"On 21 Sep 2005, at 22:06, Brian Longwe wrote: I'm not taking sides here, just asking questions that I think should straighten what is clearly spurios reasoning..." Unlike Brian, I do wish I could take sides on this one...but this issue is too complex and as outsiders, we can only make educated guesses (speculate?). Definately, the 3rd Mobile License Saga is not moving forward as planned. This has created a defacto duopoly that Safaricom and Celtel continue to exploit with impunity (High Calling rates(airtime) for Kenyans when rated Internationally, Lack of Number Portability, poorly implemented EIR (the software that disables stolen phones) system, Unreliable Emergency Service Lines (equivalent to 999 services), Delayed SMS deliveries, Retention of Unused Credit, etc, etc, etc. A 3rd Mobile Service Provider is likely to destroy un-written, cartel agreements that the current service providers are conviniently enjoying. However, the process for inviting the 3rd Operator has been halted in courts and one wonders (and speculates) on whether the delayed processing of resolving issue is not deliberate to perpetuate the status quo... walu.

...

...

<alice@apc.org> 09/22/05 11:39am >>> Brian, I think it was clear that your reference was to the conclusion arrived at by the author of the article. But you do bring into light certain aspects that the author left out which is helpful in understanding the situation. However, I think, it would be even more helpful if journalists could go the extra mile to explain the mechanisms/structures of the industry being reported on and allow readers to make the mental exercise of jumping into conclusions!

thanks alice ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Longwe" <cto@nbi.ispkenya.com> To: "KIPlist" <kiplist-cl@lyris.idrc.ca> Cc: "Kenya ICT Policy - kictanet" <kictanet@kictanet.or.ke>; "KIPlist" <kiplist-cl@lyris.idrc.ca> Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2005 9:04 AM Subject: Re: [Kictanet] Fw: [DigAfrica] How broke company won tender

On 21 Sep 2005, at 22:06, Brian Longwe wrote:

...

I'm not taking sides here, just asking questions that I think should straighten what is clearly spurios reasoning...

I don't normally reply to my own emails - but I just realised that my mention of spurious reasoning yesterday might have been misconstrued to be referring to the comments made by my colleagues Alice and Florence. I would like to make a correction - I was not referring to them but rather to the conclusion reached in the press article by the author, which seem to have been based on questionable sources of information.

Apologies to all for any misunderstanding :-)

Brian

--- Submitted by: cto@nbi.ispkenya.com 2005-09-22 02:06:01 EDT4 (Please reply to original submitter for private communication) --- You are currently subscribed to kiplist-cl as: [alice@apc.org] To unsubscribe, forward this message to %%email.unsub%%

--- Submitted by: alice@apc.org 2005-09-22 04:44:57 EDT4 (Please reply to original submitter for private communication) --- You are currently subscribed to kiplist-cl as: [jwalubengo@kcct.ac.ke] To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-kiplist-cl-102682Q@lyris.idrc.ca