Minister for Communications and Digitisation, Sam George, has emerged in recent months as a vociferous champion for Ghanaian consumers struggling under DSTV’s subscription fees.
He had called for price reductions, threatened licence suspensions, rejected what he labelled “illogical” proposals from MultiChoice, and pressed for more value.
But as with many hot-button political fights, the question arises: has his rhetoric matched the outcomes? Or is there a gap between what he promises and what is delivered?
“My goal wasn’t to destroy DStv, but to deliver value for Ghanaians.”
Good slogans, noble intentions. But let’s dig into the timeline and consequences, the points where the double standard charges stick.
Initial Demand vs Final Outcome
• In July 2025, George demanded 30% price reductions, citing improvements in the cedi and widespread dissatisfaction.
• Later, after weeks of regulatory pressure, a value upgrade offer was negotiated: customers would be moved to higher value bouquets. Some users would see “33 50% increased value” depending on their package.
The issue: “Increased value” is not the same as “lower cost.” Many expect lower monthly fees. What George initially framed as a demand for price cuts has morphed into upgrades, which may feel like more channels or features but might not reduce actual cash outflows for the consumer in all cases.
Threats vs Enforcement
• George publicly threatened to suspend DSTV’s broadcasting licence if price reductions were not applied by certain dates — August 7 was such a deadline. Then, in later statements (by late September), the offer from MultiChoice was accepted, and upgrades will begin from October 1.
The issue: Were these licences ever in real danger? Or were the threats largely leverage for negotiation? If so, is it fair to label the earlier stance as “firm enforcement” when what ensued was a compromise rather than a direct price cut?
Comparisons with Other Countries
• One of George’s arguments is that Ghanaian consumers are paying far more than customers in other countries (Nigeria is often cited) for the same Premium bouquet. Yet, while invoking those comparisons, the final measure does not seem to have fully aligned Ghana’s pricing with those benchmarked countries — rather, consumers are getting more “value” for the price. Which again begs the question: is the outcome meeting the original benchmark of fairness?
Promises about Local Content, Promotions, vs Sustainability
• The minister has argued that the pricing issue is not just about cost, but value, service quality, and content relevance.
• He’s also stressed the government’s regulatory role, public accountability, and that corporations should not be able to exploit cost differences.
The issue: For many consumers, what matters most is what comes off their bank balances. If the value upgrades require maintained or even increased payments in many bouquets, then “value” is a comforting word but may not relieve financial pressure. Some people see a difference between token “upgrades” and real price relief.
Some consumers indicated that “I’m happy I get more channels, but I still pay almost the same. Does that change much when bills rise?” While another said, “If they reduced the fees, I’d feel the relief. Getting more for the same doesn’t always help me save.”
So, is Sam George guilty of double standards? Maybe not entirely, but there are legitimate criticisms:
• When you promise a cut, people expect lower fees, not just fancier bouquets.
• When you threaten enforcement, people expect consequences if providers don’t comply, not just protracted negotiations.
• And when comparisons with other countries fuel expectations, outcomes that fall short risk eroding trust.
Conclusion:
1. The minister should clarify: for every bouquet, is the price dropping? Or are only features increasing?
2. Also, provide transparent comparisons of what people pay in Ghana vs Nigeria (or other markets) after the value upgrades.
3. Set clear enforcement and prevent non-achievement from being excused by “promotional offers.”
Until then, supporters will respect the drive, but critics will question whether it’s more showmanship than substance.
In the end, it’s not just about phrases like “fairness” and “value” — it’s about impact in people’s pockets. If Sam George’s mission truly is to deliver relief to Ghanaians, then the measure of his success will be seen in reduced burden, not just upgraded channels.
Source: Martha Crentsil Acquah
