Singapore slips in broadband stakes
-
Straits Times 5 July reported on the failure of Singapore to capitalize on our early adoption of broadband technology. A decade after, less than half of HDB homeowners have taken to broadband. The reason is clear: speeds are low and costs are high, compared to our counterparts in US, Korea and Hong Kong. The blame was placed squarely on Singtel, who has been given such a monopoly that they can dominate the market and stifle competitors. Because Singtel owns the infrastructure, other ISPs have to pay them a huge chunk of every dollar they earn.
Finally, someone dares to voice the truth....as one forum writer stated, Singaporeans are having a raw deal from broadband. -
Now that Singtel has bought itself majority stakes in the Australian telco (Optus) and also into the Belgian telco (Belgacom), how is Singtel conducting its pricing policies for Broadband services in these two countries ?
Is Singtel offering different and lower pricing in these two highly competitive foreign markets that are subjected to regulations by Governments who are not connected by "Family ties" ?
It is amazing that national telecoms exist as private enterprise in other countries, but are considered as critical industries in Singapore, to be operated only by the Singapore Government - although in the disguise as private businesses.
Singtel has been protected by the Singapore Government for too long, as the Government has too much a stake in this business to let it be subjected to any form of outside competition.
With telephone revenues falling due to the internet voice options that has been imposed on it, Singtel has only a few limited areas to continue to enjoy its exclusively monopolistic position.
What is new here ?
It has been the practise of the Singapore Government disguise its excellent services to Singaporeans but enrich its own treasury by charging atrocious rates for the same services that are offered cheaper elsewhere. -
In Hong Kong, you can get 10Mbps, 100Mbps and 1000Mbps two-way
unlimited broadband home service:
http://www.hkbn.com.hk/bb1000/html/05_new_offer/05_new_offer.htm
1000Mbps S$367/mth
100Mbps S$58/mth
10Mbps S$32/mth
And Singapore ISPs brag their 512Kbps, 1.5Mbps as broadband and at higher prices than HK's 10Mbps. sheesh!!
-
The government is quick to say we should accept lower pay cos' foreign workers are willing to work for less. But we are expected to accept higher fees cos' foreign nations do not have an elite class to protect.
-
But then, on the other side of the coin, if you privatise national utilities (like MRT, transport), these companies will run the utilities with share holders and profits in mind. Look at what happen to our privatised MRT and buses.
The problem is the singapore market is too small to allow competition. Even if you privatise each sectors, they will eventually end up work together to collude on prices (to protect the profit margins, eg. Petrol stations) or they will Merge back again (look at MediaCorp and Media Works in the media industry)
With Monopoly, quality of services goes down due to a lack competition.. a good solution has to be found, but unfortunately, i dun think privatising national utilites (in this case Telephone lines) is a good solution.
(PS. in fact starhub is also in line leasing, but doesn't seem to be getting much market penetration.) -
You can legislate and break up the monopoly (like they did to AT&T)Originally posted by k4korny:With Monopoly, quality of services goes down due to a lack competition.. a good solution has to be found, but unfortunately, i dun think privatising national utilites (in this case Telephone lines) is a good solution.
into several sub businesses (telco, internet, info service, system integration)
A one-size-rule-all monopoly does no good to businesses, job creation, market innovation and competition. It benefits only itself.
-
How about broadband prices in Australia? My friend there told me its more expensive than singapore....
-
AT&T is struggling after the breakup worr...Originally posted by macjoe:You can legislate and break up the monopoly (like they did to AT&T)
into several sub businesses (telco, internet, info service, system integration)
A one-size-rule-all monopoly does no good to businesses, job creation, market innovation and competition. It benefits only itself.
the situation is weird in SG.. seems like our "nationalised" coys are using the money to expand strongly overseas (singtel into Optus, Pakistan, SEA, etc. ComfortDelgro into China.. etc.) Whether or not, it will benefit job creation etc.. will only see it in the long run and is debatable. But at least, it is contributing strongly to our GDP/ GNP. Look at singtel's accts. Only 30% of revenue comes from local mkt.
Typical eg is to look at M1. They just compete in the local market for the hp share.. Are they able to provide cheaper rates and better service? unlikely.. cos The subscriber base is small to begin with, plus price competition is stiff from the other 2 telcos... There's too much overlap in terms of infrastructure betw the 3 telcos, and they have to cover unnecessary overheads. If we have too many disintegrated service providers, the consumer doesn't necessarily benefits in the end.