Dear Editor,

This is an open letter to Mr Dunstan Wright’s opinion piece in the Caribbean Business Report last Friday.

Dear Mr Wright,

I write regarding your article published in the Jamaica Observer on Friday 2nd March 2012, entitled ‘Why the Digicel/Claro deal is bad for Jamaicans’.

In your article there are numerous significant inaccuracies regarding Digicel and its acquisition of Claro. Indeed, these are so telling that one would question whether this ought rightly to have been placed as a paid advertorial by LIME.

The extent of these inaccuracies is a matter of such concern to Digicel that we feel it necessary to bring these to your attention.

As such, I would like to point out the following blatant misrepresentations:

1. Contrary to your repeated assertions, Digicel’s acquisition of Claro in fact has benefited Jamaica and Jamaican consumers. This is evident from Digicel’s imminent launch of 4G mobile and the rate reductions which Digicel has implemented since January 4, 2012.

2. In your article you question why Digicel does not give “cash-strapped Jamaicans a break and reduce its high rates”. Perhaps you failed to note the newspaper’s front page article entitled, “Digicel cuts rates” in which it reports Digicel’s new one rate option of $8.99 to call across all networks in Jamaica — that’s calls to any number on any local network, at any time. As the champion of competition, Digicel has yet again delivered on its promise of best value with the introduction of our one rate option. I should also point out that in 11 years in Jamaica, Digicel has never increased its rates, despite external factors (such as inflation and the devaluation of the Jamaican dollar), which have impacted the economy.

3. The idea that LIME is unable to compete is unfounded. When Digicel launched in Jamaica almost 11 years ago, it faced an incumbent that had been in operation for over 100 years. Despite that, Digicel worked tirelessly to deliver on its commitments of best value, best service and best network, as well as moving its communities forward in a positive way. As a result, the Jamaican people took us into their hearts. We have never once taken that for granted and today we continue to challenge ourselves. Rather than complaining and playing the victim, LIME would be better off focusing on running its business and reducing its operating costs. That is how you compete.

4. On the interconnect point, Digicel does not charge to LIME a higher rate for mobile termination than what Digicel is charged by LIME for the same service. The fact is that the mobile termination rates charged between both Digicel and LIME are reciprocal. This means that Digicel pays to LIME the same charges for interconnect which LIME pays to Digicel. These rates were agreed voluntarily by both Digicel and LIME in 2001.

5. Further, your assertion that before the deal, LIME customers paid $5 to call a Claro number is patently false. Prior to the deal, LIME customers were (and continue to be) charged $12 to make cross-network calls to Claro numbers — this notwithstanding the much publicised termination rate reduction which LIME agreed with Claro in 2009.

6. Regarding Digicel’s acquisition of Claro, you state that Digicel is “circumventing the licence conditions”. This is patently false. Digicel received approval from the prime minister of Jamaica for the transfer of control of Claro’s operations to Digicel. As part of this process we have migrated Claro customers to the Digicel network and the Claro network has been shut down. Digicel has never been obliged to operate and maintain two separate networks. Indeed, had this been imposed, it would have been contrary to the law.

7. What evidence is there that LIME is trying to reduce its prices? All we see is LIME talking about it and yet it has not made any effort to reduce pricing, unlike Digicel, which has reduced cross-net rates twice since January 2012.

In light of these substantial errors in your article, I look forward to hearing from you on your plans to rectify same.

Mark Linehan

Digicel Jamaica CEO