Dear Wakabi and others
Isn't it difficult to ask for a Marshall plan and at the same time see how
the sector and, above all, its users are financially drained?
PROFITABLE TELECOMS
Surprisingly there are higher profit margins in most of the business that
the mobile phone operators have in Africa, including or excluding the
licence fees, comparing to counterparts in more open and competitive
markets. How is that? Why is competition restricted and prices not coming
down, in particular considering the low purchase power of the users? Some
people obviously don't want to change the ball game.
The combined sector revenues to governments and shareholders make it a
little bit difficult to say that the sector cannot finance its own
investments, expanding footprint and new services. Actually at the same time
even reduce user prices quite a bit. How come that the users are not given
more choices from several competing providers? Shifting value to much to
users, or?
The typical licensing regime still seems, in general, to serve no other
purpose but to sell operators a hunting licence on users, maximising the
government revenues in the process. The scarce spectrum resource is in many
ways used as an over inflated bogus argument in lack of any better. True, it
is to some extent an issue and the licensing should focus on it, skipping
licensing and all other restrictions on open market, free provision of
service. On the contrary, dominant players should be obliged to
interconnect, not being sheltered from competition.
Why are operator investments taxed, instead of profits, if you like to drive
investments?
SHARING INFRASTRUCTURE
Sharing basic, non-differentiating infrastructure at cost related prices
as it is always cheaper than do-it-yourself if you have a few service
competitors using it. High utilisation would create a lower cost base for
all operators. But it requires organisational structure that lowers
operational and political risks. What is done to lower those risks?
Note, the most important thing in shared infrastructure is TRUST.
Or, who would like to bet the farm on being depending upon a flimsy
operation controlled by people with no skin in the game?
USERS
The most appalling absence in the African telecom policy debate is the users
and the user agents. True, the telecom sector is dominated by a producer
perspective globally, but in places where strong user agents are balancing
these forces we get a more reasonable chunk of the value distributed to all
parties. How will user agents come forward in the debate?
The ITU
Wouldn't it be interesting to put half of all the combined licence revenues
for the coming two years into an African backbone and global
interconnectivity fund? To create an infrastructure open to all providers,
new or old, on equal terms. Now that is a task for the ITU! Or is the ITU
too dominated by folks who don't want to change the ball game to the
advantage of users?
The document would benefit from touching the areas above.
Sincerely
Anders Comstedt
-----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
Skickat: den 16 oktober 2007 07:17
Till: APC - Private list for use by EASSY Workshop Participants
Ämne: [Fibre-for-africa] Connectivity: What does Africa really need?
Netters,
The ITU is convening the 'Connects Africa' summit in Kigali, Rwanda on
October 29-30. Its main concerns are that Internet services needed for
business, government and consumer applications continue to be either very
expensive or not available due to limited broadband network
infrastructure; and that rural connectivity and access remain inadequate
as does the availability of locally relevant content, applications and
services.
This paper, by the Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and
Southern Africa (CIPESA), outlines some of the issues that need to be
addressed for the vision of boosting connectivity in Africa to be
realised.
0dots&als[select]=4051582
Wakabi
_______________________________________________
Fibre-for-africa mailing list
_______________________________________________
Fibre-for-africa mailing list