I think both Nasir and Naeem have valid points and I would suggest using something
like number of operational ports as a variable as that will take care of concerns
raised by both of you.
Azfar
WOL
At 01:51 AM7/26/01+0500, Naeem Haq wrote:
>Nasir ,
>
>In a perfect world I would agree with you , but in Pakistan where revenues
>are falsified by some and thus this may not be a good measure as those who
>steal will benefit even further . Please also note that fees of this nature
>should not be linked with the revenue as the cost of regulation is not
>propostional to the revenue . Lets look for better variables .
>
>Naeem Haq
>NEXLINX
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: A.R. Nasir Qureshi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 4:14 PM
>To: nadeem
>Cc: ansar; Saad Saleem; Engr.Imran Akhtar Shah; POL Asif Luqman POL;
>Naeem Haq (Nexlinx); WOL Azfar Manzoor; S M Shafi; ispak mailing list
>Subject: Re: ISPAK: GOOD NEWS (Allah Akbar)
>
>
>
>Every thing is ok, but for point no. three. Small businesses and Big
>businesses should be charged differently. Big businesses already get a lot
>of benefits because of economies of scale.
>
>What ever the ratio, be it 1 % or .1 percent, but it should be based on
>the size of the business, and revenue is a good measurement.
>
>And this should be the only charge ISP's have to PTA.
>
>
>Regards,
>
>Nasir.
>
>
>On Wed, 25 Jul 2001, nadeem wrote:
>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> In my opinion the basis of talks with PTA should be:
>>
>> 1. There will be only one charge i.e, regulatory fee (Formula needs
>discussion among ISPs)
>> 2. This fee will include all charges including renewal fee
>> 3. The fee must not be linked to revenue.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: ansar
>> To: Saad Saleem ; Engr.Imran Akhtar Shah ; POL Asif Luqman POL ; Naeem
>Haq (Nexlinx) ; WOL Azfar Manzoor ; S M Shafi ; ispak mailing list
>> Cc: ispak mailing list
>> Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 10:59 AM
>> Subject: RE: ISPAK: GOOD NEWS (Allah Akbar)
>>
>>
>> Dear Saad,
>>
>> Congratulations!!!!
>>
>> I understand that the team is already there who signed the petition. If
>the Royalty is illegal, what negotiations with PTA you are talking about???
>>
>> Best Regards
>> Ansar
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Saad Saleem
>> Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 10:49
>> To: Engr.Imran Akhtar Shah; POL Asif Luqman POL; Naeem Haq (Nexlinx);
>WOL Azfar Manzoor; S M Shafi; ispak mailing list
>> Cc: ispak mailing list
>> Subject: ISPAK: GOOD NEWS (Allah Akbar)
>>
>>
>> Dear All,
>>
>>
>> Good News , (Allah Akbar )
>>
>>
>> High Court has given decision on our Writ Petition granting stay
>order and directed PTA to decide the submitted reference within 30 days .
>The stance of PTA in the court was very positive and they have shown their
>willingness to work with us in order to resolve the issue with mutual
>consent of ISP'S .
>>
>> Soon we are going to host a meeting in Islamabad and I would like that
>we should form a team which will negotiate with PTA .
>>
>>
>>
>> Best Regards
>>
>> Saad Saleem
>>
>>
>
>
>
>------------------------- ISPAK --------------------------
>ISPAK Discussion List. Members are limited to officials of
>ISPs and ESPs of Pakistan and select media representatives.
>-------------- http://ispak.net.pk -----------------------
------------------------- ISPAK --------------------------
ISPAK Discussion List. Members are limited to officials of
ISPs and ESPs of Pakistan and select media representatives.
-------------- http://ispak.net.pk -----------------------
