NO NO NO - this is outrageous! Not only should Safaricom sue, shareholders should consider suing Nkt!

@Jaguar, thanks for the link. I was there earlier though and they had only uploaded the first one, not the more draconian ones. How can they even dare mention the name of EU & US legislation, such bias can only exist in a third world country.


What CCK has done in the Tarrif Regulations 2010 is define a class of service called regulated service that denote all services rendered by a monopoly (irregardless of whether abuse of monopoly has occured) and then they
RUN THEM FROM CCK - CCK requires notice, CCK can set the tarrif, CCK approves it, etc - AND ONLY FOR ONE PLAYER


Shame shame shame
I can't believe they can even claim, in the purpose and object, to protect interests of investors, or provide market incentives, or promote fair competition?

In fact I guarantee this legislation will eliminate genuine competition, reduce shareholder value, destroy employment, and affect the profits of wider Safaricom partners - Bure Kabisa!

@Mlefu and Djin: The history of mobile telephony in Kenya is well documented, the innovations of Safcom in the Kenya market are well documented, that the growth of Safaricom has been phenomenal is not in doubt. so is Safcom's contribution to general economic growth.

When all is said and done the competitors are left envious of Safaricom. The contribution. I feel this company should be protected! About quality I feel this forum cannot pass a more fair verdict than the 17m subscribers.

Whereas Zain/Celtel/Kencell is a speculation shop, Safcom is seriously innovative and creative, Telkom entered the market knowing too well the task ahead was monumental.

Fast forward, Telkom Kenya (Orange) claim they were duped by GoK, then GoK through CCK wants to placate this complaint by "leveling the playground" whereas Safaricom had an almost 10 year head start.

If there are specific cases where Safaricaom has abused its dominant position in the market, these should be laid bare for all to see. For instance Microsoft bundled its browser with the OS. This was seen as anti competition. Windows being the dominant OS, thus locked out browser vendors from the market. Where is the proof of abuse of dominance?????

@all, no one is asking people to move from safariCON. All we need is lowest interconnection charges or zero interconnection charges. SafCON can keep its millions of subscribers and keep adding more, and charge its customers whatever charges they want. Lower interconnection charges is going to happen no matter how much noise safCON or its die hard fans make

safaricom has a case and i will help them win..i believe the know-how stated here beats whatever the small players have in mind* if they have any..love Wazua

@all, the beneficiary of all this will be THE SUBSCRIBER.

@centrebolt, number portability is more difficult than replacing a lost I.D card in the 90's, or changing the centrebolt of a Boeing 747, just do some research on it and you will realize it is a waste of government cash, maybe cash for the contract has been chewed already hence the noise,

@Much Know, you just took the words from my mouth. Why pay 1K when you can get a simcard for 20bob and a cheap dualsim phone @2500/? And that is not enough, you end up paying 2bob more for calls...this number portability contact has already been awarded

@Masukuma

You are wrong about this benefiting the subscriber...

Please read the statements by @Brewer.. As far as I can tell, the rules will make it MORE difficult for Safaricom to review its charges downwards. They will have to make an application 90 days beforehand (probably to allow the small potatoes to strategise on how to react) and their application may be denied.

The only way to make Safcom review their prices is to either move or for the small potatoes to come up with products that will compell us to move.. i moved from Kencell to Safcom coz of Mpesa.. Even now I can't find Zap agents.

I think mobile number portability is the best thing that will happen to Kenyan Mobile phone users and the reason safaricom is resisting the move and the strange coalition of Orange-Yu-Zain. I had to port my number in March 2009 from one provider to another because the competitor had the infrastructure to connect me to ADSL without the need for a fixed line unlike my provider then. Besides i could get guaranteed speeds of 10MBit/s for about Ksh 2,500 per month.

This is what i had to do: Go to the mobile provider of choice, fill in some forms and make sure i utilize all the credit on the previous provider sim card as i will lose it. I got a new sim card from my provider of choice. I had to wait for 24hrs for the migration after which i had to insert my new sim card and i had migrated to a new provider but maintained my number. This is very important for those people who have some emotional attachments to their lines and would never lose their numbers even when they have to migrate to a new provider who is offering better deals.