UK telecom regulator Ofcom defends rise in mobile spectrum charges
12 Oct 2013
1
UK telecom regulator Ofcom has defended fee increases for mobile spectrum despite concerns voiced by analysts and the media that the proposed licence fee hike could be bad for consumers.
The regulator published the revised fees yesterday.
The proposals came on consultation ordered by the government in 2010 on the annual fees paid by mobile network operators for the 900 MHz and 1,800 MHz spectrum bands.
Wired.co.uk reported that operators had expressed dismay at the proposals, which could see them having to pay up to four times the current amount.
Their concerns had been backed by some analysts, who were worried consumers might end up bearing the brunt of the price hikes, should the prices be revised.
It quoted Adam Kirby, telecom expert at uSwitch.com, as saying the size of the figures might come as bad news to the mobile networks, but more worryingly could sound alarm bells for consumers.
He added their concern was that it would be mobile users who were left to foot the bill -- and it was not clear if there would be any direct benefits to them.
Ofcom had responded to concerns, saying it believed that stiff competition between the four main UK mobile operators in the UK should discourage networks from putting up prices.
The current proposed total annual licence fees for the spectrum bands in question had increased from £15.6 million to £83.1 million for both Vodafone and O2, £24.9 million to £107.1 million for EE, and £8.3 million to £35.7 million for Three UK.
Overall, Ofcom believed that the 900MHz band should increase from £24.8 million to £138.5 million and that the 1800MHz band should shoot up from £39.7 million to £170.4 million.
Responding to the concerns, an Ofcom spokesperson told Wired.co.uk. that the UK had one of the most competitive mobile phone markets in the world, which it fully expected would look after consumers.
The spokesperson said that the proposed fees were in line with analysts' expectations and with the amounts that operators paid for accessing spectrum in other countries, so should come as no surprise to the mobile companies.
Computing.co.uk reported quoting a Vodafone spokesperson, the company was disappointed that Ofcom was proposing a 430-per cent increase in the fees the company paid for its existing spectrum at a time when it was investing more than ever in vital national digital infrastructure.
An EE spokesperson speaking on similar lines said the proposed increase in license fees was "excessive" at a time when it was investing heavily in the rollout of 4G, the report said.
According to a spokesperson for Three UK, the smallest network that would offer 4G services, the proposals "fail to recognise the relative value of high and low frequency spectrum, despite evidence from around the world".
The spokesperson suggested that the sums proposed by Ofcom over-valued high frequency spectrum.
The regulator published the revised fees yesterday.
The proposals came on consultation ordered by the government in 2010 on the annual fees paid by mobile network operators for the 900 MHz and 1,800 MHz spectrum bands.
Wired.co.uk reported that operators had expressed dismay at the proposals, which could see them having to pay up to four times the current amount.
Their concerns had been backed by some analysts, who were worried consumers might end up bearing the brunt of the price hikes, should the prices be revised.
It quoted Adam Kirby, telecom expert at uSwitch.com, as saying the size of the figures might come as bad news to the mobile networks, but more worryingly could sound alarm bells for consumers.
He added their concern was that it would be mobile users who were left to foot the bill -- and it was not clear if there would be any direct benefits to them.
Ofcom had responded to concerns, saying it believed that stiff competition between the four main UK mobile operators in the UK should discourage networks from putting up prices.
The current proposed total annual licence fees for the spectrum bands in question had increased from £15.6 million to £83.1 million for both Vodafone and O2, £24.9 million to £107.1 million for EE, and £8.3 million to £35.7 million for Three UK.
Overall, Ofcom believed that the 900MHz band should increase from £24.8 million to £138.5 million and that the 1800MHz band should shoot up from £39.7 million to £170.4 million.
Responding to the concerns, an Ofcom spokesperson told Wired.co.uk. that the UK had one of the most competitive mobile phone markets in the world, which it fully expected would look after consumers.
The spokesperson said that the proposed fees were in line with analysts' expectations and with the amounts that operators paid for accessing spectrum in other countries, so should come as no surprise to the mobile companies.
Computing.co.uk reported quoting a Vodafone spokesperson, the company was disappointed that Ofcom was proposing a 430-per cent increase in the fees the company paid for its existing spectrum at a time when it was investing more than ever in vital national digital infrastructure.
An EE spokesperson speaking on similar lines said the proposed increase in license fees was "excessive" at a time when it was investing heavily in the rollout of 4G, the report said.
According to a spokesperson for Three UK, the smallest network that would offer 4G services, the proposals "fail to recognise the relative value of high and low frequency spectrum, despite evidence from around the world".
The spokesperson suggested that the sums proposed by Ofcom over-valued high frequency spectrum.
.jpg "RBI keeps repo rate unchanged as focus remains on inflation")
.jpg "Indian Oil, Panasonic team up for lithium-ion cell production in India")
