[kictanet] 3 Media houses protest Majanja's Digital Migration Ruling

Kivuva Kivuva at transworldafrica.com
Sun Dec 29 11:19:41 EAT 2013


On 29/12/2013, Ngigi Waithaka <ngigi at at.co.ke> wrote:
> The fact that the tender was *open* is the question that is in play here
> and is the short-sightedness I alluded to earlier in a prior post.
>
> We have firms with the right infrastructure (masts, generators, workers
> etc) already in use in this country and before we ran off to procure
> equivalent from China, we ought to have procured what is already available
> locally.
>
> That is why the 2nd infrastrucure bid ought to have been local to protect
> our already existing investments.
>
> Another reason, national interest should dictate that we shouldnt rely on
> external parties for such critical infrastructure before we already have
> one from amongst our own in place.

++1 Waithaka.

>
> But we now know someone didnt see it that way. There was no money to be
> made using whats already there, best to buy everything new, since the 'cut'
> is likewise larger.
>
> And how do you do that? Open Tender!
>
> Waithaka Ngigi
>
> Alliance Technologies
> Nairobi, Kenya
>
> www.A1.io
> On 29 Dec 2013 09:11, "Mutua, Muthusi" <Mutua at cck.go.ke> wrote:
>
>>  SM Muraya, Kenyans firms were involved. There were even two different
>> consortiums of the local media that participated.
>>
>> The only difference here is that the tender was open and not necessarily
>> targeting local firms or local media for that matter.
>>
>> I don't know of any procurement law that excludes Kenyan firms but there
>> are certain tenders may only target local firms. The signal distributor
>> one
>> was open to all and the records of the participation can attest to that.
>>
>> As I pointed out earlier, losing a tender bid is not tantamount to being
>> denied a chance to participate. That's the case we are dealing with here!
>>
>>
>>  *From*: S.M. Muraya [mailto:murigi.muraya at gmail.com]
>> *Sent*: Sunday, December 29, 2013 01:03 AM
>> *To*: Mutua, Muthusi
>> *Cc*: Consumer and Public Affairs; kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke <
>> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke>
>> *Subject*: Re: [kictanet] 3 Media houses protest Majanja's Digital
>> Migration Ruling
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 9:19 AM, Mutua, Muthusi <Mutua at cck.go.ke> wrote:
>>
>>> There are particular tenders, even in Kenya, that are subject to
>>> demonstration of a certain percentage of local participation. This
>>> cannot,
>>> however, be used across the board even for services that don't require
>>> this
>>> kind of treatment.
>>>
>>
>>  Not sure when and by whom was it decided, certain critical services in
>> Kenya do not have to involve Kenyan firms.
>>
>>  Do we develop local capacity through procurement laws which ensure
>> foreign firms manage our critical local/distribution infrastructure?
>>
>>  Note Euro vs China Policy:
>> http://www.slideshare.net/IPRChina/technology-transfer-to-china-guidance-for-business-4312244
>>
>>  Does Kenyan procurement/policy require foreign firms to engage in joint
>> (technical) ventures with firms majority owned by Kenyans?
>>
>>  Suspect... Mobitelea was a case of politically "correct" ghosts getting
>> a 5% cut in a Telco. Was it a Kenyan firm with even a small track record
>> of
>> telco/service provision in Kenya, with evidence it was committed to
>> developing local talent and capabilities?
>>
>>  As we argue through, what's the definition of local media? Is it one
>>> local player, two or three of them separately or together? Must these
>>> entities also be separately 100% Kenyan in equity? Is KBC a local media?
>>>
>>>  The media/content which enters the Kenyan home/office may originate
>> from MARS, but the "last mile" infrastructure/frequency through which the
>> digital content enters the home/office, is licensed/managed in Kenya.
>>
>>  In the finance sector is shareholding by any one individual or entity
>> not limited to 24.99%. Kenyans should own over 50% of the firms managing
>> signal distribution.
>>
>>  Let's also appreciate that unless anyone has been denied the chance to
>>> participate in a tender, a loss of the bid doesn't amount to being
>>> barred
>>> from the process.
>>>
>>
>>  If being required to have prior engagements in multiple million dollar
>> contracts is not being barred from the tendering process, then you are
>> correct.
>>
>>
>>> As it is, Tanzania has already gone digital. Does anyone know the
>>> ownership of their signal distributor? Its interesting to know that. US
>>> examples are ok but we need to put them into context. Local and regional
>>> examples may even be more relevant to our situation.
>>>
>>>
>>>  *From*: Ngigi Waithaka [mailto:ngigi at at.co.ke]
>>> *Sent*: Saturday, December 28, 2013 09:01 AM
>>> *To*: Watila Alex <awatila at yahoo.co.uk>
>>> *Cc*: Consumer and Public Affairs; KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions <
>>> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke>
>>>  *Subject*: Re: [kictanet] 3 Media houses protest Majanja's Digital
>>> Migration Ruling
>>>
>>>    Doing some unrelated research and came across this story here
>>> http://www.jeffhead.com/usn21/p8.htm
>>>
>>> Key point
>>> "...*However, BAE withdrew from the competition in October 2002,
>>> recognizing the political reality that its failure to locate and team
>>> with
>>> a US-based production partner made the bid unrealistic. *
>>>
>>> *..." *
>>> Relevance, for those advocating that national interest does not matter
>>> in
>>> *critical procurement* and backing for local firms, even a large
>>> conglomerate as BAE with all the backing from Downling Street can't win
>>> a
>>> large defense contract in the US against US firms.
>>>
>>>  Another interesting read here
>>>
>>> http://www.forbes.com/sites/beltway/2011/02/28/how-boeing-won-the-tanker-war/
>>>
>>>  Regards
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 6:53 AM, Watila Alex <awatila at yahoo.co.uk>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> finally accessed the task force report at
>>>> www.cck.go.ke/about/downloads/
>>>> *migration*_*digital*_tv.pdf
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> the report made the flowing observations & recommendations on the
>>>> digital signal distribution
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>    - The signal distributors will provide services to broadcasters on
>>>>    an equitable, reasonable, non-preferential and non-discriminatory
>>>>    basis. - *note the distinction between broadcaster &** signal
>>>>    distributor*. *i was unable to find any obligation placed on
>>>>    broadcasters to avail their content to all the signal distributors.
>>>> the
>>>>    three broadcasters could decide to only provide their content to
>>>> their
>>>>    signal distribution company.   *
>>>>    - The functions of a signal distributor were previously carried out
>>>>    by the broadcasters and a number of challenges come into focus since
>>>> the
>>>>    existing broadcasters have already made significant investments in
>>>>    infrastructure. There has to be a mechanism to ensure that this
>>>> investment
>>>>    is not wasted.- *this has been the argument of the three
>>>>    broadcasters.*
>>>>    - The high set-up costs will limit the number of signal
>>>>    distributors. Furthermore, signal distribution services may not
>>>> penetrate
>>>>    to areas that are not commercially viable. - *limitation of signal
>>>>    distributors seems to have been based on cost of set-up and not the
>>>>    spectrum. according to the three broadcasters, they are able to
>>>> upgrade
>>>>    their infrastructure to distribute digital signals at a cost that is
>>>>    affordable to them*
>>>>    - In order to reduce the cost of migration, the existing designated
>>>>    transmitting analogue sites and infrastructure will be used for
>>>> digital
>>>>    transmission. - *this has been the argument of the three
>>>>    broadcasters.*
>>>>    - Based on the government decision to licence KBC as a signal
>>>>    distributor, KBC shall form an independent company to run the signal
>>>>    distribution services in order to avoid conflict of interests or
>>>> cross
>>>>    subsidies. - *Signet? shouldn't it have been a locally owned
>>>>    company. not sure how Chinese ownership came in*
>>>>    - The current broadcasters will be allowed to form an independent
>>>>    company to run the signal distribution services in order to utilize
>>>> their
>>>>    existing infrastructure. This company should be independent to avoid
>>>>    conflict of interests or cross subsidies. This company will be given
>>>> the
>>>>    first preference to a signal distribution licence. * this seems not
>>>>    to have happened as recommended. would have prevented the current
>>>> acrimony*
>>>>    - Existing broadcasters who own infrastructure will negotiate
>>>>    commercial terms with the licensed signal distribution provider for
>>>>    transfer of ownership of the infrastructure.* the three broadcasters
>>>>    seem unwilling to pursue this as a means of recovering their "40
>>>> billion
>>>>    kes" investment *
>>>>    - A time limit be set after which broadcasters will not be allowed
>>>>    to operate unlicensed signal distribution services - *seems the
>>>>    three broadcasters have a grace period to distribute digitally*.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>   On 12/27/2013 11:18 AM, Watila Alex wrote:
>>>>
>>>>   does anyone have a copy of the digital migration task force report
>>>> that the media houses are referring to in today's appeal?
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Sent from Yahoo Mail on
>>>> Android<http://overview.mail.yahoo.com/mobile/?.src=Android>
>>>>
>>>>  ------------------------------
>>>> *From: *Watila Alex <awatila at yahoo.co.uk> <awatila at yahoo.co.uk>;
>>>> *To: *Wambua, Christopher <Wambua at cck.go.ke> <Wambua at cck.go.ke>;
>>>> *Cc: *Consumer and Public Affairs <CPA at cck.go.ke> <CPA at cck.go.ke>;
>>>> KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions
>>>> <kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke><kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke>;
>>>>
>>>> *Subject: *Re: [kictanet] 3 Media houses protest Majanja's Digital
>>>> Migration Ruling
>>>> *Sent: *Thu, Dec 26, 2013 6:59:06 PM
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> why was the number of signal distributors limited to two?
>>>> --
>>>> Sent from Yahoo Mail on
>>>> Android<http://overview.mail.yahoo.com/mobile/?.src=Android>
>>>>
>>>>  ------------------------------
>>>> *From: *Wambua, Christopher <Wambua at cck.go.ke> <Wambua at cck.go.ke>;
>>>> *To: *<awatila at yahoo.co.uk> <awatila at yahoo.co.uk>;
>>>> *Cc: *Consumer and Public Affairs <CPA at cck.go.ke> <CPA at cck.go.ke>;
>>>> KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions
>>>> <kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke><kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke>;
>>>>
>>>> *Subject: *Re: [kictanet] 3 Media houses protest Majanja's Digital
>>>> Migration Ruling
>>>> *Sent: *Thu, Dec 26, 2013 6:43:55 PM
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> kictanet mailing list
>>>> kictanet at 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/ngigi%40at.co.ke
>>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>  *Regards,*
>>>
>>>  *Wait**haka Ngigi*
>>>  Chief Executive Officer | Alliance Technologies | MCK Nairobi Synod
>>> Building
>>>  T + 254 (0) 20 2333 471 |Office Mobile: +254 786 28 28 28 | M + 254 737
>>> 811 000
>>>   www.at.co.ke
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> kictanet mailing list
>>> kictanet at 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/murigi.muraya%40gmail.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 at 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/ngigi%40at.co.ke
>>
>> 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.
>>
>


-- 
______________________
Mwendwa Kivuva, Nairobi, Kenya
twitter.com/lordmwesh
kenya.or.ke | The Kenya we know




More information about the KICTANet mailing list