolen ages ago, or is so old its useless.
Click to expand...
It's not like we haven't been paying for it to be repaired or upgraded, and they wouldn't have a business if they didn't do this. The fact is that they've been allowed exclusive use of something that was paid for by taxpayers.
 
Mike Hoxbig said:
It's not like we haven't been paying for it to be repaired or upgraded, and they wouldn't have a business if they didn't do this. The fact is that they've been allowed exclusive use of something that was paid for by taxpayers.
Click to expand...

and the preferential share only elapsed fairly recently.
 
Wireless LLU is cool but hard to do after the fact due to investment, all radio licencing etc. What they should consider though is Wireless LLU for newer technology i.e. LTE/4G rollout. would be better going forward i think. End of the day 2+G is covering most of SA already, 3+G networks for big operators also wide coverage now.. so they could do something like rural wireless LLU for those tech.
 
Last edited:
When the **** did Neotel become wireless? their license is to be the second SNO (land line operator). Therefore they should be subjected to LLU like Telkom.
 
Mike Hoxbig said:
Can't say that I disagree with them much. They paid for their own networks, whereas Telkom's was paid for by the taxpayer. The fact that they charge as much as they do and have been able to maintain the status quo for so long is ICASA's fault, as is usually the case.
Click to expand...
Did you read the various submissions? Does not look like it. Go read the facts.

http://www.ellipsis.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Telkom_-LLU-Submission.pdf

Myth 1: Telkom‟s access network has been paid with taxpayers‟ money
It is a common misconception that Telkom‟s access network has been funded by government with taxpayers money. This gives rise to the notion that since the public at large has funded Telkom‟s network, it would be fair to allow all operators to have access to this network. This notion however is misplaced. The value of the net assets on Telkom‟s balance sheet when the company was corporatised in October 1991 was –R1,5bn. This negative value reflects the liabilities Telkom inherited from the Government, which offset the value of the assets received. The value of the buildings, network infrastructure and equipment that Telkom received from the State was R12,8bn but the total value of liabilities came to R14,3bn.

Furthermore, during the period 1991 – 2010 Telkom had invested more than R65bn in its network while it only receiving R4.4bn from Government as its
primary shareholder during this period. In the light of these facts, it is far-fetched to claim that taxpayers paid for Telkom‟s network and competitors should therefore have access to this network by introducing LLU.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Great idea, but not such a great idea now for the individual companies. Wireless unbundling SHOULD have occured at the beginning of the network rollout. Thanks for another grand stuff up ikaka.
 
The point is that any decent fixed line operator that wants to do business in SA should be allowed to run a cable to the premises to provide telephony and internet access. Unlike the cellular industry, Telkom has a stranglehold on the fixed line business, which augments uncompetitiveness in the industry.
 
Niren_M said:
The point is that any decent fixed line operator that wants to do business in SA should be allowed to run a cable to the premises to provide telephony and internet access. Unlike the cellular industry, Telkom has a stranglehold on the fixed line business, which augments uncompetitiveness in the industry.
Click to expand...
Any licensed operator can run their own cables... and they already do.
 
LLU should be focused on getting an open access model on all fixed wiring (fiber and copper)

LLU for me is about creating competition. We already have 4 mobile operators that do co-location
and sharing of resources. Look at the impact CellC and 8ta have already had on the market and they are
not even as big as the other two king pins yet, but Telkom is still the fixed line king, and it aint planning to share.

I have not heard of any residential neighborhoods getting other fixed line than from Telkomo
excluding gated communities
 
Last edited:
Just what I wanted to say. At least start with one operator and get it finalized before worrying about other networks. South Africa
need telkom to un-bundle so that more South Africans can get internet, especially in Rural South Africa where almost everyone has a bad salary. We are left for last in South Africa and we are going behind as we do not get close to the salary's offered in the city. I Could do more with a salary in the city than in a small town where people get paid allot less.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X