Abraham Muhumuza

Dear Patriot @KejengeR No, agency is one proposed option, not an instruction to work for MTN or give up your business. Other pathways to compliance also include independent licensing and, for qualifying not-for-profit groups, Communal Access licensing. I understand the anxiety. You bought equipment, found customers and built something. You deserve to know whether the next arrangement protects that investment. Consider a shopkeeper who adds mobile money or agency banking. They contribute premises, working capital, and customer relationships, while the regulated provider supplies its platform and established service framework. Customers get a nearby place to transact, the agent earns income, and the provider reaches more people. That’s why agency is a tried-and-tested approach, though telecommunications has its own requirements. For a hotspot owner, a well-structured partnership could work similarly: a licensed ISP provides resale capacity, and the parties agree on earnings, training, and clear customer and compliance responsibilities. The entrepreneur contributes local knowledge and delivery without necessarily taking on the full burden of becoming an independent ISP. But yes, the agreement must benefit both sides. It should clearly define equipment ownership, pricing, earnings, support, customer relationships, and exit terms. Agency must never be an excuse for exploitation. Some WiFi hotspot resellers know networking well but entered the business without clear guidance on their legal obligations. Technical expertise and regulatory knowledge are different things. @UCC_Official and providers will help bridge that gap respectfully. The opportunity is to pair your enterprise with an accountable operating structure. Fair terms and proper authorisation can make it workable, without depending on one company. #Tulinamwe