mobile network sharing : facilitating deployment of mobile broadband
TRANSCRIPT
© Cullen International SA 2017
Veronica Bocarova – Cullen International
EaPeReg Workshop on Broadband Development
Chisinau – April 6-7, 2017
Mobile network sharing:
facilitating deployment of mobile broadband
© Cullen International SA 2017
infrastructure sharing
national roamingcases & regulatory
approaches introduction
© Cullen International SA 20173
Infrastructure sharing and national roaming
• host MNO willing to increase network usage (under-utilised network)
• mutual roaming or network sharing to complement coverage
Commercial agreement
• symmetrical, applies to all operators
• policy goals: efficient use of resources, coverage, environment, emergency services
Law
implementation of policy goal: newmarket entry, coverage and rollout(roaming and/or network sharing provisions)
Licence
• telecom: SMP obligations on market 15/2003 (roaming)
• antitrust: remedy in M&As or restrictive agreements
Remedy
Legal basis
© Cullen International SA 20174
Infrastructure sharing
© Cullen International SA 20175
Passive infrastructure sharing
Source: Vodafone
Sites and masts
© Cullen International SA 20176
• MORAN (Multi Operator Radio Access Network) – dedicated frequiencies
• MOCN (Multi Operator Core Network) – shared (pooled) frequiencies
Active infrastructure sharing Radio access network (with/without spectrum)
Source: Vodafone
© Cullen International SA 20177
Why infrastructure sharing?
Source: Vodafone
Passive: 10-15% in
both CapEx and OpEx
RAN: 25-40% in CapEx
20-30% in OpEx
Cost savings
© Cullen International SA 20178
Why infrastructure sharing?Other considerations
• To facilitate rollout and expand coverage into underserved rural areas. Less likely to occur on commercial basis in the markets where coverage is seen as key differentiator
• To increase coverage and provide additional capacity in densely populated urban areas where it is difficult to acquire new sites
• Investments into independent infrastructure companies (tower business) has become popular in some countries –either owned by third parties or jointly owned by MNOs
© Cullen International SA 20179
National roaming
© Cullen International SA 201710
National roaming
• An agreement among operators to use each other’s networks to provide services in geographic areas where they have no coverage (possible even within the licensed areas)
• Occurs between MNOs (usually direct competitors) in the same country
• Operators do not share any network elements as such but use each other’s network to provide services to their customers
• Enables a mobile subscriber to automatically make and receive voice calls, send and receive data, or access other services when travelling outside the coverage area of the home network, by using a visited network
© Cullen International SA 201711
Why national roaming?
• To enable a new entrant offering a national service within a limited period while it is still rolling out its own national network
• To ensure national coverage in case of fragmented regional licences
• To facilitate coverage of rural or remote areas
• To ensure uninterrupted network access in emergency situations
© Cullen International SA 201712
Why national roaming?
New entrant
network not (yet) national coverage
2G
3G
3G
4G
2G
2G/3G
3G
2G/3G
roam on
roam on
roam on
roam on
complement
fall back
complement
fall back
Facilitating market entry
© Cullen International SA 201713
EU regulatory approach
Focus on passive sharing
NRAs shall “be able to impose the sharing of facilities or
property, including buildings, entries to buildings, building
wiring, masts, antennae, towers and other supporting
constructions, ducts, conduits, manholes, cabinets”
Article 12(1) Framework Directive 2002/21/EC
© Cullen International SA 201714
In Germany and the UK
First, and so far only, completed assessment by the European
Commission under Article 101 TFEU
2003
Passive site sharing and national roaming,
(possibly extending to RAN in Germany)
EU regulatory approach
© Cullen International SA 201715
2003
Sharing of basic network infrastructure only (such as
masts, power supply, racking and cooling)
Does not restrict competition under art. 101.1
TFEU
EU regulatory approach
Passive sharing
© Cullen International SA 201716
EU regulatory approachNational roaming – European Commission
• Coverage, roll-out, prices and
quality of service
• Especially in urban areas where
good opportunities for the rollout
of competitive networks
Does restrict
competition by
effect
• Promotes market entry, better
and quicker 3G services and
increasing retail competition
• Differentiated between urban
and rural areas
• Exemption for a start-up period
until O2 had set up its own
network in Germany
Can be temporary
exempted under
art. 101.3 TFEU
2003
© Cullen International SA 201717
EU regulatory approachNational roaming – EU General Court
• Commission’s analysis of the effect of
national roaming agreement on
competition flawed
• No restriction of competition
O2 appealed
• Commission had not properly assessed the
extent to which the agreement was necessary
for O2 to enter the market (the counterfactual)
• Dependence of O2 on T-Mobile designed to be
temporary
• May actually increase competition by letting a
small MNO compete with a large one
EU General Court
agreed
2006
© Cullen International SA 201718
Towards active sharing
Country MNOs What is shared?
AT, BE All Antennae and repeaters in tunnels and metro
FR Free Mobile & Orange 3G RAN sharing, 3G/2G and 3G/3G roaming in small towns and rural areas
Bouygues & SFR 2G/3G/4G RAN in rural areas (57% population)
CZ O2 & T-Mobile 2G/3G/4G RAN (ex. Prague and Brno)
GR Vodafone & Wind Hellas 2G/3G RAN
ES Orange & Vodafone 3G RAN in small towns and rural areas
PL T-Mobile & Orange 2G/3G RAN
RO RCS&RDS & Vodafone 4G RAN + national roaming
Orange & Telekom Romania 4G RAN + national roaming
UK EE & H3G 3G RAN
Vodafone & O2 2G/3G/4G RAN
RAN only
© Cullen International SA 201719
Towards active sharing
Country MNOs What is shared?
DK Telia & Telenor 2G/3G/4G RAN + 800MHz/1800MHz
FI DNA & Telia 2G/3G/4G RAN + 800MHz blocks (50% territory)
HU Telenor & Magyar Telekom
4G RAN + 800 MHz lease (ex. Budapest)
SE Telia & Tele2 3G RAN + 2GHz spectrum
Telenor & Hi3G 3G RAN
Telenor & Tele2 2G/4G RAN + 800MHz/900MHz/1800MHz/2.6GHz
PL T-Mobile & Orange 4G RAN + 900/1800 MHz lease
RAN + spectrum
© Cullen International SA 201720
SUNAB JV approved by the NCA in March 2002
Nr 1 and 2 (out of 4 MNOs) in the retail market
Telia left without UMTS licence in 2002
2002
3G RAN sharing with spectrum pooling
Towards active sharingRAN + spectrum
50% 50%
© Cullen International SA 201721
Net4Mobility JV approved by the NCA in September 2010
Nr 2 and 3 (out of 4 MNOs) in the retail market
Joint spectrum in 800 MHz, 900 MHz, 1800 MHz and 2.6 GHz
2010
2G/4G RAN sharing with spectrum pooling
Towards active sharingRAN + spectrum
50% 50%
© Cullen International SA 201722
Covers the whole Danish territory;
Joint spectrum ownership in 800 MHz and 1800 MHz bands
Nr 3 and 2 (out of 4 MNOs) in the retail market
Nr 3 and 1 (out of 3 MNOs) in the wholesale market
2012
RAN sharing with 4G spectrum pooling
Towards active sharingRAN + spectrum
© Cullen International SA 201723
Will not share the intelligent part of the (core) network where
services and customer data are defined
Joint venture in Eastern and Northern Finland covering 50% of
territory and 15% of population
Combine 800MHz frequency blocks to offer faster 4G
connections and more capacity to their customers in the area
Nr 2 and 3 (out of 3) in the retail market
2015
RAN sharing with spectrum pooling
Facilitating rural coverageRAN + spectrum
© Cullen International SA 201724
Facilitating rural coverage
• 2006: the French government launches ‘programme zone blanche’ to facilitate 2G coverage in rural areas where operators had no coverage
• Coverage of 99% of the French population by the end of 2007, covering more than 3,000 rural communities - either through site sharing or roaming
• National roaming stands for coverage of 1.2% of the population
• 2010: the French MNOs commit to share network infrastructure to enhance 3G coverage in rural areas by 2013
• 2015: white areas still affect 0.1 % population for 2G and 1% for 3G, and cover 1.5 % territory –to be covered by end 2016 (2G) and mid-2017 (3G)
• Requirement to notify network sharing agreements to ARCEP
2006
Rural coverage: from 2G to 3G
© Cullen International SA 201725
Target area – densely populated• Passive site sharing: OK• Active RAN sharing with spectrum pooling: “strong
reservations”• Other active RAN sharing: information exchange “must be
controlled and in any case limited”
Target area – sparsely populated• Any type of sharing is not prohibited a priori• But spectrum pooling to be examined “very carefully”
• Market power needs to be assessed
2013
Network sharing
GUIDELINES
© Cullen International SA 201726
“The NCA should pay particular attention … to duration.
Close supervision and monitoring of these agreements
are necessary, since it is not necessarily in the interest of
either the guest or the host operator to terminate a
national roaming agreement”
2013
National roaming
GUIDELINES
© Cullen International SA 201727
French NRA implements these principles in own guidelines 2016 (NRA)
ARCEP requested mobile network operators to
align their agreements to its guidelines by June 15,
2016
Since August 2015, ARCEP has the power to
amend network sharing agreements and also
has jurisdiction over dispute resolution
© Cullen International SA 201728
Phase-out of national roaming by 2022
Action taken by the MNOs after ARCEP’s guidance
2016 (NRA)
© Cullen International SA 201729
What’s next?EC telecom framework review proposals
• When attaching conditions to individual rights of use for radio
spectrum, competent authorities may authorise the sharing of
passive or active infrastructure, or of radio spectrum, as well as
commercial roaming access agreements, or the joint roll-out of
infrastructures for the provision of services or networks which rely on
the use of radio spectrum, in particular with a view to ensuring effective
and efficient use of radio spectrum or promoting coverage.
• Conditions attached to the rights of use shall not prevent the sharing
of radio spectrum. Implementation by undertakings of conditions
attached pursuant to this paragraph shall remain subject to competition
law.
Article 47(2) draft Electronic Communications Code
© Cullen International SA 201730 © Cullen International SA 2013
Infrastructure sharing and roamingSummary
• Regulated access to infrastructure sharing and roaming is used as a tool to support infrastructure based competition
• Regulators tend to encourage or even mandate national roaming at early stages of network roll-out or in rural areas
• However roaming is usually not seen as a long-term solution: typically does not count towards roll-out obligations and allowed for a limited time period and/or with a limited geographic scope
© Cullen International SA 201731 © Cullen International SA 2013
Infrastructure sharing and roamingSummary
• Infrastructure sharing is usually commercially driven rather than imposed by regulators
• Passive infrastructure sharing is encouraged and permitted, or sometimes even mandated: environmental and efficiency benefits and limited competition impact
• Active RAN sharing is permitted as long as MNOs maintain separate logical networks and the impact on network competition is assessed to be neutral
• Competition rules apply to national roaming agreementsand RAN sharing with pooled spectrum
© Cullen International SA 201732