[kictanet] Yu acquisition proposal to regulator

Wed Mar 12 17:01:47 EAT 2014

Brian,

We at the penultimate stage of the glide path i.e. at KES. 1.15.

Christopher Wambua
Manager - Communications
Consumer and Public Affairs Department
Communications Commission of Kenya
P.O. Box 14448 NAIROBI 00800
Tel: +254 20 4242209
info at cck.go.ke<mailto:info at cck.go.ke>
www.cck.go.ke<http://www.cck.go.ke>

From: kictanet [mailto:kictanet-bounces+wambua=cck.go.ke at lists.kictanet.or.ke] On Behalf Of Brian Munyao Longwe
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2014 2:58 PM
To: Wambua, Christopher
Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions
Subject: Re: [kictanet] Yu acquisition proposal to regulator

In 2012 CCK made a bold announcement about reinstating the glide path for MTR and shared the following figures, to what extent has this been achieved?

1.      Call Mobile Termination Prices

Nominal KES.

1st July 2010

1st July 2011

1st July 2012

1st July 2013

1st July 2014

Mobile Termination

2.21

2.21

1.44

1.15

0.99

On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 10:00 AM, Brian Munyao Longwe <blongwe at gmail.com<mailto:blongwe at gmail.com>> wrote:
Interesting thread, my view however is that given Safaricoms portion of the addressable market we have an effective monopoly. CCK have not been tough enough on controlling the significant market power that big green yields and this has led to the demise and poor health of their so called competitors.

Why should we be discussing MVNOs now, when this is a lifeline that could have been thrown to the ailing telcos several years ago? IMHO we should have had MVNOS licensing introduced 10+ years ago.

Now we have too little, too late...

On Thursday, March 6, 2014, John Kariuki <ngethe.kariuki2007 at yahoo.co.uk<mailto:ngethe.kariuki2007 at yahoo.co.uk>> wrote:
Walu,Listers,

The primary  issue here is one of "merger" which is well defined in the Competition Act,Cap504,Laws of Kenya whose primary role is to promote and safeguard competition...etc etc.
.It is a telecommunications issue on secondary basis and CAK will have some role to play.
In some countries, they call it "concurrent jurisdiction" and clearly define the relationship between the regulators.It does not seem so in Kenya and the real  legal muscle may  well lie with the Competition Authority .

John Kariuki

On Tuesday, 4 March 2014, 14:52, Walubengo J <jwalu at yahoo.com<mailto:jwalu at yahoo.com>> wrote:
@Ali,

I think you are refusing to see  the efficacy of MPESA in the Safaricom ecosystem. Whereas Voice still contributes their largest profit percentages, this voice market is glued  together around the MPESA product.

Think Microsoft of the last decade.  Why was their applications so successful (MS-Word, MS-Excel, MS-Exchange, etc)?  Because they were build around their fairly universal and monopolistic Operating System (MS-Windows).  In todays world of tablets and Smartphones and CloudComputing,  the Operating system of choice has changed (from Microsoft to Android,  iOS and CloudServices i.e. TCP/IP).

Suddenly Microsoft finds itself exposed on their product lines (Word, Excel, etc) because they have lost the monopoly of the Operating System.  Same thing with Safcom.  You expose MPESA to real competition, you break their stronghold on the Voice and other data services.  That is what  I blogged about @http://tiny.cc/3o36bx (thnx GG for sharing :-)

Safaricom is clever (that is why they are no. 1)  and one can see from their recent industry moves that they are reacting appropriately.  What I dont know is if CCK can also their overall game plan and what it means for the industry. Sorry, let me rephrase that - I think CCK can also see the Safaricom game plan, but I am still not sure they have the "oomph" to intervene one way or the other.

At this point in time, the game has moved from being "technical", gone through being "economical" and we are now at the stage where the big boys(where are the girls :-() in politics are receiving calls from interested parties on which way the game should end. I dont have moles way up there but ladies and gentlemen this discussion (Yu acquisition) must now at a the Politcal layer.

You and I can only wait and see - and run to court if we feel aggrieved by the final decisions taken.

walu.
--------------------------------------------
On Tue, 3/4/14, Ali Hussein <ali at hussein.me.ke<mailto:ali at hussein.me.ke>> wrote:

Subject: Re: [kictanet] Yu acquisition proposal to regulator
To: jwalu at yahoo.com<mailto:jwalu at yahoo.com>
Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke<mailto:kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke>>
Date: Tuesday, March 4, 2014, 1:42 PM

Edith
+1.
Mark, sometimes regulatory action is used as a
weapon when one has been unable to compete. My take is that
Mpesa isn't yet the bread and butter of Safaricom. The
greatest value it has is in its network effect. I suspect
that Safaricom is already on the hunt for the next big
thing. They are building out WiMAX networks, engaging
businesses for computing needs etc. This boring stuff is
where the money is.
My take? CAK (CCK) needs to stand down on this
one and let the market take its course. After all what else
does the competition need to be done for them to compete
with Safaricom? Share out subscribers through legislation? I
think this isn't a perfect market but the regulator here
is doing an ok job..

Ali Hussein
+254 0770
906375 / 0713 601113
"I fear the day technology will
surpass human interaction. The world will have a generation
of idiots".  ~ Albert Einstein
Sent from my iPad
On Mar 4, 2014, at 12:12 PM, Edith Adera <eadera at idrc.ca<mailto:eadera at idrc.ca>>
wrote:

Mark and
Listers,

If I were Safaricom, I would do exactly what they are
doing and MORE! That is the nature of competition!
But if the consumer behaved differently.....aka
"rational consumer behaviour"......would the
competition hold? ....I dont think for long!

Edith
________________________________________
From: Mark Mwangi [

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<mailto: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/ngethe.kariuki2007%40yahoo.co.uk

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.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/pipermail/kictanet/attachments/20140312/c51a7e4b/attachment.htm>