From 1st June 2021, Astro will be charging RM 5 extra for those with Astro Movies package whether consumers want  the Disney and Hotstar movies package or not.   It appears that Astro can “make changes to the packages” as per terms and conditions as they so wish that results in the increase in the price of the package for their customers.  

It is sad that the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) is allowing Atro to force existing consumers to accept a package that they never agreed to. It appears that Astro can over-charge as they please without the explicit consent of the consumers.

This is a clear assault on consumer’s right to choose.

Will the regulator, the MCMC step in to protect consumers’ rights?

While the Disney and Hotstar may be good packages with good value for money, consumers should have the right to make the choice to accept that package. At this particular time when many consumers have lost their jobs or had their incomes reduced to the pandemic, they should be given a choice whether they want to spend more on their monthly Astro bill. This approval must be explicit. No seller can use “make changes to the packages” clause to arbitrarily force a package which involves increased payment on consumers, more so at this point of time. Consumers should always be given a choice, but more so at this point of challenging economic times.

The telcos and the media and broadcastings companies are indeed powerful industries with immense lobbying power. The role of the regulator is to balance the power of the industry and the protection of the consumers. Without the protection by the regulator, the telco industry and media and broadcasting companies would seek higher profits through low quality services and over-pricing. There would be no protection for consumers. Consumers would be at the mercy of the industry.

Astro, is almost a monopoly; thus consumers have no choice and thus Astro can charge or “change their packages” as they wish and consumers will be forced to accept their deal. Only an arrogant monopoly can inform its customers that if consumers do not want to pay the extra RM5, they should cancel their entire movie package. An arrogant monopoly confident of a regulator that is unwilling to act to protect consumers’ rights.

Even in the telco industry, there appears to be a move towards mergers and thus reducing free competition towards a more monopolistic industry when consumers would definitely suffer. Will MCMC which informs it has the tools to protect consumers, actually act to protect consumers by ensuring adequate competition in the market?

FOMCA calls on Astro to get explicit consent for consumers to accept the new packages and thus willing to pay extra. Failing Astro’s willingness to be fair to consumers and instead move ahead to unjustly charge consumers, FOMCA calls on MCMC to ensure that consumer fairness, justice and protection is ensured by forcing the seller to get consumers explicit consent in changing the package where consumers may now have to pay extra.