Sunday, January 05, 2014

Thailand's long evolution to Long Term Evolution - the 4G Saga

While much of the world, including some countries that Thailand thinks of as less technologically advanced, are reaping the benefits of 4G; Thailand has yet to get beyond the dabbling stage and jump in with both feet.

It seemed to take an eternity to get on to 3G and at least one operator has made the jump to 4G trials.  Now the local regulator has finally (re)set the date for the long awaited auction of the spectrum and details are set to be announced in February.

Normally I would be a strong supporter of a free market and all that a regulated market should bring in the way of competition, and therefore when market forces kick in what that then means for consumers in terms of value for money.  However, in this case I am wondering if there is a different answer to the problem.

Having watched the mast alliances in Europe and regulator interventions in New Zealand and Australia I think that the antiquated Build, Operate, Transfer (BOT) agreements that Thai mobile operators are bound to should be scrapped.  There are two State Owned Enterprises in Thailand dealing with telecommunications, TOT and CAT.  CAT already operates a CDMA network and resells access through True Move.  When the BOT terms expire CAT is set to be the main recipient of the infrastructure, spectrum, and associated operations.  My suggestion is that NBTC abandons its normal approach and instead of auctioning off the spectrum it issues the same said spectrum to CAT and current operators become retailers only.

Before I elaborate let me lay out some of the characteristics of the Thailand Mobile market to help build the case for the argument:

  • Low loyalty and high switch rates - whilst the market is not that immature most of the competition is driven by cycles of low call prices to attract customers.  As a result your average Thai consumer is about as loyal as the next 55 Satang per Minute call plan.
  • High penetration through prepaid - the mobile phone penetration rates are extremely high in Thailand with a significant number of people having more than one phone.  This is still predominantly a prepaid market which does nothing to attract and retain customers.
  • No lock in - unlike many other markets Thailand has not gone for the SIM locked model.  This means consumers get the best of handset choice and regularly roll over to a new device, which is great for handset manufacturers and retailers, but does nothing to help operators keep consumers locked in for any decent duration.  
Just to be clear I am not a fan of the practices used by European and US operators with branded and SIM locked handsets but it does create another dynamic in the local market that builds a constraint onto the current approach of spectrum allocation.

Here's a test for you:  have a look at the window of your office or condo in Bangkok and ask yourself how many different masts you see.  Now do the same inside and try and count how many femtocells you have in the building to patch the coverage holes.  The simple fact is that the best cell sites are at a premium and so we see a lot of clutter so each operator can claim to have good coverage.  Each cell site increases operation and maintenance costs, electricity/diesel consumption, and rental fees.  All of which get passed on the you the consumer.  In Europe many operators have gone into partnership and Joint Ventures with their fellow operators to share cell sites and infrastructure.  This means a single mast will hang the transceivers for more than one operator.  Vodafone and O2 in the UK ended up decommissioning 2000 mast sites.  Not only did this bring bottom line savings to each operator but it also made a positive contribution to the environment and the people living near those sites.

Long gone are the days when operators should be competing on network coverage.  It's not enough to simply be good at operating and maintaining the mobile network, modern consumers want true innovation and differentiated service, not simply the highest number of bars for signal strength (although it goes without saying that there should be at least one bar as the mobile phone is the 4th essential service after water, electricity, and television).  By moving to a single network infrastructure company, akin to Chorus in New Zealand, access will be ubiquitous and equivalent.

An additional element of 4G is the finite nature of spectrum, at the end of the day nobody is making anymore of it.  Therefore, the future mode of operation has to be a truly efficient network and this will mean maximising specturm usage.  In this article from Bloomberg you can see the outline plans for spectrum release.  Existing and unused 25 MHz blocks will be released to create 4G spectrum.  This raises concerns on the efficacy of that idea.  As we know the constraint of an operator is the slice of the spectrum they have access to and therefore how many subscribers they can carry in that spectrum slice.  If the blocks are not contiguous then the operator can suffer edge conditions that does not allow them o make optimal use of that spectrum before bleeding out.

When you consider this within the context of the market characteristics an operator can be left with not enough bandwidth for its subscriber traffic, or conversely in the case of CAT and DTAC too much that they've paid for but aren't using.  This is not an efficient and optimal way to run a network.

Now if we move to a single infrastructure model with today's operators becoming retailers under an MVNO model where they buy minutes of usage and run as a mobile virtual network operator, that problem goes away.  CAT as the logical operator can mange the spectrum and each retailer can buy the right level of access it needs to fulfill current demand and enough for growth.  This will not lead to any waste of such a finite and precious resource as radio spectrum.

It will also do away with so much of the frustration in the market.  Too much time is spent with operators and the regulator suing and counter-suing over market "irregularities" such as interconnect charges not being paid, or too much being charged.  With a single network there will be no interconnect within the 4G space and this will free up the regulator and the operators to focus outwards on market conditions and customer innovation.  A well run and regulated market set up this way should also be good for consumers as there will only one bucket of sunk cost which would make access charges equivalent and easier to monitor and control.

Then competition will be about more important factors such as price and value, service quality and true market innovation to attract and retain customers.


Monday, October 28, 2013

IBM Disclaimer

David Mould is an employee of IBM.  The comments in this blog are his personal view and do not represent the view of IBM Thailand, the global network or any of its affiliates.  The views expressed in this blog do not constitute a commitment or offer from IBM.

Wednesday, August 15, 2012

In the overlap of technology, marketing and social media the QR Code is critical

Outside of consulting on telecommunications, CIO advisory, and the business adoption of technology I also completed an MBA.  One of the projects was on the potential use cases of two dimensional barcodes.

Today the QR Code, one of many types of 2D codes, is seen as being a critical component of any good marketing plan.  As a natural integration between social media and devices I would extend VMob Bob's question "What can a mobile operator learn from Facebook?" and also ask how can they step and start to make innovations with the extensions to social media that already exist today?

Tuesday, July 03, 2012

Long Term Evolution vs Short Term Monetisation

After a seminar late last year I commented on some of the potential shortcomings, at least in my mind, of the New Zealand Government's decision to invest tax dollars into ultra fast broadband (UFB).

In recent months Telecom New Zealand, now shed of its fixed access networks after the structural separation of Chorus, has announced its plans for a 4G trial.  This Long Term Evolution (LTE) offering is being adopted across the world and promises to have speeds of 300/75Mbps.

Putting this into context the multi-million dollar investment in UFB promises speeds of at least 100Mbps.  The geography and urban distribution of New Zealand mean that this Fibre to the Premise (FttP) rollout will never be committed to every home in New Zealand, the fixed costs would be prohibitive.  The solution is the adjunct offering of the Rural Broadband Initiative (RBI) that will see a hybridisation of the network to include fixed wireless nodes, and ADSL to try and deliver the dream of ubiquitous access.

Of course this means that for consistent delivery of services, of which the killer application has yet to be realised, will typically mean delivery to the lowest common denominator (either fixed wireless or ADSL).  In parallel Telecom will continue its aggressive push into its mobile network and people will become used to increasing speeds on a selection of form factors.  When we consider the impact that fixed wireless and mobile have made in emerging economies where whole countries and generations have skipped the clunky, restrictive, fixed access (copper) networks and jumped straight to mobile with great success, we should ask what will the usage patterns be of the general consumer by the time UFB and its network of regionalised retail service providers are ready to commence service?

Visit any modern city in South East Asia and you will see the average person using their mobile handset (often enhanced with one of the many tablets available today) in-lieu of a traditional land line.  People are being behaviourally locked in to fully mobile access to voice, email, and a growing array of content.  Will people really want to be tied to services provisioned through a set top box? or would they rather have close to UFB speed, and potentially faster, from their handset and tablet platform with its intuitive user interface?

Admittedly there will be some uptake of FttP services in the business sector. However the ability to fully monetise services at a level that is both palatable for the consumer and that generates revenue at a level to meet the return on invest projections will be tough.

Has the Government merely funded a very useful fibre backhaul pathway for Telecom?

Monday, November 14, 2011

Crisis Connections

What the flood situation in Thailand has shown once again is the power of social networks to fill the void of communication.

In recent times the role of Facebook, Twitter, and Blackberry messenger has been shown in good and bad light.  The same methods that released the Arab Spring have also been used to coordinate the London Riots.

Love them or loathe social networks are here to stay and what the floods show is how they keep people connected.  Some will say there should be no communication void if central government is on top of its game, but with a situation that can change so rapidly, and over such a large area the traditional press certainly struggle to keep the public up to date.

Twitter and Facebook have been saviours for those of us outside Thailand at this time.  With roving reporters and connected people like Patee Sarasin and Jetrin out doing and tweeting many more people are kept up to date.

Equally useful is the ability to time shift news updates through TV channel websites and YouTube.
All very good, but what would happen if this had happened in a country that had buried its infrastructure in the ground, like the UK?

With no power ant the access circuits under water many people would but unplugged! What brings this home is the pending roll out of fibre to the home/premise programmes.  This IP access platform is being touted as a replacement for internet, phone, and TV.  If this was swamped how would people keep current?

It certainly became an issue in Christchurch after the earthquake there.  Broad loss of power and severed phone circuits kept people in the dark.  Here the regional government and the crisis management agency still guided people towards agency websites! Sometimes you have to go old school, but maybe increasingly go aerial...

With government led initiatives knowing that some people will have to be served with fixed-wireless solutions maybe all access should this technology.  This would allow for more access options (mobile, net book, TV) without the need for in-premise equipment that a fibre option relies on.

All the more important when you consider the flood and fire events in Australia and the ever present earthquakebrisk in New Zealand.  What is the plan for these governments to meet the crisis connection need?