<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
</head>
<body data-blackberry-caret-color="#00a8df" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: initial;">
<div style="width: 100%; font-size: initial; font-family: Calibri, 'Slate Pro', sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); text-align: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
But the same local firms that own the said infrastructure put in a bid that could not pass muster. Should CCK or the government for that matter also help them prepare bid documents?</div>
<div style="width: 100%; font-size: initial; font-family: Calibri, 'Slate Pro', sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); text-align: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
<br>
</div>
<div style="width: 100%; font-size: initial; font-family: Calibri, 'Slate Pro', sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); text-align: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
As I indicated earlier, even restricted tenders require interested firms to meet certain basic requirements/criteria. It is really unfortunate when local firms with the required technical capacity to provide advertised licensable services lose out to foreign
companies on the basis of failure to put in a convincing technical/business proposal. </div>
<div style="width: 100%; font-size: initial; font-family: Calibri, 'Slate Pro', sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); text-align: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
<br>
</div>
<div style="width: 100%; font-size: initial; font-family: Calibri, 'Slate Pro', sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); text-align: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
I would not be surprised that the bid winners (foreign consortium ) may have used local consultants to prepare bids for them. </div>
<div style="width: 100%; font-size: initial; font-family: Calibri, 'Slate Pro', sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); text-align: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
<br>
</div>
<div style="width: 100%; font-size: initial; font-family: Calibri, 'Slate Pro', sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); text-align: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
You raise an important policy issue here. But local firms also need to raise their socks in meeting the basic requirements for government tenders. </div>
<p style="font-size: initial; font-family: Calibri, 'Slate Pro', sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); text-align: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone.</p>
<table width="100%" style="background-color:white;border-spacing:0px;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" style="font-size: initial; text-align: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
<div id="_persistentHeader" style="border-style: solid none none; border-top-color: rgb(181, 196, 223); border-top-width: 1pt; padding: 3pt 0in 0in; font-family: Tahoma, 'BB Alpha Sans', 'Slate Pro'; font-size: 10pt;">
<div><b>From: </b>Kivuva</div>
<div><b>Sent: </b>Sunday, 29 December 2013 11:16 PM</div>
<div><b>To: </b>Ngigi Waithaka</div>
<div><b>Cc: </b>Consumer and Public Affairs; KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions</div>
<div><b>Subject: </b>Re: [kictanet] 3 Media houses protest Majanja's Digital Migration Ruling</div>
</div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<div style="border-style: solid none none; border-top-color: rgb(186, 188, 209); border-top-width: 1pt; font-size: initial; text-align: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div>
<br>
<div id="_originalContent" style="">On 29/12/2013, Ngigi Waithaka <ngigi@at.co.ke> wrote:<br>
> The fact that the tender was *open* is the question that is in play here<br>
> and is the short-sightedness I alluded to earlier in a prior post.<br>
><br>
> We have firms with the right infrastructure (masts, generators, workers<br>
> etc) already in use in this country and before we ran off to procure<br>
> equivalent from China, we ought to have procured what is already available<br>
> locally.<br>
><br>
> That is why the 2nd infrastrucure bid ought to have been local to protect<br>
> our already existing investments.<br>
><br>
> Another reason, national interest should dictate that we shouldnt rely on<br>
> external parties for such critical infrastructure before we already have<br>
> one from amongst our own in place.<br>
<br>
++1 Waithaka.<br>
<br>
><br>
> But we now know someone didnt see it that way. There was no money to be<br>
> made using whats already there, best to buy everything new, since the 'cut'<br>
> is likewise larger.<br>
><br>
> And how do you do that? Open Tender!<br>
><br>
> Waithaka Ngigi<br>
><br>
> Alliance Technologies<br>
> Nairobi, Kenya<br>
><br>
> www.A1.io<br>
> On 29 Dec 2013 09:11, "Mutua, Muthusi" <Mutua@cck.go.ke> wrote:<br>
><br>
>> SM Muraya, Kenyans firms were involved. There were even two different<br>
>> consortiums of the local media that participated.<br>
>><br>
>> The only difference here is that the tender was open and not necessarily<br>
>> targeting local firms or local media for that matter.<br>
>><br>
>> I don't know of any procurement law that excludes Kenyan firms but there<br>
>> are certain tenders may only target local firms. The signal distributor<br>
>> one<br>
>> was open to all and the records of the participation can attest to that.<br>
>><br>
>> As I pointed out earlier, losing a tender bid is not tantamount to being<br>
>> denied a chance to participate. That's the case we are dealing with here!<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> *From*: S.M. Muraya [mailto:murigi.muraya@gmail.com]<br>
>> *Sent*: Sunday, December 29, 2013 01:03 AM<br>
>> *To*: Mutua, Muthusi<br>
>> *Cc*: Consumer and Public Affairs; kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke <<br>
>> kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke><br>
>> *Subject*: Re: [kictanet] 3 Media houses protest Majanja's Digital<br>
>> Migration Ruling<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 9:19 AM, Mutua, Muthusi <Mutua@cck.go.ke> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>>> There are particular tenders, even in Kenya, that are subject to<br>
>>> demonstration of a certain percentage of local participation. This<br>
>>> cannot,<br>
>>> however, be used across the board even for services that don't require<br>
>>> this<br>
>>> kind of treatment.<br>
>>><br>
>><br>
>> Not sure when and by whom was it decided, certain critical services in<br>
>> Kenya do not have to involve Kenyan firms.<br>
>><br>
>> Do we develop local capacity through procurement laws which ensure<br>
>> foreign firms manage our critical local/distribution infrastructure?<br>
>><br>
>> Note Euro vs China Policy:<br>
>> http://www.slideshare.net/IPRChina/technology-transfer-to-china-guidance-for-business-4312244<br>
>><br>
>> Does Kenyan procurement/policy require foreign firms to engage in joint<br>
>> (technical) ventures with firms majority owned by Kenyans?<br>
>><br>
>> Suspect... Mobitelea was a case of politically "correct" ghosts getting<br>
>> a 5% cut in a Telco. Was it a Kenyan firm with even a small track record<br>
>> of<br>
>> telco/service provision in Kenya, with evidence it was committed to<br>
>> developing local talent and capabilities?<br>
>><br>
>> As we argue through, what's the definition of local media? Is it one<br>
>>> local player, two or three of them separately or together? Must these<br>
>>> entities also be separately 100% Kenyan in equity? Is KBC a local media?<br>
>>><br>
>>> The media/content which enters the Kenyan home/office may originate<br>
>> from MARS, but the "last mile" infrastructure/frequency through which the<br>
>> digital content enters the home/office, is licensed/managed in Kenya.<br>
>><br>
>> In the finance sector is shareholding by any one individual or entity<br>
>> not limited to 24.99%. Kenyans should own over 50% of the firms managing<br>
>> signal distribution.<br>
>><br>
>> Let's also appreciate that unless anyone has been denied the chance to<br>
>>> participate in a tender, a loss of the bid doesn't amount to being<br>
>>> barred<br>
>>> from the process.<br>
>>><br>
>><br>
>> If being required to have prior engagements in multiple million dollar<br>
>> contracts is not being barred from the tendering process, then you are<br>
>> correct.<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>>> As it is, Tanzania has already gone digital. Does anyone know the<br>
>>> ownership of their signal distributor? Its interesting to know that. US<br>
>>> examples are ok but we need to put them into context. Local and regional<br>
>>> examples may even be more relevant to our situation.<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> *From*: Ngigi Waithaka [mailto:ngigi@at.co.ke]<br>
>>> *Sent*: Saturday, December 28, 2013 09:01 AM<br>
>>> *To*: Watila Alex <awatila@yahoo.co.uk><br>
>>> *Cc*: Consumer and Public Affairs; KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions <<br>
>>> kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke><br>
>>> *Subject*: Re: [kictanet] 3 Media houses protest Majanja's Digital<br>
>>> Migration Ruling<br>
>>><br>
>>> Doing some unrelated research and came across this story here<br>
>>> http://www.jeffhead.com/usn21/p8.htm<br>
>>><br>
>>> Key point<br>
>>> "...*However, BAE withdrew from the competition in October 2002,<br>
>>> recognizing the political reality that its failure to locate and team<br>
>>> with<br>
>>> a US-based production partner made the bid unrealistic. *<br>
>>><br>
>>> *..." *<br>
>>> Relevance, for those advocating that national interest does not matter<br>
>>> in<br>
>>> *critical procurement* and backing for local firms, even a large<br>
>>> conglomerate as BAE with all the backing from Downling Street can't win<br>
>>> a<br>
>>> large defense contract in the US against US firms.<br>
>>><br>
>>> Another interesting read here<br>
>>><br>
>>> http://www.forbes.com/sites/beltway/2011/02/28/how-boeing-won-the-tanker-war/<br>
>>><br>
>>> Regards<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 6:53 AM, Watila Alex <awatila@yahoo.co.uk><br>
>>> wrote:<br>
>>><br>
>>>> finally accessed the task force report at<br>
>>>> www.cck.go.ke/about/downloads/<br>
>>>> *migration*_*digital*_tv.pdf<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> the report made the flowing observations & recommendations on the<br>
>>>> digital signal distribution<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> - The signal distributors will provide services to broadcasters on<br>
>>>> an equitable, reasonable, non-preferential and non-discriminatory<br>
>>>> basis. - *note the distinction between broadcaster &** signal<br>
>>>> distributor*. *i was unable to find any obligation placed on<br>
>>>> broadcasters to avail their content to all the signal distributors.<br>
>>>> the<br>
>>>> three broadcasters could decide to only provide their content to<br>
>>>> their<br>
>>>> signal distribution company. *<br>
>>>> - The functions of a signal distributor were previously carried out<br>
>>>> by the broadcasters and a number of challenges come into focus since<br>
>>>> the<br>
>>>> existing broadcasters have already made significant investments in<br>
>>>> infrastructure. There has to be a mechanism to ensure that this<br>
>>>> investment<br>
>>>> is not wasted.- *this has been the argument of the three<br>
>>>> broadcasters.*<br>
>>>> - The high set-up costs will limit the number of signal<br>
>>>> distributors. Furthermore, signal distribution services may not<br>
>>>> penetrate<br>
>>>> to areas that are not commercially viable. - *limitation of signal<br>
>>>> distributors seems to have been based on cost of set-up and not the<br>
>>>> spectrum. according to the three broadcasters, they are able to<br>
>>>> upgrade<br>
>>>> their infrastructure to distribute digital signals at a cost that is<br>
>>>> affordable to them*<br>
>>>> - In order to reduce the cost of migration, the existing designated<br>
>>>> transmitting analogue sites and infrastructure will be used for<br>
>>>> digital<br>
>>>> transmission. - *this has been the argument of the three<br>
>>>> broadcasters.*<br>
>>>> - Based on the government decision to licence KBC as a signal<br>
>>>> distributor, KBC shall form an independent company to run the signal<br>
>>>> distribution services in order to avoid conflict of interests or<br>
>>>> cross<br>
>>>> subsidies. - *Signet? shouldn't it have been a locally owned<br>
>>>> company. not sure how Chinese ownership came in*<br>
>>>> - The current broadcasters will be allowed to form an independent<br>
>>>> company to run the signal distribution services in order to utilize<br>
>>>> their<br>
>>>> existing infrastructure. This company should be independent to avoid<br>
>>>> conflict of interests or cross subsidies. This company will be given<br>
>>>> the<br>
>>>> first preference to a signal distribution licence. * this seems not<br>
>>>> to have happened as recommended. would have prevented the current<br>
>>>> acrimony*<br>
>>>> - Existing broadcasters who own infrastructure will negotiate<br>
>>>> commercial terms with the licensed signal distribution provider for<br>
>>>> transfer of ownership of the infrastructure.* the three broadcasters<br>
>>>> seem unwilling to pursue this as a means of recovering their "40<br>
>>>> billion<br>
>>>> kes" investment *<br>
>>>> - A time limit be set after which broadcasters will not be allowed<br>
>>>> to operate unlicensed signal distribution services - *seems the<br>
>>>> three broadcasters have a grace period to distribute digitally*.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> On 12/27/2013 11:18 AM, Watila Alex wrote:<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> does anyone have a copy of the digital migration task force report<br>
>>>> that the media houses are referring to in today's appeal?<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> --<br>
>>>> Sent from Yahoo Mail on<br>
>>>> Android<http://overview.mail.yahoo.com/mobile/?.src=Android><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> ------------------------------<br>
>>>> *From: *Watila Alex <awatila@yahoo.co.uk> <awatila@yahoo.co.uk>;<br>
>>>> *To: *Wambua, Christopher <Wambua@cck.go.ke> <Wambua@cck.go.ke>;<br>
>>>> *Cc: *Consumer and Public Affairs <CPA@cck.go.ke> <CPA@cck.go.ke>;<br>
>>>> KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions<br>
>>>> <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke><kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke>;<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> *Subject: *Re: [kictanet] 3 Media houses protest Majanja's Digital<br>
>>>> Migration Ruling<br>
>>>> *Sent: *Thu, Dec 26, 2013 6:59:06 PM<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> why was the number of signal distributors limited to two?<br>
>>>> --<br>
>>>> Sent from Yahoo Mail on<br>
>>>> Android<http://overview.mail.yahoo.com/mobile/?.src=Android><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> ------------------------------<br>
>>>> *From: *Wambua, Christopher <Wambua@cck.go.ke> <Wambua@cck.go.ke>;<br>
>>>> *To: *<awatila@yahoo.co.uk> <awatila@yahoo.co.uk>;<br>
>>>> *Cc: *Consumer and Public Affairs <CPA@cck.go.ke> <CPA@cck.go.ke>;<br>
>>>> KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions<br>
>>>> <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke><kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke>;<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> *Subject: *Re: [kictanet] 3 Media houses protest Majanja's Digital<br>
>>>> Migration Ruling<br>
>>>> *Sent: *Thu, Dec 26, 2013 6:43:55 PM<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> _______________________________________________<br>
>>>> kictanet mailing list<br>
>>>> kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke<br>
>>>> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Unsubscribe or change your options at<br>
>>>> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/ngigi%40at.co.ke<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform<br>
>>>> for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and<br>
>>>> regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT<br>
>>>> sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and<br>
>>>> development.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors<br>
>>>> online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and<br>
>>>> bandwidth,<br>
>>>> share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy,<br>
>>>> do<br>
>>>> not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.<br>
>>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> --<br>
>>> *Regards,*<br>
>>><br>
>>> *Wait**haka Ngigi*<br>
>>> Chief Executive Officer | Alliance Technologies | MCK Nairobi Synod<br>
>>> Building<br>
>>> T + 254 (0) 20 2333 471 |Office Mobile: +254 786 28 28 28 | M + 254 737<br>
>>> 811 000<br>
>>> www.at.co.ke<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> _______________________________________________<br>
>>> kictanet mailing list<br>
>>> kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke<br>
>>> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet<br>
>>><br>
>>> Unsubscribe or change your options at<br>
>>> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/murigi.muraya%40gmail.com<br>
>>><br>
>>> The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform<br>
>>> for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and<br>
>>> regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT<br>
>>> sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and<br>
>>> development.<br>
>>><br>
>>> KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors<br>
>>> online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and<br>
>>> bandwidth,<br>
>>> share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy,<br>
>>> do<br>
>>> not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.<br>
>>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> kictanet mailing list<br>
>> kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke<br>
>> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet<br>
>><br>
>> Unsubscribe or change your options at<br>
>> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/ngigi%40at.co.ke<br>
>><br>
>> The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform<br>
>> for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and<br>
>> regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT<br>
>> sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and<br>
>> development.<br>
>><br>
>> KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors<br>
>> online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and<br>
>> bandwidth,<br>
>> share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do<br>
>> not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.<br>
>><br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
-- <br>
______________________<br>
Mwendwa Kivuva, Nairobi, Kenya<br>
twitter.com/lordmwesh<br>
kenya.or.ke | The Kenya we know<br>
</div>
</body>
</html>