New figures from the Communications Authority of Kenya (CA) show that subscriptions have fallen to record lows, exposing how quickly households are abandoning traditional television.

By June 2025, DStv subscriptions had dropped to 188,824 from 1.2 million a year earlier, while GOtv fell to 314,520 from 2.8 million. Together, they account for most of the 77% contraction in Kenya’s broadcasting market. 

Competitor services have fared no better, with StarTimes tumbling to 492,330 from 1.7 million. Only Zuku, the Wananchi-owned cable provider, managed to grow, up 20% to over 64,000 customers.

The scale of the collapse became obvious this year after CA introduced a tough reporting policy that counts only active subscriptions generating revenue within 90 days. Under this new measure, DStv’s customer base shrank by 84% while GOtv lost 89%.

Price hikes have been a major factor. MultiChoice, which owns DStv and GOtv, has raised subscription fees five times across Nigeria and Kenya, amongst other African countries, in three years. Its flagship bouquet, DStv Premium, now costs KES 11,700 ($91) per month, compared to KES 7,500 ($58) in 2022. 

The increases have forced many customers to reconsider their options. Streaming platforms have absorbed much of the fallout. Showmax, MultiChoice’s own streaming service, grew active users by 44% over the past year, supported by price cuts and telecom partnerships. 

DStv Stream also reported a 38% rise in subscriptions and a 48% boost in revenue. The streaming market in Kenya is projected to reach $5.4 million by the end of 2025, with 46.3 million users forecast by 2029.

For many households, the change is about cost as much as convenience. Netflix charges just KES 200 ($1.55) for its mobile plan and KES 1,100 ($8.5) for its premium option, while Showmax’s entertainment plan is priced at KES 520 ($4). 

By comparison, DStv’s top package has almost doubled in cost since 2022. Piracy adds further pressure. Football matches and premium shows are widely available for free on unauthorised apps and websites, damaging the value of MultiChoice’s expensive sports rights.

The situation is particularly sensitive as MultiChoice’s Premier League rights expire this year. Some viewers openly say they would prefer the broadcaster not to renew them, arguing that the price hikes tied to these rights no longer make sense given shrinking audiences. 

Bars and hotels remain among the last steady DStv subscribers, but even they are turning to cheaper or illegal alternatives as profit margins narrow.

The upheaval comes just weeks after French broadcaster Canal+ completed its $2 billion takeover of MultiChoice, lifting its stake to 48.2%. The combined group now controls over 40 million subscribers across 70 countries. 

Canal+ executives say there will be no immediate changes to pricing or packages, but they have noted a content revamp and digital upgrades beginning in 2026.

Across Africa, viewers are walking away from expensive satellite subscriptions and choosing a mix of streaming, free-to-air channels, and piracy instead. For MultiChoice and its new owner Canal+, the challenge will be to convince millions of customers that premium television is still worth paying for.

According to a charge sheet, FHC/ABJ/CR/197/2025, the commission alleges that the accused wilfully failed to appear before it on March 6, 2025, following an official summons issued on February 25. 

The document lists John Ugbe, Gozie Onumonu, Adewunmi Ogunsanya, and five other directors as defendants.

This follows the Federal High Court’s dismissal of a suit filed by MultiChoice on May 8, which sought legal backing for its controversial price hike on DStv and GOtv subscriptions. Justice James Omotosho ruled that the suit was “an abuse of court process”.

The FCCPC claims that the accused deliberately failed to submit documents relevant to its probe, a breach of section 3 of the FCCPC Act 2018. 

The charge sheet states: “Being Directors of MultiChoice Nigeria Limited on or about the 6th day of March, 2025, at 23 Jimmy Carter Street, Asokoro, Abuja, within the jurisdiction of this Court, [they] caused the aforesaid MultiChoice Nigeria Limited to fail to produce documents which the Company was required to produce, in compliance with a lawful summons issued and dated 25 February, 2025, and thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 3 of the FCCPC Act 2018.”

Beyond failing to appear, the commission says MultiChoice’s leadership actively hindered its investigation by refusing to disclose requested documents, an act the FCCPC considers a direct challenge to its regulatory authority.

When the matter came up in court on Tuesday, the Commission’s lawyer informed Justice Omotosho that while the company had been served, the individual directors named in the charge had not yet received personal service. Justice Omotosho subsequently adjourned the case until October 7, 2025, for arraignment.

This issue is rooted in FCCPC’s concerns over repeated and unexplained price increases by MultiChoice. In February, the Commission summoned Ugbe to explain what it described as “frequent price hikes, potential abuse of market dominance, and anti-competitive practices.” It warned that failure to provide clear justification could trigger regulatory sanctions.

MultiChoice objected, filing a case through its legal team led by Onigbanjo SAN. The company argued it had not been given a fair hearing and sought to block the Commission from taking further action, citing a letter dated March 3, 2025. The court, however, dismissed the suit, stating that it was an attempt to stall accountability.

The ruling, delivered by Justice James Omotosho on Wednesday, came in response to an ex parte motion filed by MultiChoice’s legal team, led by Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) Moyosore J. Onibanjo. 

The suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/379/2025, challenges the FCCPC’s authority to interfere in the company’s pricing decisions.

MultiChoice had notified its customers of a price adjustment, effective March 1, 2025, affecting various DStv and GOtv packages. The changes included:

• DStv Compact: Increased from ₦15,700 to ₦19,000 (25% rise)
• Compact Plus: Increased from ₦25,000 to ₦30,000 (20% rise)
• DStv Premium: Rose from ₦37,000 to ₦44,500 (20% rise)
• GOtv Supa Plus: Increased from ₦15,700 to ₦16,800

The FCCPC, concerned about possible abuse of market monopoly and anti-competitive behaviour, had summoned MultiChoice Nigeria for an investigative hearing on February 27, 2025. 

The Commission warned that failure to justify the price hikes could result in regulatory sanctions.

However, MultiChoice challenged this directive, arguing that Nigeria operates a free-market economy where companies set their prices without government intervention. 

The company claimed that its subscription rates in Nigeria remain the lowest among all the countries where it operates.

“For instance, the cost of the Premium package in Nigeria is equivalent to $29.81, while the same package costs $85.11 in Kenya,” stated Gozie Onumonu, head of Regulatory Affairs and Government Relations at MultiChoice, in an affidavit submitted to the court.

During Wednesday’s hearing, Onibanjo urged the court to grant an interim injunction to prevent the FCCPC from taking punitive action against MultiChoice while the case is pending. 

He also pointed out that the Commission had continued to issue statements on the matter despite the ongoing litigation.

After reviewing the submissions, Justice Omotosho granted the restraining order and scheduled an accelerated hearing for March 27, 2025.

The ruling effectively stops the FCCPC from enforcing any sanctions or directives against MultiChoice until the court delivers a final judgment on the matter.

The Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) argues that the suit is baseless and constitutes an abuse of court process.

The lawsuit, filed by Maduabuchi O. Idam Esq. on 29 April 2024 (Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/563/2024), demands that Multichoice allow customers to roll over unused subscriptions. The case also lists the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) and the National Broadcasting Commission (NBC) as defendants.

During proceedings on 19 February 2025, Multichoice’s counsel, Moyosore J. Onigbanjo (SAN), opposed the case. The legal representatives of the FCCPC and NBC confirmed that they had filed counter-affidavits against the suit, while the AGF’s lawyer also confirmed submitting a motion on notice. 

The presiding judge, Justice Inyang Ekwo, asked the claimant whether he had received and responded to all submissions. He confirmed this but stated that further affidavits needed to be exchanged. The court then scheduled the hearing for 6 May 2025.

The AGF’s motion, dated 25 October 2024, insists that the case should be struck out as the claimant failed to establish any wrongdoing by the AGF. The AGF’s lawyer, Maimuna Lami Shiru, stated:

“The AGF is not a regulatory body in respect of the subject matter of the claim and has no business in the suit. The AGF is not a proper or necessary party to the suit. The originating process is premature and defective as it relates to the AGF.”

The AGF’s office further asserted that its role does not extend to regulating Multichoice or any other TV service provider in Nigeria. It also accused the claimant of filing the case without the necessary court approval.

Background

Multichoice has had repeated issues in Nigeria over its pricing structure in recent times. The company previously justified its subscription adjustments by pointing out factors such as exchange rate fluctuations, rising content acquisition costs, and increased electricity tariffs.

The FCCPC, while acknowledging its role in consumer protection, clarified that it does not directly regulate business pricing. The NBC also noted that a prior court ruling had limited its authority to intervene in such matters.

In 2024, a tribunal fined the company ₦150 million and ordered a one-month free subscription for violating interim orders. The ruling was later overturned after the case was withdrawn.

However, Multichoice recently announced a fresh price increase across all DStv and GOtv packages, effective 1 March 2025. The company has blamed previous subscriber losses on multiple price hikes, inflation, and economic challenges.

This decline, revealed in the company’s interim financial report released on Tuesday, follows Nigeria’s skyrocketing inflation rate, which has surpassed 30%. 

Increasing costs of essential goods, such as food, fuel, and electricity, have stressed household budgets, leading many customers to discontinue their DStv and GOtv subscriptions.

MultiChoice Group’s CEO, Calvo Mawela, described these conditions as some of the most challenging in nearly four decades. Nigeria’s inflation has been a persistent issue for the company, contributing to the sharp decline in its subscriber base and prompting price adjustments for its services. 

Within the past 12 months, MultiChoice Nigeria raised its subscription prices on three occasions to keep up with operational expenses and currency fluctuations, with the latest increase in May 2024.

The company’s operations in Africa have been hit by similar economic challenges. Across the continent, MultiChoice reported a loss of 566,000 subscribers within the first half of the financial year. 

Zambia and Nigeria were among the most affected, accounting for over 95% of the overall decline, with Zambia experiencing a loss of 298,000 customers amid extensive power outages attributed to drought. 

This continuous drop follows a reported decline of 803,000 subscribers in the second half of the previous financial year, pointing to the sustained impact of regional economic pressures on the company.

The competition from global streaming services has compounded MultiChoice’s challenges, as consumers increasingly shift towards on-demand content. 

In response, the company is investing heavily in Showmax, its streaming service, allocating an additional ZAR1.6 billion in the recent quarter. 

Showmax has reported a 50% growth in its user base year-over-year, becoming a good component in MultiChoice’s strategy to compete in the growing African streaming market.

Despite the setbacks, MultiChoice’s Mawela noted that the company expects to return to a positive net equity position by November 2024, partly due to cost-cutting measures and favourable liquidity, with over ZAR10 billion in available funds. 

This expected turnaround follows a period of technical insolvency, largely due to currency depreciation in several African markets, which has eroded the group’s profits by nearly R7 billion over the past 18 months.

In a regulatory setback, MultiChoice faced some issues in Nigeria this year over its latest price hike, with the Abuja-based Competition and Consumer Protection Tribunal issuing a fine of N150 million for ignoring a restraining order on the new pricing structure. 

The Tribunal’s ruling also mandated a one-month free subscription for Nigerian DStv and GOtv customers, a directive aimed at compensating subscribers affected by the price increase.

Multichoice Nigeria Limited had asked the court in suit number FHC/ABJ/CS/563/2024 to refuse a plaintiff application seeking to compel it to meter its GOtv and DStv decoders to read customers’ subscriptions only per view or during viewing.

FCCPC and NBC were drawn into the fresh legal dispute by Maduabuchi O. Idam Esq, who sought an order compelling the FCCPC, NBC, and the Attorney General of the Federation to direct every TV network provider in Nigeria to regulate or meter their subscriptions to read per view or during viewing and to roll over unused subscriptions after the expiration of the subscription duration.

In the suit, the claimant also seeks an order compelling Multichoice to roll over unused subscriptions upon expiration for Idam and other Nigerian customers, allowing them to maximize their investment in its products.

In this latest suit, Idam alleges that GOtv subscriptions, for instance, are not metered and do not account for viewing time; instead, customers are disconnected from service upon the expiration of their subscription, regardless of usage.

Idam states that apart from the alleged arbitrary price hikes that took effect in May 2024, Multichoice does not allow customers to roll over unused subscriptions, preventing them from fully utilizing their purchased services, citing this development as oppressive.

Multichoice denies the allegations of customer oppression, drawing the court’s attention to prior clarifications from Multichoice and other pay-TV operators during meetings with the NBC regarding the feasibility of the Pay-As-You-Go (PAYG) model, stating that it is not commercially or technically viable in satellite broadcasting due to current technological limitations.

“PAYG has been investigated several times by the National Assembly. In the 8th Assembly, the House Committee on Information, National Orientation, Ethics, and Values, led by Hon. Olusegun Odebunmi, found that allegations of exorbitant Pay-TV subscription charges against Multichoice and the GOtv license holder were unsubstantiated and that the PAYG model is not technically or commercially feasible in the broadcast industry,” Multichoice stated.

In FCCPC’s counter affidavit dated August 16, 2024, Mr. Adedeji Bankole, an officer in the Department of Legal Services of the Commission, countered the claimant’s submission, maintaining that most of the allegations regarding its Pay-Per-View request are incorrect.

Bankole stressed that the FCCPC’s mandate focuses on promoting competition and protecting consumers, but it does not directly regulate how businesses should be run.

He stated that while the FCCPC sets guidelines and enforces laws related to competition and consumer protection, it does not dictate how businesses should be operated or managed.

“The FCCPC is not in any position to direct or compel Multichoice to regulate or meter their subscriptions to read per view or during viewing and to roll over unused subscriptions after the expiration of the subscription duration,” he stated.

He added that the FCCPC has investigated Multichoice several times before and that other subscribers/consumers have taken Multichoice to court in the past over increases in tariffs, and several of those cases are now on appeal.

Meanwhile, Odoeme N.V., representing the NBC, submitted to the court that it received a complaint from the plaintiff dated September 20, 2023, addressed to the Chief Executive Officer of Multichoice TV.

In response to the complaint, it set up a committee to investigate the matter concerning requests for Pay-Per-View, among others.

He stated that Multichoice, through their letters dated October 30, 2023, and April 23, 2024, informed the NBC of their intention to increase the subscription fee.

According to him, the NBC, in its letters dated November 7, 2023, and April 30, 2024, urged and directed Multichoice to suspend the increase while inviting the pay-TV provider for a meeting for further discussion.

“But Multichoice did not honor the invitation. The NBC, on September 28, 2023, wrote to Multichoice to respond to the plaintiff’s complaint, but Multichoice did not respond or make any representation,”

He explained that before the committee established to investigate the plaintiff’s complaint against Multichoice concluded its assignment, the Federal High Court Abuja delivered a judgment declaring that the NBC, not being either the Nigerian Police or the court, does not have the power to investigate or sanction.

The NBC said it is bound by the judgment of the court and cannot presently attend to any complaint against Multichoice for now.

“This judgment forestalled the implementation of the (NBC)committee’s findings. Owing to the said judgment, the NBC could not take any action in sanctioning or giving directives to Multichoice regarding the plaintiff’s complaint,” the NBC stated in its submission.

Furthermore , it was gathered that the court has scheduled December 5, 2024, for a hearing on this legal dispute.

Earlier report has it that Multichoice has faced accusations of exploiting Nigerian customers.

Over the years, the Pay-TV provider has been scrutinized by lawmakers and consumer protection tribunals over its pricing practices.

The hearing follows the Nigerian Competition and Consumer Protection Tribunal’s decision on July 12, 2024, granting a request from lawyer Festus Onifade to withdraw his case against Multichoice Nigeria concerning a price hike of GOtv and DStv subscriptions.

Initially, the tribunal fined Multichoice 150 million naira and mandated a one-month free subscription for violating interim orders, but Multichoice appealed and filed for a stay of proceedings.

The tribunal rescheduled the case to November, but Onifade chose to withdraw the suit, which the tribunal approved without awarding costs.
Multichoice announced new price adjustments for DStv and GOtv packages on Wednesday, April 24, 2024.

An email to subscribers stated, “On Wednesday, May 1, 2024, we will adjust our prices across all our packages on DStv and GOtv. We understand the impact this change may have on you—our valued customer—but the rise in the cost of business operations has led us to make this difficult decision.

It remains our mission to provide the best entertainment and viewing experience to you, and we are committed to continuing to deliver high-quality content and unparalleled service.”

Following Multichoice’s initial objection to the tribunal’s jurisdiction, which was overruled, the decision, issued last Friday, is part of the ongoing legal proceedings focused on consumer protection and fair competition in the Nigerian market.

According to a notice of appeal obtained from sources close to the case, Multichoice is contesting the tribunal’s jurisdiction and the imposed sanctions.

The tribunal, led by Justice Thomas Okosu, ordered Multichoice to provide Nigerian subscribers with one-month free access to DStv and GOtv. 

This directive also follows Multichoice’s non-compliance with interim orders that restrained the company from increasing subscription rates pending the outcome of a motion filed by Barrister Festus Onifade.

Onifade’s lawsuit against Multichoice Nigeria Ltd and the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) accused the Pay-TV giant of unjustly raising subscription fees without adequate notice to customers. 

The tribunal’s interim order, issued earlier, prevented Multichoice from implementing a scheduled price increase on May 1, 2024, until a full hearing could take place.

Multichoice’s lawyer, Moyosore J. Onibanjo (SAN), argued that the tribunal should dismiss the case based on precedent, asserting that similar disputes had been resolved previously in Multichoice’s favour. 

However, Onifade maintained that the core issue was the insufficient notice given to customers regarding the price hike, rather than the hike itself.

The tribunal ruled that it has jurisdiction over the matter under Section 39(2) of the FCCPC Act, which covers all commercial activities aimed at profit across the federation. 

The panel determined that Multichoice’s eight-day notice for the price increase was inadequate and dismissed the company’s preliminary objections. Consequently, the tribunal imposed the N150 million fine and mandated a free subscription period for Nigerian users.

In response to the ruling, Multichoice’s legal team communicated their intent to appeal, pointing to a breach of their right to a fair hearing. They argued that the tribunal delivered a verdict on the merits of the case without allowing Multichoice to fully present its defence.

According to sources, Multichoice has officially filed an appeal, seeking to overturn the tribunal’s decision. Meanwhile, the company has announced new price adjustments for DStv and GOtv packages, which took effect on May 1, 2024, due to rising operational costs. This adjustment has led to a 25% to 26% hike in subscription fees, despite the ongoing legal dispute.

The FCCPC has disclosed that it will review Multichoice’s reasons for the price hike and may involve other regulatory bodies, such as the National Broadcasting Commission (NBC).

In the midst of these developments, Multichoice Group has attributed the decline in active DStv subscribers in Nigeria to the country’s challenging economic conditions. 

In a ruling on Friday, the tribunal ordered the company to provide one-month free subscriptions on DStv and GOtv, for Nigerians.

On April 24, Multichoice Nigeria announced an increase in the cost of subscriptions for its DStv and GOtv packages.

However, on April 29, the tribunal stopped Multi-Choice from increasing its tariffs and cost of products and services, which was scheduled to begin on May 1.

In response, Multichoice Nigeria, in May, challenged the tribunal’s verdict restricting it from increasing the prices of its packages.

The company, through its lawyer, filed an application on April 30 challenging the jurisdiction of the tribunal on the price restraining order make.

In its ruling on Friday, a three-man panel, led by Thomas Okosu, cited section 39(2) of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) Act that states that the “tribunal shall have jurisdiction throughout the federation and on all commercial activities aimed at making a profit”.

“The jurisdiction of this tribunal extends to all business activities within Nigeria,” Okosu ruled.

The Company has jacked up the prices of its offerings in Nigeria four months after its last increment.

The company reviewed prices in its packages across the board. The new prices will take effect from May 1, 2024.

DStv and GOtv New Subscription Rates from May 1, 2024:

With the latest price hike, the DStv Premium package increased from N29,500 to N37,000. Similarly, the DStv Compact+ gone up N19,800 to N25,000 while the Compact package increased from N12,500 to N15,700.

The Comfam package moved from N7,400 to N9,300. Yanga package moved up from 4,200 to N5,100 while Padi package increased from N2,950 to N3,600. HDPVR was increased from N4,000 to N5,000, the Access Fees package from N4,000 to N5,000, and XtraView moved from N4,000 to N5,000.

Meanwhile, the Gotv Supa+ package moved from N12,500 to N15,700, Supa package from N7,600 to N9,600, and Max package from N5,700 to N7,200.

While the Jolli package was jacked up from N3,950 to N4,850, the Jinja package moved from N2,700 to N3,300, and Smallie package from N1,300 to N1,575.

The company implemented an upward review of prices in December 2023, days after announcing a $72m loss in its financial statement for the third quarter of the year.

Checks on the company’s reviewed price list then showed a 20 per cent per cent hike in the company’s packages across the board.

Monopoly can also arise when a producer or supplier offers a product or service which does not have substitutes. It may also arise when a product is not easily available.

Government regulations can also encourage a monopoly when competing players are not allowed into a sector.

For example, the defunct Nigerian Telecommunications Limited (NITEL) was the sole provider of telecom services in Nigeria until the Federal Government deregulated the sector in 2001, leading to the award of GSM licences to MTN, Airtel, Globacom, and later Etisalat Nigeria (now 9mobile).

Also, the former National Electric Power Authority/Power Holding Company of Nigeria (NEPA/PHCN) was a monopoly until 2005 when the Electric Power Sector Reform (EPSR) Act enabled private sector participation in some aspects of electricity services – especially generation and distribution.

As a lone player in the market, a monopoly dictates the price or availability of its product or service. For example, MultiChoice Nigeria, the local subsidiary of South Africa’s pay-tv company was a monopoly for more than two decades; it consistently increases the prices of its services despite lawsuits filed by subscribers seeking to curb the trend.

This year alone, it has raised prices three times. According to Statista, MultiChoice, owners of DStv and Gotv, presently controls 10.23 million, while StarTimes owns 7.81 million market shares respectively.

Rival StarTimes – a partnership between the private sector and the Nigerian Television Authority (NTA) – was launched in 2019. Despite this, monopoly still persists in the segment.

Telecom operators provide mobile communication services including voice, data, internet services and other value-adding services that make the transmission or exchange of communication or information between one or more people possible across long distances using modern technology.

Monopoly in the telecom industry can occur when a dominant operator owns multiple spectrums, controls the largest subscribers  and profits.

A monopolistic network operator might grow so big wielding enormous influence and connection within the regulatory and political leadership of a country.

Speaking on the implications of allowing a monopoly in Nigeria’s telecom market, Chief Adeolu Ogunbanjo, the national president, National Association of Telecommunications Subscribers (NATCOMS), stated that a monopoly can impact quality of telecom service provided as it will depend on the whims and caprice of the dominant operator.

The services may be poor. The industry will be characterised by poor performance and dissatisfaction, low penetration of wireless services and expensive internet, mobile and telephone services.

On the contrary, a competitive and free market ecosystem will lead to high performance and satisfaction, high penetration of wireless services and cheap internet, mobile and telephone services.

Chief Ogunbanjo opposed the recent move by MTN Group to acquire the spectrum of struggling fourth GSM operator, 9mobile, describing it as a potentially-dangerous descent of the nation’s telecom sector into a total monopoly.

“We’ve been back and forth on this and I have had cause to put my mouth on this issue. Again, I will say that MTN is going through the backdoor to acquire that spectrum (9mobile). I’m sorry, but that’s the sad truth and the regulator shouldn’t encourage it at all, they should keep it open,” he stated.

He suggested that it would be better for the board of Emerging Market Telecommunications Services (EMTS) – owners of 9mobile, to recapitalise the business rather than selling the network to MTN, which already controls more than half of the telecom market.

His words:

“With just about 6% of the market share, they (9mobile) are not doing well. For me, I really do not know why they could not recapitalise and why they want another network to acquire them. The other operator (MTN) will now become the dominant service provider. It’s not going to be tidy for the telecoms sector. In my opinion, it should be discouraged. However, even if the merger and acquisition should be done, the regulator should keep it open. Again, you may want to ask, why can’t Glo and Airtel buy it (9mobile)? At least, I think one is 20 something per cent and the other about 30 something per cent of the market share. The regulator should encourage those ones to come to terms with building their network as well.”

The NATCOMS boss further stated that in order to build a more resilient telecom industry with fair competition, other MNOs apart from MTN should be allowed to seek funds to acquire 9mobile should the owners consider it as the most viable business decision.

“There are some funds from multilateral finance organisations. If they (other MNOs) apply, it will be granted, because it’s telecoms and we have the market; we’ve got the subscribers base, we’ve got everything. But for 9mobile, they should at least go to town and recapitalise and then come up again and increase their market shares rather than just having a single-digit market share, which is too low to play and dominate in the Nigerian telecoms sector. Perhaps that might be the driving force for the board members to say, ‘look, we are still single-digit market penetration, so why shouldn’t we just sell out? But, in my honest opinion, I oppose selling out. They should rather recapitalise; they shouldn’t sell out. But if they are going to sell out, it should be thrown open back to the NCC and I expect the NCC to do the needful,’’ Chief Ogunbajo stated.

He further warned that MTN’s acquisition of 9mobile would make the South African telco more powerful.

“They will be too powerful. They will have bigger control of the market and dictate the direction of things in the sector. In their (MTN) early days they had a lot of funds to play with at a very low-interest rate in the 2000/2001 days. They’ve been favoured in a way because the South African Government is ready to assist them as well, plus the fact that multilateral financial organisations are also ready to fund them because of their success stories. But nonetheless, others should not die or go out of extinction because of one particular network operator. They should be encouraged to compete and thrive,’’ he noted.

Chief Ogunbanjo emphasised that, “The moment MTN acquires that (9mobile) with their 43 or 44 per cent market share, which means they will have a minimum of about 50 something per cent and that is half of the Nigerian telecoms market. They’ll have so much power and control over the sector and that means they will be dictating the pace. While I agree it’s a free market, nonetheless we can’t afford to have one dominant force in this space.’’

The NATCOMS President also asserted that allowing a dominant player would be a disincentive to the Federal Government’s efforts at attracting foreign investors into the economy, including the telecom sector.

He stated: “Our President is marketing the country’s economic potential to attract more foreign direct investments; so, it will be wise not to kill the ones available here. We should encourage others to be major players in the sector.

Airtel is there also, they have about 20 whatever per cent; the other one (Glo) is also about 20 something per cent. Encourage these ones as well to be major players in the sector. They shouldn’t allow only one player to overtake the entire industry, which is going to be a disadvantage to the benefits of the other players.

“Aside from that, if you look at Multichoice, they have dominated the pay-tv sector in the country, and they have made three increases this year alone to their subscription rate. We don’t want to see that happen in the telecoms sector.

No! We don’t. They will be dictating the pace because they have the volume and they control more than 50 per cent market share. And that won’t be tidy for the Nigerian telecoms industry.’’

Chief Ogunbanjo advised the industry regulator, Nigeria Communications Commission, to initiate and implement innovations that can strengthen the Nigerian telecom sector, including ensuring fair and level-playing field for all operators.

“As a regulator, they should regulate and ensure that every Mobile Network Operator (MNO) competes pretty well within the space and also ensure the competition is healthy. They should regulate the entire telecoms sector without giving any form of preferential treatment to another at the detriment to the growth and development of others. Let NCC keep its operations open and be fair to all parties concerned by ensuring that they are transparent in whatever spectrum that they want to sell or return or give back to the NCC, so that other MNOs can take advantage of the potential in the market, and if possible, acquire the spectrum.

“For instance, I know that some of them have now started deploying the 5G, though China is already looking at the 6th Generation already, but let’s get ours right first. So, it’s good, let them keep exploring other things, but to acquire another MNO’s spectrum is unacceptable. But, if the likes of Airtel and Glo say, look, we don’t have the money, then it is good and fine for a takeover. But, it has to be through the right channel and not the backdoor,’’ the NATCOMS boss said.

*Oluwatosin Agunbiade is a freelance Journalist from Lagos