| Author |
Do you agree with the NTC's latest ruling? (PH) |
GOwin
Joined: Jan 17, 2002
Posts: > 500
From: .uʍop ǝpısdn s&
PM, WWW
|
Last week, in the NTC decision that allowed Sun to continue it's 24/7 service, they now allow operators to set their own minimum service performance standards.
On one hand, this allows "sub-standard" services like 24/7 to continue. (It is sub-standard because there used to be a standard basis by which an operator is judged against. )
On the other hand, this now gives power to the operators to define their new "standard". It's possible, and now likely that operators will create their own performance standards that appears good in paper, but leaving us subscribers out to dry in the sun.
I disagree with the NTC allowing operators to set their own minimum standards. NTC is shirking from its duty to regulate and maintain standards with which operators must follow.
|
|
|
arnoldc
Joined: Dec 14, 2001
Posts: > 500
From: Philippines
PM, WWW
|
My same sentiments exactly. What is a "governing body" for if they will just allow the operators to set their own "standards" and leave the consumers biting the dust. |
steele
Joined: Dec 27, 2003
Posts: 329
PM |
@GOwin
I agree when you said that NTC should regulate the standard for telcos' service. However, there's also consumer rights to consider. Sun's 24/7 is successful because there's a market for it. If you can afford to pay for better service you have to pay more. But if you can't, at least you are given a choice.
[addsig] |
GOwin
Joined: Jan 17, 2002
Posts: > 500
From: .uʍop ǝpısdn s&
PM, WWW
|
If you argue along that line (about getting the kind service which you can afford), it still does not give the NTC the excuse NOT to define a minimum standard for such a case. |
steele
Joined: Dec 27, 2003
Posts: 329
PM |
I agree. They should impose such standards. Regulating the scheme is different from regulating the standards of service though.
[addsig] |
|
|
Posted: 2005-05-31 08:21
