WILL TRAI?

The
walkout by cellular operators at the open house on limited mobility, organized
by TRAI, has raised the basic issue of fair play in the telecom business. The
industry associations are sharply divided on this. Cellular operators are on the
offensive, with their association crying itself hoarse against the introduction
of limited mobility by the use of WLL technology — as a service by the basic
phone operators in India. The Association of Basic Telephone Operators (ABTO) is
trying to counter the Cellular Operator’s Association of India’s (COAI)
aggressive strategy in its own way.

The war of words has reached a crescendo, and it is unlikely to settle down
till the DoT formulates the policy on the recommendation from TRAI, which is due
very soon. COAI has even threatened to take DoT to court if it allows the
service of limited mobility. Confusion is reigning supreme as TRAI is also
considering the option of recognizing limited mobility as the third kind of
service — after basic and cellular. The third option has been vehemently
opposed by the ABTO. SC Khanna, secretary general of the ABTO, contends
"Providing mobility services by basic operators only needs a change in
customer premises equipment, from fixed wireless terminals to hand-held
terminals and this does not require constituting a separate service." The
association also contends that separate services would mean allocation of
separate frequency bands, distinct from already allocated frequency to the basic
operators, which would mean bad spectrum management. According to Khanna,
"All the cellular operators like Bharti, Hexacom, Tata Cellular, and
Reliance, who also operate basic services are solidly behind ABTO’s
stand". The cellular operators who do not have any basic interest are
Hutchison Max, Sterling Cellular, Spice Communication, Birla AT&T, Fascel,
Koshika, Modi Telstra, Usha Martin, RPG Cellular, Skycell, Aircel, RPG Cellcom.
It is the latter who are opposing limited mobility.

The government should realize that the two services will have totally
different sets of users, and it will be the value-added services and customer
care, which will be the key differentiator. The basic service license issued by
DoT stipulates WLL as the preferred method of providing basic services.
Incumbent operators like MTNL have already introduced WLL, with limited
mobility, based on CDMA technology in 1996. The mobile handset offered by MTNL
is identical to the cellular handset. BSNL also has plans to introduce similar
services in the future.

If a certain technology supports certain services, it should be allowed.
Stopping this would be stopping the march of technology. The debate as to which
technology is superior will continue. According to some experts, CDMA is better
than GSM when it comes to negotiating the volume of traffic, and the quality of
service is equivalent if not better. While COAI cites the certain clauses
support. ABTO contends that the clauses can be altered in the interest of the
customers.

The tremendous anticipation among the basic phone subscribers is
substantiated by Khanna, who says, "We receive about 15-20 letters daily
from the general public, asking us about the launch of the services." The
reason, needless to say, is the cheap call rates which operators promise to
offer–almost equivalent to the existing fixed tariff. Even the TRAI paper says
"It is likely that WLL access with limited mobility in basic services may
considerably fulfil the mobility requirements of many subscribers, at a much
cheaper cost, and subscribers may not find it cost effective to go for a full
fledged cellular mobile service with hand-over and roaming facility"

The government should safeguard consumer interests and allow this service.
This will not only increase the tele-density (which currently stands at 3 per
100) at a faster pace but will also mean a quick roll-out of services. More
important is the fact that the survival of the private basic operators is at
stake and some operators have not been able to even start their services. The
start of limited mobility services will lead to drastic reduction in the
cellular tariffs, which are artificially high and not affordable to many.
Mobility is going to drive the growth of tele-density in general and in
inaccessible areas in particular. If this means a change in policy by the
government, be it so. Moreover, we should not forget that the NTP calls for an
"affordable" telecom service for the masses.

Sudesh Prasad