Owners of Telecoms companies in Guyana

A blogger on another blog site, is contending that a Guyanese parliamentarian is the owner of a telecommunication company, and that at the end of GT&T's monopoly there may be zero telecoms regulation for Guyana.

The blog post titled "Shiela Holder - Telecoms Owner" quotes a letter from Ms. Holder in which she said that "in a market economy, only monopolies need to be regulated". The blogger is contending that GT&T may be giving up its monopoly for that reason and that Digicel may have taken GT&T to court to fight for the monopoly to end since that would bring freedom from regulation.

According to Ms. Holder, I-net is owned and managed by her husband, She said, "my husband is an investor and the CEO" for i-net.

One would recall that in February 2009, Ms. Holder called for GT&T's monopoly to be ended.(see Stabroek news article).

The blogger opines that the future of telecoms in Guyana may be non-regulated, given Holder's assertions and representations for her company in parliament.

iPhone 3GS Costs $178.96 to Manufacture

"The entry-level, 16Gbyte version of Apple's new iPhone 3G S carries a BOM cost of $172.46 and a manufacturing expense of $6.50, for a total of $178.96," said Andrew Rassweiler, director and principal analyst, teardown services, for iSuppli.

How would this affect Guyana?
This would have no effect on Guyana as Guyana's import of goods and supplies come mainly from the counterfeit sources of the world. Cheap imitation phones, made to order, come from China. A majority of stores sell the imitation phones as the price of an 'original' phone.

Fabric, electronics, machinery all come from China, Singapore, Malaysia, India, Panama and other places. It is noteworthy that these same countries make the 'original' too, and then places the copies on the market. Simple things like handbags and shopping bags come in container-loads at a few cents per item, yet they are sold for 10x the cost.

The unanswered question shall remain, "how would the unsuspecting public know the difference?"

What is after Skype?

Intent...Business Intent, According to Lee Dryburgh, "the man behind the Emerging Communications Conference".
In an article in Skype Journal posted by Phil Wolff, there is yet more freedom to come in telecommunications - and that freedom is tied tot he intent of the subscriber.

Speaking of basic telephony, Wolffe quotes Dryburgh: "Because of the exceptional widespread deployment of the telephone, it’s century long cultural embedment, extreme ease of use and very low barriers to usage, it’s not going away in a big way, at any time least soon. It’s far too big and you’ve got far too much inertia in and around it.

However because its substantial list of deficiencies grows, what we are seeing emerging and what will gain ever further traction is software based voice-enabled, communication technologies. Interestingly voice may not be the “substrate” of these clients, “relationships” will be, both between people and things.
Second, we’ve got the economic model behind it. Even today, well over a hundred years since it’s original inception, we still have the same usage paradigms and economic models put in place at the time of the first electro-mechanical switches.
Now the keyword in all of this is “software.” Six years ago, the Skype software client was released. It was the harbinger of change to come. It called into question the need for very expensive dedicated underlying transport networks by pushing edge intelligence into the Codec layer to deal with less than ideal networks. It called into question the need for dedicated telecom hardware in the core network, by using the edge-clients to perform the work in a decentralised fashion. It called into question the inherent limited geographical structuring of telecom operators themselves; software does not face such physical and regulatory boundaries; distribution is relatively zero-cost; and worse still for the operator model, by it’s global footprint, it achieves unprecedented scale."

And what's ahead?

Dryburgh says that Skype is at phase one as yet, ahead is phase 2, the '“new” multi-trillion dollar market replacing much of what today is the multi-trillion-telephony market.'

Details of Phase II
Phase two is about intention-based economics. It’s focused on fulfilling intentions and desires. Another way of putting it is we no longer need to care about network availability (i.e. “dial tone”), and reaching an endpoint (i.e. A telephone).

Network availability and endpoint reachability is assumed. What we care about with intention based economics is human psychology and behaviour, both individual and in aggregate. I’m not saying we need to become psychologists and anthropologists. But what we need to build for is access to ever more personal information, i.e. about the human behind the endpoint. Privacy does not exist looking long-term. Ever more personal information is the new currency, which underlies intention-based economics, and people will increasingly trade it for free access to services.

If any of this seems abstract at the moment, think about what makes Google money, Ad Words. Google provides search free to the consumer in order to gain eyeballs (mass attention) and takes the search parameter to try and deduce intention. It then sells that attention and intention data upstream to advertisers. Google even has machines reading your emails in order to deduce your possible intentions and desires, which is why you may often find an eerily relevant ad above your Gmail account inbox. The underlying reason for the Android initiative surely has to be to gain access to better intention deriving data in order to sell upstream to advertisers.

Yet telecom networks receive vastly more human attention coming in from the edges and transit much more “intention data” than Google, in the form of telecom signaling. But it’s latent, not acted upon and thrown away. They actually throw away their most precious asset and plan to continue charging for their long-term least worthy asset (voice transmission).

To make the situation even worse, telecoms today is still charging downstream to the consumer, ignores money and wishes of upstream parties (like retailers, media companies for example). Because the telecom business model and regulation is pretty much hard nailed like the network itself, the bulk of telecom operators are not likely to be able to transition in time before other entrants move in who appreciate the new economics and who don’t have ball and chain legacy. New entrants and probably a third of telecom operators will transition successfully around phase two.
You’re probably wondering what phase two looks like from the point of view of applications? This is where things get very abstract and potentially the prose could get long-winded. But this is not to be unexpected since the foundation is in the abstract with the word “intention.” To try and get a flavour of the phase two application direction, imagine for a start that the demarcation lines between content, information access, entertainment, ecommerce unravel ever further and the result is intrinsically tied to an ever smarter fusion of more communication modalities. Now underpin that with attention and intention based economics.

Now dream a little.
------------------------------------
As a follow-up:
Commenting on the above view,Richard Bennett said, "As always. "Intention economics" raises one of the problems with advertising today, namely the barriers it raises to doing what we want. Click on a link to an article, and before you can read it you have to deal with ads in your face. I don't want an ad jumping up in my ear before I can place a call, so this model has to go. And of course I don't want to be nickeled-and-dimed to death by service providers converting every intention into a "billable event." So how does intention intelligence get converted into money without pissing everybody off?

Concerned GPTWU gets assurance from PUC

GUYANA Postal and Telecommunications Workers’ Union (PTWU) President. Ms. Gillian Burton has expressed concerns over recent comments, in the media, on certain aspects of Guyana Telephone and Telegraph Company (GT&T) operations.

Speaking at a media briefing at the Lot 310 East Street, Georgetown headquarters, she said claims of GT&T not being able to put forward a positive business plan and sabotage of its fibre optic cable, at Loo Creek along Soesdyke/Linden Highway, might cause the revocation of the utility’s licences, constitute a threat to its employees who are members of her union.

“Any revoking of licences means that hundreds of persons will be placed on the bread line…and if you take an analysis of the tenure of employment within GT&T, they can be termed as long service employees,” Burton said.

She said GPTWU members, whenever they come within the employment of GT&T, remain committed and dedicated to the company and the country.

Noting that some of the worrying statements were made by the Public Utilities Commission (PUC), she said following a Monday meeting with its Chairman, Mr. Prem Persaud, he promised to cease publication of any material that will negatively impact GT&T workers.

PTWU General Secretary Mr. Harold Shepherd said both the GT&T management and the PUC have assured his union that no ill will bodes the employees or the well-being of the company.

“The GPTWU and its membership stand resolute alongside the management of GT&T in these challenging times of the company and, together, we will overcome these and all other challenges.

“We remain an undivided team in our commitment to national development. We will not allow any challenge to deter us from the path we have embarked upon, which is to successfully pioneer the enhancement of the telecommunication industry in Guyana,” he said.

Also present at the forum were PTWU Vice-President, Mr. Morris Walcott and its Demerara Branch Chairman, Mr. Vibert Adams.

Press Statement by Guyana Telecoms Union

Press Statement released by the GPTWU on June 23, 2009:

This Press conference is called by the GPTWU to publicly register our concern over the comments made recently in the media about the GT&T.

As the union that represents the employees within this sector we want to assure our membership and the public that we will not stand idly and allow hindrances to be placed in the path of the employees' contribution to national development.

The GPTWU having discussed with the management and the Public Utilities Commission these recent developments have been re assured that there will in no way be any ill will meted out to the employees or in anyway affect the well being of the company.

The GPTWU and its membership stand resolute alongside the management of GT&T in these challenging times of the company and together we will overcome these and all other challenges. We remain an undivided team in our commitment to national development.

We will not allow any challenge to deter us from the path we have embarked upon which is to pioneer successfully the enhancement of the telecommunication industry in Guyana.

Utilities Commission in Guyana

It seems like the Utilities Commission of Guyana is only a telephone commission.

Many people only know that this commission exist because of the recent press releases by the commission in which the commission airs its rejection to development of data in Guyana.

Is electricity not under the commission? Were they so strong on Power, we would have had a progressive Guyana. Nothing is being said about power. Yet blackout continues unchecked. The losses are amounting to billions. Even though there is blackout, the "electric bills" continue to shock consumers! Yet, nothing from PUC.

Instead they are bent on a path that seem to aim to stop the cable from coming to Guyana. So, in their minds - no cable, therefore no great demand for electricity, therefore no hue and cry about electricity! Keep the pressure on stopping the cable!

Good going PUC!

Digicel suit against LIME dismissed

Published on Thursday, June 11, 2009

KINGSTON, Jamaica -- Contempt proceedings brought by Digicel against its telecommunications competitor LIME and two of its top executives were dismissed by Justice Glen Brown in Jamaica’s Supreme Court on Tuesday, 9 June.

The Digicel suit named LIME’s Jamaica Country Manager Geoff Houston and Executive Vice President for Carrier Services Lawrence McNaughton.

Justice Brown also ordered Digicel to pay all of the legal costs incurred by LIME as a result of Digicel’s application.

Digicel’s contempt proceedings came in response to legal action taken by LIME earlier this year when that company accused Digicel of blocking LIME’s international call circuits.

LIME subsequently brought a suit against Digicel for damages and breaches of the Interconnection Agreement between the two companies and the Fair Competition Act.

Expressing satisfaction with the judge’s decision, Houston said: “I am extremely pleased that the Court has ruled in LIME’s favour. The contempt action was a wholly unmeritorious ploy by Digicel to bully LIME and as I have said before we will not be cowed or silenced. We fully intend to press ahead with all the legal actions we currently have pending against Digicel.”

As part of its case for an injunction, LIME obtained an affidavit from Jamaican telecommunications provider Claro, which led to Digicel filing a new action seeking an ex parte injunction against Claro (but which also named LIME in the Order) to prevent the use of the information in the Claro affidavit.

According to a LIME press release, Digicel then proceeded to bring contempt action against Houston and McNaughton charging them with breaching the Claro injunction based on an affidavit by LIME prepared before the injunction was sought.

After hearing submissions from LIME and Digicel, Justice Brown dismissed Digicel’s application and ordered costs for LIME.

Digicel issued its own statement in response to the judge’s ruling on Wednesday, 10 June.
“In January 2009, Digicel found that C&W/LIME had used information which it was not supposed to use in breach of a court order, which had restricted its use,” the Digicel statement said.

“In Digicel’s view, the breaching of an order of the Court is a very severe thing and, as such, Digicel decided to file a complaint against C&W/LIME because of its breach of this Order.”

The Digicel statement said the company had not yet been given the judge’s reasons for the ruling.
“Once we have had the opportunity to review the Judge’s reasons, we will then better be able to assess how to proceed with this matter,” the Digicel statement said.

The statement concluded by saying, “Digicel has the greatest of respect for the courts and for court orders - and is of the view that complying with these is of the utmost importance.

“We will not shy away from continuing to maintain this high standard; and, if needs be, will continue to bring companies that show little respect for the Jamaican laws and court system to court.”

Was anyone misleading the nation?

Stabroek News reports on June 13 that the PUC said: "...there were significant disruptions to voice traffic, both local and international, and the data transmissions were completely disrupted."

Guyana Telecoms Watchers have received GT&T's response to the PUC - which is carried on this blog. In addition, the company provided its traffic chart to show the flow of traffic for the day in question (June 11) as compared to traffic on a regular day (June 4).

The chart shows that there was indeed no disruption to its traffic on the day in question.

GT&T as asserted that there seems to be "an orchestrated campaign to damage GT&T's operations and good will through planned disruptions in order to make a case for giving another carrier an international license?"

SMS agreement

SMS interconnection between GT&T and Digicel has been signed.

This has started flow of SMS from either party's subscribers to the other. The rates are as follows:
GT&T to GT&T: G99cents per text
GT&T to Digicel: G$8.00
Digicel to Digicel: G$10.00
Digicel to GT&T: $10.00

Each company would run their personalized promo on their own rates.

Power for health

Power for health! From this Blog:

No power in Guyana. Does this affect health services?
The acquisition of reliable and affordable power poses a challenge to many health facilities.
- This is the case in Guyana where the PEPFAR program and the Ministry of Health (MOH) requested USAID assistance in assessing options for improving energy services in health facilities.
- Full service district hospitals located on the coast suffer from expensive, unreliable, and poor quality power.
- District hospitals located in the interior face similar problems compounded by the fact that the power is intermittent, of worse quality, and from a variety of expensive sources.
- Hinterland health centers often have no energy at all.
- The expensive cost of electricity in Guyana makes the long-term operating costs of power intensive health care facilities currently under construction significant.

Enough is enough - by GT&T

GT&T has once again been victimized by the PUC's new-found practice of issuing press releases on Friday night making accusations against GT&T without first contacting GT&T to determine whether the press release is accurate. This is obviously an attempt by the PUC to seize a public relations advantage over GT&T by gaining press coverage in Saturday's newspapers before GT&T can respond to correct the record. GT&T does not know why the PUC is stooping to this practice, but the time has come to ask why.

Is the PUC pulling out all stops to prevent GT&T from following through on its binding contractual commitments to build the first submarine fibre optic cable to land in Guyana? Why do they seem to want to hinder a project that is crucial to Guyana's future, a project which GT&T has undertaken at its own cost and risk? We do not know the answer, but the question needs to be asked.

The PUC's threat to recommend giving other international licenses in violation of Guyana law and GT&T's license is disturbing. Does this mean that the PUC have given up on the ongoing negotiations between GT&T and the Government to obtain GT&T's consent to relinquish its exclusive franchise at the end of next year? We do not know the answer, but the question needs to be asked.

The PUC's licensing threat is especially curious since the PUC has no authority to issue an international license. Even more curious, giving a license to other international carriers will not prevent fibre optic cables from being cut in Suriname, which is what happened in this case. Nor would giving a license to other carriers stop unknown parties from engaging in a campaign of dirty tricks against GT&T to sabotage GT&T's cable facilities in Guyana, which is what also happened in this case. We do not know the answers, but these questions need to be asked.

To set the record straight, there was a cut in the Americas-II cable connectivity on Thursday due to road construction in Suriname. The cut was repaired in four hours. No voice communications were interrupted, as GT&T has sufficient satellite back-up capacity. Full data connectivity also was preserved for subscribers whose services included a redundancy feature. No national security issues were raised.

In addition, GT&T's services in Regions 7, 8 and 10 were interrupted due to an act of sabotage near Loo Creek on the Linden Highway where unknown parties used a chain saw to fell one of GT&T's riser poles carrying the southern link fibre optic cable. Is this the beginning of an orchestrated campaign to damage GT&T's operations and good will through planned disruptions in order to make a case for giving another carrier an international license? We do not know the answer, but the question needs to be asked.

Finally, we would note that the nation has experienced a series of severe electrical outages. Where are the PUC's press releases expressing outrage? Why isn't the PUC threatening to recommend giving licenses to new electrical companies? And what about the sewerage sector? We do not know the answers, but the questions need to be asked.

We have other concerns about the PUC’s public intervention on this matter, which we will raise in an appropriate way and in the proper forum.

Who's holding back Guyana's development?

Who's really keeping back Guyana's development. This Stabroek News cartoon captures it so nicely.
Who manages GPL? Who owns it? Who regulates it?

Is PUC a GT&T Competitor?

Seems like not only Digicel giving GT&T a hard time with frequent court cases and frequent complaints.
Now the PUC is in the fray. Maybe PUC is in telecoms business - or they have someone lined up for the business.
I don't think anyone in Guyana suffered any loss of traffic on June 11 or 12 or 13. So either the regulator is lying to the public or the regulator is up to something move....come clean reg!

Is this the same regulator that controls GPL? I guess GPL is operating efficiently!

GT&T's response to Luncheon

Recently, we have noted reports accusing GT&T of holding back Guyana’s economy through its monopoly rights. We are taken aback by such reports because GT&T takes its national obligations seriously. As a company we are proud of the role we play towards the development of Guyana. Such accusations betray a disconnect with factual and economic reality.

It is difficult for GT&T to accept such criticisms when we are one among few Guyanese entities that, on an annual basis, continue to make substantial investments in a modern infrastructure. We are now building the first-ever submarine fiber optic cable to be landed in Guyana. This cable system will enable GT&T to provide more reliable services, and deliver substantially more bandwidth, at lower prices. GT&T is doing so at its own risk and cost (US$30 million). We are therefore disappointed, on behalf of our 650 employees, at such accusations when we have invested billions of dollars in Guyana and are proud to be one of the largest contributors to the national economy.

GT&T’s rates are the lowest in Guyana and stand at par with, or are better than, those rates in other countries in the Caribbean. A study by the International Telecommunications Union showed that Guyana’s landline telephone rates are the 4th lowest among 28 Latin American countries. Few countries in the world deliver a quality-to-price ratio for landline service that is better than Guyana and in many liberalized economies consumers pay 5-10 times more for an inferior service.

GT&T has a great vision for its continued role in Guyana’s development. We agree that competition, if implemented correctly, can bring benefits. To that end, GT&T has offered for years to relinquish voluntarily its monopoly rights as early as 2010 so long as the Government agrees to establish a permanent framework that promotes and protects infrastructure investment while resolving various remaining legacy issues. As everyone knows, GT&T has been in negotiations with the Government and we remain optimistic that these can be successfully concluded. We are also hopeful that whatever new laws and regulations emerge should result in positive growth for Guyana as well as for continued telecommunication investment in Guyana.

We need to develop a robust ICT sector. We all know this is a challenging task for Guyana because ICT growth requires, among other things, heavy long-term capital investment, a population with significant disposable personal income and reliable and reasonably priced electricity supply. GT&T has provided a modernized landline and mobile telecoms infrastructure and has indicated its willingness to assist in other ways.

Our new submarine cable project is a clear indication of our continuing commitment to Guyana's development.

PUC press release

PUC on Friday 5th June issued a press release signaling unclear questions about GT&T investment in the new submarine cable. They issued the statement even though there was an arranged meeting between the two parties slated for 9th June.
The PUC statement and GT&T's response can be found here.

The planned meeting between the two (PUC and GT&T) took place on 9th June.