Terms of Telkom shareholding sale to Thintana put both 'above the law'

Must...control...rage....

One wonders if the government will play the race card, the third force card, or acknowledge, apologise, learn and move on.
 
LordFoom said:
One wonders if the government will play the race card, the third force card, or acknowledge, apologise, learn and move on.
Click to expand...

I think government will play the race card. When ever have they not played the race card? They'll probably throw a mention about Apartheid along the way as well.
 
No wonder even ordinary shareholders are not able to get hold of the actual shareholders agreement. Dont think any govt agency would even consider investigating this agreement for possible fraud - so I guess we need to get the M&G to do some investigation to shed some more light on the matter. Cant think of how we can punish those responsible if they transgressed any laws - maybe only force Telkom to break up now. Even that would be a small victory for SA.
 
Interviewed in Telecommunications Policy, Jim Myers, described as "SBC's central operative in South Africa between 1994 and 1998", says clauses in the shareholders agreement agreed to in 1997 stipulated that once the Telecommunications Act was in place, neither Telkom nor Thintana would be compelled to follow any legislation that violated the shareholders' agreement.
,,
,,
Myers said the details of the Telkom shareholders' agreement were never made public because some of its provisions bound the government so stringently and gave Thintana so much control that had they become public, they would have raised a huge outcry.
Click to expand...

Government sanctioned extortion, and they extended TELKOM's monopoly knowing all of this :eek:

This was all negotiated in Jay Naidoo's time, did he not oversee all of this? Nice one Jay!
 
All I can say is eish...

WTF drafts a shareholder agreement like that?... I mean honestly, how flipping stupied were they?
 
I think they will play the denial card, then the race card, then call everyones bluff and burn the rest of their cards, blaming the fire on global warming...
 
Blast from the past.
http://www.btimes.co.za/97/0406/comp/comp1.htm
An article about the deal and a *cough* 'job well done' by Jay Naidoo.

Naidoo was also vocal in the press just recently bitching about high costs cause his call center interests cannot potentially make the money that they should. Funny as Jay Naidoo was the one that extended TELKOM's monopoly for another 5 years.
http://www.itweb.co.za/sections/telecoms/2007/0706151032.asp?S=IT in Government&A=ITG&O=FPIN
http://www.sundaytimes.co.za/article.aspx?ID=493394

Wonder what it feels like to walk around being responsible (at least partly) for the single biggest bugger up on the African continent.
 
dominic said:
eish and ffs

if anyone gets hold of that article.....
Click to expand...

If it gets rewritten (and retitled) from more of an SBC/AT&T perspective, I can almost guarantee that it will make the front page of Slashdot...
 
The powerful position enjoyed by Thintana until 2002 is described at length in the journal, published recently by Elsevier.

The two authors of the article, entitled "Another instance where privatisation trumped liberalisation: the politics of telecommunications reform in South Africa - a ten year perspective", are Willie Currie, a former counsellor of the Independent Communications Authority of SA; and Robert Horwitz, a member of the department of communication at the University of California in San Diego.

The article, which is supported extensively by recent interviews with the key players, describes in chilling detail the forces that shaped telecoms policy in South Africa in the crucial period between 1994 and 2004.
Click to expand...
Need to get our hands on this article by Currie and Horwitz.

In the words of Charles Montgomery Burns,,,, 'Smithers,,, release the hounds!!!'
 
Soon after the first democratic election in 1994, South Africa passed legislation to revamp the telecommunications
sector—to roll out telephone service to the previously disadvantaged and establish an independent regulator to oversee the
reform. The Government sold a 30 percent stake in the state-owned incumbent network operator, Telkom, to expand
telephone service to under-serviced areas and populations. Ten years on, the reform has largely failed. Telkom, granted a
5-year period of exclusivity to expand the network, has used its monopoly power to thwart competition. It has raised prices
so high as to be damaging to the economy. The Regulator has been largely sabotaged by the Government, in part due to
the consequences of the haste to privatize, in part because the ANC leadership has been loath to trust democratic
structures outside of its immediate control. The situation has opened up opportunities for rent-seeking under the
ideological aegis of Black Economic Empowerment. The paper examines the relative failure of reform in South Africa in
the context of internal South African politics and against a backdrop of sectoral reform in similarly situated countries.
Click to expand...

Here's the abstract from the article. I would very much like to send this to every newspaper out there, but I don't know how eligible that is and I can't risk getting sacked by the university. :-P

I'm sure rpm can get the article at Wits quite easily?

On another note, pm me with your e-mail
 
Why doesnt this surprise me :mad:

I knew that they ran off with allot of money when they left, but they left a worse legacy of purist capitalism entrenched in Telkom (that would'nt have been an issue had Telkom not been a monopoly).

For that, its a crime against every single South African, poor and rich, because the systems and management style that they implemented has caused this catastrophe which we call Telekoms in South Africa
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X