The suit cuts both ways. The matter is sub judice and we may not have ample
latitude to comment. The fees vs interest aspect will help Safaricom set
straight a perception.
Whether in court or somehow Safaricom got to justify the ‘service fees’
rate relative to its cost of capital and the predatory angle is in line
with topical public debate on dominance.
Lack of ubiquitous information before someone makes a decision to borrow
should make interesting proceedings. You dont have airtime and yet required
to read terms and conditions in internet?
That said, and to digress a bit, Safaricom is market leader due to doing
the right things right. Its competitors are very good at shooting their own
feet. Get that from an industry insider. With the right leadership, other
telcos can easily erode Safaricom so- called dominace.
Leadership is a very rare skill in those telcos.
On 20 Feb 2018 19:06, “Ali Hussein” <email@example.com> wrote:
Let me understand this:-
You take 100- Okoa Jahazi airtime on credit. It’s clear that there’s a
cost to it. Then you go to court?
Am I missing something here?
*AHK & Associates*
Tel: +254 713 601113
13th Floor , Delta Towers, Oracle Wing,
Chiromo Road, Westlands,
Any information of a personal nature expressed in this email are purely
mine and do not necessarily reflect the official positions of the
organizations that I work with.
On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 6:21 PM, K Machuhi <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Ali….frivolous lawsuits never get admitted into court process. The okoa
> jahazi matter is of great public interest and whichever way it goes will
> have major impact.
> As a society we are not as litigious as we ought to be.
> On 20 Feb 2018 17:05, “Ali Hussein via kictanet” <