Robert: I cannot rationally argue against fibre connectivity, but on processes yes. Of course, I will argue hypothetically since if I responded seemingly with insider information then I would be misleading consumers. And you know my issues... On Nov 30, 2007 4:46 PM, robert yawe <robertyawe@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

Explain one issue to me, how will the marine cable increase the remittances from the diaspora, they are sending 3.9 billion over slow, expensive satellite links why should we reduce this by spending 7 billion to land the fiber?

1. AfDB data shows that in total Africa spends US$ 500 million (shs 30 billion) every year on transit satellite bandwidths.( i.e. 5 TEAMS projects). That would be a saving! 2. Back to your question, since it would be (promised very) cheap to call them, then we shall call them day and night "convincing" them how they have neglected mother Africa, poetically narrating Wanjiku's financial sufferings back home, her kiosk that needs only one-off stocking and her anguish will ease. They are only human. They will dig deeper into their pockets, miss a few lunches, tighten their belts, or speak nicely to their bosses on their urgent need to alleviate home poverty. If we collude and do this nationally for just one year, then we could quadruple remmitances to 16 billion shillings or at worst double it to 8 billion-enough to build a cable that will benefit us for the next 25 years:) That was on a light note though I am paraphrasing real comments attributable to *130* "Please call me" to diasporans. 3. Imagine starting a movie company. Be it a comedy, folk tales, Flora and Fauna, or like developing video games like Wesley Kiriinya's, "Adventures of Nyangi" http://www.sinc-studios.com/. The fibre gives one a potential 1.2 billion internet users customer base. Because THEY can play quality demo videos clips fast many are bound to purchase and if, say 10,000 buy a product at US$10 that would be Kshs 6 million. Such opportunities are lost every day we are not connected by fibre. 4. We have 2.7 million internet users. For how long does each one take tapping their fingers on the desk waiting for a slow web page to load? Multiply each one's lost productivity by 365 days/year then by 2.7 million and compute the national productivity loss caused by slow, yet very expensive internet. Based on these mathematics OECD countries have put up a nifty graphic showing broadband rankings of member countries, but which also include average price of broadband and average throughput here http://www.fiberevolution.com/2007/11/us-lags-in-grap.html, pointer courtesy Bill St. Arnaud http://www.canarie.ca/. I would be interesting to have Dr. Ndemo's expected consumer prices to compare. 5. Consumer/Busineses costs saving would be the most apparent benefit. I need not dwell on that since we all feel them pretty well. 6. I also skip outsourcing.

Alex, all I ask is can you give me a logical reason why we should spend 7 billion to land this fiber?

Are above logical enough reasons sufficiently compelling justification to support the international fibre? But like I said, remember SAT3 West Africa cable cost nearly the same as satellite because of Bandwidth cartels. So should be assured they have no space in TEAMS to clog broadband to consumers, but that is somebody's job. We are only asking for assurance it will not turn out to be a white grey elephant project:)

I am aware this discussion is academic but it should not stop us from questioning the rational.

That's the spirit! We keep Ndemo on his toes, always.... Thanks, Alex