- KICTANet - KICTANet

Kenya finally signs WCIT12 ITRs
by Ali Hussein 27 Feb '15

27 Feb '15

Listers So finally Kenya Government signs the 2012 ITRs which the former government didn't sign. It would really be good to know the process taken to rescind the earlier decision; who was engaged locally and why weren't the stakeholders at least given the courtesy of being formally informed. http://www.itu.int/online/mm/scripts/mm.final-acts.list?_languageid=1&_agrm… Ali Hussein +254 770 906375 / 0713 601113 Twitter: @AliHKassim Skype: abu-jomo LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim Blog: www.alyhussein.com "I fear the day technology will surpass human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots". ~ Albert Einstein Sent from my iPad

1 0

The challenge of value realization for indigenous technology firms - The mind of Mbugua Njihia
by Mbugua Njihia 27 Feb '15

27 Feb '15

http://www.mbuguanjihia.com/business/challenge-value-realization-indigenous…

1 0

Fwd: Thank the FCC
by Bernard Kioko 26 Feb '15

26 Feb '15

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "Derek Slater, Google" <no-reply(a)takeaction.withgoogle.com> Date: Feb 27, 2015 1:17 AM Subject: Thank the FCC To: "Bernard Kioko" <bkioko(a)bernsoft.com> Cc: <https://takeaction.withgoogle.com/page/m/1439da90/18aeee9/2a6fe56/3ed7d859/…> Dear Bernard: You may have heard that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) just put in place rules to protect 'net neutrality.' That's big news. But there was another important decision today to help keep the Internet competitive and open — and while it's getting less attention, it may be just as important. As part of its agenda to encourage meaningful competition in high speed broadband for all Americans, the FCC supported allowing cities to make their own decisions about investing in new broadband networks. More needs to be done to drive innovation in bigger, faster broadband, but this is a good step. *Share this graphic to thank the FCC and Chairman Tom Wheeler for their actions:* <https://takeaction.withgoogle.com/page/m/1439da90/18aeee9/2a6fe56/3ed7d833/…> [image: Thank the FCC for their critical action.] <https://takeaction.withgoogle.com/page/m/1439da90/18aeee9/2a6fe56/3ed7d826/…> [image: Share on Google+] <https://takeaction.withgoogle.com/page/m/1439da90/18aeee9/2a6fe56/3ed7d818/…> [image: Share on Facebook] <https://takeaction.withgoogle.com/page/m/1439da90/18aeee9/2a6fe56/3ed7d8f3/…> [image: Share on Twitter] <https://takeaction.withgoogle.com/page/m/1439da90/18aeee9/2a6fe56/3ed7d8e4/…> While the FCC's net neutrality rules can help prevent Internet access providers from relegating some applications to a "slow lane," this move alone won't lead to a world where every consumer has an ultra fast connection to the entire Internet. That's going to take more competition and innovation in new broadband networks. It's been nearly five years since we offered to build a fiber-optic network in one U.S. city as an experiment — and as we've expanded Google Fiber into a business, we've seen firsthand how faster speeds can improve lives and give cities new platforms for economic development. Google is not the only one innovating in this area. Along with investments by other private providers, cities like Lafayette, LA and Chattanooga, TN have been investing in their own networks and developing public-private partnerships to that end. Today, the FCC decided that it's important for users to be able to control their own Internet connections and for communities to make their own choices to suit their local needs for broadband. While it may not make sense for most governments to operate broadband networks themselves, we think faster, better broadband for all Americans is too important to remove an option for deployment. *Thank Chairman Wheeler and the FCC for supporting local choice and competition in broadband networks:* *https://takeaction.withgoogle.com/thank-the-fcc* <https://takeaction.withgoogle.com/page/m/1439da90/18aeee9/2a6fe56/3ed7d8df/…> Thanks, Derek Slater Google Inc. P.S. If you want to learn more about the ingenuity of cities supporting broadband investment and competition, check out *Next Century Cities.* <https://takeaction.withgoogle.com/page/m/1439da90/18aeee9/2a6fe56/3ed7d8cc/…> © 2015 Google Inc. 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA You are receiving this email because you asked to receive updates on Internet legislation and initiatives from Google. To opt out of future communications, please click here <https://takeaction.withgoogle.com/page/m/1439da90/18aeee9/2a6fe56/3ed7d8b9/…> . -- * ------------------------------ * This e-mail and any attachments may contain information that is confidential, legally privileged and protected by law and is intended for the sole use of the named recipient(s). Any unauthorized review, use, or disclosure or distribution is prohibited. Any liability (in negligence or otherwise) arising from any third party acting, or refraining from acting on any information contained in this email is hereby excluded. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the contents and notify the sender immediately; do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose or store or copy the information in any medium. Whilst our e-mails are checked for viruses, we cannot guarantee that this message or any attachment is virus free, does not contain malicious code or is incompatible with your electronic system and the Company does not accept liability in respect of viruses, malicious code or any related problems that you might experience. For further information about us, please contact us at the address indicated below. Bernsoft Interactive Limited - P O Box 15177-00100 Nairobi - Tel: +254 722 929192 Email: admin(a)bernsoft.com Web: www.bernsoft.com

1 0

ADN OWNERSHIP - DOES SK MACHARIA'S SON & A COLLEAGUE OWN CONSORTIUM?
by James Mbugua 26 Feb '15

26 Feb '15

Listers, Things never cease to get interesting in this country. So, now, it turns out, according to a document circulating, that the African Digital Network (NTV, CTV, KTN & QTV) that the consortium could be owned by two individuals: The names John Macharia Maina and Timothy Charo-Odhiambo are named as the two shareholders of ADN with 500 shares each of the issued 1000 shares. The share capital is listed as Sh100000 and the address of the directors is given as 669 00516 Nairobi. The only anomaly appears to be the date given for registration which is listed as January 1, 1900. The Director General of CAK Francis Wangusi had wondered at a recent show on TV whether the ADN consortium was even registered. The document purporting ownership of ADN is shown to be issued by the Assistant Registrar of Companies on February 23, 2015 and addressed to The Star newspaper. So, exactly what is the participation of each of the three media houses in the said consortium? Regards, James

1 0

Re: [kictanet] Kenya's Silicon Savannah & the Need to do more
by Matunda Nyanchama 26 Feb '15

26 Feb '15

Paul Korir and James Kulubi I stand educated on some of the provisions of the Science Technology and Innovation Act of 2012. I think this is debate worth engaging in to have some of the offending sections struck out. It is possible the "voices" needed to forestall the inclusion of the said sections weren't loud (or powerful) enough to be felt by the drafters of the Act. My 2 cents observation is that the lobbying potential of the Science, Technology and Innovation "sector" is very weak; unlike sectors like manufacturers (with KAM) and the larger private sector (with KEPSA) the myriad of organizations in the sector (e.g. in ICT) present a weak front to mount any meaningful lobby. But I also see the large number of universities as a blessing of some sorts; now suppose they work with the regulator CHE (if the law allows) they can be a formidable force to occasion change in the act. Research (basic or applied) and the entire science and technology sector are too important a cog in the wheels of development to be constrained by sections in the laws such as this. My reading: we need to do more. Cheers! Matunda Nyanchama Message: 2 Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 06:20:00 +0000 From: James Kulubi <jkulubi(a)yahoo.co.uk> To: Paul Korir <polariseke(a)gmail.com>, KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions <kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> Subject: Re: [kictanet] Kenya's Silicon Savannah & the Need to do more Message-ID: <1424931600.16271.YahooMailBasic(a)web172102.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Paul, you hit the nail on the head. The problems facing research and innovation commenced in the late 70s when some experts thought that research and innovation could only be carried out by institutions created by a Science and Technology law. Upon enactment, the law created the KEMRIs, KIRDIs, KEFRIS, KARIs and allowed the government to create additional research institutes when necessary. With the government diverting research funds to these institutions, the University of Nairobi (only university in the 1970s) started experiencing both human and capital problems as active researchers drifted to these institutes and the government cut the university research budget. This served well the political system of the day since they wanted to tame political radicalism at the university by diverting the much needed funds to these ill conceived institutions. The political elite overlooked the fact that the university can conduct research at very low cost since students are not paid to carry out research (instead they pay the institution through fees, research grants, etc) and by design students are always graduating from the institution thus avoiding problems associated with ageing researchers. Proponents of modern university would tell you that the Science and Technology Act killed the ?triple helix?, i.e the interplay between the university, industry and government and reduced the universities to lecturing, evaluating and degree granting institutions. Lastly, although licensing of researchers may be necessary in certain fields such as medicine on ethical basis, it should not apply to all fields. The drafters of the STIA 2013 needed to be more specific in this regard or specify that regulations will be developed covering the fields to be licensing and that the regulations will be reviewed from time to time. James A. Kulubi -------------------------------------------- On Thu, 26/2/15, Paul Korir via kictanet <kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote: Subject: [kictanet] Kenya's Silicon Savannah & the Need to do more To: jkulubi(a)yahoo.co.uk Date: Thursday, 26 February, 2015, 3:21 Listers,? I recall reading the Science Technology and Innovation Act of 2013 (STIA 2013) and being sorely disappointed at some of the articles in that piece of law. I?m not convinced that that is the kind of law that will advance Kenya. If anything, it has taken us back (pre-1976 when the previous legislation was signed into law). For example, article 12 criminalises scientific research except with with a license, which is clearly in contravention of article 33 (c) of the constitution (academic and scientific freedom). The penalty of this contravention is a fine of up to five million or a sentence of four years.? Unless I?m missing something could someone please explain how this is progress? The previous law was in harmony with international laws (to the best of my understanding) in support of scientific research but these were thrown out because NACOSTI (previously NSTI, if I recall) had been operating ?illegally? (i.e. demanding licenses without any legal basis). Now STIA 2013 makes it legal and given NACOSTI the teeth it needs to enforce its agenda. In fact, private companies are required to pay the highest research license fees. These are things which only happen in developing countries and stifle creative innovation for short-term gain. Paul Korir, PhD+353 86 224 1966+254 72 400 4767 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Matunda Nyanchama, PhD, CISSP; mnyanchama(a)aganoconsulting.com Agano Consulting Inc.; www.aganoconsulting.com; Twitter: nmatunda; Skype: okiambe ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Manage your ICT risks! We are the experts you need! The trusted partners you deserve!Call: +1-888-587-1150 (Canada) +254-20-267-0743 (Kenya) or info(a)aganoconsulting.comLicensed by Communications Authority of Kenya (CA) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------"The best revenge is massive success" - Frank Sinatra----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This e-mail, including attachments, may be privileged and may contain confidential or proprietary information intended only for the addressee(s). Any other distribution, copying, use, or disclosure is unauthorized and strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and permanently delete the message, including any attachments, without making a copy. Thank you.

1 0

Kenya's Silicon Savannah & the Need to do more
by Paul Korir 26 Feb '15

26 Feb '15

Listers, I recall reading the Science Technology and Innovation Act of 2013 (STIA 2013) and being sorely disappointed at some of the articles in that piece of law. I’m not convinced that that is the kind of law that will advance Kenya. If anything, it has taken us back (pre-1976 when the previous legislation was signed into law). For example, article 12 criminalises scientific research except with with a license, which is clearly in contravention of article 33 (c) of the constitution (academic and scientific freedom). The penalty of this contravention is a fine of up to five million or a sentence of four years. Unless I’m missing something could someone please explain how this is progress? The previous law was in harmony with international laws (to the best of my understanding) in support of scientific research but these were thrown out because NACOSTI (previously NSTI, if I recall) had been operating ‘illegally’ (i.e. demanding licenses without any legal basis). Now STIA 2013 makes it legal and given NACOSTI the teeth it needs to enforce its agenda. In fact, private companies are required to pay the highest research license fees. These are things which only happen in developing countries and stifle creative innovation for short-term gain. Paul Korir, PhD +353 86 224 1966 +254 72 400 4767 > On 25 Feb 2015, at 15:29, kictanet-request(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke wrote: > > Kenya's Silicon Savannah & the Need to do more

3 3

Kenya's Silicon Savannah & the Need to do more
by Matunda Nyanchama 26 Feb '15

26 Feb '15

Friends, The MoICT and ICT Authority are planning a 2-Day ICT Innovation Forum on the 2nd and 3rd of March, 2015. See details on the ICT Authority website) I offered (and the Technical Committee organizing the Forum agreed) that I do 2 Op-ed pieces on the subject as a lead up to the Forum. Business News » Kenya as Silicon Savannah – The need to do more!; I will be posting the second piece in the next day or so. | | | | | | | | | Business News » Kenya as Silicon Savannah – The need to do more!Business News - Reading is FunDamental | | | | View on www.aganoconsulting.com | Preview by Yahoo | | | | | Kenya as Silicon Savannah – The need todo more!by Matunda Nyanchama*February 22, 2015 The National ICT Innovation Forum, convened by the Ministry ofInformation Communications and Technology and ICT Authority, is slated for March2rd and 3rd, at the Kenyatta International ConferenceCentre (KICC). Its theme is SiliconSavannah! Mind the Gap! Close the Gap! Participants are expected totackle challenges pertaining to ICT innovation in the country and the wayforward to ensure ICT innovation thrives in Kenya. Industry stakeholders areagreed: our ICT sector has reached a tipping point: no longer just a sexy idea,but an industry that is creating lasting change and impact. One may ask why the theme: Silicon Savannah! Mind the Gap! Close theGap!? The media coinage, Silicon Savannah, has become near-synonymouswith Kenya’s technology sector. The words carry a subliminal play with America’sSilicon Valley, home of many global technology giants such as Apple, Google,Oracle and many others. As a country, we offer a series ofadvantages to claim the Silicon Savannah brand. These include boasting a largenumber of academic institutions offering ICT programmes; taught in English, theglobal business language, steering our next generation of leaders; our laws andregulations, favouring free market economics and more. This is in addition toKenya being the region’s economic powerhouse despite lacking in resources (oil,minerals, etc.) that have been the curse of many African nations. The Silicon Savannah label didn’tcome by accident. A lot of time and effort has been invested in promoting thecountry as a technology destination. Under a triumvirate of the Ministry ofInformation of Communications and Technology, the ICT Authority and BrandKenya, the nation’s image as a leader in the technology sector has continued torise. And the proof of the pudding isin the eating. Kenya’s image, as a leader in innovations, is well-known. Onecase in point is M-Pesa that stands out to become a global brand in electronicmoney transfer. The Konza Technology City plans, if well-executed, wouldfurther buttress the Silicon Savannah brand. In addition, there is a lot morein the works with the vibrant activities happening in incubation hubs,university ICT departments, government, and the private sector. The future isbright; the future is IT. With Government and the privatesector working in tandem, the Silicon Savannah brand value can only grow. Otherswould claim that we have a huge gap between that brand promise and where weare. In spite of the achievements to date, serious work needs to be done tofully realize the benefits of that gilded metaphor. There is a need to accelerate thepace of the sector’s growth via deliberate efforts, plans, actions andperformance monitoring. These efforts must tap into the amount of energydevoted to innovation in order to harness its full potential. The approachshould result in a well-oiled innovation ecosystem that would deliver thepromise. A thriving innovation ecosystem needskey components synergistically working towards a common goal: exponential ICT growththat has wide-ranging, knock-on benefits. Key among these are the laws,regulations and policies; access to knowledge and expertise; access to capital;ongoing research and development; deliberate promotion of the sector’s productsand services; and a vibrant network of incubation hubs with clear tentacles tothe market, academia and financiers. Laws, Regulations and Policies & Promotion of Kenya ICT Products& Services The public sector, includingnational and county governments, public agencies and state corporations, aremajor consumers of ICT products and services. The national ICT spending acrossthe public sector could be in the range of hundreds of billions of Shillings. Now,suppose Government regulations and policies required that we give priority tothe local ICT sector, driving innovation at home. This would assure a readymarket for Kenyan ICT products and services; the resultant process would createjobs, build local ICT capacity and provide a springboard towards regional andinternational growth for the sector. There is more. With the recognition of thesignificance of the ICT sector, Government could make deliberate effort topromote the sector abroad. It is key to include ICT sector representation ininternational trade fairs and promotions the country participates in. In part,it would help the sector’s targeted contribution of 8% GDP and 180,000 jobs by2017. Knowledge and Expertise In recent years, Kenya has seen asubstantial growth of institutions: universities are expanding both in studentpopulation and in programmes offered. This is the good news. The bad news is that higherlearning in Kenya appears to be more of the business of education than thequality of the programmes and relevance to the market. There is a disconnectbetween what we are teaching and the needs of local industry, such that universitiesstand accused of a failure to proactively tune their programmes to marketneeds. The term “yellow notes” has been mentioned in relation to use of thesame material from year to year by some lecturers and professors, caring lessfor the dynamic nature of knowledge. ICT education and knowledge is afast-paced affair. Knowledge and its packaging evolves rapidly, as do the deliverymodes. Academic institutions must keep up with these changes if their graduates,especially in ICT – a key pillar to the President’s Digital Promise - have tofind relevance in the market. There is more. There are fewinstitutions with focus on bridging gaps between what is learnt in universitiesand what the market needs. Further, as a relatively young (e.g. compared withengineering) discipline the sector does not have a clearly defined professionalpath for growth. Nonetheless, the need forprogrammes that bridge gaps between academic qualifications and practicalindustry needs has never been greater. There are yawning gaps in this space.Indeed, it is this realization that resulted in the establishment the recentlylaunched Presidential Digital Talent Programme to address government ICT needs. Sadly, there is still more badnews. As we celebrate the mushroomingof universities we appear to have forgotten the key role played by tertiary andvocational training institution. Our universities appear to have grown at theexpense of polytechnics and, in the process, left a gap in human capital development. Finally, considering that ICT isexpected to play a key role in economic growth, there is a need to ensure thatICT graduates come out of university equipped with even basic businessknowledge, such as knowledge of intellectual property and how to secure it; andhow to turn the intellectual property into a business venture, how to raisemoney and how to run an enterprise. Access to Capital According to recent privateequity surveys, Kenya is missing out to its African neighbours, Nigeria, andSouth Africa. The challenges in Kenya include lack of innovator awareness ofthe varied range of sources of capital and the required preparedness to obtainrisk capital. This has also been blamed on lack of viable business plans for early-stagebusinesses. On the other hand, most investorsstake their money in tried and tested ventures such as in real estate; and theyhave poor understanding of the technology sector. Clearly, there is a need toaddress the gap via (say) a venture capital fund that would help start-ups gothrough the early stages of development while raising awareness on thepotential for growth that the sector presents. Research and Development Innovation pertains toimprovements (product, service, process) that addresses a key need. Ofteninnovation takes ideas from different disciplines, combines these to realizesomething new. A good example is M-Pesa that significantly improved themovement of money using mobile phone and messaging. It was an innovation that has transformedlives. In order to experiment with andtest ideas, there is a need to have ongoing research and development. The needfor collaboration and cooperation between the ICT sector and academicinstitutions, has never been greater. In addition, companies - public and private- need to set up research and development departments that would be chargedwith continual innovation. Often significant value can berealized through incremental changes via co-innovation, e.g. throughcustomization and incremental change to an existing product, service orprocess. Research and development activitycan be substantially enhanced through government incentive programmes. The Innovation Hubs A number of these exist in thecountry. They are run as independent businesses, components of businesses oracademic institutions. There is no doubt that a lot takes place in these hubs,with respect to testing and incubating ideas with a view to commercialization. The need for stakeholder collaborationhas never been greater. There is a need for greater awareness of their role andstructure and value they add to the innovation value chain. … The need for focus in ICTinnovation has never been greater. Deliberate action is needed in order tocreate a well-oiled innovation ecosystem with a friendly policy and regulatoryenvironment, aided by a supportive incubation ecosystem, supplied with relevantskills, fed by ongoing research and development, served with risk capital, and activelypromoted nationally and globally by all. Dr. Matunda Nyanchama is a Director and Managing Consultant at AganoConsulting Inc., and a Technical Advisor in the Ministry of Communications andTechnology and can be reached at mnyacnhama(a)aganoconsulting.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Matunda Nyanchama, PhD, CISSP; mnyanchama(a)aganoconsulting.com Agano Consulting Inc.; www.aganoconsulting.com; Twitter: nmatunda; Skype: okiambe ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Manage your ICT risks! We are the experts you need! The trusted partners you deserve!Call: +1-888-587-1150 (Canada) +254-20-267-0743 (Kenya) or info(a)aganoconsulting.comLicensed by Communications Authority of Kenya (CA) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------"The best revenge is massive success" - Frank Sinatra----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This e-mail, including attachments, may be privileged and may contain confidential or proprietary information intended only for the addressee(s). Any other distribution, copying, use, or disclosure is unauthorized and strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and permanently delete the message, including any attachments, without making a copy. Thank you.

5 5

Re: [kictanet] Kenya's Silicon Savannah & the Need to do more (Evans Ikua)
by Matunda Nyanchama 25 Feb '15

25 Feb '15

Evans, You are right on the money. A colleague has recently remarked that the process for introducing new courses or changing existing ones at many of our universities is very arduous and discouraging. Some just choose to give us. As well, we should seriously consider how we deliver university education in the country. Many colleagues I meet hardly have time for research while largely focused on lectures and marking. The large class sizes don't help. .... UASU has in the past raised this and asked for more tutorial/assistantship support so that lecturers focus more on course design/changes, course material & testing preparation, course quality assurance (design, testing/grading/etc.) and research while tutorial fellows/assistants would help with the grunt work: tutorials in small groups and marking. And how about the "missing middle"? Mid-level colleges (polytechnics, etc.) that deal with deep hands on training! (Of course not the Nairobi Aviation types). Baadaye. From: Evans Ikua <ikua.evans(a)gmail.com> To: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions <kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> Cc: Security List <security(a)lists.my.co.ke> Subject: Re: [kictanet] Kenya's Silicon Savannah & the Need to do more Message-ID: <CAJ5wL0_V2FyFPs-GMKKWw8hMzH1yikVB9aqm3PiCktgoSfybMw(a)mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" "The bad news is that higher learning in Kenya appears to be more of the business of education than the quality of the programmes and relevance to the market. There is a disconnect between what we are teaching and the needs of local industry, such that universities stand accused of a failure to proactively tune their programmes to market needs. The term ?yellow notes? has been mentioned in relation to use of the same material from year to year by some lecturers and professors, caring less for the dynamic nature of knowledge. ICT education and knowledge is a fast-paced affair. Knowledge and its packaging evolves rapidly, as do the delivery modes. Academic institutions must keep up with these changes if their graduates, especially in ICT ? a key pillar to the President?s Digital Promise - have to find relevance in the market." I totally agree with you there. The way it works in our Universities is that if teaching word processing pays and is easy to do, then that's what they teach. They are under financial pressure but that is no excuse. If they were to invest more in research, then they would come up with more interesting things to teach, and these topics would then match with the Industry demands. Otherwise we will never hear the last of the half-baked graduate story. This is not easy to do, but it pays in the long run. But how far can we see? What we need to ask ourselves is this; what do the best Universities in the world do that we don't? Why is everybody dying to go to MIT and Harvard? When you look at the fees that these Universities charge, it shows that they have enough money to invest in research, and the people who pay that money can see the value that they get. For us, it's a vicious cycle of mediocrity. If we continue teaching word processing in our Universities, we will never produce the next Google or Facebook. The greatest IT companies today came out University halls. What have our Universities produced lately? From what I see, we are producing people who are very skilled in implementing and supporting other people's technologies, and we are even struggling with that! Evans ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Matunda Nyanchama, PhD, CISSP; mnyanchama(a)aganoconsulting.com Agano Consulting Inc.; www.aganoconsulting.com; Twitter: nmatunda; Skype: okiambe ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Manage your ICT risks! We are the experts you need! The trusted partners you deserve!Call: +1-888-587-1150 (Canada) +254-20-267-0743 (Kenya) or info(a)aganoconsulting.comLicensed by Communications Authority of Kenya (CA) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------"The best revenge is massive success" - Frank Sinatra----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This e-mail, including attachments, may be privileged and may contain confidential or proprietary information intended only for the addressee(s). Any other distribution, copying, use, or disclosure is unauthorized and strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and permanently delete the message, including any attachments, without making a copy. Thank you.

2 1

Digital Migration - The new Circus trending in Town..!
by Harry Delano 25 Feb '15

25 Feb '15

Blah, blah, blah ...! Meanwhile the unfolding circus that is the digital migration, continues to draw mixed reactions and court new controversy day in day out with each principal actor in the competing casts spinning out a bagful of tricks and manoeuvres in an effort to outdo each other. Clearly, the audience remains kept on the edge of their seats, askance and just can't wait any longer to find out the grand finale to this spectacular drama unfolding right before their eyes...! Of course it remains to be seen what this amazing state of affairs portents. Keep tuned, to find out shortly..! Reporting live, from the theatre of the digital drama, or is it..? Blah, blah, blah..!

1 0

Fwd: [Chapter-delegates] WEBCAST TODAY: Senate hearing on IANA transition
by Ali Hussein 25 Feb '15

25 Feb '15

Listers For those of you following the above. Ali Hussein +254 770 906375 / 0713 601113 Twitter: @AliHKassim Skype: abu-jomo LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim Blog: www.alyhussein.com "I fear the day technology will surpass human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots". ~ Albert Einstein Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: > From: Joly MacFie <joly(a)punkcast.com> > Date: February 25, 2015 at 6:05:54 PM EAT > To: ISOC Chapter Delegates <chapter-delegates(a)elists.isoc.org> > Subject: Re: [Chapter-delegates] WEBCAST TODAY: Senate hearing on IANA transition > Reply-To: joly(a)punkcast.com > > Correction: the webcast is on http://www.commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=Hearings&ContentRecord_id… > > > >> On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Joly MacFie <joly(a)punkcast.com> wrote: >> JUST ABOUT TO BEGIN >> Today Wednesday February 25 2015 the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation will convene a hearing – Preserving the Multistakeholder Model of Internet Governance – in Washington DC. As the U.S. government considers relinquishing control over certain aspects of Internet governance to the private sector, concerns remain that the loss of U.S. involvement over the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) could empower foreign powers – acting through intergovernmental institutions or other surrogates – to gain increased control over critical Internet functions. Featuring testimony from the U.S. government official assessing the threat to the Internet and the CEO of ICANN, the hearing will examine the potential benefits and preparedness of non-governmental actors to protect Internet governance functions from attempted interference by foreign governments. Witnesses: Fadi Chehadé, CEO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN); Ambassador David Gross, Partner, Wiley Rein LLP, and former U.S. Coordinator for International Communications and Information Policy, U.S. Department of State; and Lawrence Strickling, Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information and Administrator, National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), U.S. Department of Commerce. >> >> What: Preserving the Multistakeholder Model of Internet Governance >> Where: Washington DC >> When: Wednesday February 25 2015 10am-11:30am EST | 15:00-16:30 UTC >> Webcast: http://www.ustream.tv/channel/hclive01 >> Twitter: #iana + #senate | #netgov >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> --------------------------------------------------------------- >> Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast >> WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com >> http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com >> VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org >> -------------------------------------------------------------- >> - >> > > > > -- > --------------------------------------------------------------- > Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast > WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com > http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com > VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org > -------------------------------------------------------------- > - > _______________________________________________ > As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed > to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society > Chapter Portal (AMS): https://portal.isoc.org

1 0

Kenya as Silicon Savannah – PART II – Actualizing the Dream!
by Matunda Nyanchama 25 Feb '15

25 Feb '15

Business News » Kenya as Silicon Savannah – PART II – Actualizing the Dream! | | | | | | | | | Business News » Kenya as Silicon Savannah – PART II – Actualizing the Dream!Business News - Reading is FunDamental | | | | View on www.aganoconsulting.com | Preview by Yahoo | | | | | In the previous article we identified a number of key gaps in the promise of Kenya as Silicon Savannah and the reality on the ground. We need a structured approach to close these gaps. Indeed, as the old adage holds, ukiona vyalea vimeundwa. The National Innovation Forum, scheduled for 2nd and 3rd of March 2015 is expected to focus on how to close the gaps between promise and reality. It is also anticipated that the Forum would become an annual event focused on the ICT innovation space. Done well, it could become a “book of record” of and track progress with respect to ICT innovation in the country. The economic targets set for the ICT sector include an 8% contribution to the GDP and creation of 180,000 jobs by 2017. This task is too urgent to wait for sectorial reforms that encompass the entire economy. It is important that focus on the sector not be lost and that which can be accomplished be done as a matter of urgency. These targets are achievable numbers with collaboration between the private and public sectors with respect to planning and execution. There is a need to understanding the common goals and clear roles and responsibilities for both sectors. This would lead to the creation of a conducive environment that can nurture innovation. We need policies and regulations that promote Kenyan ICT products and services, especially with respect to public procurement; “support Kenyan ICT to, promote Kenya” should be the mantra! Our academic institutions must (of necessity) produce talent that is in tune with market needs, while collaborating with industry in research and development initiatives. Indeed, our academic institutions need to be forward-looking in a manner that is responsive to market skills demand. Capital and funding for initiatives need to be readily available, and streamlined in favour of innovation. We need mechanisms that can encourage more risk capital and ready access to ICT innovators. Further, we need to actively promote Kenyan ICT products and services regionally and internationally. One can envision a case where national trade delegations routinely incorporate ICT sector representation. Results can only be realized through orchestrated efforts, complete with plans, targets, performance measures and accountability. The approach should be based on collaboration between the public and private sectors. Moreover, the initiative should be supported from the highest offices in the nation. Key to these are the President and Cabinet Secretary of the Ministry of Information Communication and Technology. In planning the future of ICT innovation and its potential contribution to the economy, we need to look at the promise of the Science, Technology and Innovation Act of 2012. The Act, which was formally assented to by President Mwai Kibaki in January 2013, providing a good foundation for national innovation in general. It creates the National Commission for Science Technology and Innovation (NACOSTI), Kenya National Innovation Agency (KENIA) and the National Research Fund (NRF). NACOSTI’s mandate centres on regulation and quality assurance in the Science, Technology and Innovation. On the other hand, KENIA’s main objective is to develop and manage the Kenya National Innovation System, while NRF’s charged with mobilizing finance the advancement of science, technology and innovation in the country. The foregoing notwithstanding, we can also learn from the experience of others where the ICT sector has thrived. In Ireland for instance,Enterprise Ireland drives the entire ICT innovation value chain, from idea to testing to funding and maturity. It has components of support for marketing and skills development. A similar entity (call it Enterprise Kenya) in Kenya would identify, nurture and facilitate the ICT innovation value chain. It would coordinate initiatives for competition, information sharing, and access to capital and marketing the products. It would work closely with governments (both national and county) to promote the support of Kenyan ICT products and services. It would, on an ongoing basis, spark conversations on the talent landscape. The entity would also explore opportunities for commercialization, be these from the public, private sectors or academia. As an example, one could consider commercializing the Huduma Centres concept: the designs, software and accompanying services. This would entail securing associated intellectual property (products, processes and services) and packing these for offer to other countries that may be in need. The country needs an ICT-focused Equity Fund as means of providing access to capital for ICT innovations. Unlike the National Research Fund envisioned in the Science, Technology and Innovation Act of 2012 the Equity Fund would focus mainly on commercialization of ICT products. The Equity Fund would be an arms-length quasi-public entity that would invest in targeted promising innovations. For capitalization, the government, working with the private sector, could provide initial funding and hence help jumpstart the Fund’s activity. With success of funded innovations, the government stands to reap returns in terms of growth in equity of financed enterprises while enhancing economic growth. Over time, and once the sector is steady, the government could divest from the Fund. It is important that the Presidency and the Ministry of ICT continually engage with players in the sector to ensure that the processes established work and that there is meaningful progress with respect to ICT initiatives. One can envision a Presidential Task Force on ICT Innovation (perhaps combining with the recently launched Presidential Digital Talent Programme) domiciled at the Ministry of Information, Communication and Technology and working very closely with the ict.go.ke ICT Authority. The Task Force would continually work with the ICT sector to ensure government support in the innovation value chain. It would regularly report on the state of ICT innovation in the country, capturing associated achievements, challenges and means to overcome those challenges. There will also be an advocacy role for the Task Force, including popularizing ICT innovation in schools, tertiary training institutions as well as universities. Working with other entities (such as the proposed Enterprise Kenya) in the innovation space, the Task Force would create an innovation index, track on the index and identify direct achievements realized through ICT innovation. Further, we need to make ICT innovation as part of the parliamentary agenda. Both houses of parliament need to be involved, both from awareness and reporting perspectives. In doing so, they should make ICT innovation part of their agenda and require status updates on the date on a regular basis. There is more. There are many lessons that can be learnt from past, ongoing and future projects such as Huduma, the eCitizen, National Payment Gateway, IFMIS, etc. Procurement policy should not only require a minimum percentage of local participation but also provide for knowledge transfer to help build local capacity. In the end, we can generate substantial intellectual property from such projects while also (potentially) supporting co-innovation as a result of joint ventures and participation. Finally, we need to institutionalize the National Innovation Forum as an annual event with focus on issues of ICT innovation and as a show case for innovators. At the Forum, we would demonstrate successes, share challenges, solutions to those challenges and lessons learnt. It is possible that the Forum could be a culmination of nation-wide county activities of similar kind starting at the grassroots in the counties. Now that would be an ICT reawakening and a drive towards the promise of Kenya as a Silicon Savannah! Dr. Matunda Nyanchama is a Director and Managing Consultant at Agano Consulting Inc., and a Technical Advisor in the Ministry of Communications and Technology. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Matunda Nyanchama, PhD, CISSP; mnyanchama(a)aganoconsulting.com Agano Consulting Inc.; www.aganoconsulting.com; Twitter: nmatunda; Skype: okiambe ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Manage your ICT risks! We are the experts you need! The trusted partners you deserve!Call: +1-888-587-1150 (Canada) +254-20-267-0743 (Kenya) or info(a)aganoconsulting.comLicensed by Communications Authority of Kenya (CA) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------"The best revenge is massive success" - Frank Sinatra----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This e-mail, including attachments, may be privileged and may contain confidential or proprietary information intended only for the addressee(s). Any other distribution, copying, use, or disclosure is unauthorized and strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and permanently delete the message, including any attachments, without making a copy. Thank you.

1 0

Kenya's Silicon Savannah & the Need to do more
by Matunda Nyanchama 25 Feb '15

25 Feb '15

Bwana Kieti I have lately learnt of the term "co-innovation", really fancy terminology for incremental innovation. We can learnt from the automobile industry where parts manufacturers eventually become car manufacturers. Often, we can piggyback on established applications/processes as a means of growth. A good example is MLedger (again something I have learnt of recently) that wouldn't have been without MPesa. In that respect, one doesn't need a pot of money for R&D. There is also the Science, Technology and Innovation Act of 2012 that envisions (among other things) the creation of a Kenya National Innovation Agency and a National Research Fund. If we designated a % of our annual budget for R&D and disbursed this well through the NRF, we can be miles ahead. Further, we could consider incentives (e.g. tax writeoffs, etc.) for companies' spending on R&D so as to encourage R&D. On your taxonomy, I agree. I believe the local ICT sector has a similar taxonomy for classification of enterprises in the innovation value chain. Business News » Kenya as Silicon Savannah – PART II – Actualizing the Dream! | | | | | | | | | Business News » Kenya as Silicon Savannah – PART II – Actualizing the Dream!Business News - Reading is FunDamental | | | | View on www.aganoconsulting.com | Preview by Yahoo | | | | | Hi Dr. Nyanchama, The article helps in assembling a set of keyconsiderations moving forward for the sector. On *Research and Development*(R&D), since we don't have many large native IT corporations that wouldafford the requisite R&D budgets, would you recommend that we treatinnovation and entrepreneurship among thousands of startups as a democratizedR&D division for the sector? Also, does it help to classify enterprises in the sectorso as to develop targeted interventions? See my proposed taxonomy <http://www.slideshare.net/JohnKieti/taxonomy-of-it-enterprises-in-kenya-and…> and abstraction of undeveloped interventions shared lastweek at AITEC. Best regards ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Matunda Nyanchama, PhD, CISSP; mnyanchama(a)aganoconsulting.com Agano Consulting Inc.; www.aganoconsulting.com; Twitter: nmatunda; Skype: okiambe ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Manage your ICT risks! We are the experts you need! The trusted partners you deserve!Call: +1-888-587-1150 (Canada) +254-20-267-0743 (Kenya) or info(a)aganoconsulting.comLicensed by Communications Authority of Kenya (CA) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------"The best revenge is massive success" - Frank Sinatra----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This e-mail, including attachments, may be privileged and may contain confidential or proprietary information intended only for the addressee(s). Any other distribution, copying, use, or disclosure is unauthorized and strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and permanently delete the message, including any attachments, without making a copy. Thank you.

1 0

Re: [kictanet] [isoc_ke] For those who think Safaricom is Dominant - Think Again..
by Ali Hussein 25 Feb '15

25 Feb '15

Kelvin Not sure I see the link between this sorry and the dominance issue.. It is however an interesting read. Thanks for sharing. Ali Hussein +254 770 906375 / 0713 601113 Twitter: @AliHKassim Skype: abu-jomo LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim Blog: www.alyhussein.com "I fear the day technology will surpass human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots". ~ Albert Einstein Sent from my iPad > On Feb 23, 2015, at 11:46 PM, Kelvin Githira <kelvin(a)skysys.co.ke> wrote: > > is this the reason for the push to declare safaricom dominant ? > > http://www.businessdailyafrica.com/Corporate-News/VeriFone-seeks-managers-f… > > > well its just a matter of time before an LTD is registered in the British virgin island by nameless Kenyans > >> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 12:42 AM, Ali Hussein via isoc <isoc(a)lists.my.co.ke> wrote: >> Listers >> >> Isn't it time to reboot our thinking on Policy and Regulation to fit the current global situation? >> >> This story in Forbes just made me realize one fundamental flow in our thinking regarding the regulatory environment we live in today. Should we not totally re-invent the environment to suit the circumstances? Why should we let the FCC trail-blaze in Regulation? What do they know about mobile innovation and regulation? Why are we abdicating our global responsibility from a regulatory perspective when we lead the world in mobile innovation? >> >> http://www.forbes.com/sites/mfonobongnsehe/2015/02/19/somali-entrepreneur-r… >> >> The world remittance market is $550b. What market share does Mpesa have? Let's not wallow in the hype and really make it happen. Today one in every three humans who use mobile money is a Kenyan. How does this translate to market share in this global stage. How many Indians/Chinese/Nigerians use Mpesa to remit money back home? That's the playground we must play in. After all isn't Kenya ground zero for all things mobile innovation? >> >> http://blogs.worldbank.org/africacan/how-kenya-became-a-world-leader-for-mo… >> >> Instead of trying to stifle local based companies let's give them the boost they require to become truly global. >> >> Here's what I think should happen. (Forgive me for being presumptive) but The Govt should cultivate BFF Status (my daughter tells me BFF means Best Friends Forever) with the likes of Mpesa, Mode, Cellulant, Pesapal, Jambo Pay, CopyCat, Seven Seas etc and present them as African Champions at every possible regional and Global event. Our very Economic Diplomacy should be anchored in this thinking. If my history serves me right that's how the Japanese Global Giants were borne. Through a truly PPP & Multi-Stakeholder Model (yes that word again..) Japanese industry became the world beaters they are today. For more on this it would be instructive to read the history of MITI. >> >> http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry_of_International_Trade_and_Industry >> >> Our folly is in thinking that private sector and government are mutually exclusive and that an adversarial stance is best to protect consumers. Let's expand the pie. There is no reason that Mpesa cannot become the de-facto mobile money system across Africa. For this to happen it would require not thinking out of the box - but reinventing the box. Literally. >> >> As Bob Collymore aptly put it - Being dominant is not a crime. >> >> Ali Hussein >> >> +254 770 906375 / 0713 601113 >> >> Twitter: @AliHKassim >> Skype: abu-jomo >> LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim >> Blog: www.alyhussein.com >> >> "I fear the day technology will surpass human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots". ~ Albert Einstein >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >> _______________________________________________ >> isoc mailing list >> isoc(a)lists.my.co.ke >> http://lists.my.co.ke/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/isoc >

4 10

Re: [kictanet] [isoc_ke] For those who think Safaricom is Dominant - Think Again..
by Mwendwa Kivuva 24 Feb '15

24 Feb '15

Meanwhile, Orange "says it has lost control of Telkom Kenya" due to minority shareholder interference. http://www.businessdailyafrica.com/Corporate-News/French-firm-loses-control… On Feb 24, 2015 5:57 PM, "Ali Hussein via kictanet" < kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote: :) *Ali Hussein* +254 770 906375 / 0713 601113 Twitter: @AliHKassim Skype: abu-jomo LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim <http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim> Blog: www.alyhussein.com "I fear the day technology will surpass human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots". ~ Albert Einstein Sent from my iPad On Feb 24, 2015, at 5:05 PM, Walubengo J <jwalu(a)yahoo.com> wrote: *From:* Ali Hussein via kictanet <kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote @Walu, I agree with your assertions and you seem to straddling the fence :) not sure what should be done..:) --- @Ali, I actually know what needs to be done. I just did not want to say it because we pay the DG and the CS good money to figure it out :-) walu. ------------------------------ *From:* Ali Hussein via kictanet <kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> *To:* jwalu(a)yahoo.com *Cc:* ISOC Kenya Chapter <isoc(a)lists.my.co.ke>; KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions <kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 24, 2015 3:54 PM *Subject:* Re: [kictanet] [isoc_ke] For those who think Safaricom is Dominant - Think Again.. @Mwendwa My point is that Mpesa represents the whole innovation landscape in Kenya. There are other products/services that have global appeal. Kenyan made or at least Kenyan bred. The principle is that we MUST develop strong champions that can be global players - Free Markets be damned.. @Walu I agree with your assertions and you seem to straddling the fence :) not sure what should be done..:) Actually by default Mpesa has already been spinned off Safaricom. So that's a Fait Accompli. *Ali Hussein* +254 770 906375 / 0713 601113 Twitter: @AliHKassim Skype: abu-jomo LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim <http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim> Blog: www.alyhussein.com "I fear the day technology will surpass human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots". ~ Albert Einstein Sent from my iPad On Feb 24, 2015, at 3:45 PM, Mwendwa Kivuva <Kivuva(a)transworldafrica.com> wrote: On 24 February 2015 at 15:03, Ali Hussein via kictanet < kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote: My other point is that the regulatory environment needs to take into consideration the global environment. Mpesa must be allowed space to grow beyond Kenya. Mpesa here means any Kenyan product. We must emulate Japan & other Asian Giants. Policy and regulation must as a matter of course favor local companies. I make no apologies for this last point - Free markets are a dream perpetuated by foreign interests with the end game of dominance. Ali, the tragedy is Vodafone pulled the rug from under our feet. They saw the value of MPESA long ago and patented it, thus licensing it to Sub Saharan Africa and Southern Asian countries. Thus it's not possible for Safaricom to grow the MPESA brand beyond our borders. That is what Vodafone has been doing all along. ______________________ Mwendwa Kivuva, Nairobi, Kenya "There are some men who lift the age they inhabit, till all men walk on higher ground in that lifetime." - Maxwell Anderson _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/jwalu%40yahoo.com The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development. KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications. _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/kivuva%40transworldaf… The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development. KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.

1 0

For those who think Safaricom is Dominant - Think Again..
by Ali Hussein 24 Feb '15

24 Feb '15

Listers Isn't it time to reboot our thinking on Policy and Regulation to fit the current global situation? This story in Forbes just made me realize one fundamental flow in our thinking regarding the regulatory environment we live in today. Should we not totally re-invent the environment to suit the circumstances? Why should we let the FCC trail-blaze in Regulation? What do they know about mobile innovation and regulation? Why are we abdicating our global responsibility from a regulatory perspective when we lead the world in mobile innovation? http://www.forbes.com/sites/mfonobongnsehe/2015/02/19/somali-entrepreneur-r… The world remittance market is $550b. What market share does Mpesa have? Let's not wallow in the hype and really make it happen. Today one in every three humans who use mobile money is a Kenyan. How does this translate to market share in this global stage. How many Indians/Chinese/Nigerians use Mpesa to remit money back home? That's the playground we must play in. After all isn't Kenya ground zero for all things mobile innovation? http://blogs.worldbank.org/africacan/how-kenya-became-a-world-leader-for-mo… Instead of trying to stifle local based companies let's give them the boost they require to become truly global. Here's what I think should happen. (Forgive me for being presumptive) but The Govt should cultivate BFF Status (my daughter tells me BFF means Best Friends Forever) with the likes of Mpesa, Mode, Cellulant, Pesapal, Jambo Pay, CopyCat, Seven Seas etc and present them as African Champions at every possible regional and Global event. Our very Economic Diplomacy should be anchored in this thinking. If my history serves me right that's how the Japanese Global Giants were borne. Through a truly PPP & Multi-Stakeholder Model (yes that word again..) Japanese industry became the world beaters they are today. For more on this it would be instructive to read the history of MITI. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry_of_International_Trade_and_Industry Our folly is in thinking that private sector and government are mutually exclusive and that an adversarial stance is best to protect consumers. Let's expand the pie. There is no reason that Mpesa cannot become the de-facto mobile money system across Africa. For this to happen it would require not thinking out of the box - but reinventing the box. Literally. As Bob Collymore aptly put it - Being dominant is not a crime. Ali Hussein +254 770 906375 / 0713 601113 Twitter: @AliHKassim Skype: abu-jomo LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim Blog: www.alyhussein.com "I fear the day technology will surpass human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots". ~ Albert Einstein Sent from my iPad

3 2

Digital Migration - Set Top Box Ownership - Time to move the debate forward!
by Consumers Federation of Kenya (COFEK) 23 Feb '15

23 Feb '15

Dear All, At Cofek, we find as (regrettably) misplaced the fact that people are re-opening the same old debate on digital migration merely because of the 3 media houses’ objections. Regardless of their somewhat valid grievances, we are on record saying they are fighting a lost battle. The Supreme Court has pronounced itself. It is end of debate on analogue switch-off. We need to move on – beyond the exchanges between CA/MOICT and the media houses. We need to listen to “Wanjiku”. We need to exploit the opportunities which migration brings with them. On set-top boxes, and if you thought South Africa is better on Digital Migration, then Kenya has no problems at all. A minister in South Africa has said no to STB’s with encryption! Read on: http://www.cofek.co.ke/index.php/14-news/957-if-you-thought-there-are-more-… Kind regards David Kedode www.cofek.co.ke

4 5

Exactly how free is FTA?
by Collins Areba 23 Feb '15

23 Feb '15

I have a question thats been bugging my head to the extent of considering reading on firmware of most of the upcoming "providers" for "educational purposes". What exactly constitutes Free to Air? a) Signal distributed free of charge, and viewable on any FTA receiver. b) Signal Distributed Free of charge, but provider can encode to "lock" users to only using their decoder. c) Signal Distributed Free of charge by persons licensed to distribute FTA exclusively. d) What about Commercial Pay TV licensees that choose to distribute their signal free of charge... Would the service constitute FTA service? Regards, Collins Areba, P.O Box 44441, 00100 Nairobi, Kenya. Tel: +254 707 750 788 / 720 516 758 Twitter: @arebacollins. Skype: arebacollins

2 1

Fwd: Ipsos poll on TV Switch Off
by Ali Hussein 23 Feb '15

23 Feb '15

Listers This may be of interest. Ali Hussein +254 770 906375 / 0713 601113 Twitter: @AliHKassim Skype: abu-jomo LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim Blog: www.alyhussein.com "I fear the day technology will surpass human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots". ~ Albert Einstein Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: > From: Rehema Muniu <Rehema.Muniu(a)ipsos.com> > Date: February 23, 2015 at 4:44:06 PM EAT > Cc: Tom Mzungu <Tom.Mzungu(a)ipsos.com>, Kui Kariuki <Kui.Kariuki(a)ipsos.com> > Subject: Ipsos poll on TV Switch Off > > Good day, > > I trust that you had a great weekend. > > Kindly find attached findings of a Poll conducted by Ipsos between 17th and 18th February 2015. This survey highlights : > > 1. Awareness levels of the Television Switch off > 2. New/Alternative Source(s) of information > 3. Who is responsible for the switch off > 4. Purchase of Set Top Boxes (STB) > > For any further clarification and/or information, please get in touch with Tom Mzungu - tom.mzungu(a)ipsos.com or kui.kariuki(a)ipsos.com > > Have a great week ahead! > > > Kind regards, > > Rehema >

1 0

Dominance issue in the Telco sector
by Ali Hussein 22 Feb '15

22 Feb '15

Listers An analysis on the dominance issue with case studies across the world. 1 The Kenya Information and Communications (Amendment) Act 2013 The Kenya Information and Communications (Amendment) Act 2013 (the Act) states In Section 84W (3) that Communications Authority of Kenya (the Authority) may, by notice in the Gazette, declare a person or institution to be a “dominant telecommunications service provider” for the purposes of this Act. Section 84W (4) goes further to clarify what the Authority should consider in declaring an operator or institution dominant in subsection (4) as follow: - (a) the market share of the telecommunications service provider being at least fifty percentum of the relevant gross market segment; (b) the level of control over the communications infrastructure; (c) the level of technological advancement of the telecommunications service provider; (d) the scale of operations of the telecommunications service The Authority further developed Supplementary Legislation cited as the Kenya Information and Communications (Fair Competition and Equality of Treatment) Regulations, 2010 “the Regulations”. The Regulations indicate in section 7(1) that the Authority shall from time to time develop and publish, in the Kenya Gazette, guidelines to be followed when determining whether a licensee in a dominant market position in a specific communications market but this is not a precondition to determining an Institution as being dominant and therefore the Authority is mandated to declare an operator dominant under the current available Primary and secondary legislation. In regards to Dominance, the Regulations in Section 7 (2) and (3) further mentions additional criteria for deciding on dominance which include among others— (a) the degree of market concentration or the market share of the licensee, determined by reference to revenues, numbers of subscribers or volumes of sales; (b) the degree to which a licensee’s prices vary over time; (c) the ability of the licensee to maintain or erect barriers to entry to the market, including, by means of control of essential facilities, access to superior technology, privileged access to resources or capital markets or superior buying or negotiating position, amongst others; (d) the ability of the licensee to earn supernormal profits; (e) the global technology and commercial trends affecting market power; (f) the licensee’s power to make independent rate setting decisions; (g) the degree of product or service differentiation and sales promotion in the market; and (h) any other matters which the Commission may consider relevant. Section 7 (3) A licensee shall be in a dominant market position if; (a) it has the ability to materially raise prices without suffering a commensurate loss in service demand to other licensees; (b) it has the ability to erect or benefit from barriers to market entry; (c) the Commission has so determined a dominant market power report, after considering the circumstances and criteria set in these Regulations. In reference to the legal instruments cited above, the Authority has the mandate to declare an Institution dominant and our submission is dependent on these cited instruments to make a case for determining Safaricom as a being dominant in the Mobile Retail Voice, Data, SMS market and also in the Mobile Money Transfer markets. 2 The Relevant Market Segment In line with best practice worldwide and also based on previous market study done by PWC in 2010 for the Authority (then CCK) it is clear and evident that the Retail Mobile Voice, Retail Mobile Data, Retail SMS and Mobile Money Transfer are relevant market segments. Our focus will therefore be on the Mobile Retail Voice, Data, SMS and Mobile Money Transfer market segments. 3 Market Dominance definition in Kenya Market Dominance in Kenya can be determined based on the Act and the Regulations as identified above in item 2 above. Whereas globally there are other considerations known, we will use what is within the regulatory instruments available in Kenya. However for completeness, the Competition Act Chapter 504 Part C section 23. Also defines as dominance as follows: - Sections 23 (1) “dominant undertaking” means an undertaking which: (a) produces, supplies, distributes or otherwise controls not less than one-half of the total goods of any description which are produced, supplied or distributed in Kenya or any substantial part thereof; or (b) provides or otherwise controls not less than one-half of the services which are rendered This definition by the Competition Act is in harmony with the definition in the Act as it refers to half of total good s which aligns to the 50% market share specified in the Act. Our submission will therefore concentrate on the criteria in the Act and Regulations (which are yet to be amended in line with the Act) together with the Competition Act. 4 A case for Declaring Safaricom Dominant 4.1 Degree of Market Concentration or Market Share The Commission through its consultation paper on the intention to declare regulated services, found that there was high market shares, concentration ratios and Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) 5,230 on Subscriber base and 6,758 on revenues against best practice of 1,800 which was a clear demonstration of lack of effective Competition in the mobile voice termination market and hence the need for regulatory intervention to correct market failure. While we appreciate that the market shares, concentration ratios and HH index might have changed since the consultation was done, we strongly feel that the mobile voice market is not effectively competitive and hence the need for regulatory intervention by the Commission. The current HHI based on number of subscribers remains well over 4000 which is still double the threshold for a concentrated market. The HHI thresholds in US and EU are defined as follows: - HHI below 1000 – a competitive market. There are no dominant competitors in this market. HHI between 1000 and 1800 – a moderately concentrated market HHI above 1800 – a concentrated market. There are one or more dominant competitors in this market. This HHI though not reflected as a requirement to determine dominance in the Kenya goes to reinforce our submission that Safaricom is dominant. Safaricom’s market share has remained over 63% on the basis of mobile subscribers as can be seen from Table 2 and 78 % in traffic volumes for the period of January to March 2014. In terms of revenues it is about 80%. These figures are above the threshold that would lead to a rebuttable presumption of dominance. In established competition cases and also in line with the Competition Act chapter 504 in Kenya, sustained market shares of over 50% gives rise to a rebuttable presumption of dominance, while market shares of over 40% are suggestive of possibility of dominance. On the basis of market share alone, Safaricom holds a position of Dominance in retail voice, Retail Data, SMS and Mobile Money market and should be declared dominant. As per data provided below and also slide 30 in SFC H1 ’15 presentation, SFC holds: 68%, 78%, 97% and 72% market shares in subscribers, voice minutes, SMS traffic and data users. Moreover, they control 88% of total revenues of the market. (See extracts below) In summary, Safaricom has retained highest market shares as follows: - Market share by Subscription (voice) 80% in 2010 to 68% in 2014 Market share by Subscription (Data) 99% in 2010 to 71% in 2014 Market Share by Voice Minutes (Voice) 80% in 2012 to 79% in 2014 Market Share by number of SMS (SMS) 84% in 2012 to 96% in 2014 Market Share by Revenues (Voice) 86% in 2012 to 88% in 2014 well over 80% market share in each Mobile voice, SMS and Mobile Data 4.1.1 Market Shares by Subscriptions Number Mobile Subscriptions per Operator in Millions Month Safaricom Ltd Airtel Networks Kenya Ltd Telkom Kenya Ltd Essar Telecom (K) Ltd Totals 2009/10 16.24 1.83 0.55 1.49 20.12 2010/11 17.35 3.61 2.73 1.58 25.28 2011/12 19.01 4.91 3.12 2.66 29.70 2012/13 20.15 5.22 2.13 3.05 30.55 2013/14 21.93 5.07 2.69 2.56 32.25 Table 1: Number of mobile subscriptions since 2010 to Jun 2014 Source: Extracted from CCK/CA published reports Market Share by Subscriptions since 2010 Month Safaricom Ltd Airtel Networks Kenya Ltd Telkom Kenya Ltd Essar Telecom (K) Ltd Totals 2009/10 80.7% 9.1% 2.7% 7.4% 100% 2010/11 68.6% 14.3% 10.8% 6.3% 100% 2011/12 64.0% 16.5% 10.5% 9.0% 100% 2012/13 65.9% 17.1% 7.0% 10.0% 100% 2013/14 68.0% 15.7% 8.3% 8.0% 100% Table 2: Market Share by mobile subscriptions since 2010 Source: Extracted from CCK/CA published reports Source: Derived from Table 1 above. Chart 2: Market Share by Number of Subscriptions Mobile Data Subscriptions by Operator Operator 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 Safaricom Ltd 2,959,906 3,584,283 5,262,307 9,332,995 9,974,377 Airtel Networks Kenya Ltd 10,000 496,509 1,074,764 1,597,481 1,880,644 Telkom Kenya Ltd - 108,926 674,255 795,513 1,574,168 Essar Telecom (K) Ltd - - 644,250 614,016 501,505 Totals 2,969,906 4,189,718 7,655,576 12,340,005 13,930,694 Source: Compiled from CCK/CA published reports Mobile Data Market Shares by Operator by Number of Subscriptions Operator 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 Safaricom Ltd 99.7% 85.5% 68.7% 75.6% 71.6% Airtel Networks Kenya Ltd 0.3% 11.9% 14.0% 12.9% 13.5% Telkom Kenya Ltd 0.0% 2.6% 8.8% 6.4% 11.3% Essar Telecom (K) Ltd 0.0% 0.0% 8.4% 5.0% 3.6% Totals 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Mobile Data Market Share by Subscription Source: CA Reports Extracts Source: Safaricom Half-Year Results Presentation 2014/2015 4.1.2 Market Shares by Traffic or Transactions Mobile Traffic Volumes by Operator since 2012 in Billion Minutes Operator Year 2011/12 Year 2012/13 Year 2013/14 Safaricom Ltd 21.75 22.61 23.88 Airtel Networks Kenya Ltd 2.93 3.38 3.06 Telkom Kenya Ltd 0.21 0.38 0.92 Essar Telecom (K) Ltd 2.07 2.43 2.38 Totals 26.96 28.80 30.24 Source: Compiled from CCK/CA published reports Mobile Voice Minutes Market Share by Operator over a three year Period Operator Year 2011/12 Year 2012/13 Year 2013/14 Safaricom Ltd 80.7% 78.5% 79.0% Airtel Networks Kenya Ltd 10.9% 11.7% 10.1% Telkom Kenya Ltd 0.8% 1.3% 3.0% Essar Telecom (K) Ltd 7.7% 8.5% 7.9% Totals 100% 100% 100% Chart 3: Market Share by Traffic Volumes in Minutes (2013/14) The above numbers clearly supports our submission to declare Safaricom as dominant in the Retail Voice, Data and SMS market. Mobile SMS Traffic by Mobile Operator in Millions SMS’s Operator Year 2011/12 Year 2012/13 Year 2013/14 Safaricom Ltd 3,626.14 12,386.16 23,502.51 Airtel Networks Kenya Ltd 494.01 632.10 731.61 Telkom Kenya Ltd 75.02 74.25 92.35 Essar Telecom (K) Ltd 100.21 140.58 117.55 Totals 4,295 13,233 24,444 Source: Compiled from CCK/CA published reports SMS Market Shares by Operator by number of SMS’s Operator Year 2011/12 Year 2012/13 Year 2013/14 Safaricom Ltd 84% 94% 96% Airtel Networks Kenya Ltd 12% 5% 3% Telkom Kenya Ltd 2% 1% 0% Essar Telecom (K) Ltd 2% 1% 0% Totals 100% 100% 100% 5 Benchmarking – Case Studies 5.1 Dominance Declarations in African Countries Recently the Nigeria Communications Commission declared MTN Nigeria and Globacom dominant following a study conducted by KPMG Professional Services. MTN was declared dominant in two market segment-Mobile Voice Market and Wholesale leased lines and transmission capacity whereas Globacom (Nigeria’s second National Operator) was declared the leader in wholesale leased lines and transmission capacity market. In its determination, Nigeria Communications Commission found that the mobile voice market was not effectively competitive and therefore ordered MTN (which has 44% of the mobile voice market) to charge same amount for on-net and off-net calls. We further wish to share with the Authority a list of countries in Africa which have declared some mobile operators dominant. Country in Africa Name of Dominant Operator in country Market Share of Dominant Operator Year Operator declared Dominant Nigeria MTN 44% April 28, 2013 Congo B MTN Airtel 40% 38% March 2013 Niger Airtel 61.4% 2013 chad Airtel 53% 2013 Rwanda MTN 57% 2013 Burkina Faso Airtel Telmob 39.24% 38.36% 2012 Senegal Orange 62.06 % 2012 Gabon Airtel 45% 2013 We wish to highlight to the Authority that Safaricom has more market shares than most of the operators declared dominant as per the table above. We therefore request the Authority to proceed with speed to declare Safaricom dominant just like the other regulators have done in their jurisdictions. 5.2 IFT (Federal Telecommunication Institute) Mexico In early 2014 America Movil and its operating subsidiaries- Telecel (Mexico’s wireless market leader) and Telemex (the dominant fixed line player) were declared by the IFC as a dominant economic interest group in the telecommunications market. Telecel’s market share at the time stood at 69 % and Telemex’s market share stood at around 85%. The market concentration stood at 6382 points on the HHI with Mobile Market standing at 5334 point and the fixed telephony market stood at 4761 points on the HHI. According to the IFT a HHI score of more than 2000 points can affect competition. As the Authority will note the HHI scores are very much in line with the market concentration levels in Kenya. The regulator subjected them to the following regulations on the wholesale level: · Asymmetric interconnection rates · Access to passive infrastructure · Local loop unbundling · Mandatory National roaming Access The regulator subjected them to the following regulations on the retail level: · End to SIM locking of handsets · All services sold in bundles were required to be sold separately · Certain retail prices were to be reviewed. 5.3 Summary of obligations Imposed on Dominant Operators in other countries The following is a summary of Dominance Remedies implemented in various countries. It is important to note that Asymmetric Interconnection is one of the remedies, Account separation, infrastructure sharing and on-net/off-net equalization. Country Obligations Ghana • Accounting Separation • Collapse of On‐net and Off‐net Retail Tariffs. The tariff for on‐net and off-net will be the same, and subject to periodic review. • Submission of Required Details: The Commission may require the dominant operator to submit details on specific aspects of its operations from time to time as the need arises. • Asymmetric interconnect termination rate regime applies to new entrants as well as Operators with less than 5% of subscriber market share Gabon • Interconnection • Obligations of the quality of service, Obligation of non-discrimination transparency; • Publication of the catalog of infrastructure sharing; • Accounting separation obligation and duty on the cost accounting of all benefits Nigeria • Collapsed of on-net and off-net retail tariffs to discourage calling club effect; • Accounts Separation; Mexico • Asymmetric interconnection rates • Access to passive infrastructure • Local loop unbundling • Mandatory National roaming Access • End to SIM locking of handsets • All services sold in bundles were required to be sold separately • Certain retail prices were to be reviewed. Ali Hussein +254 770 906375 / 0713 601113 Twitter: @AliHKassim Skype: abu-jomo LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim Blog: www.alyhussein.com "I fear the day technology will surpass human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots". ~ Albert Einstein Sent from my iPad

3 3

Visualizing Procurement & CRM Performance
by S.M. Muraya 22 Feb '15

22 Feb '15

Dear Listers, Does anyone have a study or report of Kenyan public institutions with a 3 year track record of decently funding Intranet (Business Intelligence) portals. This includes end user training. This is to increase visibility and automation of Procurement and CRM processes. We have local talent who have for years developed these kinds of solutions for international organizations. Teams interested in meeting this kind of talent for one day seminars can email training(a)saltech.co.ke for more details. Noted in the news media, for legal/local processes including "arguments" IEBC currently owes over KES 600M. Does this have anything to do with it? http://www.cw-uk.org/trial-monitoring/ Their defence said they were just doing things “the African way”, and that they are guilty only of “being generous”.

1 0

Re: [kictanet] [isoc_ke] Should Safaricom be broken up as 'recommended' by Airtel?
by Mwendwa Kivuva 21 Feb '15

21 Feb '15

On 18 February 2015 at 15:22, WANGARI KABIRU via isoc <isoc(a)lists.my.co.ke> wrote: > *"The Kenya Information and Communications Act section 84W gives the > Communications Authority of Kenya powers to declare a service provider to > be dominant if their market share is at least 50 per cent of the relevant > gross market segment," Mr Matiang'i noted. * > Wangare, you have murdered the law, and read it out of context. "The current regulation on competition, published by the ICT ministry in 2010, equates dominance to abuse of the market. The regulator says this makes it difficult to declare a licensee dominant considering that the threshold of proof of abuse is very high." ______________________ Mwendwa Kivuva, Nairobi, Kenya "There are some men who lift the age they inhabit, till all men walk on higher ground in that lifetime." - Maxwell Anderson

9 11

FW: Call for Proposals: Quantified Society
by Grace Githaiga 21 Feb '15

21 Feb '15

fyi Subject: Call for Proposals: Quantified Society From: info(a)mediademocracyfund.org To: ggithaiga(a)hotmail.com Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2015 16:33:22 +0000 Call for Proposals: Quantified Society Examining the Consequences of Algorithmic Decision Making for Open Societies View this email in your browser Media Democracy Fund, Ford Foundation and Open Society Foundations are pleased to announce an inceptive study of Big Data and the practices around large scale data collection, analysis and use: “Quantified Society: Examining the Consequences of Algorithmic Decision Making for Open Societies”. This international Call for Proposals invites submissions from researchers, academicians, journalists, human rights defenders, civil society organizations, and professionals. Successful proposals will help synthesize an understanding of how technologies and policies around Big Data collection, analysis and use are driving changes in innovation, human rights, and relevant regulations. We have followed your work in the field of human rights and technology with great interest and believe you can further the debate and clarify concerns and opportunities around Big Data. We are pleased to invite a proposal from you and encourage you to circulate this Call for Proposals to others in your network who may be interested. The details of this Call for Proposals, including application instructions and timeline, may be downloaded here. Concept notes must be received by 27 March 2015. Full proposals from semi-finalists will be due 22 May 2015. Research awards will range from $10,000-25,000. ------- You are receiving this email because the Media Democracy Fund, Ford Foundation, and/or Open Society Foundations believe you may be interested in applying for funding to conduct research on the use of big data. Our mailing address is: Media Democracy Fund1201 Connecticut Avenue NW, Suite 300Washington, DC 20036 Add us to your address book unsubscribe from this list update subscription preferences

2 1

Safaricom to reduce Investment IF Kenya moves on Dominance
by Walubengo J 20 Feb '15

20 Feb '15

@Ali, Mwendwa et al. Just spotted this and it confirms what I meant Safcom will chew them up faster than the broadcasters are attempting to do. Read on: Safaricom Will Reduce Investment If Kenya Moves on Dominance | | | | | | | | | Safaricom Will Reduce Investment If Kenya Moves on Dominance(Bloomberg) -- Safaricom Ltd. will cut its planned $400million investment in East Africa’s biggest economy this year ifKenyan regulators impose penalties on the wireless carrier tolimit its market dominance, its chief executive officer said. | | | | View on www.bloomberg.com | Preview by Yahoo | | | | | walu.

3 2

Re: [kictanet] Dominance issue in the Telco sector
by Dennis Kioko 20 Feb '15

20 Feb '15

And hasn't the market in Kenya achieved most of these obligations? I urge the regulator to try out a different remedy in the form of declaring Safaricom's competitors non-competitive. In this light, they should then be urged to cede the resources they occupy to a more competitive operator who will capture the hearts and pockets of Kenyans. As someone said, it is important to understand the market rather than rely on "market studies". On Fri, 20 Feb 2015 18:18 Ali Hussein via kictanet < kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote: > Listers An analysis on the dominance issue with case studies across the > world. > 1 The Kenya Information and Communications (Amendment) Act 2013 > > The Kenya Information and Communications (Amendment) Act 2013 (the Act) > states In Section 84W (3) that Communications Authority of Kenya (the > Authority) may, by notice in the Gazette, declare a person or institution > to be a "dominant telecommunications service provider" for the purposes of > this Act. > > > > Section 84W (4) goes further to clarify what the Authority should consider > in declaring an operator or institution dominant in subsection (4) as > follow: - > > (a) the market share of the telecommunications service provider being at > least fifty percentum of the relevant gross market segment; > > (b) the level of control over the communications infrastructure; > > (c) the level of technological advancement of the telecommunications > service provider; > > (d) the scale of operations of the telecommunications service > > > > The Authority further developed Supplementary Legislation cited as the > Kenya Information and Communications (Fair Competition and Equality of > Treatment) Regulations, 2010 "the Regulations". The Regulations indicate in > section 7(1) that the Authority shall from time to time develop and > publish, in the Kenya Gazette, guidelines to be followed when determining > whether a licensee in a dominant market position in a specific > communications market but this is not a precondition to determining an > Institution as being dominant and therefore the Authority is mandated to > declare an operator dominant under the current available Primary and > secondary legislation. > > > > In regards to Dominance, the Regulations in Section 7 (2) and (3) further > mentions additional criteria for deciding on dominance which include among > others-- > > (a) the degree of market concentration or the market share of the > licensee, determined by reference to revenues, numbers of subscribers or > volumes of sales; > > (b) the degree to which a licensee's prices vary over time; > > (c) the ability of the licensee to maintain or erect barriers to entry to > the market, including, by means of control of essential facilities, access > to superior technology, privileged access to resources or capital markets > or superior buying or negotiating position, amongst others; > > (d) the ability of the licensee to earn supernormal profits; > > (e) the global technology and commercial trends affecting market power; > > (f) the licensee's power to make independent rate setting decisions; > > (g) the degree of product or service differentiation and sales promotion > in the market; and > > (h) any other matters which the Commission may consider relevant. > > > > Section 7 (3) A licensee shall be in a dominant market position if; > > (a) it has the ability to materially raise prices without suffering a > commensurate loss in service demand to other licensees; > > (b) it has the ability to erect or benefit from barriers to market entry; > > (c) the Commission has so determined a dominant market power report, after > considering the circumstances and criteria set in these Regulations. > > > > In reference to the legal instruments cited above, the Authority has the > mandate to declare an Institution dominant and our submission is dependent > on these cited instruments to make a case for determining Safaricom as a > being dominant in the Mobile Retail Voice, Data, SMS market and also in > the Mobile Money Transfer markets. > > > 2 The Relevant Market Segment > > > > In line with best practice worldwide and also based on previous market > study done by PWC in 2010 for the Authority (then CCK) it is clear and > evident that the Retail Mobile Voice, Retail Mobile Data, Retail SMS and > Mobile Money Transfer are relevant market segments. > > Our focus will therefore be on the Mobile Retail Voice, Data, SMS and > Mobile Money Transfer market segments. > > > 3 Market Dominance definition in Kenya > > > > Market Dominance in Kenya can be determined based on the Act and the > Regulations as identified above in item 2 above. Whereas globally there are > other considerations known, we will use what is within the regulatory > instruments available in Kenya. > > > > However for completeness, the Competition Act Chapter 504 Part C section > 23. Also defines as dominance as follows: - > > > > Sections 23 (1) "dominant undertaking" means an undertaking which: > > (a) produces, supplies, distributes or otherwise controls not less than > one-half of the total goods of any description which are produced, supplied > or distributed in Kenya or any substantial part thereof; or > > > > (b) provides or otherwise controls not less than one-half of the services > which are rendered > > > > This definition by the Competition Act is in harmony with the definition > in the Act as it refers to half of total good s which aligns to the 50% > market share specified in the Act. > > > > Our submission will therefore concentrate on the criteria in the Act and > Regulations (which are yet to be amended in line with the Act) together > with the Competition Act. > 4 A case for Declaring Safaricom Dominant4.1 Degree of > Market Concentration or Market Share > > The Commission through its consultation paper on the intention to declare > regulated services, found that there was high market shares, concentration > ratios and Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) 5,230 on Subscriber base and > 6,758 on revenues against best practice of 1,800 which was a clear > demonstration of lack of effective Competition in the mobile voice > termination market and hence the need for regulatory intervention to > correct market failure. While we appreciate that the market shares, > concentration ratios and HH index might have changed since the consultation > was done, we strongly feel that the mobile voice market is not effectively > competitive and hence the need for regulatory intervention by the > Commission. The current HHI based on number of subscribers remains well > over 4000 which is still double the threshold for a concentrated market. > > > > The HHI thresholds in US and EU are defined as follows: - > > - HHI below 1000 - a competitive market. There are no > dominant competitors in this market. > - HHI between 1000 and 1800 - a moderately concentrated market > - HHI above 1800 - a concentrated market. There are one or more > dominant competitors in this market. > > > > This HHI though not reflected as a requirement to determine dominance in > the Kenya goes to reinforce our submission that Safaricom is dominant. > > > > Safaricom's market share has remained over 63% on the basis of mobile > subscribers as can be seen from Table 2 and 78 % in traffic volumes for the > period of January to March 2014. In terms of revenues it is about 80%. > These figures are above the threshold that would lead to a rebuttable > presumption of dominance. In established competition cases and also in line > with the Competition Act chapter 504 in Kenya, sustained market shares of > over 50% gives rise to a rebuttable presumption of dominance, while market > shares of over 40% are suggestive of possibility of dominance. On the basis > of market share alone, Safaricom holds a position of Dominance in retail > voice, Retail Data, SMS and Mobile Money market and should be declared > dominant. As per data provided below and also slide 30 in SFC H1 '15 > presentation, SFC holds: 68%, 78%, 97% and 72% market shares in > subscribers, voice minutes, SMS traffic and data users. Moreover, they > control 88% of total revenues of the market. (See extracts below) > > > > In summary, Safaricom has retained highest market shares as follows: - > > - Market share by Subscription (voice) 80% in 2010 to 68% in 2014 > - Market share by Subscription (Data) 99% in 2010 to 71% in 2014 > - Market Share by Voice Minutes (Voice) 80% in 2012 to 79% in 2014 > - Market Share by number of SMS (SMS) 84% in 2012 to 96% in 2014 > - Market Share by Revenues (Voice) 86% in 2012 to 88% in 2014 well > over 80% market share in each Mobile voice, SMS and Mobile Data > > > 4.1.1 Market Shares by Subscriptions > > *Number Mobile Subscriptions per Operator in Millions* > > *Month* > > *Safaricom Ltd* > > *Airtel Networks Kenya Ltd* > > *Telkom Kenya Ltd* > > *Essar Telecom (K) Ltd* > > *Totals* > > *2009/10* > > 16.24 > > 1.83 > > 0.55 > > 1.49 > > 20.12 > > *2010/11* > > 17.35 > > 3.61 > > 2.73 > > 1.58 > > 25.28 > > *2011/12* > > 19.01 > > 4.91 > > 3.12 > > 2.66 > > 29.70 > > *2012/13* > > 20.15 > > 5.22 > > 2.13 > > 3.05 > > 30.55 > > *2013/14* > > 21.93 > > 5.07 > > 2.69 > > 2.56 > > 32.25 > > Table 1: Number of mobile subscriptions since 2010 to Jun 2014 > > *Source: Extracted from CCK/CA published reports* > > > > Market Share by Subscriptions since 2010 > > *Month* > > *Safaricom Ltd* > > *Airtel Networks Kenya Ltd* > > *Telkom Kenya Ltd* > > *Essar Telecom (K) Ltd* > > *Totals* > > *2009/10* > > 80.7% > > 9.1% > > 2.7% > > 7.4% > > 100% > > *2010/11* > > 68.6% > > 14.3% > > 10.8% > > 6.3% > > 100% > > *2011/12* > > 64.0% > > 16.5% > > 10.5% > > 9.0% > > 100% > > *2012/13* > > 65.9% > > 17.1% > > 7.0% > > 10.0% > > 100% > > *2013/14* > > 68.0% > > 15.7% > > 8.3% > > 8.0% > > 100% > > Table 2: Market Share by mobile subscriptions since 2010 > > *Source: Extracted from CCK/CA published reports* > > > > *Source: Derived from Table 1 above.* > > Chart 2: Market Share by Number of Subscriptions > > > > Mobile Data Subscriptions by Operator > > *Operator* > > *2009/10* > > *2010/11* > > *2011/12* > > *2012/13* > > *2013/14* > > *Safaricom Ltd* > > 2,959,906 > > 3,584,283 > > 5,262,307 > > 9,332,995 > > 9,974,377 > > *Airtel Networks Kenya Ltd* > > 10,000 > > 496,509 > > 1,074,764 > > 1,597,481 > > 1,880,644 > > *Telkom Kenya Ltd* > > - > > 108,926 > > 674,255 > > 795,513 > > 1,574,168 > > *Essar Telecom (K) Ltd* > > - > > - > > 644,250 > > 614,016 > > 501,505 > > *Totals* > > 2,969,906 > > 4,189,718 > > 7,655,576 > > 12,340,005 > > 13,930,694 > > *Source: Compiled from CCK/CA published reports* > > > > Mobile Data Market Shares by Operator by Number of Subscriptions > > *Operator* > > *2009/10* > > *2010/11* > > *2011/12* > > *2012/13* > > *2013/14* > > *Safaricom Ltd* > > 99.7% > > 85.5% > > 68.7% > > 75.6% > > 71.6% > > *Airtel Networks Kenya Ltd* > > 0.3% > > 11.9% > > 14.0% > > 12.9% > > 13.5% > > *Telkom Kenya Ltd* > > 0.0% > > 2.6% > > 8.8% > > 6.4% > > 11.3% > > *Essar Telecom (K) Ltd* > > 0.0% > > 0.0% > > 8.4% > > 5.0% > > 3.6% > > *Totals* > > 100% > > 100% > > 100% > > 100% > > 100% > > > > Mobile Data Market Share by Subscription > > Source: CA Reports Extracts > > > > Source: Safaricom Half-Year Results Presentation 2014/2015 > > > 4.1.2 Market Shares by Traffic or Transactions > > > > Mobile Traffic Volumes by Operator since 2012 in Billion Minutes > > *Operator* > > *Year 2011/12 * > > *Year 2012/13* > > *Year 2013/14* > > *Safaricom Ltd* > > 21.75 > > 22.61 > > 23.88 > > *Airtel Networks Kenya Ltd* > > 2.93 > > 3.38 > > 3.06 > > *Telkom Kenya Ltd* > > 0.21 > > 0.38 > > 0.92 > > *Essar Telecom (K) Ltd* > > 2.07 > > 2.43 > > 2.38 > > *Totals* > > 26.96 > > 28.80 > > 30.24 > > *Source: Compiled from CCK/CA published reports* > > > > Mobile Voice Minutes Market Share by Operator over a three year Period > > *Operator* > > *Year 2011/12* > > *Year 2012/13* > > *Year 2013/14* >

2 1

Should Safaricom be broken up as 'recommended' by Airtel?
by Ali Hussein 20 Feb '15

20 Feb '15

Listers Safaricom seems to be riding the Network Effect gravy train. Is this enough to break it up ala AT&T? Where do market forces stop and regulation begin? Read on:- http://www.businessdailyafrica.com/Matiangi-backs-Airtel-push-to-break-up-S… Ali Hussein +254 770 906375 / 0713 601113 Twitter: @AliHKassim Skype: abu-jomo LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim Blog: www.alyhussein.com "I fear the day technology will surpass human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots". ~ Albert Einstein Sent from my iPad

4 5