Online Reporter
Jacqueline Ntaka, [email protected]
THERE is still something familiar — and yet increasingly fragile — about conversations around tariffs in Zimbabwe’s telecommunications sector. For years, the pattern had been the same. Potraz explains that costs are rising, operators need relief, and adjustments become necessary to keep the industry alive. Fuel prices move, exchange rates shift, and imported equipment becomes more expensive. The reasoning was not new, and on paper, it always made sense.
But in 2026 the ground has shifted.
If anything, the old approach — of simply raising tariffs to match rising costs — is no longer as straightforward as it once was. The arrival and steady growth of alternatives like Starlink have quietly changed the rules of the game. What used to be a closed, predictable market is now one that demands far more thought, caution, and even restraint.
In fact, if there is one clear reality now, it is this: tariff increases can no longer happen automatically. They must be carefully weighed, measured, and in some cases, avoided altogether.
Let us start, once again, with the operators.
Telecommunications companies still face the same pressures. Their costs have not gone away. They still need foreign currency for equipment, upgrades, licences and maintenance. Infrastructure still demands heavy investment. Those challenges remain real, and no one can pretend otherwise.
But survival is no longer just about covering costs — it is about keeping customers. And that is where the old model begins to show its limits. In a market where consumers now have alternatives, even if only for a portion of the population, the idea of simply passing costs onto the user becomes risky. Every price increase carries a new question: will customers stay, or will they look elsewhere?
That alone changes the role of tariff policy.
Where once increases were seen as a way of stabilising the sector, today they must be handled with care because they can just as easily weaken it. Push prices too high, and you do not just strain households — you push your own customers away.
This is why, in today’s environment, a different idea begins to emerge — one that would have seemed unlikely a few years ago.
Lower prices, or at least stable ones, can be an advantage.
In the presence of Starlink and other alternatives, competitiveness matters just as much as sustainability. A telecoms operator that finds ways to improve efficiency, manage costs, or offer better value stands a better chance of keeping its customer base. In some cases, holding prices steady — or even reducing them — may do more for long-term survival than repeated increases.
This is not just economic theory. It is market reality.
Consumers, on their part, are also in a different position. They still feel the pressure of high costs — that has not changed. Connectivity is still essential for work, business, and everyday life. But they are no longer entirely without choice.
And even where options are limited, the awareness of alternatives matters. It creates a silent comparison in the minds of users: not just how much they are paying, but what they are getting in return.
That shifts expectations.
People begin to demand value, not just access. Reliability, speed, and fairness become just as important as price. In that environment, raising tariffs without improving service becomes harder to justify.
Potraz, meanwhile, finds itself in a more complex position than before. It is no longer just balancing operators and consumers in isolation. It is overseeing a market that is gradually opening, where external players introduce new standards and new pressures.
That means regulation itself must evolve.
*Jacqueline Ntaka is the CEO of Mviyo Technologies, a local tech company that provides custom software development, mobile applications and data analytics solutions. She can be contacted on [email protected]
