The Sunday Mail
It has been a particularly trying fortnight for mobile telecommunication companies around the globe.
On Monday, one of the country’s eminent “brain exports”, Mr Sifiso Dabengwa – who holds an Engineering degree from the University of Zimbabwe – tendered his resignation at Johannesburg-based multinational telecoms giant MTN Group after a tumultuous period that followed the US$5,2 billion fine imposed by the Nigerian Communications Commission on October 26 for failure to disconnect non-registered SIM cards.
It is a big spot of bother for a company whose total annual revenues topped US$12,8 billion last year.
Just as MTN was smarting from that, VimpelCom, the Dutch company that controls 60 percent of Telecel Zimbabwe, was making a US$900 million provision to cover possible US and Dutch fines over bribery allegations in Uzbekistan.
There are questions over the role the daughter of Uzbek president, Ms Gulnara Karimova, played in awarding telecommunication contracts, especially in the wake of allegations that VimpelCom and Takilant – an investment company linked to Ms Karimova and President Islam Karimov – had improper dealings.
These incidences give a rare glimpse beyond the PR-cobbled image of telecommunication companies.
In cases where regulators snooze, they are likely to push the envelope.
Until September 1, 2010 when the directive by the Postal Telecommunications Regulatory Authority of Zimbabwe for mobile phone companies to adopt a per-second billing system became effective, local subscribers had been slaves to the most vicious and extortionate billing system there ever was.
Most, if not all, operators levied a flat US25c per minute fee for calls, notwithstanding the time that one spends on the call.
An unreliable and diabolic network system also meant that subscribers even had to pay for dropped calls.
It was a golden period for mobile companies; they grew bigger and richer.
But even though the per-second billing system was welcomed by weary customers, there were still reservations on the prices that were being charged.
Again Potraz had to intervene.
With effect from January 1, 2015 mobile tariffs were cut by over 30 percent to US15c from an average of US23c per minute.
So as mobile operators groan, the customers celebrate.
There are, however, outstanding issues to be attended to.
It’s still not possible to interconnect mobile money services from local mobile phone companies
The mutual distrust among the three operators – Econet Wireless Zimbabwe, NetOne and Telecel Zimbabwe – has meant that it has been impossible for the three to establish a seamless ecosystem of value-added services for the consumer.
It is absurd that while it is easier to transfer money from offshore service providers to local network operators, it is still difficult to transfer money from Ecocash (Econet’s mobile money service) to Telecash (Telecel), or from Telecash to One Wallet (NetOne).
There is need for the platform of mobile network operators (MNOs) to be interconnected , or to be interoperable as experts say, so that the majority of locals, most of whom are largely unbanked, can transact affordably and with ease.
Equally, there is also need for MNO platforms to interconnect with banks so that transactions become easier.
Most transactions seem to be now handled through mobile money platforms.
Statistics show that Econet, for example, has managed to move more than US$11 billion in the past four years through Ecocash.
Yet mobile networks have largely elected to remain in their respective corners, reluctant to open up and interconnect their services.
Naturally, this has led to a phenomenon that some call “Multi-SIMing”, where subscribers have more than one SIM card in order to enjoy the services they require.
This is clearly an anomaly that needs to be addressed.
Judging from the uneasy relationship that once characterised Econet’s relationship with banks when such projects where at one time mulled and the obvious distrust among local telecommunication companies , which is however inherent in profit-seeking entities, it is obvious that it has to take the intervention of authorities such as the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe – which oversees the national payment system – and Government to coax mobile operators to share their various platforms.
This is not ideal.
Although it is admittedly difficult to set up such a system due to the challenges that are involved in investing in a payments switch or in setting up a bilateral realtime payment instruction interfaces and settlement procedures, it has to be taken into account that some countries have been able to make inroads towards such systems.
Rwanda, which is well known for pushing the frontiers of technological innovations, has managed to make this possible through its national payment switch, Rswitch.
The platforms of two of Rwanda’s network operators Tigo and Airtel Rwanda had become interoperable by last month.
Nigeria as well has made inroads.
It’s not only about mobile money transfers.
Surely, subscribers deserve to be given an opportunity to move from a crappy network to one that they perceive to be ideal for them while retaining their same number for convenience.
Technical experts call this mobile number portability.
The sheer hassle of shifting and maintaining contacts is discouraging enough under the current circumstances.
So, a lot more needs to be done in order to democratise the services that are provided to subscribers and Government has to take the lead.
Where any financial resources are required to invest in a switching system or any investment that might be needed to provide convenience to customers, Government could resort to the Universal Services Fund, whose use remains unclear to this day.
In short, Government should continue to push consumers’ interests.
Feedback: [email protected]
