零点知识库SPECTRUM PRICING UMENT, DECEMBER 2002.pptVIP

PRESENTATION ON NEW SPECTRUM FEES AND PRICING STRATEGYToNigerian Telecommunications Operators11th December, 2002 BACKGROUND Ministry of Communications had a spectrum pricing formula they have been using over the years, which our study has revealed to be defective in certain aspects. A detailed analysis of the records of previous spectrum allocation by the MOC revealed the following facts: BACKGROUND CONT’D ? Spectrum was priced on a per-subscriber basis, however, it was observed that there were lots of inconsistencies on the amount charged per subscriber. While some were charged 50,000 per subscriber other charged 5,000 or 2,500 per subscriber on exactly same spectrum band. BACKGROUND CONT’D Frequency licence was renewable every year Frequency assignments were not accompanied with license conditions to enable each assignee know his rights and obligations, e.g. fees renewal etc RESULTS There were lots of inconsistency and discrimination in pricing. Fees tied to subscriber base were punitive, discouraged expansion and efficient use of spectrum and led to false declaration of actual subscriber base by operators. RESULTS CONT’D Annual frequency licence increased administrative overhead cost, constituted insecurity for investors and encourages licence renewal evasion. Strong protest by operators. ?Loss of confidence in the licensing process by investors. Higher cost of services to consumers. METHODS OF DETERMINING SPECTRUM PRICES (INCLUDING ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES) Source: ITU Spectrum Management Handbook and other references. LEAST COST ALTERNATIVE OR OPPORTUNITY COST CRITERIA. ?? The alternatives to spectrum are copper network, optical fibre or coaxial cable. May lead to artificially high prices. Cost of alternatives difficult to determine. ? ? A PROPORTION OF REVENUE DERIVED FROM THE LICENSEE’S USE OF RADIO SPECTRUM ?Simple and generates economic value. May discourage investment and growth. Revenue may