[kictanet] Fw: [ke-internetusers] at inflated shs 20 billion, let's just forget 'Number Portability' ever benefiting consumers

[Harry Delano]

Simple question, is whether this is more of a priority, than for example
working on "The National Broadband Plan", - Universal Coverage and Access 
etc,etc at least looking at the price tag.. Mind boggling.
 
Secondly, Cost-benefits analysis would sort this whole conundrum once and
for all. Why saddle the country with such an astronomical price tag,
if we can't vouch clearly for the benefits forthcoming from Number
Portability...
 
My thoughts..
 
Harry

  _____  

From: kictanet-bounces+harry=comtelsys.co.ke at lists.kictanet.or.ke
[mailto:kictanet-bounces+harry=comtelsys.co.ke at lists.kictanet.or.ke] On
Behalf Of Walubengo J
Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2010 8:11 AM
To: harry at comtelsys.co.ke
Cc: ke-users; KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions
Subject: [kictanet] Fw: [ke-internetusers] at inflated shs 20 billion,let's
just forget 'Number Portability' ever benefiting consumers


The above thread was floated on a neighboring list and has failed to attract
any official answers and I thought maybe KICTAnet might have some
answers...even from a technical point of view. For example.

1.  Is it possible for Number Portability Solution to be provisioned Ksh @
20Million? (250,000USD) as opposed to ksh 20Billion as alleged in the
newspaper article?
2. What are the key price factors in such a technology as well as price
experiences elsewhere across the world?
3. Is this Number Portability thing really going to take off? What are the
planned timelines and how much would it really cost the consumer
4. Must we enactment the Freedom of Information Act in order to extract
these answers?

feel free to answer All, One or None of the above ;-)

walu.
--- On Sat, 4/17/10, Alex Gakuru <gakuru at gmail.com> wrote:




From: Alex Gakuru <gakuru at gmail.com>
Subject: [ke-internetusers] at inflated shs 20 billion, let's just forget
'Number Portability' ever benefiting consumers
To: "ke-users" <ke-internetusers at bdix.net>
Cc: "info" <info at cck.go.ke>
Date: Saturday, April 17, 2010, 12:37 PM


Good people,

Sometimes it is necessary to start with the conclusion then build the
argument.

Conclusions:

a) Local Number Portability may, after all, never not take off, or be
of much use consumers,

b) The country need to avoid celebrating premature local Number
Portability implementation,

c) Media caution against dancing to rhythmic gymnastics: 'great new
Number Portability' tunes,

d) Communications Commission of Kenya may be further eroding it's
consumer protection teeth,

Why?

Trouble looms large on the horizon of Number Portability - a great
technology but we risk oppositely live to regret its local
implementation route. Intention hereby to provoke detailed information
responses from the concerned.

Regards the attached newspaper cutting, confidential sources
allude,"..one of the bidders felt the portability thing could be done
with around Ksh 20Million, how the 20B guys won remains a
mystery...this enormous amount will simply find its way lumped onto
the consumers after the operators have paid for it."

My documented view has always been that Number Portability should be
funded from the Universal Service fund created by the Communications
Act.

Background:

Hello CCK, Number Portability is a Consumer Protection Tool
Alex Gakuru
12 November 2007

Consumers are stuck without the option to switch to a different
operator while keeping their mobile phone number and are hesitant to
change to avoid losing important future calls in the persistent status
quo. This is at odds with the law commanding the Communications
Commission of Kenya to ensure consumers are protected offering a raft
of implementation avenues.

But when CCK gives up implementation of number portability citing
complexity, high costs, duopolists' disinterest, and no licence
applicants for the service category, the issue escalates to bursting
limits considering the prevailing high communication tariffs that hurt
businesses but the service providers.
..
http://allafrica.com/stories/200711120436.html

A reader's reaction:

From: Okoth Okwemba <ookwemba at dtbkenya.co.ke>
Date: Mon, Nov 12, 2007 at 3:37 PM
Subject: hello CCK, number portability is a consumer protection tool
To: gakuru at gmail.com

Well done Gakuru on this article. This is excellent. The CCK has been
told, let us find a way to compel it to act swiftly and deal with the
lack of accountability that sees it get away with such laxity and
abdication of duty. The Kenya Private Sector Alliance might be an
organisiation you might want to involve.

Well done again.

Regards,
Okoth

References:

i)     Cost/Recovery: 'Funding Models for AIN-Based Local Number
Portability'
        http://www2.sis.pitt.edu/~mweiss/papers/lnp-funding.pdf
<http://www2.sis.pitt.edu/%7Emweiss/papers/lnp-funding.pdf> 
    
ii)    Increased Consumer Choice: 'Wireless Local Number Portability'
    http://www.kpmg.com.co/publicaciones/publicaciones_ICE/WLNP.pdf
    
iii)    Stakeholders:'Number Portability Worldwide Implementation
Experience'
    http://www.canto.org/doc/gabriellago.ppt


-----Inline Attachment Follows-----


_______________________________________________
ke-internetusers mailing list
ke-internetusers at bdix.net
http://www.bdix.net/mailman/listinfo/ke-internetusers



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/pipermail/kictanet/attachments/20100421/c96ada5d/attachment.htm>