Smart questions delayed number porting service for Globe’s GOMO
Smart Telecommunications is calling out rival Globe Telecom for the late implementation of number porting for the latter’s brand, GOMO.
Smart said in a statement on Wednesday it had sought clarity from the National Telecommunications Commission (NTC) since telcos were mandated to comply with Republic Act No. 11202 or the Mobile Number Portability (MNP) Act.
Number porting, which allows subscribers to easily switch between telco providers and plans without changing mobile numbers, was formally rolled out last Sept. 30—more than two years since the law was signed.
But GOMO, according to a Smart letter to the NTC that was cited in the statement, told subscribers last Sept. 30 that porting services would only be available “by October 2021 due to unavoidable technical issues.”
Globe, which allowed number porting for its other brands, has not yet responded to requests for comment.
No exceptions
“The MNP Act applies to all MSPs (mobile service providers) without exception and GOMO subscribers can demand from Globe a seamless network switch starting September 30,” Smart said in its letter to NTC Commissioner Gamaliel A. Cordoba.
“We do not believe that Globe is above the law, that is why we are asking the Commission’s clarification on this issue,” it added.
GOMO was launched by Globe last year and marketed as a fully digital service with flexible data options.
Last April, GOMO announced it had reached over 1 million subscribers.
Meanwhile, Smart, Globe and Dito Telecommunity have been ramping up their marketing efforts for the implementation of mobile number switching.
The three companies jointly operate Telecommunications Connectivity Inc., their number porting venture.
Number porting should be free of charge while processing will take no longer than 48 hours, according to the rules issued by the NTC.
The law allows subscribers to move between their preferred telcos and plans without penalties.
However, not all subscribers could avail of number portability. Restrictions covered those with outstanding debts or users who were blacklisted due to fraud.
