“Consumers and competitors should not have to pay excessive charges to dominant firms that are not investing in Europe”, says ECTA Chairman Tom Ruhan
(Brussels, 28 November 2011): CEOs of major telecoms competitors have called on Commission Vice-President Neelie Kroes to put an end to excessive charges for historic telephone networks, which they say amount to a subsidy for dominant firms. In a meeting with the Commissioner for the Digital Agenda, CEOs emphasised that there was no justification for paying more than the real cost of copper networks, when incumbents are failing to invest in new high speed infrastructure. An April 2011 study by consulting group WIK, found that the level of wholesale charges in some countries could be as much as double the amount that it actually cost incumbent operators to build the networks decades ago.
Tom Ruhan, Chairman of ECTA, said “despite the extra profits made from excessive copper pricing by incumbent operators, investments in the roll out of ultra fast fibre networks in Europe are not taking place. European consumers and competitors should not have to pay excessive prices to dominant operators for them to distribute high dividends to their shareholders and invest outside of Europe. European competitiveness will be further undermined as a result”.
The Commission is engaging in a major consultation exercise on how telecoms charges should be set across Europe. One of their proposals is that higher copper charges could be permitted if incumbents commit to building modern fibre networks, which are capable of offering much higher speeds.
Tom Ruhan continued: “If dominant firms are permitted to subsidize the investment on fibre networks by allowing them to keep making – or even increase – the excessive profits on their legacy networks, then these subsidies must be shared for the benefit of all, and not only for the benefit of dominant firms. It must be made clear that dominant operators that receive excess profits from their legacy networks paid by their customers should pay the money back by reducing charges on high speed fibre networks. Alternatively, the money could be channelled into a fund available for other potential investors in open fibre networks.”
(Source: INTUG)
(Brussels, 28 November 2011): CEOs of major telecoms competitors have called on Commission Vice-President Neelie Kroes to put an end to excessive charges for historic telephone networks, which they say amount to a subsidy for dominant firms. In a meeting with the Commissioner for the Digital Agenda, CEOs emphasised that there was no justification for paying more than the real cost of copper networks, when incumbents are failing to invest in new high speed infrastructure. An April 2011 study by consulting group WIK, found that the level of wholesale charges in some countries could be as much as double the amount that it actually cost incumbent operators to build the networks decades ago.
Tom Ruhan, Chairman of ECTA, said “despite the extra profits made from excessive copper pricing by incumbent operators, investments in the roll out of ultra fast fibre networks in Europe are not taking place. European consumers and competitors should not have to pay excessive prices to dominant operators for them to distribute high dividends to their shareholders and invest outside of Europe. European competitiveness will be further undermined as a result”.
The Commission is engaging in a major consultation exercise on how telecoms charges should be set across Europe. One of their proposals is that higher copper charges could be permitted if incumbents commit to building modern fibre networks, which are capable of offering much higher speeds.
Tom Ruhan continued: “If dominant firms are permitted to subsidize the investment on fibre networks by allowing them to keep making – or even increase – the excessive profits on their legacy networks, then these subsidies must be shared for the benefit of all, and not only for the benefit of dominant firms. It must be made clear that dominant operators that receive excess profits from their legacy networks paid by their customers should pay the money back by reducing charges on high speed fibre networks. Alternatively, the money could be channelled into a fund available for other potential investors in open fibre networks.”
(Source: INTUG)
No comments:
Post a Comment