Telkom uncapped ADSL prices reduced

If Telkom really want to help the ADSL market, they
need to reduce the IPConnect and ADSL and POTS costs (bitstream, unbundle, naked adsl)

They are reducing the DATA costs, but they can subsidise their DATA costs with
revenue from IPConnect, ADSL and POTS income.

Why does it cost 3x for IPConnect vs international SEACOM capacity?

Seems to me, that they are trying to put MWEB, AfriHost, WebAfrica, etc under pressure on DATA.
The ISP's can't compete because Telkom controls IPConnect, ADSL and POTS rates.

See "Telkom must cut where it hurts" on techcentral
http://www.techcentral.co.za/telkom-must-cut-where-it-hurts/37766/
 
Telkom Internet can't subsidize their data costs with revenue from IPConnect, ADSL and POTS income and in actual fact TI is significantly more constrained than other large ISPs in aggressively pushing cheaper data. MWeb has Naspers - a lot bigger than Telkom and probably more built using taxpayers money and state contracts than Telkom (just done more with more stealth) and who have had a monopoly on satellite television similar to Telkom's copper monopoly) - to bankroll it but TI are bound to the same wholesale rates as are offered to everybody else.

Whether Telkom is overcharging on IPC relative to the SAIX wholesale pricing is tricky to comment on - my view is that IPC is a general obstacle on the market and needs to be re-looked at - but don't confuse Telkom Internet as a service provider with the wholesale operations. TI only benefit in the market is marketing and sales channels really. TI is my second favourite ISP while Telkom is the becoming less evil devil.
 
some very welcome news.....

been back with telkom for nearly 2 years and am very happy......downloading is a pleasure.......do a radio show once a week using skype and no problems at all......watch movies on line with out hassles......

i ain't leaving telkom again.....lol
 
Paul Hjul said:
Telkom Internet can't subsidize their data costs with revenue from IPConnect, ADSL and POTS income and in actual fact TI is significantly more constrained than other large ISPs in aggressively pushing cheaper data. MWeb has Naspers - a lot bigger than Telkom and probably more built using taxpayers money and state contracts than Telkom (just done more with more stealth) and who have had a monopoly on satellite television similar to Telkom's copper monopoly) - to bankroll it but TI are bound to the same wholesale rates as are offered to everybody else.

Whether Telkom is overcharging on IPC relative to the SAIX wholesale pricing is tricky to comment on - my view is that IPC is a general obstacle on the market and needs to be re-looked at - but don't confuse Telkom Internet as a service provider with the wholesale operations. TI only benefit in the market is marketing and sales channels really. TI is my second favourite ISP while Telkom is the becoming less evil devil.
Click to expand...
By sharing management, marketing, brand, Telkom are directly subsidising TI.
Marketing: I don't see any reference on telkom.co.za to any other ISP except TI.

Sure MWEB is part of Naspers, but there are plenty of other ISP's - http://ispa.org.za/membership/list-of-members/
that don't have a big government backer.
IPC is 3x more expensive than international bandwidth, POTS rental is a tax imposed on ADSL only consumers.

If they reduce IPC, POTS and ADSL components then we will see real savings.
 
I fail to see why Telkom should make reference to ISPs on their website at all nor do I see how a person can claim that the sharing of management is an advantage at all.

I am all for LLU - having gone to the trouble to make submissions on the matter and having had great fun taking on Telkom's delegation at the hearings. I have also fought Telkom on guarantees on minimum speeds on ADSL and am quite proud of the fact that in between fighting the issue minimum speeds came in and the terms of service changed. However I am sensible enough to understand that LLU is not about line access price reduction - it can't be, the costs to service access capacity determined in the network supply and management side not the demand and product sales side. My probably reasonably informed guestimate is that Telkom can comfortably provide a line between exchange and premises at about 5k a year (VAT inclusive, fully serviced and doing the connection handover to the other operators equipment) wholesale, my problem is that they refuse to and don't, but what this would mean is that the leasee would have to resell that line and provide infrastructure to the exchange point - so installing DSLAMs etc ... This means that it would only be possible to look at naked DSL products at more than R700 a meg in high density areas (if the operator can get sufficient demand and low fibre costs) but if you can have 1:3 contention ration uncapped internet at R1200 from an ISP then its a damn good thing. Where LLU will see price reductions is if it forces more efficient management of the network but I suspect that those with brains in Telkom attribute the network inefficiency to matters outside their control and governments agenda.

Vodacom, MTN and CellC don't advertise other ISPs products to run on their network, O wait
 
Paul Hjul said:
I fail to see why Telkom should make reference to ISPs on their website at all nor do I see how a person can claim that the sharing of management is an advantage at all.

I am all for LLU - having gone to the trouble to make submissions on the matter and having had great fun taking on Telkom's delegation at the hearings. I have also fought Telkom on guarantees on minimum speeds on ADSL and am quite proud of the fact that in between fighting the issue minimum speeds came in and the terms of service changed. However I am sensible enough to understand that LLU is not about line access price reduction - it can't be, the costs to service access capacity determined in the network supply and management side not the demand and product sales side. My probably reasonably informed guestimate is that Telkom can comfortably provide a line between exchange and premises at about 5k a year (VAT inclusive, fully serviced and doing the connection handover to the other operators equipment) wholesale, my problem is that they refuse to and don't, but what this would mean is that the leasee would have to resell that line and provide infrastructure to the exchange point - so installing DSLAMs etc ... This means that it would only be possible to look at naked DSL products at more than R700 a meg in high density areas (if the operator can get sufficient demand and low fibre costs) but if you can have 1:3 contention ration uncapped internet at R1200 from an ISP then its a damn good thing. Where LLU will see price reductions is if it forces more efficient management of the network but I suspect that those with brains in Telkom attribute the network inefficiency to matters outside their control and governments agenda.

Vodacom, MTN and CellC don't advertise other ISPs products to run on their network, O wait
Click to expand...

Is copper or FTTH really the last-mile answer for South Africa though? Shouldn't we consider looking at WiMax/LTE technologies to connect consumers to their local exchanges (provided by Telkom/Neotel/ISP's or perhaps even community forums)? These technologies are at a stage where services/games requiring low-latency can run pretty comfortably on them.

I'm of the opinion we should look past our obsession with fixed-line solutions but granted there may be factors I'm unaware of.
 
system32 said:
If they reduce IPC, POTS and ADSL components then we will see real savings.
Click to expand...

This will come sooner rather then later, when Telkom realises that all major cities will run fibre throughout the provinces, where the copper will become obsolete. the market will change soon enough
 
Capacity on wireless is simply insufficient. It boils down to the amount of data you are transferring. Less than a gig a day and copper of FTTH is substitutable but if a household is transferring 10 gigs a day fixed is the way to go.
 
Paul Hjul said:
Capacity on wireless is simply insufficient. It boils down to the amount of data you are transferring. Less than a gig a day and copper of FTTH is substitutable but if a household is transferring 10 gigs a day fixed is the way to go.
Click to expand...

You'll need to be more specific in your answer - how do you get to an amount of 1GB per day? I downloaded 8GB on an 8ta connection yesterday afternoon. That was on a usually very busy Midrand tower. On my Amobia uncapped wireless account, I regularly download 30GB - 50GB a month.

If you're referring to tower congestion (which I suspect you are), isn't the answer to construct more towers to service congested suburbs? Wireless technology also keeps on improving year on year, so in time it could be less of an issue. Also, wouldn't congested fixed-line exchanges face the same problem anyway?

For me it comes down to the following, I'd rather have a reliable 1Mbps wireless connection as opposed to no connection because Telkom doesn't have the time/money/interest in servicing my suburb or alternatively the cables are constantly stolen.
 
Your question is why copper and FTTx are important not what makes sense for individual users. Currently individual users can get great value in wireless offerings from 8ta and CellC for multiple megs but that is a promotional setting to increase network usage uptake. Fixed line providers have time/money/interest in areas where 10gigs a day are being taken up by multiple households or businesses and MNOs are interested in areas where they can sell business grade mobile internet at a premium. You also are conflating the exchange equipment with the physical line. The copper line between my house and the exchange doesn't get congested the exchange does. I can't add an extra box at the exchange point and produce spectrum from ether. What I can do is make smaller cells and have the wireless last mile smaller and smaller but this involves getting fibre closer and closer. If you have cityblock sized cells with fibre running to a cabinet connecting to the transmitters you might as well run copper from that cabinet to the premises (FTTC to FTTH is a small gap). The bottom line is 4G as defined doesn't come close to the capacity of fibre. If copper hits its limits fixed line infrastructure adapts to fibre and adding piconodes and other animals to fixed infrastructure is always an option.
 
Paul Hjul said:
Your question is why copper and FTTx are important not what makes sense for individual users. Currently individual users can get great value in wireless offerings from 8ta and CellC for multiple megs but that is a promotional setting to increase network usage uptake.
Click to expand...

I believe you're trivialising a pretty large subscriber base here - it's larger than the fixed line users if I'm not mistaken. In other words, I'm definitely not enquiring about what makes sense for individual users but for suburbs instead. Also, this is also no longer promotional environment. I've been enjoying large cellular data caps for more than three years now. The price of mobile bandwidth also keeps decreasing. It certainly seems as though the model is sustainable.

Paul Hjul said:
Fixed line providers have time/money/interest in areas where 10gigs a day are being taken up by multiple households or businesses and MNOs are interested in areas where they can sell business grade mobile internet at a premium.
Click to expand...

No argument there. That's why I'm proposing wireless as an alternative last mile. There are lots of areas that will most likely never satisfy these 10 gigs a day requirements.

Paul Hjul said:
You also are conflating the exchange equipment with the physical line. The copper line between my house and the exchange doesn't get congested the exchange does.
Click to expand...

This was never implied in my post - I just make mention of congested exchanges.

Paul Hjul said:
I can't add an extra box at the exchange point and produce spectrum from ether. What I can do is make smaller cells and have the wireless last mile smaller and smaller but this involves getting fibre closer and closer.
Click to expand...

Yes, this is well understood, that's why I also suggested increasing the number of towers.

Paul Hjul said:
If you have cityblock sized cells with fibre running to a cabinet connecting to the transmitters you might as well run copper from that cabinet to the premises (FTTC to FTTH is a small gap).
Click to expand...

Valid point but since Telkom can't be bothered to roll out FTTH anywhere but they do install FTTC I believe my suggestion to have merit.

Paul Hjul said:
The bottom line is 4G as defined doesn't come close to the capacity of fibre. If copper hits its limits fixed line infrastructure adapts to fibre and adding piconodes and other animals to fixed infrastructure is always an option.
Click to expand...

Once again no argument here but I'll repeat what I posted previously: "...I'd rather have a reliable 1Mbps wireless connection as opposed to no connection..."

No doubt about it, fibre's potential has me licking my chops and I'd prefer it to anything else. Thing is, we have no one willing to deploy to the home. And when we finally find a company willing to do so, what percentage of the SA population would such a service be available to? I contend that a wireless last mile makes a lot of sense for a country like SA.
 
Last edited:
So I called Telkom today and was told that I have to take another line to enjoy the R 837.00 deal, so I should just cancel my current line and apply for another - weird. Apparently I'm on the highest and I cannot jump down a notch :mad:
 
Choose Do Premium 20GB Capped or New Uncapped up to 4Mbps ? Decision Time ??

:confused:As I am moving location this month I need to make some changes. But Confused, can some kind sole help.
At present I have Do Premium Telkom 20 Gb cap shaped, speed 4/10Mbps but we know it is below 4Mbps . Monthly Cost R702.37pm (ex Closer calling)

Now I read of new package Do Uncapped up to 4Mbps, Cost Total R847.37pm . What is the advantage to switch ? Extra Cost R145.00 pm. My data runs at about 13Gb a month.

Both Exchange lines are claimed to run at 4Mbps, one in Killarney and new line in Observatory.

My keen interest is to have available Clean Comms, low latency but Telkom is very variable and weekends often unstable ?

So what should drive my choice ?, Happiness would be speeds between 6/8Mbps. No night Owl. ??
 
cryptic1 said:
So I called Telkom today and was told that I have to take another line to enjoy the R 837.00 deal, so I should just cancel my current line and apply for another - weird. Apparently I'm on the highest and I cannot jump down a notch :mad:
Click to expand...

Really? Ugh, typical Telkom uselessness showing there already. So everyone here , who will have a line already, can't take the bundle unless they cancel their lines? How stupid can your systems get? Not a good start.
 
diabolus said:
Really? Ugh, typical Telkom uselessness showing there already. So everyone here , who will have a line already, can't take the bundle unless they cancel their lines? How stupid can your systems get? Not a good start.
Click to expand...

I highly doubt that to be the case. Incompetent call center operator is more likely.
 
Bushbug said:
:confused:As I am moving location this month I need to make some changes. But Confused, can some kind sole help.
At present I have Do Premium Telkom 20 Gb cap shaped, speed 4/10Mbps but we know it is below 4Mbps . Monthly Cost R702.37pm (ex Closer calling)

Now I read of new package Do Uncapped up to 4Mbps, Cost Total R847.37pm . What is the advantage to switch ? Extra Cost R145.00 pm. My data runs at about 13Gb a month.
Click to expand...

Unless you have to have to torrent during the day, capped would be better. If you do occasionally run over 20GB, and some internet access in such a time is all you need, you will be soft-capped, or if you need full speed for a few extra 100MB, post-billed ("cap management") might be ok. I think you should actually be able to switch between soft-capped and using topup or post-billed, but I haven't tested myself yet (some of that code may not be quite ready yet, but will probably be ready in a few days).

Both Exchange lines are claimed to run at 4Mbps, one in Killarney and new line in Observatory.

My keen interest is to have available Clean Comms, low latency but Telkom is very variable and weekends often unstable ?

So what should drive my choice ?, Happiness would be speeds between 6/8Mbps. No night Owl. ??
Click to expand...

Let me just say, if you don't need to torrent during the day, but can schedule downloads, you may not want to go capped just yet ...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X