Mobile operators may also face LLU

GSM doesn't have a local loop... Uncultured technologically challenged farmers.....
 
Why don't they do LLU on on TV Licenses? Thats where the consumer is going to win the most. I don't even have an antenna or dish.
 
Aren't there interconnect fees which the service providers charge each other?
 
Unbundling the Mobile Local Loop only requires an operator to setup switches around the country and have interconnection points with the Operator Concerned. Traffic that moves over the network is routed to the New operators switch. This is re-routed back to the destination number. Much like roaming but there will be Fixed charges for access and back-end systems required by the new operator. So in essence if i wanted to Operate a Mobile Network I could setup a network nerve centre with Switches and all the back-end systems in place and request roaming ................I will then have access to the Mobile Local Loop.

Hope we get a few interests from International Operators - Orange - Airtel - Telenor
 
jes said:
Mobile operators may also face LLU

Local loop unbundling regulations are not meant to be limited to Telkom’s copper cable local loop, according to Icasa
Click to expand...

My cell number is xxx-xxx-xxxx. I travel around the country weekly and around various regions daily. Where is my 'Local Loop'?

Or let me put it another way. LLU has been available as a model in SA for years. It's called MVNO.
 
jannievanzyl said:
My cell number is xxx-xxx-xxxx. I travel around the country weekly and around various regions daily. Where is my 'Local Loop'?

Or let me put it another way. LLU has been available as a model in SA for years. It's called MVNO.
Click to expand...

point but MVNO deals are voluntary not obligatory
@ the end of the day LLU is an instance of open access - whether LLU is the correct way to go about in respect of mobile is debatable & i think strategically naive in the sense that if you cannot get it right with the fixed line incumbent then what hope the MNOs
 
... giving theoretical (in a weak regulatory authority context) access to facilities, not networks or services
 
well if the access was real the rest would follow when joined to a principle of non-discriminatory wholesale pricing and products

This is why Vodacom owning Neotel would be a good thing if Neotel remained a separate wholesale providing entity.
 
there is a world of difference between leasing a facility such as a tower and wholesale access to the network - facilities leasing applies only in respect of facilities not forming a system / ECN.

The focus of the exercise needs to be exactly that principle you have spelt out, just not sure LLU is the right vehicle

and in our regulatory environment a truly separate wholesale provider owned by Vodacom (or any of the other incumbents) is fantasy
 
I am not advocating that any incumbent maintain or own a truly separate wholesale enterprise - that degree of separation in my view is silly - but rather that the moment a provider has a wholesale pricing on a product it is obliged to charge itself (its retail operations) that pricing.

Looking at the Vodacom Neotel situation in particular if Vodacom acquire Neotel and inject capital for Neotel to roll out a Neotel wholesale LTE network that would be a wholesale operation but they'd be foolhardy not to additionally use Neotel as a VMNO (and actually enjoy some of the benefits of asymmetrical MTRs) and migrate a pool of Neotel customers over to there One Express product offerings. What is important is that Neotel's pricing for wholesale access be the same to Vodacom as to any other provider. By sheer volume of capacity - Vodacom will no doubt purchase assess on a capacity rather than quantity of data basis - the discount for VC would be huge.

I am quite strongly of the view that once you have essential facilities covered - especially wayleaves - and a proper spectrum policy is in play the game changes wrt services and networks because the prospects of a competitor building its own network and outflanking you becomes a real threat. It makes business sense to move towards a wholesale access approach.
 
Moving back to the LOCAL LOOP question...

Have ICASA defined what they view as the wireless loop loop, taking into consideration that there is no fixed point of connect on the customer's side?

This not like a fixed line look-a-like network or point-to-multipoint radio system such as those that Telkom installed (DECT, CT2, etc).

How do they propose sharing the limited spectrum available per tower, especially where operators use different frequencies?
 
it doesn't seem like they really have defined the wireless local loop. It looks as though they presume that a service is delivered within a local loop context and that access to the last mile is possible through various means.

That particular assumption is not entirely false in my view - it is very true with ADSL and if we look at the GPRS design it is is possible for GSM provisioning and in fact operators are currently providing each other with services on a wholesale basis - MTN to TM (8ta) and Vodacom to CellC
 
Paul Hjul said:
it doesn't seem like they really have defined the wireless local loop. It looks as though they presume that a service is delivered within a local loop context and that access to the last mile is possible through various means.

That particular assumption is not entirely false in my view - it is very true with ADSL and if we look at the GPRS design it is is possible for GSM provisioning and in fact operators are currently providing each other with services on a wholesale basis - MTN to TM (8ta) and Vodacom to CellC
Click to expand...
Scenario: I'm a two-bit enterprise with my own licence. I'm willing to lay my own cable to a few lucrative areas within a suburb where Telkom has no fixed line presence (new development - getting in first). I want to connect my fixed line network to the nearest available network point, eg. MTN. How do I do it?
 
well the whole problem I have with ICASAs general take is that they are seeming to work on the basis that a local loop is inherently "owned" by a large incumbent

My approach is that such an enterprise using a class or individual network license lays the cable and runs a service (so it needs both licenses) they can connect to MTN's network point and use the MTN network on a wholesale basis - say running a virtual circuit to a different point on their network - at the price MTN has set for their wholesale product. If MTN doesn't have an appropriate product they can turn to Telkom or Neotel or Vodacom or FibreCo or whatever for national backhaul (which is a really competitive market). Such an enterprise could
It becomes viable for Telkom however to offer a seriously competitive IPConnect product for such an operator- which requires Telkom to lower the IPC pricing on DSL. The upside however is that such a provider could be brought under facilities leasing to make access to the facilities available to other operators and the general force of the market will create a usage case for such an enterprise to consider a charge model for other service providers.

If we can get to the point where an iECNS license holder (and really ideally Telkom - the CEO should be taking notes, I'll send the invoice later) provides a service to SPV entities (I'd look seriously at co-ops actually but a simple trust could be best) that are localized FTTH infrastructure pools that property owners hold the interest in and the iECNS holder acts as a managing company for you then are able to have a fixed charge for access into the network by service providers (including the managing companies retail ISP operations) with the proceeds being paid out to the owners of that vehicle. The payment is likely to be a really poor "return on investment" except for the value of having fiber infrastructure to your property. Think of the value for residential blocks of flats and office parks.
Considering the prospects of Telkom placing its copper network into SPV the case for Telkom to jack its facilities management operations into a new gear is one they really need to consider seriously.

These LLU regulations seem to assume that the local loop is not filled with rollout opportunities at all.
 
Of course Neotel would be as well placed as Telkom to move into a last mile facilities management company - and it would make a ton of sense for Vodacom to go that route with the acquisition.
 
MickeyD said:
Scenario: I'm a two-bit enterprise with my own licence. I'm willing to lay my own cable to a few lucrative areas within a suburb where Telkom has no fixed line presence (new development - getting in first). I want to connect my fixed line network to the nearest available network point, eg. MTN. How do I do it?
Click to expand...

This is the major problem we are having with SMP operators - MTN - VodaCom - Telkom
Current legislation states you have to interconnect at their nearest point of Connection / Switch.
Since MTN is not making the request and you are - you need to meet them at their Interconnection Point.

You will only be able to terminate calls on the MTN network if you do this.
How are your customers going to call other Networks ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X