PPP - A famous protocol for reliable customer access, control, and maintenance has another meaning with EC announcements on NGN investment framework. Public Private Participation is a welcome idea for rapid roll out on upcoming technologies. Collaboration is a well known concepts in Telecommunication industry, Operators have to share available infrastructure, Route servers have to share inter continent routes, Internet exchanges have to share traffic. collaboration is the base for Internet and hence telecom network as a whole. This has an added advantage when it comes to creating a fibre infrastructure, Infinite bandwidth that fibre offer is inevitable in Next Generation Network (NGN) roll out. Voice, Video, and Data tripe play offerings need more bandwidth, Upcoming technologies like LTE, WiMax, LTE advanced, and WiMax advanced base stations need a reliable high bandwidth interconnection. Having a fibre optic infrastructure and latest technology access network is inevitable in NGN.
Europe is well behind in FTTH
Today there are signs that Western Europe is falling behind the rest of the world in FTTH deployment, which worries Europes equipment manufacturers. Idate in a report published earlier this year said the Asian market accounted for 80% of the worlds 28.2 million FTTx subscribers last year. There were a total of 22.5 million fibre subscribers in Asia by the end of June 2008, with Japan leading the way with 13 million. Europe took a 7.4% share of global FTTH/B subscribers and the US 5.2% said Idate.
The government in Singapore asked operators to bid for contracts to provide a passive dark fibre network, and a separate active network which would be open to multiple service providers.Singtel, the national incumbent, was part of a four-party consortium that last year won the national dark fibre contract, thereby giving the consortium access to Singtels ducts.
Regulatory Positions in Europe:
ECTA accepts the principle that operators should share investments in joint ventures, but it doesnt trust incumbents to create a competitive environment. If competition and choice for consumers and businesses are guaranteed through this arrangement then regulation could be removed. But we have seen no signs that incumbents are seriously interested in negotiating in good faith with their rivals, except as a means to delay and confuse the process, it says in a statement.
The reality is there are n't that many substantive build these networks. There is a bit of a view in some parts of telecoms that we have an automatic right to participate without any investment. That is not reasonable.Current European regulation is geared to promote infrastructure-based competition by providing a relatively low cost of market entry through wholesale access to former incumbents copper networks. That has allowed fixed alternative operators to acquire customers before investing in partial and full un-bundling. The ECs current draft recognizes that NGAs change the ground rules and will need new regulatory models. Any operator that combined an infrastructure monopoly with service provisioning would likely face long-term regulation. Do not expect European governments building open access networks with substantial public funds as planned in Australia and New Zealand. The Australian government, for example, in April said it will oversee the construction of an A$43 billion nationwide fiber-to-the-premises (FTTP) network through a company in which it will hold a minimum 51% stake. In Europe there wont be that level of state financing. Most of it will be built with private money, says Feasey.
Certainly, some government funding plans are receiving a mixed response. In the UK, the government reportedly is considering going against the politically sensitive recommendation in the June Digital Britain report to tax phone services in order to part-fund next-generation access networks in rural areas. And in the US, the three largest operators have chosen not to apply for funding from the first round of the broadband stimulus package to roll out services in un-served and under served regions. Whatever approach is taken, Shared investment mode can maintain competition and protect consumer interests. There isn't a trade-off between competition and investment. Minimum number of players is needed. The mobile market is the only one where we have seen significant network investment and where there is what most regulators would regard as acceptable levels of competition. Mobile networks are not perfectly competitive as there are not thousands of service providers. There are three or four.
Collaborations so far in Europe:
Mobile operators, and notably Vodafone, already share passive infrastructure in some European countries. In Sweden, Tele2 and Telenor this year went a step further and agreed to share active mobile infrastructure for LTE networks, reflecting a move to focus on the branding and distribution of services rather than exclusive control of the underlying networks.Its all about branding and really understanding customer needs and distribution, says Lars-Ake Norling, CEO of Telenor Sweden, explaining the decision to share with Tele2 both the RAN and spectrum of their future 4G networks.
Vodafone already has struck a deal for fixed network sharing. Last December Vodafone Germany and Deutsche Telekom announced they would provide each other with wholesale access to VDSL networks to be built in Heilbronn by Vodafone and in Wurzburg by Deutsche Telekom.
The UK has taken a different approach to opening up infrastructure, introducing structural separation of the copper loop. But in many countries structural separation has proven unpalatable.
Europe is well behind in FTTH
Today there are signs that Western Europe is falling behind the rest of the world in FTTH deployment, which worries Europes equipment manufacturers. Idate in a report published earlier this year said the Asian market accounted for 80% of the worlds 28.2 million FTTx subscribers last year. There were a total of 22.5 million fibre subscribers in Asia by the end of June 2008, with Japan leading the way with 13 million. Europe took a 7.4% share of global FTTH/B subscribers and the US 5.2% said Idate.
The government in Singapore asked operators to bid for contracts to provide a passive dark fibre network, and a separate active network which would be open to multiple service providers.Singtel, the national incumbent, was part of a four-party consortium that last year won the national dark fibre contract, thereby giving the consortium access to Singtels ducts.
Regulatory Positions in Europe:
ECTA accepts the principle that operators should share investments in joint ventures, but it doesnt trust incumbents to create a competitive environment. If competition and choice for consumers and businesses are guaranteed through this arrangement then regulation could be removed. But we have seen no signs that incumbents are seriously interested in negotiating in good faith with their rivals, except as a means to delay and confuse the process, it says in a statement.
The reality is there are n't that many substantive build these networks. There is a bit of a view in some parts of telecoms that we have an automatic right to participate without any investment. That is not reasonable.Current European regulation is geared to promote infrastructure-based competition by providing a relatively low cost of market entry through wholesale access to former incumbents copper networks. That has allowed fixed alternative operators to acquire customers before investing in partial and full un-bundling. The ECs current draft recognizes that NGAs change the ground rules and will need new regulatory models. Any operator that combined an infrastructure monopoly with service provisioning would likely face long-term regulation. Do not expect European governments building open access networks with substantial public funds as planned in Australia and New Zealand. The Australian government, for example, in April said it will oversee the construction of an A$43 billion nationwide fiber-to-the-premises (FTTP) network through a company in which it will hold a minimum 51% stake. In Europe there wont be that level of state financing. Most of it will be built with private money, says Feasey.
Certainly, some government funding plans are receiving a mixed response. In the UK, the government reportedly is considering going against the politically sensitive recommendation in the June Digital Britain report to tax phone services in order to part-fund next-generation access networks in rural areas. And in the US, the three largest operators have chosen not to apply for funding from the first round of the broadband stimulus package to roll out services in un-served and under served regions. Whatever approach is taken, Shared investment mode can maintain competition and protect consumer interests. There isn't a trade-off between competition and investment. Minimum number of players is needed. The mobile market is the only one where we have seen significant network investment and where there is what most regulators would regard as acceptable levels of competition. Mobile networks are not perfectly competitive as there are not thousands of service providers. There are three or four.
Collaborations so far in Europe:
Mobile operators, and notably Vodafone, already share passive infrastructure in some European countries. In Sweden, Tele2 and Telenor this year went a step further and agreed to share active mobile infrastructure for LTE networks, reflecting a move to focus on the branding and distribution of services rather than exclusive control of the underlying networks.Its all about branding and really understanding customer needs and distribution, says Lars-Ake Norling, CEO of Telenor Sweden, explaining the decision to share with Tele2 both the RAN and spectrum of their future 4G networks.
Vodafone already has struck a deal for fixed network sharing. Last December Vodafone Germany and Deutsche Telekom announced they would provide each other with wholesale access to VDSL networks to be built in Heilbronn by Vodafone and in Wurzburg by Deutsche Telekom.
The UK has taken a different approach to opening up infrastructure, introducing structural separation of the copper loop. But in many countries structural separation has proven unpalatable.
