A tribunal has recently ruled that this pay-per-view platform should suspend its price hike until further notice.
A ‘concerned’ Nigerian had taken the firm to the tribunal, arguing that the company did not provide sufficient notice to its customers before implementing a price increase, thereby violating specific regulations.
I have also heard that Multichoice has appealed the judgment.
But let me say this, even at the risk of being sub judice, if that applies in this case. Last time I checked, pay TV was not a social service.
The firm was not established with taxpayer money and is not operated with government funds, to the best of my knowledge.
Therefore, issues regarding the pricing of their services should be managed by its management and shareholders while also being guided by the forces of demand and supply and fair play.
That said, I think the bullying of Multichoice should stop forthwith unless I am missing something here.
The firm operates under the same volatile economic conditions as others who have been hiking their prices. Have you bought a carton of Indomie noodles recently? It has major inputs priced in foreign exchange and, as such, is vulnerable to the volatility of that market.
It is faced with horrendous price fluctuations in diesel, a major input, increasing human capital costs including some priced in forex, and reducing the purchasing power of the people, thereby stunting market share acquisition, among other challenges.
In trying to stay afloat, they increase subscription fees, and we cry foul when we are neither shareholders, share any part of their operating expenses, nor truly require their services in the real sense of the word as an essential service.
By heckling them each time they try to stay afloat by increasing prices, we are attempting to reap where we did not sow. The dollar hit N1,400 last week, tripling the acquisition costs of those favourite programs and shows that draw us to them, and we expect the subscription rate to remain stable.
Are there any government buffers, tax waivers, or incentives that can stabilize subscription rates?
Are we a serious people? If DSTV sets its prices, why not just move on? It’s not a social or essential service, nor is it benefiting from any subsidy like fuel and power, which gives us the right to protest any hike.
This is solely a private business concern with capital risks borne by a group of people and not the government.
This court case should have seen the government in the dock, pressuring it to make the operating environment a little more bearable, not a beleaguered firm buffeted by inclement harsh operating conditions.
In all of this, all tiers of government are pushing different levels of taxation their way with no respite, so they are struggling with increasing costs, diminishing revenues, lower margins, disappearing shareholder value and in response, they decide to hike prices.
This is expected to throw their services into a higher income bracket where they intend to create and maintain better margins, and we scream?
All of this is because they seem to hold a monopoly on broadcasting the best football leagues in the world. These leagues have captivated Nigerians from all income brackets and seem to provide a respite, hence the hue and cry anytime there is news of a price hike.
My people, since the government is still subsidizing power and fuel—wuruwuru subsidy—then more energy should be expended in getting them to subsidize football on NTA so that we can continue watching our favorite leagues free of charge while ignoring the local leagues.
My people, Multichoice is a private concern and must reserve the right to fix its prices within the bounds of pragmatic market forces and under the guidelines of fair play and equity.
If we can no longer afford it, we leave it and move on, after all, we still have NTA.
The bullying must stop.
