JANUARYandFEBRUARY2012GSMOPERATORSQoSKPISUMMARYSHEET S/N 1 2 3 4 5

OPERATORS MTN GLO EMTS AIRTEL NCCTARGET

CSSR
JAN' 12 96.41 95.57 98.04 97.02 98% FEB 12 96.71 96.42 97.80 97.17

CDR
JAN' 12 1.34 1.81 1.21 0.84 2% FEB 12 1.33 1.78 1.32 0.87

HoSR
JAN' 12 95.34 96.27 92.98 96.94 98% FEB 12 95.1 97.21 92.90 96.65

SDCCH
JAN' 12 0.73 1.64 1.32 0.47 1% FEB 12 0.62 1.91 2.25 0.67

CCR
JAN' 12 95.12 93.84 96.94 96.18 96% FEB 12 95.42 94.81 96.61 96.32

TCHCoNG.
JAN 12 1.22 4.81 1.34 0.53 2% FEB 12 1.20 1.66 1.38 0.62

Feb'12CSSR%
98.5 98% 98 97.8%

97.5 97.15% 97 96.71% 96.5 96.42%

96

95.5 MTN AIRTEL MTN AIRTEL GLO GLO ETISA ETISA TARGET TARGET

1. NCCCSSRTarget98%:

MTN, AIRTEL; GLO, ETISALAT; failed to meet the Commissions target in period under review. Etislat and Airtel can be said have a fair performancewhencomparedwithMTNandGlointheperiodunderreview.

Feb"12CCR%
98.5 98 97.5 97 96.5 96 95.5 95 94.5 94 93.5 93 MTN AIRTEL MTN AIRTEL GLO GLO ETISA ETISA TARGET TARGET 95.42 94.81 96.32 96% 97.8

2. NCCCCRTarget96%: MTNandGlofailedtomeettheCommissionstargetintheperiodunderreview. EtisalathadthebestperformancefollowedbyAirtelintheperiodunderreview.

Feb'12DCR%
2.5

2 1.78 1.65 1.5 1.32

2%

0.87

0.5

0 MTN AIRTEL MTN AIRTEL GLO GLO ETISALAT ETISALAT TARGET TARGET

3. NCCDCRTarget 2%:

AlltheOperatorsmettheCommissiontargetintheperiodunderreview.DespitemeetingtheCommissionstargetGloandMTNrecordedhigher valuesofDropCallRatewhileAirtelhadthebestperformanceintheperiodunderreview.

Feb'12TCH%
2.5 2% 2 1.66 1.5 1.2 1 0.62 0.5 1.38

0 MTN AIRTEL MTN AIRTEL GLO GLO ETISA ETISA TARGET TARGET

4. NCCTCHCongTarget2%:

AlloperatorsmettheCommissionstargetintheperiodunderreview.SignificantimprovementwasobservedonGlonetwork. AirtelhadthebestperformanceonthisKPIwhencomparedwithothersintheperiodunderreview.

2.5

Feb'12SDCCH%
2.25

1.91

1.5

1 0.62 0.5 0.67

0.01 0 MTN AIRTEL MTN AIRTEL GLO GLO ETISA ETISA TARGET TARGET

5. NCCSDCCHCongTarget0.01:

All the Operators failed to meet the Commission target in the period under review. However, MTN and Airtel recorded lower values on the SDCCH Cong when compared with Glo and Etisalat. Etisalat also recorded the worst performance in the period review. The SDCCH Cong record showstendencyofheavycongestionsettingintoEtisalatsnetworkwhencomparedwithitsDecember,2011andJanuary2012records.

Feb'12HOSR%
99 98% 98 97.21 97 96 95.1 95 94 93 92 91 90 MTN AIRTEL MTN AIRTEL GLO GLO ETISALAT ETISALAT TARGET TARGET 92.7 96.65

6. NCCHoSRTarget98%:

AlltheoperatorsfailedtomeettheCommissionstargetintheperiodunderreview.However,fairperformancerecordswasobservedonAirtel andGlonetworksintheperiodunderreview.Etisalathadtheworstperformancerecordwhencomparedwithothersintheperiodunder review.

Comments February 2012 QoS Report

Airtel
Airtel recorded marginal improvements in CSSR, CCR, andamarginaldecayonTCH, SDCCH and DCR when compared with January 2012 performancerecord. Airtel had good performance on the respective QoS Kpi when compared with the Commission targets in the periodunderreview. Its overall performance can be said to be good in the period under review. See summary sheet for ease of reference.

Etisalat
Etisalat had marginal decay across the KPIs in the period under review when compared with January 2012 performancestat. Etisalat performed creditably well in three of the five KPIs, and worse in the SDCCH when compared with the Commission targets in the periodunderreview. Its overall performance can be said to be good with the exception of the SDCCH performance which was worse intheperiodunderreview.See summary sheet for ease of reference.

Globacom
Globacom had marginal improvement across the KPIs in the period under review except for SDCCH when compared with December2011andJanuary2012 performance stats. The TCH had significant improvement in the period under review when compared with previous performances.

MTN
MTN recorded marginal improvements on all the KPIs in the period under review when compared with January 2012performancestat. MTN however passed in three KPI when compared with the Commissionstargets. Its overall performance can be said to be fair in the period under review. See summary sheetforeaseofreference.

Globacom seems to show consistent improvement on all theKPIssinceJanuary2012when compared with December 2011performance.

This is the first time Globacom is having such consistent performanceimprovement

Its overall performance can be said to be fair in the period under review. See summary sheet for easeofreference

Attention:
Improvementdoesnotmeanthenewkeyperformanceindicatorthresholdismet;itmeansthatthetrendtoreachthethresholdisprogressing towardsthesettargetoftheindicatortakingintoconsiderationthechallengestheoperatorsarefacingtoday.

DecaymeansthePerformanceIndicatorconcernedisslightlyworsethaninthepreviousmonth.

PoormeanstheIndicatorisconsistentlypoorintheperiodunderreview.