Its pretty common in business to push the boundries of the law in the name of profit. Thats why tax consultant firms exist.
When you live your life on Twitter and Facebook, and are only friends with like minded people on Twitter and Facebook, you are not living in the real world. You are living in a narcissistic echo chamber.
My thoughts are my own and are in no way representative of my employer.
geekiegeek: Its pretty common in business to push the boundries of the law in the name of profit. Thats why tax consultant firms exist.
Tax consultant firms exist because the tax boundaries can be a bit technical and open to interpretation, but the objective is to work within the boundaries instead of being penalised for tax evasion. Marketing people also have to stay within the law too, and much of fair trading/commerce is common sense -- ie if you could be accused of cheating then you probably shouldn't be doing it.
If a company feels it owns the market then its less likely to offer competitive prices/services. I don't know if backhaul will again be an issue with lack of RBI competition, but 12M is not a huge penalty if CC expect it to be a deterrant, considering the profits that could be made and the lost opportunities of other players in the market.
Qualified in business, certified in fibre, stuck in copper, have to keep going ^_^
LAC: So Telecom would promote robbing a bank? Hmmmmm.
Beccara: No it's business. Robbing a bank is taking something that's not yours, Telecom protected it's retail arm profits by giving them a cost advantage for using the Telecom network. Something that wasn't extended to non-Telecom ISP's. The only reason it broke the law was because Telecom was handed their network on a silver platter.
And costing them 12M to do it? Nice.
Yes it's exactly like Telecom robbing a bank, The same reason we give life sentences to petty theft criminals.
It may have cost them $12mill but someone somewhere did the math before they did it, I'd bet my wage that the income as a result of this action far surpasses $12mill + public loss of face
Most problems are the result of previous solutions...
All comment's I make are my own personal opinion and do not in any way, shape or form reflect the views of current or former employers unless specifically stated
I don't want to be the guy proving Godwin's Law but I'm sure there is an analogy to be made here about how the Nazi's argued they were just following orders and could not be held accountable and Bruce Parkes adhering to Telecom's 'strategy'.
Bottom line is, Telecom broke the law. They have been convicted and fined and that to me is justice.
New Zealand telecommunications would be a lot better off by now if we were competitive from the start. The hold up because of profit is just sad.
Beccara: It's business, every single business man out there would do the same if in that position, It's all risk vs reward,.
If the fine for breaking the law is less that the money you get from breaking it and the risk of being caught minimal then most would choose the path Telecom did, They didn't kill anyone they just moved to protect their income
Couldnt have put it better.
I'm pretty sure (but I could be wrong) that all of the major telco's in NZ have been dragged before the CC at some point for breaking laws. Seems to me that it is just the way business is done in this industry.
I'm not saying its right, I'm just saying thats the way it is.
So you advocate intentionally breaking the law so long as you end up richer for it.
Something is not quite right about your morals.
Business often brake the law to better there return. Easter weekend look at how many garden centres etc will be open on Friday and Sunday when they should shut. They take a hit on the fine as the profit from opening on those days far exceed it.
Not saying a i agree with this, however business is about making a profit, without profit you wouldnt have a business.